[ardilla]

There are "in your face"-detail and detail that is just there... 
 
Quote:

Are we saying the LCD-3 HAVE to have more details than the Signature Pro even if our ears tell us otherwise?
Not that I know anything, I never heard either of them.

 

 

[pcf]

Quote:

There are "in your face"-detail and detail that is just there... 
 


 

I can tell if something is " in you face" or not, I have some of those headphones. 

 
That wasn't my question. What if our listening experience doesn't match our preconceived idea about certain gear? Are we supposed to ignore what we hear? 
 

 

[dagothur]

Quote:

That wasn't my question. What if our listening experience doesn't match our preconceived idea about certain gear? Are we supposed to ignore what we hear? 
 

I think the original statement - and rhythmdevils is free to contradict me here - was meant to be more like "It should have better detail than the Signature Pro, considering the price point of the LCD-3 and the signature of the headphone itself."  I would expect my LCD-2s to have better microdetail and transparency than a pair of Pro900s for the same reason.
 
 

 

[Audiowood]

I think when I drop 2 grand on a headphone, the expectation starts to be slightly twisted...

 

[dagothur]

Quote:

I think when I drop 2 grand on a headphone, the expectation starts to be slightly twisted...

At the very least, it shouldn't make you want to upgrade without a jump.

 

[Duckman]

I've just purchased an RMA'd LCD3 and already have the LCD2Rev2. Have found in side-by-side comparos that the 2 has a tighter, more detailed sound. IMO, it is a beter phone, all things considered. I wonder if any owners of both have had a similar experience? Most seem to consider their 3's to be better.
 
Also wonder how Audeze would feel about returning a pair for testing that has already been 'cherry picked'.

 

[dyl1dyl]

Quote:

I've just purchased an RMA'd LCD3 and already have the LCD2Rev2. Have found in side-by-side comparos that the 2 has a tighter, more detailed sound. IMO, it is a beter phone a all things considered. I wonder if any owners of both have had a similar experience? Most seem to consider their 3's to be better.
 
Also wonder how Audeze would feel about returning a pair for testing that has already been 'cherry picked'.

Sorry to ask, not saying you're lying or anything but are you sure your LCD-3 has been RMA'd? In my experience with 3 RMA'd LCD-3s so far, they have all soundly beaten the LCD 2.1s and 2.2s that I have used. I believe that almost everyone else who has received a pair of RMA'd LCD-3s also concurrs with such an opinion. Maybe you should drop Audez'e an email to confirm it's been RMA'd.

 

[Duckman]

No worries. Yes, I'm sure they've been back once. The drivers were replaced.
 
I will get in touch with Audeze. It's just an awkward situation.

 

[pcf]

Quote:

I think the original statement - and rhythmdevils is free to contradict me here - was meant to be more like "It should have better detail than the Signature Pro, considering the price point of the LCD-3 and the signature of the headphone itself."  I would expect my LCD-2s to have better microdetail and transparency than a pair of Pro900s for the same reason.
 
 

My post wasn't directed at rhythmdevils, I always enjoy his witty comments and sense of humour anyways.
I guess expectations based on the price point is okay, provided we don't form our opinions based on the price point. 
 

 

[Loevhagen]

After quite some time to assess to buy the LCD-3 or not - I decided the time was right just recently (cf. passed the "RMA, fix, veiled, not veiled, bla, bla, bla"). Does that mean I´ll sell my R1 and R2? Nope. Love them both - and hopefully also the LCD-3. I´d hoped the lambskin and headband was in black though. I really hate brown as a colour.
 
Am I a little excited to get the LCD-3s? Well, a bit. After having read all the post-February impressions I´m not quite sure what to expect. I really don´t care to much - as long as it portrays the music  as an Audeze should - I´m happy.
 

 

[ardilla]

1) The brown is so dark it really looks better in real than in pictures (except the pictures where it looks black). When I opened up my box, it took me some time to realize that they weren't black, even though I was expecting them to be brown.
 
2) No worries - The LCD-3 will have a different flavour of Audez'e.  
 
Quote:

After quite some time to assess to buy the LCD-3 or not - I decided the time was right just recently (cf. passed the "RMA, fix, veiled, not veiled, bla, bla, bla"). Does that mean I´ll sell my R1 and R2? Nope. Love them both - and hopefully also the LCD-3. I´d hoped the lambskin and headband was in black though. I really hate brown as a colour.
 
Am I a little excited to get the LCD-3s? Well, a bit. After having read all the post-February impressions I´m not quite sure what to expect. I really don´t care to much - as long as it portrays the music  as an Audeze should - I´m happy.
 

 

 

[ardilla]

The Ultrasone's are 1299 in the US... So in prize it isn't really that far away
http://ultrasone.com/stores/us/Ultrasone-Signature-PRO/#21
 
BTW. The ED10 is US 2990... 
 
I think that the main competetive advantage of Audez'e is its sound signature. Detail-freaks should get HD800. 
Quote:

Are we saying the LCD-3 HAVE to have more details than the Signature Pro even if our ears tell us otherwise?
Not that I know anything, I never heard either of them.

 

 

[Jian]

The had the sig pro for a while and to me, it was quit a bit behind LCD3 in almost every aspects. IMO, it is not as natural and balanced as LCD3, and the the way it presents the details are a bit harsh and exaggerated.

 

[MuppetFace]

 
Quote:

There are "in your face"-detail and detail that is just there... 
 
Quote:

Are we saying the LCD-3 HAVE to have more details than the Signature Pro even if our ears tell us otherwise?
Not that I know anything, I never heard either of them.

 

 
 
Ardilla hit the proverbial nail on the head with regard to my post. I find details are more readily and immediately discernible with the Signature Pro. The LCD-3 seems less detailed at times, but I've gone back and scrutinized things and discerned that in terms of actual content it's not that different. This leads me to believe that the sound signature of former helps to emphasize details. I find this to sometimes be the case with brighter headphones versus their darker counterparts. That being said, I don't find the Signature Pro to be overly bright or harsh (whereas the Edition 8 is to my ears), but I would agree that the LCD-3 sounds more natural overall.

 

[Lan647]

Quote:

I've just purchased an RMA'd LCD3 and already have the LCD2Rev2. Have found in side-by-side comparos that the 2 has a tighter, more detailed sound. IMO, it is a beter phone, all things considered. I wonder if any owners of both have had a similar experience? Most seem to consider their 3's to be better.
 
Also wonder how Audeze would feel about returning a pair for testing that has already been 'cherry picked'.

I know a couple of people that have compared the rev.2 to the LCD-3 directly and preferred the former! Maybe the LCD-3 is not an improvement at all, just a different flavor. Or the store had a veiled pair, what do I know.