[ValentinHogea]

Quote:

 
Had a buddy just recently have his Rev 1 right driver fail, sent them into Audeze, they replaced them with Rev 2 drivers.

Then it technically becomes Rev 1.5? 

 
Or was the type of Rosewood changed too (except for the possibility to buy with a leather headband for 50 USD extra)? Or did they just add the option to buy Bamboo also?

 

[paradoxper]

Quote:

Then it technically becomes Rev 1.5? 

 
Or was the type of Rosewood changed too (except for the possibility to buy with a leather headband for 50 USD extra)? Or did they just add the option to buy Bamboo also?

No, they just replaced drivers, same exact housing. Which Is funny because I could have swore
that Audeze said they were incompatible. Guess I was mistaken.

 

[ValentinHogea]

Quote:

No, they just replaced drivers, same exact housing. Which Is funny because I could have swore
that Audeze said they were incompatible. Guess I was mistaken.

I meant more that when they changed their products offerings from Rev 1 to Rev 2. The "real" ones, not your friends "hybrid"-pair.

 

[paradoxper]

Quote:

I meant more that when they changed their products offerings from Rev 1 to Rev 2. The "real" ones, not your friends "hybrid"-pair.

Currently LCD-2 Rev2 are available in Bamboo or Rosewood, both with the new angled connectors.

 

[mikek200]

Tnx Icenine,
Yeah,my Lcd-2's are the top of my line as well..work perfectly on almost every type of music ,I throw at it.
But lately got bitten by the beyerdynamic bug...DT990's 250 ohm/ still waiting for  Tesla T1's...comfort's a big issue for me.
 
Just thought it might add a different flavor to my collection.?
 
Mike

 

[Kojaku]

Quote:

Tnx Icenine,
Yeah,my Lcd-2's are the top of my line as well..work perfectly on almost every type of music ,I throw at it.
But lately got bitten by the beyerdynamic bug...DT990's 250 ohm/ still waiting for  Tesla T1's...comfort's a big issue for me.
 
Just thought it might add a different flavor to my collection.?
 
Mike

Oh Boy...Teslas...SO HOT. That upper treble energy is...attention-grabbing to say the least...
 
Kojaku

 

[Argo Duck]

^ no hot treble on my T1s. However, reportedly there may be variation. IIRC Purrin's measurements of a few T1s showed marked inconsistency between them.
 
My listening is split about 90% LCD2; 8% T1; 2% Grado. There's no contest among these 'phones - LCD2 win hands down.
 
However, I enjoy my T1 sessions. They do add a different flavor, and enhance my enjoyment of LCD2.

 

[sphinxvc]

Quote:

Really high up? Yes. I'm talking K-Pop girls pronouncing "S", here. Very high up.
Kojaku

 
Interesting.  
 
Quote:

 
WAS more similar.  The RMA process of the LCD-3 continues the brightening of the line.  An RMAed LCD-3 is flat to 2K, slopes down slowly then comes back up from 10-20K.  Rev1 started a steep slope at 1K, the Rev2 a slow slope at 1K.

 
Yeah, I'm just going off the phones I heard last, not FR measurements from a huge sample set.  I'm guessing you overlaid many FR charts for each headphone to come up with averages, then compared the averages?  

 

[Solude]

Nope just owned a Rev1, Rev2 and LCD-3

 

[pp312]

Reading all this about sample variations and incremental improvements etc, I start to feel the first stirrings of utter confusion. When the original LCD-2 came out it was manna from Heaven; you could hardly find a bad word about it. Some of course said it was a little "dark" (never quite understood that word in this context), but then they were the ones saying that about the HD650; generally all was sweetness and light. Then the Rev2 came out and people were selling their "world class" Rev1s all over the place, wondering how they ever abided that dark, muted monstrosity when the Rev2 was so clearly a step up. Then came the Rev3 and again...illumination! Except...maybe it was a little too much like the Rev1, a little muted--needed more bite. Or at least, some thought so; others thought it was just fine. Seems there was some sample variation, or was it incremental tinkering ? So...now I look at my LCD-2s and wonder just where they stand in relation to everyone else's LCD-2 (or 3). Has there been sample variation all along? Was there an original LCD-2 that the Rev1 replaced, that sounds different to both Rev1 and 2? Do ear pads really make a substantial difference? Does after-market silver cable (which incidentally I use)? Are there amps that magically brighten and open out the early versions? Is it possible that a Rev1 with silver cable and the right amp could sound exactly like a Rev2 with stock cable and less magical amp? Is it possible that an early, muted LCD-3 could sound pretty much like an LCD-2 Rev1, under the right (or wrong) conditions? These are questions the world awaits answers to.
 
Last night after posting I did some serious listening with my Rev1 and I have to say that they sounded "right" to me, in terms of what I hear in the concert hall. However, I usually sit midway back, a fair distance from the orchestra, and consequently that's how I judge "right". If I sat closer I would undoubtedly hear more high frequencies, as those diminish with distance. And if I were used to live music in a jazz club or rock gig (heaven forbid) I'd undoubtedly find the Rev1 lacking up top. So to sample variation and the synergistic variables of amps and cables (not to mention variable ear shapes and conditions) we can add variable expectation based on taste and life experience. All of which combined, I would suggest, just about renders this forum moot. 

  

 

[Argo Duck]

Never a truer word! Or equivalently, it renders all the arguments about equipment moot, as we never have the same audio-chains, same track samples, same ears, same neural circuits doing the decoding, same emotional sets etc.
 
Might as well all just sit back, relax and enjoy our choices whatever they are.
 
Quote:

All of which combined, I would suggest, just about renders this forum moot.

  

 

[K3cT]

Wait, wait revision 3? Did I miss anything during my long absence from this forum? 
 
Anyway, I would guess sample variance is a real issue with Audez'e headphones because every time I brought my LCD2 (it's an older 2010 version) to local meets, my friends would always tell me how my pair sounded different from other LCD2 R1s. Mine sounds 80% like a R2 but with less upper mids and a wider X axis in the soundstage. 

 

[killmurer]

Quote:

Reading all this about sample variations and incremental improvements etc, I start to feel the first stirrings of utter confusion. When the original LCD-2 came out it was manna from Heaven; you could hardly find a bad word about it. Some of course said it was a little "dark" (never quite understood that word in this context), but then they were the ones saying that about the HD650; generally all was sweetness and light. Then the Rev2 came out and people were selling their "world class" Rev1s all over the place, wondering how they ever abided that dark, muted monstrosity when the Rev2 was so clearly a step up. Then came the Rev3 and again...illumination! Except...maybe it was a little too much like the Rev1, a little muted--needed more bite....

 
What is rev3? Are you saying bamboo + angled connectors changed the sound? 

 

[MacedonianHero]

Quote:

 
What is rev3? Are you saying bamboo + angled connectors changed the sound? 

 
I'm pretty sure that the drivers are the same as the Rev.2s, just the physical changes to add bamboo as an option and the angled drivers. Sonically, they should be identical.

 

[pp312]

Sorry to get everyone all sweaty and over-excited. I meant of course LCD-3.