Audeze LCD-2

[luvdunhill]

I knew you weren't totally joking, I only mentioned the F5 because unlike the nemesis I actually have parts to build one. I wonder how the nemesis sounds...

I'm sure kwkarth knows, ask him?

[Nebby]

I'm sure kwkarth knows, ask him?

I think I would prefer Steve's review of the article more than kwkarth's review of the amp:

Just got my copy.

It sounds absolutely fantastic!

The nouns are rich and full without being too warm. It's well extended in both the verbs and adverbs. Conjunctions are silky smooth, much as you'd find in a tube SET amp.

If I had any nit to pick it would be that it's just a tad light in the preposition department, but then personally I prefer my prepositions a bit on the heavy side so this may not be a problem for most.

All in all I'd have to say it's worth every last word.

se

[Eric5676]

Not as funny as Asr's "If I were drunk..." comments, but here, after 3 tries, are my (sorry, somewhat hype-y) thoughts on the LCD-2s and HD-800s which I posted on HF (with some unnecessary crap removed):

What strikes me about the LCD-2s are they are the first headphone which allows the music to shine as it is absolutely. The HD-800s do this too, stepping back to allow the music through, but stepping TOO far back. They don't do intimacy where it is required, and they suffer from a degree of vagueness, rather like listening to orchestra, and the individual instruments are somewhere "out there". For a lot of music, I prefer the Symphones Magnums, which are, to my ears, equally fast, yet very front-row, with the kind of intimacy that you can see the strings on a player's guitar vibrate as he plays, yet sometimes are a bit too intense. The LCD-2s aren't that close, yet they aren't far. They are ready to step in and really hand the music to you when it's required, yet will step back when the music steps back. The singer in front of the mic is in front of the mic, the instruments are exactly where they were placed on stage at the distance they are from the microphones and with the exact intensity that results.

On my 3+ stars random playlist, I have a Black Crowes track which starts off with vocals. I had the volume up a bit from normal, and out of the black of nowhere their voices just jumped out at me in total detail, rather as if they'd appeared right in front of me and started singing. I'm not a real fan of their music, but it was absolutely stunning. The thing is, this isn't being done by tonal trickery (eg: a peaky treble or mid-bass) but by being extremely fast. Take my Black Crowes vocals impressions and substitute The Crystal Method or Shpongle or anything where there is bass impact. Same result.

Their frequency response, being as technically the closest to genuine "flat" possible with a headphone becomes quickly irrelevant. The HD-800s you are often trying to compensate for, with a re-cable, with a slightly warm-of-neutral tube amp -- the absolute seems always just out of reach, so you compensate a little, maybe spending a lot of money in the process. The LCD-2s just hand you the music as it absolutely is, warts and all. If there's distortion, it will tell you about it, including details of exactly how that distortion is, yet, it will still make the music sound glorious at the same time. With the HD-800s, you stand back and look at how beautiful the musical painting is. With the LCD-2s you are IN the painting.


This is the kind of post that can get me into trouble. As much as I love the 800s, this is kind of feedback that can tempt me to do something evil.

If no one minds: It doesn't mean much, but I've never heard of this company. Who are they? I gather at this point these phones aren't just FOTM? I really don't mean that question in a heckling way.

[Icarium]

It's two guys who both work 70-80 hr full time jobs (One of them also has a music label) and a silent partner.

Really cool guys who are dedicated to producing a product that is worth the money. That aside the LCD-2s are decent headphones. Feel free to do your own research though.

[Eric5676]

It's two guys who both work 70-80 hr full time jobs (One of them also has a music label) and a silent partner.

Really cool guys who are dedicated to producing a product that is worth the money. That aside the LCD-2s are decent headphones. Feel free to do your own research though.

Sounds promising. I'll be keeping tabs on these.

[Currawong]

I was searching to see if there were any decent images of the latest revision and...you lot are a bunch of web-polluters:

:p:p:p:p

[DefectiveAudioComponent]

What revision? Are there changes now?

[morphsci]

It is now the LCD-2.24

[Currawong]

What revision? Are there changes now?

Just the angling of the connectors and the "A" shape in the grills. All the pics only showed how they looked prior to that, or some cats balls or a penis gourd.

[DefectiveAudioComponent]

What your are looking for is Page 36 where I have posted a glorious picture of a recent version (No pigs there. Sorry). (But it's not the most recent revision. There has been a minor change since that version.)

Just the angling of the connectors and the "A" shape in the grills. All the pics only showed how they looked prior to that, or some cats balls or a penis gourd.

[Solude]

Finally got mine complete with damage that occurred during assembly, yay. So far honestly not getting the hype. I'm going to use them exclusively this week before pitting them against the HE-5LE and O2 but not looking good on first listen.

[xand1x]

Finally got mine complete with damage that occurred during assembly, yay. So far honestly not getting the hype. I'm going to use them exclusively this week before pitting them against the HE-5LE and O2 but not looking good on first listen.

What kind of damage? (Physical? Sonically they are off?)

Edited September 14, 2010 by xand1x

[HDen]

Finally got mine complete with damage that occurred during assembly, yay. So far honestly not getting the hype. I'm going to use them exclusively this week before pitting them against the HE-5LE and O2 but not looking good on first listen.

Well that's not good, I would've called them immediately if I received an expensive item with damage from factory...

[dBel84]

Well that's not good, I would've called them immediately if I received an expensive item with damage from factory...

He did and hence the replacement

So far honestly not getting the hype.

This is allowed , the most important thing is to be honest with yourself - if you do not like what you hear, move on, this is what the journey is about. ( and considering the demand, you will not be out of pocket by the exercise )

..dB

[luvdunhill]

What kind of damage? (Physical? Sonically they are off?)

probably cable wired out of phase

[Solude]

Nah its the stock not Alo... zing

The damage was to the R mount. Got over torqued and cracked from one side across then down. Also the cable's techflex doesn't quite reach the heat shrink Both really should have been noticed by the tech who assembled them. Now Audez'e is out a headband and cable and shipping to Canada because no one gave them a one over before packing them up.

Sound wise there just seems so far to be an overall softening of the music. Very little attack and air.

[n3rdling]

I wrote this up for Andy, so I might as well post it here too...sorry for the length:

The LCD2 is a very nice headphone. I don't consider it the king of the world the way it's being hyped up right now, but it is definitely a great deal at under $1000. It has a very similar frequency response to the O2mk1 to my ears. I think the O2 is better at pretty much everything though. The O2, and electrostats in general, are a touch faster, have a little more clarity, and are more detailed. For instance, the O2 and Lambda Signature are very good at letting you hear the room during a recording - the LCD2 not so much. That very slight delay in very low level echo when sound is recorded in a room is pretty much lost in the LCD2 (and most headphones). This can make the LCD2 sound more intimate and personal, but I prefer to have that detail as it sounds more alive and real. This is most noticeable with live recordings, where the LCD2 can at times make a live album sound like a studio album with an audience thrown in. I'm not sure you can picture what I'm talking about but it's something I noticed. To my ears electrostats are also much superior to dynamics at revealing pitch and allowing you to focus on any instrument you want at any time without trouble (especially when playing midrange notes and bass notes simultaneously). I don't know what causes this, but I think it might be due to there being "less impact" and lower distortion in general. The common comparison used to explain this is the way a large car subwoofer will produce bass but all the bass notes sound very similar, whereas listening on an electrostat takes it to the other extreme by presenting you with the pitch and texture of every bass note. I'd say the biggest difference in frequency response between the O2mk1 and LCD2 is in the upper mids and highs. The LCD2 has more presence in the upper mids/lower treble area and this results in a slightly bigger emphasis on the sound spectrum commonly mistakenly referred to as "detail" - things like tape hiss, sibilance, bad recording artifacts, and the small time sometimes captured when a finger initially hits a metal guitar string are all more prominent on the LCD2. This in turn gives the O2 a slightly smoother sound that can make even bad recordings sound nice, whereas the LCD2 is a little less forgiving. From the mid treble to upper treble, the O2 has a little more presence than the LCD2, which is pretty much air. This is explained earlier - part of what gives you the sense of area of a recording space. The O2 is also better at imaging, but that's one of the many things it does best. Another difference between the two headphones is that the LCD2 has a thicker sound. The O2 has a thick sound compared to other electrostats, but the LCD2 probably has the most impact throughout the audible frequency spectrum of any headphone I've heard. I can see somebody having a preference for either presentation.

I know all of the above probably makes the LCD2 sound horrible, but it is actually a great headphone. I am being pretty nitpicky, and this is compared to a very high caliber headphone. In comparison to most other headphones, the LCD2 is great at everything. If impact, a natural sounding frequency response, tonality, imaging, and extension are high on your list, this is a definite headphone to look at. This is pretty much all I have to say on the LCD2 as I'm not really one to attempt full blown reviews and try to only report what I'm fairly certain I hear instead of what I think I hear.

[Currawong]

I think you wrote it up well and the example of low-level echo being missing is something I agree with. It's present in O2s even with a 717 or 007t. I wouldn't worry about not being good at reviews. I find I have moments of inspiration where i'll spew forth similarly and I prefer reading this kind of summary anyway.

[HeadphoneAddict]

n3rdling, nice writeup. I posted similar impressions myself.

[swt61]

I'm really not sure why these are so often being compared to the 02s.

It's an unfair comparison IMO. They're not in the same price range.

However, I like the more forward nature, and they don't require an expensive specialty amp. But to expect the same detail and refinement as the 02 is unrealistic.

IMO a comparison to the HD800 makes more sense, and IMO the LCD-2 wins on all accounts.

Also I guess it's a taste thing, but to my ear they trounce all of the HE series orthos by a fair margin.

Edited September 14, 2010 by swt61

[spritzer]

The O2 comparisons came from the fanboys. The idiots claim this is the best headphone ever made so naturally, to them, it is superior to the SR-007.

[emelius]

IMO a comparison to the HD800 makes more sense, and IMO the LCD-2 wins on all accounts.

what he said...

[AmanGeorge]

I've never owned an O2, but from what I've heard at meets it makes plenty of sense to use the O2 as a reference point for the LCD-2. Even if you think the O2 offers a higher degree of refinement, I think the two sound much more similar than different in terms of their presentation. Both have a rather warm frequency response while retaining detail, they are quite intimate, and both focus on precise imaging within a small-ish headstage rather than projecting a huge headstage like an HD800. And I wouldn't be surprised if most people who have a preference for the LCD-2 also like the O2, and vice-versa (although Solude sounds like he may end up being an exception to this) much the same way that folks who like the K701 are immediately taken in by the HD800.

[Eric5676]

IMO a comparison to the HD800 makes more sense, and IMO the LCD-2 wins on all accounts.

Pretty bold. How and why? At the risk of making you repeat yourself I may have missed it maybe you could just link me to an earlier post.

[DefectiveAudioComponent]

I have to make sure I never listen to a good O2 rig.