Jump to content
Joe-Siow

Audez'e LCD-2 Rev 2

Recommended Posts

Am I late to the game? Of course I am, but better late than never right?

 

The LCD-2 weighs a hefty 500+ grams, and though I felt the weight of this hot babe when it was on my head, it felt relatively comfortable. At no point did it felt like slipping off my head. The clamping force was acceptable and is definitely not as tight as the HD600 that I own. The LCD-2 may not be as sleek or futuristic looking as HD800, but it definitely rocks me the right way through its classic and retro look, and believe me, it is very solidly built. The leather headband completes the look of LCD-2 as a high end headphone; I have always felt that for the price that LCD-2 commanded, the foam headband in Rev 1 was simply unacceptable and a very bad joke. The earpads are thick and extremely comfortable.

 

I listened to the LCD-2 on both my Burson HA-160 and a loaner WA6 SE amps and the playlist that I played contained male & female Jazz, Pop and R&B alongside instrumental tracks from Yoyo-Ma and Chris Botti. So I guess one can call it a rojak playlist as I wanted to hear how the LCD-2 handles various genres. In short, the LCD-2 is an outstandingly versatile performer capable of handling both vocals and instrumental tracks, though I personally felt that it excelled with vocal tracks.

 

LCD-2 is not a pair of neutral headphone but it is one of the most natural and organic pair of headphone I have ever heard. T1 and HD800 introduces listening fatigue over long hours of listening through their overly accentuated treble, but with LCD-2, I feel that I could listen to it all day and not feel tired (though I did not have the luxury of 5 hours of it on my head) with its extremely creamy smooth signature.

 

Its bass is punchy and extends extremely low, yet it is by no mean overly bassy nor dark. Though the bass extends very low, it has got some of the best clarity to accompany it. The combination of clarity and the level that it manages to extend to simply astounds me, and this balance is usually only present in high end headphones and is so difficult to achieve. Not even HD800 manages to hit the low notes as low as LCD-2, though it also has clarity in oodles to compete with LCD-2.

 

The mids of LCD-2 is the creamiest and lushest I have ever heard, and is only outdone by you guessed it, LCD-3. Though LCD-2 has the best mids I have ever heard, again like its bass, the amount of clarity that accompanies the lush sound is astounding. Now, I have experienced that with Westone ES5 (I compare the 2 because they both have glorious mids to die for), sometimes when the mids are too lush, it adds a thin veil that just covers the clarity and transparency. Not so with LCD-2. Clarity and transparency are ever present and the mids simply does not bleed into the bass or treble. How about that for amazing?

 

Alas, the treble might be the Achilles heel of LCD-2. Though the treble of Rev 2 is more pronounced and evident than in Rev 1, personally, I could do with a bit more sparkle, but that would be nitpicking. The treble of Rev 2 already extends further and is smoother than Rev 1. Rev 2 is also noticeably brighter than Rev 1.

 

Soundstage width on LCD-2 is also not particularly wide, though its depth performance is excellent. I could hear the soundstage depth as if it is a layered onion. But, LCD-2 can never hope to match HD800's width in soundstage. Being an open headphone, LCD-2 sounds very open and rather airy. As mentioned earlier, the transparency and clarity of this pair of headphone is also amazing. Next up, the imaging and separation of LCD-2 is also right up there with the best. With my eyes closed and LCD-2 on my head, I could easily pinpoint where the drummer, guitarist, pianist and Chris Botti were on the stage when listening to the album Chris Botti in Boston. Also, I could hear the individual instruments coming together to form a great blend of music.

 

In conclusion, the LCD-2 Rev 2 is right up there among the current flagships of HD800 and T1 (I have not heard of Ultrasound's headphones, so I am unable to form an opinion on their products). To me, other than the minor annoyance with the treble and not so wide soundstage , both of which I can easily live with in view of how spectacular the rest of LCD-2 Rev 2 is, it takes clarity, transparency, the great bass and simply peerless mids and marries them with musicality to form one of the best sounding headphone I have heard; it is simply balanced and breathtaking.

 

 

Synergy rating:

With Burson HA-160: 9/10

With Woo Audio 6 SE: 8.5/10

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would expect the treble rolloff to be very fatiguing. I can live with slightly less bass if I have to, but a dull high end is headache-inducing, straining to hear details that aren't coming through.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For me, Rev 1 had more of the treble roll off problem. The Rev 2 sounded slightly brighter overall, with better tonality. For me, I prefer the Rev 2 and might be getting one either this month or next.

 

Much actually depends on the listeners' personal tastes. Some have also commented that the Rev 1 is more forgiving on not so good recordings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Much actually depends on the listeners' personal tastes.

The funny thing about personal taste is, as soon as I decide that the colorations in headphone A sound best with certain music tracks, then I switch to other music tracks and headphone B sounds better with those tracks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well said, after all each of us have a different pair of ears & sensitivity towards music. For me, I will be trying out the LCD-3 during Christmas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The LCD3 is even more bassier, I dont find the LCD1/2/3 enjoyable and for that price tag for coloured, I prefer even my YH1 over them, the Fostex is extremely worth the price. Headphones that are deskbound is also a minus point in my books. If you have more exposure to other headphones, you won't be looking at the LCD at all. May I know which headphones you are currently upgrading from?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have both Rev 1 and Rev 2, LCD3 sounds more like Rev1 with better extension at both ends. I think "more bass" is too general a term. I never understand why some Rev 1 owners complain that it lacks sub-bass. Only when I heard the LCD3 at the ISSE I understand what they meant. IMHO I feel that the LCD3 bass isn't just deeper, there's better definition too. This is through a humble Squeezebox Touch with iBasso DB2 and PB2. With better equipment, improvement in the mids and high frequency becomes more obvious.

 

Some feel that the LCD Rev 2 has better clarity. However the LCD3 at the ISSE isn't run-in yet according to the exhibitor. IMO, the LCD3 is also more particular on equipment partnering.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes it does go deeper, but it then brings about the question of realistic levels in terms of decibels in the sub bass region, as with the Stax, bass representation isn't realistic at all, If the set at ISSE isn't burned in yet, then we should adjourn for another audition. I don't find much of an improvement that is worth that extra few hundreds imho.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Joe and all

 

Have you tried Audeze LCD2 with Violectric HPA-V200 ?

To open the soundstage of LCD2 while remain other good quality of the HP. I have tried silver plated copper (60micro ) cable from Nordost Odin and it is just wonderful.

 

also , as singapore Head-fi community , we probably should have a FTP site or similar so that we could upload 24/96 and 24/196 file up there to share with all.

 

What do you think ?

 

Thanks

Raymond Lim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Brought my LCD2R2 with Lyr to friend's place and hook-up to his OPPO BDP-95. Even 16 bit 44khz FLAC sounded wonderful. Really good stuff! :cans:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks to joe-siow, I had the opportunity to try out the LCD-2r2 on my rig for about two weeks. I've been very happy with my Sennheiser HD800 for more than a year, so much so that announcements of the LCD-2, HE-5/5LE/6 and Stax SR-009 did not interest me. But I was a bit curious as to how the LCD-2 would sound, and in my hands for a short period of time was the second revision of the LCD-2. The source I used for this review was an EffectiveAudio-modded Cambridge Audio 840C and the amp was a lightly-modded Woo Audio WA22. I spent some days rolling tubes to find a good combination, and in the end I used either:

 

Mullard GZ34 metal base, Brimar CV1988 and Tung Sol 7236 or,

United Electronics 596, Tung Sol 6SN7GT round plate oval mica and GEC 6AS7

 

First thing first, the construction. After using the HD800 for so long, the LCD-2 feels really heavy! But weight is deceiving, and surprisingly I found myself wearing them for 3 hours straight with no major discomfort. The soft leather earpads breathe a little so you don't sweat so much, and the strong clamping force is forgotten after about 30 minutes. I wear glasses, and fears of getting the earpads creased or poked by my glasses turned out to be unfounded. The leather headband and wooden trimming suggest fine hand-crafted workmanship, unlike the futuristic-looking HD800 with its use of plastic. Mind you, the HD800 is still well built, but the LCD-2 oozes sophistication and class.

 

Listening to the LCD-2r2, the bass struck me first. It goes deep, hits pretty hard and has a very enjoyable mid-bass bump. Kick drums explode with force, and the LCD-2 is capable of deep, tactile, rumbling bass that's wonderfully textured. Sure, the HD800 might be able to go lower with the right tubes, but rarely is it capable of bass that resonates this well. And neither is the bass bloated, leaving the midrange untainted. The only bass-oriented headphones I have right now are the AKG K240 Sextetts, and they can only dream of what the LCD-2 is capable. Colour me impressed.

 

The midrange was also quite impressive, being lush and creamy, yet transparent and detailed. Detail retrieval here does not lose out too much to the HD800, and the lower midrange suits acoustic guitars and male vocals very nicely. Surprisingly, I had mixed feelings for female vocals; Diana Krall and Jheena Lodwick retained their soul, but Eva Cassidy and LiSA sounded a bit restrained. The upper midrange also sounded a little flat when faced with brass instruments like trumpets. Perhaps I'm a little harsh in this area, after all my gold standard for midrange is the Audio Technica AD2000, which has still not been dethroned after all these years. While the midrange is not perfect to me, I would unreservedly give it high marks here.

 

Now the treble, yes it is not as extended as the HD800. But I wouldn't have it any other way. Bumping the treble up would spoil the overall presentation in my opinion, and while it doesn't have the bite to showcase cymbals, hi-hats and triangles at their best, it doesn't leave me wanting more. The construction, bass and midrange of the LCD-2 give me the impression of laid-back easy listening, and more treble would ruin that. I would say that the treble has sufficient presence and more is not needed.

 

I've often read that the LCD-2's soundstaging is nothing to shout about, but one of my tube combinations gave me a very wide, expansive soundstage with pretty good precision, approaching 85% of the HD800's width. It cannot match the HD800's 3D imaging, but there is plenty of air around instruments without sounding too diffused. Depth is perhaps it's weakest point here, but that's just nitpicking. Despite all the text bashing the LCD-2's soundstaging, I found it enjoyably wide and precise. Absolutely no complaints here.

 

In terms of speed, the LCD-2 cannot match the HD800 and AD2000, but it still manages to squeeze out quite a lot of details. Listening to some of my soundtracks, I could hear the fingers plucking on the guitar strings, and on one occassion someone dropping something plasticky on the floor. Tonal balance is shifted to the warm side of things, making it very enjoyable for jazz, pop, ballads and certain instrumental tracks. I was also surprised that it handled my J-rock tracks with aplomb, considering the somewhat tame treble.

 

So who should consider the LCD-2 over other equally impressive flagships? Those who like jazz, pop, guitar and rock I suppose. But if you're the type who just likes to chill out on a sofa, cup of tea in one hand, ready to melt into the world of soothing music and leave the ordinary pedestrian world aside for one moment, the LCD-2 might just be what the doctor ordered. Or perhaps the LCD-3 if what people's initial impressions are true.

 

Once again, thank you joe-siow for the LCD-2r2 loaner. While I'm still an HD800 fan through and through, my feelings for the LCD-2 have changed from mild curiosity to great respect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Putting all those negatives together in one place, it doesn't sound quite so good:

 

Has a mid-bass bump.

Doesn't go as low as the 800.

Loses some midrange detail compared to the 800.

Treble not as extended as the 800.

Not as good soundstage as the 800.

Not as good speed as the 800.

 

Not a criticism since I haven't heard the LCD2, but those are six things that seem like they add up to a lot. The other thing that bugs me about the LCD2 is reading about so much variance in their sound from sample to sample, as well as a high incidence of defects.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...