[Shahrose]

For me, the HD800 vs LCD-2 isn't even a fair comparison. One is a flagship and is priced significantly higher so I expect it to perform better (HD800)...and I strongly feel it does.
 
The LCD-3 vs HD800 would be a better matchup. I've seen mixed opinions on that one.

 

[MacedonianHero]

Quote:

For me, the HD800 vs LCD-2 isn't even a fair comparison. One is a flagship and is priced significantly higher so I expect it to perform better (HD800)...and I strongly feel it does.
 
The LCD-3 vs HD800 would be a better matchup. I've seen mixed opinions on that one.

 
Agreed on mixed opinions, for you I'd still say you'd prefer the HD800s Shahrose. Both are top flight cans IMO. If you're ever in the east end, let me know you can hear both side by side. 

 

[Windsor]

The HD800 and LCD-3 are two of the best headphones I've tried and between them it's a matter of personal preference. Essentially for those who want to hear all the details on recordings in a very resolving way with a leaner than natural timbre, I'd recommend the HD 800. The LCD-3 is probably better for those who want a weightier sound with more natural-timbres who don't mind sacrificing some technicalities such as treble extension and bass clarity.

 

[MacedonianHero]

Quote:

The HD800 and LCD-3 are two of the best headphones I've tried and between them it's a matter of personal preference. Essentially for those who want to hear all the details on recordings in a very resolving way with a leaner than natural timbre, I'd recommend the HD 800. The LCD-3 is probably better for those who want a weightier sound with more natural-timbres who don't mind sacrificing some technicalities such as treble extension and bass clarity.

I think your Lavry must be holding your LCD-3s back. I find the bass clarity actually tighter/deeper/more defined on the LCD-3s. Treble extension is up to 20Hz, though shelved back. Some may or may not prefer this. 

 

[Shahrose]

Quote:

 
Agreed on mixed opinions, for you I'd still say you'd prefer the HD800s Shahrose. Both are top flight cans IMO. If you're ever in the east end, let me know you can hear both side by side. 

 
Gracious as always. Someday I'll take you up on that Peter.

 

[extrabigmehdi]

Just a little critic regarding the hd800:
I  think Sennheiser invented the tangling cable.
Each time I  put them on the box, and then  when I remove them , it's a pain to untangle.
Maybe Sennheiser should work in association with Monster cable ...

 

[MorbidToaster]

My D7000 stock cable was waaaaaaay worse than my HD800 though they feel similar. 
 
Quote:

Just a little critic regarding the hd800:
I  think Sennheiser invented the tangling cable.
Each time I  put them on the box, and then  when I remove them , it's a pain to untangle.
Maybe Sennheiser should work in association with Monster cable ...

 

[BournePerfect]

Yeah the HD 800 cable has nothing on my old D2000 cable-that thing was almost reason enough to ditch the headphone...
 
-Daniel

 

[Windsor]

Quote:

I think your Lavry must be holding your LCD-3s back. I find the bass clarity actually tighter/deeper/more defined on the LCD-3s. Treble extension is up to 20Hz, though shelved back. Some may or may not prefer this. 

 
You're probably right about the Lavry not driving the LCD-3 to its full potential. I do love that the Lavry is very neutral and allows the sound of different recordings to speak though.
 
I agree that the LCD-3's bass is more prominent than the HD 800's in terms of weight, but I do think bass sounds cleaner with the HD 800 and with much more spaciousness than the LCD-3; the recordings are still a big factor though as are DACs/Amps, and listening volume (I tend to listen quietly and find the LCD-3 sometimes speaks clearer when I turn it up). I love that the LCD-3's treble is so non-fatiguing, which is a big plus point especially for those that may listen to harsh-sounding or bright recordings.
 
I think that I've been so used to the sheer clarity of the way the HD 800 sounds that the LCD-3 sounded muddy by comparison, but it's just a case of adjusting to the sound signature of each headphone when listening - both are different and truly first-class headphones in their own right. I can see how have both the HD 800 and LCD-3 will most probably cover all bases for audio listening. 
 
Another head-fier is kindly sending me a Q cable so I look forward to hearing the differences over the stock cable. The LCD-3 is a great headphone that I want to hear in the best-sounding way possible.

 

[dallan]

I thought the LCD-3 was actually way better than the 2, hands down.  It doesn't have the disjointed sound that i had such an issue with.  Really my hat's off to them.  I loved hearing them at the Village meet.   On the other hand i love the 800s which my system is focused around and wouldn't trade them in.  I could easily see having them both however when the time came to have a different pair of phones, i elected closed due to the background noise.  I have to deal with at home with family often......so i ended up getting the W3000anv which seems to me to have many of the open attributes of the 800's in a closed formate(crazy as it sounds).  So the 3's will be on hold for me, though they compete well with the 800's if i had to choose one i would still be with the 800's.

 

[Windsor]

Quote:

I thought the LCD-3 was actually way better than the 2, hands down.  It doesn't have the disjointed sound that i had such an issue with.  Really my hat's off to them.  I loved hearing them at the Village meet.   On the other hand i love the 800s which my system is focused around and wouldn't trade them in.  I could easily see having them both however when the time came to have a different pair of phones, i elected closed due to the background noise.  I have to deal with at home with family often......so i ended up getting the W3000anv which seems to me to have many of the open attributes of the 800's in a closed formate(crazy as it sounds).  So the 3's will be on hold for me, though they compete well with the 800's if i had to choose one i would still be with the 800's.

 
I love the HD 800, but for some things, such as listening to rock records, the LCD-3 are my clear fave. Have you heard the Fostex TH900? They're getting great write-ups on head-fi. 

 

[dallan]

I heard them in passing at the Village meet too i believe.....Jude's pair.  I think i liked them but they didn't stand out and wow me in passing.  Didn't really know what i was listening too because out of the loop for a few months with work and family.  Had my needs met too with my several setups.  Now i am mad at myself that i didn't take a listen, but when the time came, the W3000anv sounded like it suit my tastes more from sound descriptions.  Also got a pretty good deal, under half the price of the 900s so i could swing it immediately.  Figure i will probably get to hear the 900's again at the Hilton meet in LA in August and this time i will pay close attention, that's for sure.  I have never bothered to listen to Denon's and that is the general the comparison made to the 900's so i am totally lost with the actual signature.
 
And yes, the LCD-3 would seem good for rock.  My main listening is Jambands, then Classic rock and Jazz/Blues.  Right now i am listening to 24 bit download of Umphrey"s McGee at Bonnaroo recorded on June 8 this year thru my HD800's fed with the V200.  Zana Deux happens to be off.

 

[irzekk]

Beauts.

 

[Windsor]

Quote:

And yes, the LCD-3 would seem good for rock.  My main listening is Jambands, then Classic rock and Jazz/Blues.  Right now i am listening to 24 bit download of Umphrey"s McGee at Bonnaroo recorded on June 8 this year thru my HD800's fed with the V200.  Zana Deux happens to be off.

 
Given the preferences you listed I'd say the LCD-3 (and probably an aftermarket cable) would be a great match for you. 

 
The HD 800's still great though. 

 

[Windsor]

Quote:

Beauts.

 
For a moment there I thought you said Beats.