[nigeljames]

Quote:

 
I do not use measurements to dictate what I hear, I use them for facts. 
 
What I HEAR, and the first thing that always stands out for me with the LCD-2s is just how smooth and coherent they are, how natural and effortless the reproduction is. The bass isn't forward at all, just very capable when it's called for. Never ever does it overshadow the rest of the spectrum. 
 
To me, the HD 800 is of a lower caliber. Yes, they are significantly more open sounding than the Audeze's and perhaps more crystal-clear, but through the neutral "high-end" systems I've heard the bass is passive and lacks extension, the midrange leans towards the thinner side of neutral and isn't as smooth and liquid as the Audezes, and the treble is bright - causing what many seems to think is a very detailed and "honest" sound. 
 
When I compare the HD 800 and LCD-2 to my reference headphone - the STAX SR-007 mk1 - the LCD-2 is much closer in terms of tonality and presents a more transparent and natural sound than the clinical, bright-ish HD 800. 

(This is an LCD-3 thread, so I'm not going to go off-topic any further after this)

 
Yes, blame the system ( regardless of how 'high end' it might be) not the HD800's.
My pair has tremendous bass extension, slam and control.
Overall better than the LCD2.2's IMO.

 

[jonstatt]

While I think I know what Solude was getting at, I am not sure I buy into the high resolution vs detail terminology. If you think of a TV, high resolution  = high definition = more detail.
 
But essentially, if you have a higher top end treble response, it will always give the illusion of more detail. Crispness, timing, detail are often mis-associated with a stronger treble. As a pianist I would like to think that I have a slightly different insight into this. I have carefully listened to piano recordings and the sound of my Yamaha Clavinova with both the HD800 and the LCD-2 and LCD-3. To my ears, I heard much to much high frequency piano mechanical action with the HD800 that it became distracting. To my mind what sold me on the LCDs was that the timbre of the piano seems to be immaculately preserved. The HD800 were too sharp/trebly and distracted from the beautiful music.
 
What is amusing is how our brains respond differently. By taking that treble back a bit, some are perceiving the LCD-3s as having pushed bass. The frequency graph clearly shows that isn't the case. However, none of these headphones have a ruler flat response. As we all know a ruler flat response is not desirable either above 1kHz! But then how do we get to that holy grail of "listening as the composer, producer etc intended?". Is that some kind of echelon that simply isn't possible because we all hear things differently, or there are so many factors in the chain, that we should just find a sound we like rather than a sound that we think is what the composer heard?
 
Oh by the way I also listened to the PS1000. That was absolutely HORRIBLE with the piano. While I could appreciate the HD800 and what it was achieving, the PS1000 was another several clicks up on the treble overload for me.....made the piano sound thin and uninspiring.

 

[Argo Duck]

^ good post

 

[commtrd]

At a point listener subjectivity will always interfere with truly accurate assessment of musical reproduction from any system. As well as possible hearing problems such as high-frequency loss from too much listening at high volume (for example) on top of different amps and dacs and then even the effects of different cables in which it is desired to hear a difference due to the $500 I just spent on this new cable etc. In other words this whole hobby is really a huge exercise in subjectivity but is extremely rewarding when one achieves the synergy in system they are looking for whatever that may be. Some will always prefer the HD800 and some will prefer the LCD3s and others will have nothing other than a Stax 009 etc. The options are out there so it's all good.

 

[Richyieee]

I find at medium listening levels piano sounds much better on the ps1000 than the lcd3

 

[commtrd]

Quote:

I find at medium listening levels piano sounds much better on the ps1000 than the lcd3

It's all very subjective...  ;0)

 

[jonstatt]

Quote:

It's all very subjective...  ;0)

 It is, and there is other equipment in the way such as the amplifier, especially if someone is "tuning" their sound with a particular pair of headphones through a choice of tubes etc. In my case, I was actually playing a real piano (Yamaha) and looking to hear a similar timbre through the headphones on an electronic one (also Yamaha). Only the LCD-2 or LCD-3 achieved that.

 

[Argo Duck]

Exactly, and agreed; (real) piano - the only instrument I play - has been my reference too. It's the timbre I find accurate (not to mention those 'thuds' and other sounds from the mechanical action of pedal and dampers) with the LCD.

OTOH, I have no argument with what others hear and prefer.

One catch with my piano-based observations is that my audio-memory is mostly built from playing at the piano, not hearing it out in a room or auditorium. No doubt this makes a difference.

 It is, and there is other equipment in the way such as the amplifier, especially if someone is "tuning" their sound with a particular pair of headphones through a choice of tubes etc. In my case, I was actually playing a real piano (Yamaha) and looking to hear a similar timbre through the headphones on an electronic one (also Yamaha). Only the LCD-2 or LCD-3 achieved that.

 

[OPR8R]

I think in the end, it boils down to some combination of expectations and preferences.

 

[dleblanc343]

I agree that the LCD3 sound wonderful plugged into musical equipment (my piano and bass guitar amplifier) and does sound better than the HD800 in that regard. Its got a more natural timbre overall.
I do have to confirm that my HD800's have a higher level of resolution than the LCD3's though. It simply reveals things I cannot hear with the LCD3. What comes to mind is the intro of Careless Memories by duran duran with the 1,2,3,4 count in (it's in all versions of the track) and the intro of Nightcall by Kavinsky (distant bird chirping after the telephone booth sound). The HD800's also sound fuller than the lcd3 on my McIntosh, while presenting a very deep and more extensive, but less impactful bass.

 

[Mach3]

Quote:

I agree that the LCD3 sound wonderful plugged into musical equipment (my piano and bass guitar amplifier) and does sound better than the HD800 in that regard. Its got a more natural timbre overall.
I do have to confirm that my HD800's have a higher level of resolution than the LCD3's though. It simply reveals things I cannot hear with the LCD3. What comes to mind is the intro of Careless Memories by duran duran with the 1,2,3,4 count in (it's in all versions of the track) and the intro of Nightcall by Kavinsky (distant bird chirping after the telephone booth sound). The HD800's also sound fuller than the lcd3 on my McIntosh, while presenting a very deep and more extensive, but less impactful bass.

Totally agree with your statement. I find the HD800 totally outclass my LCD3 in details with well recorded track. As soon as you listen to current charts trash on the HD800, OMG. It's like someone took a drill to my head. arghhh..... One of my favorite track with the HD800. Eagles, Hell Freeze Over - Hotel California Live. Jaw dropper track... 

 

[Saraguie]

I agree that the HD800 has more detail however I found them sterile, like a sanitized operating room. I demoed at the N.Y. Audio show, at the Senn booth amped by their new DAC/AMP. And they were more comfortable then the LCD3s, which were 10 feet away at the Audeze booth, I went back and forth to compare.
 
IMO  Besides those two things..........the LCD3 is so much more in every way. They are fun and engaging to listen to.  How long would one want to spend in a room looking at scrubbed surfaces and scalpels?
 
To be fair I heard the HD800 is very equipment dependent and I only spent a short time listening. YMMV

 

[Lan647]

Quote:

I agree that the HD800 has more detail however I found them sterile, like a sanitized operating room. I demoed at the N.Y. Audio show, at the Senn booth amped by their new DAC/AMP. And they were more comfortable then the LCD3s, which were 10 feet away at the Audeze booth, I went back and forth to compare.
 
IMO  Besides those two things..........the LCD3 is so much more in every way. They are fun and engaging to listen to.  How long would one want to spend in a room looking at scrubbed surfaces and scalpels?
 
To be fair I heard the HD800 is very equipment dependent and I only spent a short time listening. YMMV

 
Above all, the HD 800 doesn't sound natural. 

 

[Zoom25]

How do you guys find the HD800 for electronic music? Seeing many people post saying they are getting deep bass and good impact intrigued me.

 

[Lan647]

Quote:

How do you guys find the HD800 for electronic music? Seeing many people post saying they are getting deep bass and good impact intrigued me.

 
Awful. The headphone is fast and crisp but the HD 800 doesn't have a very deep or impactful bass. When I owned them I never enjoyed them with any type of electronic music. They are just too thin and dry sounding for that, in my opinion.