[Jian]

The FR carries very limited informantion and never equals to SQ,and there is so much more to the sound than just the FR graph. Even if the FR is identical, the sound could be very different. Lots of aspects can be improved instead of FR, and product lines Crome other brand proved this point including stax or senheiser. And I agree with Skylab that considering how human ears and brains function, a true flat FR response might sound natural. That being said, the FR of LCD# are very flat across the board compare to any other top tier headphones

 

[purrin]

 
Quote:

That being said, the FR of LCD# are very flat across the board compare to any other top tier headphones

And that's what's sad.
 

 

[Jian]

The FR should not be interpreted as SQ and is not dirrectly link to what people hear. And looking at the FQ graph, the "mid- treble slope" of LCD2 is not actually a slope compare to other headphones such as 800, t1 or even 009, it is pretty much because the FR of LCD2 before 1k hz looks too flat.

 

[Olias of Sunhillow]

Quote:

I strongly disagree with this. For me, the HE-6 soundstage is miles beyond the LCD2.2 and bested only by the T1 (the HD800 going too far and presenting what I found to be an artificially exaggerated soundstage).
 
I've only had my LCD-3s on for literally minutes, so I can't report on them yet... but let's just say that if they don't have considerably better soundstage than the LCD2.2, they'll be going back to Las Vegas.

And so, to answer my own question, yes... the LCD-3 soundstage is much improved over the LCD-2.2. I believe them to be on par with the HE-6 and perhaps one tiny notch beneath the T1 in terms of soundstage. Of course, the LCD-3 possesses substantially better tonality and cohesiveness than either of the other two, making listening to the LCD-3 a much more enjoyable experience.

 

[Jian]

My impression is very much the same

 

[metalgear]

I'm comparing the LCD2 (rev. 1) to the LCD3 on the Violectric V200. The dual headphone sockets makes it easy for A/B compariasons with a slight volume adjustiment (the LCD3 is slightly softer). Good to hear that the Audeze house sound  - smooth but still very detailed and extended at both ends still persists.
 
No surprises, and consistent with early reviews and impressions, the LCD3 has wider soundstage and has better texture and decay in the treble. The increased soundstaging also means that  the LCD3 presents the singers/musicians further away, not as intimately as the LCD2. The LCD3 is better both with the little details and the big picture - perhaps more "hi-fi-ish", and will certainly settle well with a broader set of the audiophile community, who love scutinizing the details. The big change I feel is really is in the treble - the amount of detail and delicacy there without being fatigueing - yep its there. Nothing more to say that hasn't been mentioned.
 
However the LCD2 still sounds good to me, and it is still able to beat the LCD3 in some areas:
- the "sound of wood "e.g. Brubeck's piano, Starker's cello - you hear the wood resonating in a very palpable manner, almost 'feeling' it especially when it scales towards the lower registers (anyone who's played the piano should understand)
- rich deep vocals e.g. Shelby Lynne's 'Just a little loving'... the intimacy just comes across better on the LCD2.
- taming strongly sibilant recordings e.g. Norah Jones 'Come away with me' where there her voice is sibilant due to the mixing (overdub?) its less distracting on the LCD2. Granted some may argue this is a coloration, the point here is about the enjoying music.
- quieter (darker?) background - very close to what you'd get in a smoky, dark jazz bar, where mid-range is king
 
Maybe its the lack of treble extension in the LCD2 that's given it a pronounced strength in certain areas. A more specialized tool, perhaps.
So to me they are two different phones targeted at two different audiences. I'm certainly finding it easier to keep both than to part with the LCD2.
 
Probably a bad anology, but just to drive home the point, the LCD2 and LCD3 pair complement each other like how the HD650 and D7000 would.

 

[tupac0306]

Thank you very much for the review. very fair and interesting.
Wow HD650 and D7000. I never thought this could be the case. These two headphones are like day and night phones. But I see what you trying to say.

 
Quote:

I'm comparing the LCD2 (rev. 1) to the LCD3 on the Violectric V200. The dual headphone sockets makes it easy for A/B compariasons with a slight volume adjustiment (the LCD3 is slightly softer). Good to hear that the Audeze house sound  - smooth but still very detailed and extended at both ends still persists.
 
No surprises, and consistent with early reviews and impressions, the LCD3 has wider soundstage and has better texture and decay in the treble. The increased soundstaging also means that  the LCD3 presents the singers/musicians further away, not as intimately as the LCD2. The LCD3 is better both with the little details and the big picture - perhaps more "hi-fi-ish", and will certainly settle well with a broader set of the audiophile community, who love scutinizing the details. The big change I feel is really is in the treble - the amount of detail and delicacy there without being fatigueing - yep its there. Nothing more to say that hasn't been mentioned.
 
However the LCD2 still sounds good to me, and it is still able to beat the LCD3 in some areas:
- the "sound of wood "e.g. Brubeck's piano, Starker's cello - you hear the wood resonating in a very palpable manner, almost 'feeling' it especially when it scales towards the lower registers (anyone who's played the piano should understand)
- rich deep vocals e.g. Shelby Lynne's 'Just a little loving'... the intimacy just comes across better on the LCD2.
- taming strongly sibilant recordings e.g. Norah Jones 'Come away with me' where there her voice is sibilant due to the mixing (overdub?) its less distracting on the LCD2. Granted some may argue this is a coloration, the point here is about the enjoying music.
- quieter (darker?) background - very close to what you'd get in a smoky, dark jazz bar, where mid-range is king
 
Maybe its the lack of treble extension in the LCD2 that's given it a pronounced strength in certain areas. A more specialized tool, perhaps.
So to me they are two different phones targeted at two different audiences. I'm certainly finding it easier to keep both than to part with the LCD2.
 
Probably a bad anology, but just to drive home the point, the LCD2 and LCD3 pair complement each other like how the HD650 and D7000 would.

 

 

[Argo Duck]

Gee that's a good point. Maybe because I sold my grand piano years ago and mostly use a yamaha electric piano these days, I'd forgotten about this palpability. Probably one of the things that makes me feel the LCD2 does piano convincingly.
 
Nice impressions btw.
 
Quote:

<snip>
- the "sound of wood "e.g. Brubeck's piano, Starker's cello - you hear the wood resonating in a very palpable manner, almost 'feeling' it especially when it scales towards the lower registers (anyone who's played the piano should understand)
 

 

 

[johnwmclean]

I really enjoyed your post metalgear.

 

[Jian]

Been listening to this for a couple of days now, and I think the ALO magic still applies!

 

[lofty]

Quote:

Not Rob here, but they SHOULD be included with each and every LCD-2 and LCD-3. I'd shoot Sankar an email to get yours. They are made specific by Audeze for each serial number.
 

Thanks for the reply. My manila envelope only contained a small plastic warranty card. I just emailed Sankar to see what happened.
 

 

[Olias of Sunhillow]

Hey metalgear -- fantastic review! Very well said on all counts.
 
Your observations mirror mine in several areas. The LCD-3 is clearly more of a hi-fi, all-around headphone. It appears to be excellent with all genres -- even symphonic classical. The nimbleness and power it brought to Goosens/LSO "Rite of Spring" really made me smile last night.
 
But you are correct, it draws attention to poorly recorded or highly sibilant music in a way that the LCD-2 never did, and there are certain tracks where you miss the sort of smoky intimacy and richness of the LCD-2. In last night's extended Sandy Denny listening session, for example, I found myself occasionally missing the LCD-2's hauntingly beautiful presentation of Sandy's voice. A track in which Sandy's vocals dominate, like "Farewell, Farewell,"  fared better on the LCD-2, while nearly everything else (like "Tam Lin" or "Matty Groves") were far superior on the LCD-3.
 
 

 

[brobilly]

Quote:

Been listening to this for a couple of days now, and I think the ALO magic still applies!

haha, guts?
 
 

 

[visualguy]

Quote:

I'm comparing the LCD2 (rev. 1) to the LCD3 on the Violectric V200. The dual headphone sockets makes it easy for A/B compariasons with a slight volume adjustiment (the LCD3 is slightly softer). Good to hear that the Audeze house sound  - smooth but still very detailed and extended at both ends still persists.
 
No surprises, and consistent with early reviews and impressions, the LCD3 has wider soundstage and has better texture and decay in the treble. The increased soundstaging also means that  the LCD3 presents the singers/musicians further away, not as intimately as the LCD2. The LCD3 is better both with the little details and the big picture - perhaps more "hi-fi-ish", and will certainly settle well with a broader set of the audiophile community, who love scutinizing the details. The big change I feel is really is in the treble - the amount of detail and delicacy there without being fatigueing - yep its there. Nothing more to say that hasn't been mentioned.
 
 

I find my LCD-3 to be better than my LCD-2r1 in the areas that you mentioned, but not better than my LCD-2r2. In fact, my LCD-3 are darker and less resolving than my LCD-2r2 - closer in sound signature to my LCD-2r1. It seems like there are some significant variations between units of the same model, so I don't know how widely this applies.
 

 

[grokit]

Interesting, I wonder if these differing impressions are due more to manufacturing variances of the headphones or to the different gear feeding them.