Well to answer the EQ question: I don’t really know. I have never really thought about how I go about doing EQ, but if I think back on it, I first compare to whatever headphone I already consider to sound correct or gits my target curve. From there I kind of mold headphone’s FR with EQ until the tonality sounds like the other one. I use the 6XX (with EQ) for reference, because I’m very familiar with them and they sound correct to me. Some times it can be like “yeah, I hear that there is glare at x frequency,” for example. However, most of the time it is listening, comparing them to my personal target (my “neutral”), and then saying which frequencies sound like they need adjustment. There are times as well were I look at graphs, but it mostly to check and confirm how my listening compares to what graphs say. I hope my response does a decent job at explaining that.
As for listening out for the tension of instruments, I credit that to dynamics and micro dynamics. I personally do not associate dynamics with FR, I associate with the headphone’s performance (I don’t know if that makes any sense at all). The reason why I follow this train of thought is that there are many headphones that I have tuned to sound similar, but they reproduce dynamics very differently. I listen out in particular to instruments like xylophones, pianos and guitars as the initial attack on those instruments varies a lot on the way in which the musician interacts with them. As a guitarist, I know the difference between someone playing with or without a pick, and that is much easier to distinguish when a headphone has good dynamics and micro dynamics. Off the top of my head I cannot think of any examples for guitar, but I do always think of it when listening to the piano in “Oh! Darling,” by The Beatles. On a headphone with good dynamics you can hear how the initial attack from when notes are played varies when the piano is being played softer or harder. It’s hard for me to explain, as many of the terms we use when describing headphones have a vague definition, but it isn’t always the same for everyone. Often I hear differences in the way sound is recreated in a headphone, and I associate those differences to those somewhat vague terms.
Can we get your input on this @metal571@Resolve, I think I’m starting to confuse even myself a little here
Edit: I do not have any graphs of my own, I compare what I hear to graphs online. I use Inner Fidelity’s graphs, some times the ones on Head-Fi, as well as Oratory 1990. I do cross check them as well, just to make sure that they are consistent with one another.
Plucked as in, tight and ‘pulled’ rather than ‘pushed’. I know this has to do with the mechanics of planar vs dynamic, but that’s how I hear it as well. It goes all the way back to my first experience of the HE-500, where I remember thinking “this sounds like everything is being pulled and rebounding rather than force being exerted forward” - which at the time didn’t involve knowing that planar diaphragms have the conductive trace on them and the interaction with the magnetic field happens to function that way. So really ‘plucked’ is just a description of a kind of tightness and immediacy that I typically associate with planars. Timbre? maybe. Speed? Also maybe. I should note, it’s not always there with planars, but frequently it is.
Saying they revise it (often) isn’t the same as being transparent about it. Detailing what was changed and how to identify versions would be transparent.
As it sits, there’s no way to know what you’re buying. We have to police all this ourselves. If I hear a LCD-2 from 4 years ago, think “that’s spiffy, I’ll buy a new one for myself” then I’m pretty much screwed because it’s not going to sound the same. I’d have to do a mountain of research. It’s dishonest.
They need to change model numbers when they make revisions, or officially add a prefix like LCD-2a, LCD-2b, etc. to the label on the product itself. How many versions of the LCD-2F exist now? We can’t even get that pinned down, I bet.
I’m not sure why this has me all fired up, but it’s one of the reasons I won’t but Audeze.
No you’re right about that. I only mean when you ask them they tell you haha. And yeah I agree, I think what was changed and when should be published - but just like with silent revisions, this gets tricky for dealers.
I have to say, these are one of the headphones that interest me most that I’d love to have. Been deciding whether I want to save up for this or the Ether CX since those strike me as an interesting pair of headphones within the price range. Reviews pit these as drastically different sounding cans, but it’d be great to demo these myself.
Hey @Resolve , after watching your review of the LCD-2 2020 version, I was thinking if you have a chance in the future to compare them to the old Hifiman HE-500? I recently got a used set of the HE-500, and I tried Hifiman’s Velpads on them, and to my ears they sound like a warmer and more technical performing Sundara. I wouldn’t be surprised if they compete with the LCD-2 2020.
Been looking heavily into what headphones to buy lately and these have been at the top of my list and this review is really confidence inspiring! I have never EQed with software before; however, I am assuming I could easily download the above linked softwares and it just integrates with windows 10 easily! That said I do have a Schiit Loki EQ, would I be able to achieve the same things using that?
How is this one different from 2019 fazor version? I suppose I can’t use this EQ settings? Btw what EQ you use for pre-2020 fazor LCD2 model?
Too bad the review didn’t say how it sounds with different amps and DACs, does it scale, whats recommended combination, what doesn’t sound good, etc
No you have to set the gain to -10 or so. Then there shouldn’t be any clipping issues. As to the other models, I can’t comment on those since the only other LCD-2 I’ve heard was the original one from way back, and I never put together a profile for it.
You might want to try Head-Fi to find out about all the different LCD-2 models, last time I checked there were about 6 different versions from LCD-2 w/ wood connectors, LCD-2 with plastic/metal connectors (LCD-2.2), LCD-2f 2014 IIRC this is the first fazor version, LCD-2f 2016 (revised fazor), LCD-2 Classic, and now the LCD-2 2020. I’ve only heard LCD-2.2, LCD-2F (2014, kept these), LCD-2F (2016) and LCD-2 Classic. They all sound slightly different.