SF Bay Area LCD-3 Tour

[purrin]

Let's send them down south to you and Particleman since you both are close. I'll let Whitney know that you will be picking them up.

[909]

if i could be added to the list, i'd like to give them a listen. i live in glendale, california.

[n3rdling]

If it comes down to the LA area I wouldn't mind a couple days with them either.

[NekoAudio]

Just to update, still waiting to arrange pickup from rhythmdevils.

[rhythmdevils]

Hmmm a pm must have been lost in the digital void... Not to worry though pm sent.

Edited December 14, 2011 by rhythmdevils

[purrin]

Updated. Got the SoCal guys. Maybe a few more after the NorCal meet, but I'm selling them after that. I get feeling I'm not going to get more than $1200 for them by then.

[NekoAudio]

Just picked up the LCD-3's this morning. Particleman will be picking them up from me this weekend.

[rhythmdevils]

Going to Particleman on Sunday.

Edited December 17, 2011 by rhythmdevils

[Horio]

You can cross me off the list. I don't think I will have time to get down to SJ to pick up the headphones in the next couple of weeks. I'll just have to wait till the next big meet.

[rhythmdevils]

I'm in Palo Alto. But that's fine, they're going on to the next person.

[rhythmdevils]

Bob has them now. Will be interesting to see what he thinks comparing to the Rev2.

No one seems to want to hear them with TP. I swear to them that it is clean TP, never touched my heiny and I even offer a screw driver and instructions on how to do it. But I think since it's a limited audition people are wanting to hear them stock so they have a reference point to other's impressions.

[cAsE sEnSiTiVe]

First off, Whitney....and of course Purrin, thanks so much for allowing us to try these headphones out on our rigs. It's a rare opportunity that I wish came around a lot more often than it does.

Below is a copy & paste from a post I just made at the "other place" regarding my initial but fairly confident findings regarding what I am hearing from the LCD-3. As usual, YMMV.

The loaner I now have in house sounds veiled compared to my Rev 2's. There is a distinct lack of transparency with these, and I believe it stems from the overly ripe low end. On Wynton Marsalis' "Live at the Village Vanguard" disc #6, there is a track called 'Brother Veal'. It opens up with what I can only describe as just about the best recording of an upright acoustic bass I have ever heard. It is front and center, has depth, beautiful rendering of the resonant tone of the strings, digs down deep and tight as a nut. If the system is up to things, the musician will be right there in the room with you.

Versus the LCD-2 rev 2, the LCD-3 portrays the bass sound as overly thick and lacking definition. The natural resonation of the instrument is audibly subdued and even the crowd interaction as the bassist rips through his solo is not nearly as pronounced and apparent.

I went through all of my favorites list that I typically utilize for evaluations, and pardoning my pun....the song remained the same. Everything had a fine sheen to it, less of a connection with the music, everything sounding a bit rounded off and slightly lacking of the rawness of certain instruments such as the human voice, and especially the raw edge of horns such as trumpets and the seductive smokiness of a tenor sax.

After about a 3 hour listening session with a few breaks thrown in, I replaced the LCD-3's with my pair of Rev 2's....and all the magic that I so crave, returned in spades.

Needless to say this particular LCD-3 is a GREAT disappointment to me. It is unclear whether or not the only thing keeping this headphone from performing at the level I had expected is the thickening up of the bass region, which in my mind is intruding upon everything above its spectrum. About the only things I'd say it has over the rev 2 is that it is more comfortable to wear long-term due to the much softer ear cups, and the different angling of the connectors helps to keep the cables off of your chest. If what I am hearing is the result of poor quality control, and there are LCD-3's out there giving a much different sonic presentation, then they apparently need a tighter rein on things at Audeze.

My playback system from soup to nuts was as follows:

Source: HP Elitebook 8460P Core i7 2620M @ 3.4ghz 8MB, 160GB SSD (running in battery mode)

Player: JPLAY in FullScale Hibernation mode

DAC: Meitner MA-1 (plugged into an Acoustic Revive RTP-2 Ultimate conditioner w/Tel Wire power cord)

Amplifiers: VTL IT-85 (single-ended), 4ch Beta 22 (balanced) (both amps plugged straight into the wall with LessLoss DFPC Sig cords)

Headphones: LCD-2 rev 2, LCD-3 (both with Q-Audio cable and Q-Audio 1/4" to XLR adapter for use with b22 amps.)

USB cable: Acoustic Revive 1.0PL

Interconnects: Wireworld Platinum Eclipse 6 (rca), Nordost Heimdall (XLR)

Music used to evaluate included:

Erich Kunzel & the Cincinnati Pops 'Mancini's Greatest Hits

Joshua Redman Quartet 'Spirit of the Moment, Live at the Village Vanguard'

Fred Hersch Trio 'The Fred Hersch Trio Plays'

Wynton Marsalis Septet 'Live at the Village Vanguard'

Buddy Guy 'A Tribute to Stevie Ray Vaughan'

Lyle Lovett 'Joshua Judges Ruth'

Harry Belafonte 'Belafonte Returns to Carnegie Hall'

Frank Sinatra 'Sings for only the Lonely'

Carmen McRae 'The Great American Songbook, Live at Donte's'

John Hammond 'Rough & Tough' (24/96khz)

Richard Thompson 'Folk, Live from Mountain Stage' (24/96khz)

Rani Arbo 'Cocktail Swing' (24/96khz)

Brooks Williams 'Hundred Year Old Shadow' (24/96khz)

Trondheim Solistene 'Divertimenti' (24/192khz)

All music in uncompressed WAV format.

[Audiojunkie]

Please enlighten us how these comments line up with:

http://www.innerfidelity.com/images/AudezeLCD2Rev2.pdf

and

http://www.innerfidelity.com/images/AudezeLCD3sn2312454.pdf

They measure quite similar with a small advantage to the LCD-3s. Unless your pair has been damaged/tampered with/defective, your comments just don't add up.

[jp11801]

Purrin have you thought to contact Alex or Sankar about these to see if you have a defective pair? They sounded absolutely fantastic at RMAF.

[cAsE sEnSiTiVe]

Please enlighten us how these comments line up with:

http://www.innerfide...ezeLCD2Rev2.pdf

and

http://www.innerfide...D3sn2312454.pdf

They measure quite similar with a small advantage to the LCD-3s. Unless your pair has been damaged/tampered with/defective, your comments just don't add up.

Sure they add up....to my ears, and in my system. With your ears, in your system, you could definitely come up with a completely different set of conclusions. Since I was shat into this world with but a pair of human ears, and not a pair of microphones, I can't really comment on what the analyzer mics hear/heard. I've found graphs to be able to give you a possible glimpse into what you MIGHT hear yourself, but in the end it tells you how it measures....not necessarily how it sounds. You've got to listen to them in order to see if they do it for you or not.

My $.02

[TMoney]

Unless you have a shit pair, they should sound better than any LCD-2. They clearly measure better on the Inner Fidelity measurements.

My own listening impressions with a pair have matched up very well with the way I expected them to sound based on the measurements.

If they sound worse in your system they are either broken or your system (or hearing) blows.

From what you posted, it sounds like they are damaged and might need to go back in to Purrin or Audeze for a little check up. Your impressions do not match up with how the LCD-3 measures relative to the LCD-2s.

[catscratch]

How do they measure better? I see slightly higher THD for the LCD3, and possibly slightly more linear FR for the Rev2 though the measurements on the whole look very similar. But maybe I'm reading it wrong.

Edited December 31, 2011 by catscratch

[n3rdling]

LCD2rev2 looks to have less distortion, cleaner square waves, less rolled off treble but all the differences look pretty minor.

[TMoney]

I think the better distortion measurements are the biggie here.

Edited December 31, 2011 by TMoney

[Fitz]

I think the better distortion measurements are the biggie here.

I think you misunderstood, the distortion measurements favor the LCD2, not the LCD3.

[Audiojunkie]

I think you misunderstood, the distortion measurements favor the LCD2, not the LCD3.

Nope...I think you've got it the other way around.

[Tyll Hertsens]

WTF do I care ... Pretty animated gifs of headphone measurements means the geeks are on patrol!! Woooot!!!

[Fitz]

Nope...I think you've got it the other way around.

So the average THD+Noise being higher on the LCD3 is a good thing, in your opinion?

[TMoney]

I don't think its that. I think its the separation between the 90 and 100 dB traces that tells the story here. Only the 009 has separation between the traces like the LCD-3.

If I'm not mistaken, the separation indicates better power handling capabilities and thus better clarity?

Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

Edited December 31, 2011 by TMoney

[mikeymad]

reminds me of an eye chart. better 1 or 2, 1 or 2.