[geoffalter11]

Yes, it does. Hearing the LCD-5 like that was the first time I didn’t hear any hint of the drawbacks I usually hear from a planar driver. But it only took a $15,000 setup

That always helps. If you were an objectivist, that wouldn't make a difference, as sound is sound and measurements would tell you that it makes zero difference as long as the distortion levels are vanishingly low. Yet, differences we hear. Alchemy isn't meant to be determined by science alone. You were most likely hearing the LCD-5 at its peak being driven exactly as it should. Leading to an experience where you get to hear the 5 at its full potential. I see a ton of merit in what you are saying.

 

[jonathan c]

Neither the Classic or Atrium are as resolving as my LCD-4z, but they aren't lacking either. Everything is there! Both have this innate sense of pacing that makes listening a pure joy.

Resolution definitely is not everything for me. Without PRAT, even tonal balance, ambience recovery, and spacious soundstage, ultra resolution would be totally distracting - revealing mercilessly how disjointed the music presentation is .

 

[geoffalter11]

Resolution definitely is not everything for me. Without PRAT, even tonal balance, ambience recovery, and spacious soundstage, ultra resolution would be totally distracting - revealing mercilessly how disjointed the music presentation is .

I believe we are in agreement..

 

[Slim1970]

Resolution definitely is not everything for me. Without PRAT, even tonal balance, ambience recovery, and spacious soundstage, ultra resolution would be totally distracting - revealing mercilessly how disjointed the music presentation is .

Well said....

 

[haasaaroni]

Could be the tuning or the amp. I actually don't hear the low end as different. It sounds the same to me in terms of quantity, but I think the changes to the staging and imaging play a part in internalizing the bass differently. The Classic is definitely an evolved version of the OG. I can't write that the OG is better. But, the differences are great enough that I like to think of the headphones each on their own merits. I think the Auteur OG was a seminal moment in design for ZMF, and must be preserved for what it is. The Classic is wonderful. A step forward, but so much of the tuning remains untouched to my ears. The introduction of the ADS gave them so much more room for creativity with the sound. The ability to open up the midrange and use the damping to project near and far sounds more acutely gives the bass and treble a totally different feel. Not sure this makes any sense on a Sunday morning. I totally get why you feel the bass to be more impactful on the Classic. I have been trying to get to the "whys" as the amount of bass sounds so similar, yet its presentation is different. Of course, YMMV. I am by no means an expert.

Yeah this makes sense. The Auteur has always been super sensitive to source chain (as its namesake suggests), so I bet that’s also a big factor in how I’m hearing it. The separation also makes the bass stand out more, so it can easily be perceived as more prominent because of that. Regardless, I'm really loving this thing.

 

[geoffalter11]

Yeah this makes sense. The Auteur has always been super sensitive to source chain (as its namesake suggests), so I bet that’s also a big factor in how I’m hearing it. The separation also makes the bass stand out more, so it can easily be perceived as more prominent because of that. Regardless, I'm really loving this thing.

All that matters

 

[Pharmaboy]

Comfort was just weird

You're being kind. That thing is a torture device.

 

[DenverW]

Yeah! For the ZMF room I really liked the Caldera, but surprisingly for a planar, I especially loved it on tubes, like most ZMF’s. I heard it on the upcoming ZMF OTL from Deckware alongside the Atrium and thought it was my favorite ZMF I’ve ever heard. The sound was intense, detailed, and just huge. I also really loved the Atrium, I thought it pulled the mids back from the Auteur Classic and added more micro detail better separation and layering. But both were outside my budget, so I went with the still very mighty Auteur Classic.

I think the overall highlights were hearing the LCD-5 on the Ampsandsound Nautilus, and the Stax X9000 on the Blue Hawaii SE. Both of those setups were just unreal. The LCD-5 on those tubes sounded so perfectly natural and lifelike, and the speed from the X9000’s make for the most dynamic presentation I’ve ever heard, in headphones or in real life.

Honestly, nothing I heard sounded bad. The DCA Expanse was very mellow and very resolving at the same time, with a huge stage, but I wasn’t too moved by it. I also found myself hunting down all the HD800S’s that I could to hear them on a bunch of different stuff, and I think they’re going to replace my Arya Stealth’s very soon.

Oh! There was one headphone I really didn’t get: the Abyss 1266 on the Lina stack. Comfort was just weird, and it had a very planar-like timbre that made everything sound unnatural. I wasn’t a fan of the new Utopia either, but I think most Focal headphones sound too harsh, so no surprises there.

This was what I was finding, too. Everything was set up on these amazing 10k systems and sounded fantastic. Sometimes it was hard to tell which headphones sounded fantastic vs which headphones sounded fantastic in their current chain. I also really liked it when wifi was available (such as in the zmf room) so I could pick music I knew to demo. Not always the case in the show room.

Also, I appreciated it when all of us were standing in a circle around the table with the gear we wanted in hand so no one could swoop in and grab it! I had the Caldera and a Macassar Atrium in each hand while I was waiting to speak with Zach. There is something great about being the first people in the room!

 

[geoffalter11]

This was what I was finding, too. Everything was set up on these amazing 10k systems and sounded fantastic. Sometimes it was hard to tell which headphones sounded fantastic vs which headphones sounded fantastic in their current chain. I also really liked it when wifi was available (such as in the zmf room) so I could pick music I knew to demo. Not always the case in the show room.

Also, I appreciated it when all of us were standing in a circle around the table with the gear we wanted in hand so no one could swoop in and grab it! I had the Caldera and a Macassar Atrium in each hand while I was waiting to speak with Zach. There is something great about being the first people in the room!

Lucky Denver! Congrats!

 

[geoffalter11]

You're being kind. That thing is a torture device.

Those are fighting words to the 1266 aficionados. I happen to agree. I just couldn't get it to fit on my oblong noggin.

 

[AudioDuck]

You're being kind. That thing is a torture device.

It certainly LOOKS like one! Even if it were the greatest-sounding headphone on earth, I’d be worried it would try to strangle me anytime I used it.

 

[Pharmaboy]

Resolution definitely is not everything for me. Without PRAT, even tonal balance, ambience recovery, and spacious soundstage, ultra resolution would be totally distracting - revealing mercilessly how disjointed the music presentation is .

I couldn't agree more. In excess, resolution even becomes intense and distracting, with "excess" defined as beyond what one would hear in live music in a real space.

To my ears, too much resolution is the aural equivalent of using a magnifying glass on a painting--it certainly reveals more detail than one would otherwise see, but at the same time obscures the gestalt of the artwork.

 

[geoffalter11]

I couldn't agree more. In excess, resolution even becomes intense and distracting, with "excess" defined as beyond what one would hear in live music in a real space.

To my ears, too much resolution is the aural equivalent of using a magnifying glass on a painting--it certainly reveals more detail than one would otherwise see, but at the same time obscures the gestalt of the artwork.

What would be an example of a headphone where it provides "excess" resolution? While I agree with this wholeheartedly, I can't think of a headphone that provides "excess". Certainly out of balance... A headphone that is highly resolving but missing other aspects that make it seem off. Going the other way, headphones that excel with impeccable tonal balance and PRAT, yet the drivers don't extract all of the detail. This is a fuzzy thing for my brain.

 

[Pharmaboy]

What would be an example of a headphone where it provides "excess" resolution? While I agree with this wholeheartedly, I can't think of a headphone that provides "excess". Certainly out of balance... A headphone that is highly resolving but missing other aspects that make it seem off. Going the other way, headphones that excel with impeccable tonal balance and PRAT, yet the drivers don't extract all of the detail. This is a fuzzy thing for my brain.

I expressed that thought inexactly.

The sad fact is that no headphone driver can extract all the detail there is IRL music...or any of the other qualities present IRL music. Audio gear of any kind, no matter how big or expensive, can reproduce just a fraction, a subset of what one hears in live music in a real space. Particular audio characteristics that can't match the real thing (in my experience, anyway) are dynamics, macro-and micro-; bass (depth and impact); peak volume; and reproduction of the acoustic of the space itself.

While every element of audio is less than the real thing, audio still sounds extremely convincing when the reproduction balances all those sonic elements in a good imitation of the real thing. So audio resolution is less than the real thing, but as long as it doesn't overwhelm the other elements, it sounds great. Same thing with bass, dymamics, and all the other facets of music experience.

There are headphones whose raison d'etre seems to be maximizing resolution. They succeed in this, but then the imitation that audio reproduction really is becomes unbalanced in favor of resolution. The same thing can happen with bass in other headphones.

The Focal headphones I've heard (Elear, Clear, Stellia--especially the Clear) push resolution past the point where it's in balance with everything else. I've also heard some freakishly detailed and bright sound from electrostats (can't name names because I forgot the brands in question). In the case of the Elear (which I heard at length IMS), it also pushed dynamics to an unnatural degree, which made the sound not just bright, but overly insistent. I've also had a few random experiences with various Beyerdynamic models at shows that qualify.

I can't give better, more elaborate examples simply because I avoid audio gear that exaggerates resolution.

PS: the experience of music being 100% subjective, it's always possible I'm wrong about all of this. All I can do is honestly report what I hear...

 

[haasaaroni]

This was what I was finding, too. Everything was set up on these amazing 10k systems and sounded fantastic. Sometimes it was hard to tell which headphones sounded fantastic vs which headphones sounded fantastic in their current chain. I also really liked it when wifi was available (such as in the zmf room) so I could pick music I knew to demo. Not always the case in the show room.

Also, I appreciated it when all of us were standing in a circle around the table with the gear we wanted in hand so no one could swoop in and grab it! I had the Caldera and a Macassar Atrium in each hand while I was waiting to speak with Zach. There is something great about being the first people in the room!

Haha yes!! I was torn between that B-stock Atrium and my AC. And it was also so good to meet you and others from the forum! Nice to know we’re all in the same “neighborhood” and that Zach and Bevin are real live (and very kind and honest) human beings too. I know some of us spent the first 2 or 3 hours of the show just in that room haha