K3cT

Yeah, despite the questionable QC their customer service is top-notch fortunately. Sankar and co. have always been a pleasure to deal with. Comparing the LCD3 to the 007 MK1 is quite curious. I think ultimately the 007 wins in terms of detail retrieval, transient and finesse (impossible to beat an electrostatic in these aspects) but I definitely dig the overall tonal balance in LCD3 more. It's not as dark and laid-back sounding as the MK1. If you ask me, the closest equivalent to the LCD3 is probably the custom IEM JH13 but with a much better extension, air and tauter bass and similarly, the LCD3 can be very real/live-sounding. I find that live effect very musically engaging. I dunno though, I'm still not happy that they re-use the arc assembly design from the LCD2. I would want something far more comfortable to wear at that price point.

Have you tried switching back the old thin felt into the new unveiled LCD3? Wait for the LCD3 R3. You know it's coming sooner or later.

dsavitsk, thank you for the helpful explanation. And to all, my bad if I caused a little confusion because I used the term "hybrid" quite loosely back then. I just thought that the L-2 doesn't look like a "traditional" tube amplifier so I went ahead with that term.

Nice write-up, Nate! Short, concise and informative just the way I like it although it would be even nicer to have some tech specs around like output impedance or how much power the amplifier pumps into a 32 ohm load for example. I really would like to hear the L2 as I have yet to hear a hybrid amplifier that rocks my socks off. The Apex/Peak probably came closest to this regard but with the wrong headphones, it can be a bit too aggressive-sounding.

Well, I do think that the LCD3 (unveiled version, lol) is a significant improvement from the LCD2 in those areas you mentioned but with QC being all over the place and ergonomics/design still a bit lacking just like what you said, I will probably stick around with what I have now and see what the market offers in the future. Why the 009 has to be so bloody expensive?

Although value is very subjective, I can see where you're coming from. The sound itself is a very welcome alternative to other dynamics which sound annoyingly bright but the actual headphone itself could use better ergonomics and design. I suppose designing a comfortable arc assembly design around these large orthodynamic drivers + damping is quite a challenge in itself. We will see whether Audez'e will release a revision to correct this in future LCD3s.

If only the LCD3 has an improved arc assembly that makes it more comfortable to wear (this is my biggest gripe about them actually) instead of reusing the LCD2's, the asking price would be more palatable. That aside, if we focus on the sound alone it definitely has potential if they can get the infamous veil fixed. I thought it was quite close to the O2 MK1, definitely not as airy-sounding and not as detailed either but sort of made it up by rendering texture better and sounding more direct. As for T50RP vs LCD2, unless some magic damping scheme from other dimensions are used, these are not going to sound close to the LCD2 in terms of airiness and detail-extraction but I would give credits for the T50RP for having a better overall tonal balance (not as dark-sounding). However, there is no rule that says you cannot tweak your LCD2 though. A Lambda is going to sound VERY different than the HD600: airier, faster, more forward and detailed, brighter but lighter with a more diffused soundstage and less bass. Definitely worth trying though but it's a different animal! I would suggest getting a decent desktop amplifier. I really like the sound of HD600/650 driven with a good tube amp.

There is a brief comparison with vanilla PerfectWave and Reference 7.1 here in the 6moons review. It's written by John Darko, an Aussie who maintains a DAC review site whom I have been following for a while as it's one of the few sites left that has detailed DAC comparisons handy. His prose may be a bit too long-winded and flowery sometimes but at least you can get a rough gist on how the DAC is supposed to sound like.

That article was just first impressions and unboxing though so I wouldn't worry too much about it. Usually Mike's reviews are reasonable (other than the RSA Dark Star which I disagree with) once he has time to sit down and properly evaluate the gear so I'm sure he will do a good job on that.

Mike is a good friend of mine in real life and we often organize little meets together. I do agree that he can be a bit too enthusiastic sometimes especially if the toys are new but I guess we are all susceptible to this... I can vouch that he means no harm though. Anyway, I have heard his HD700 today and it's a pretty interesting piece. Overall it sounds like a watered-down HD800 but somehow images better and possesses a more realistic headstage than its older brother. Its treble is quite a mess though, with ringing and peaks in the upper midrange and lots of unwanted energy in the treble area. Holy shit, I don't know how Senn thought it's a good idea to make the HD700 sounds even brighter than the already bright HD800. Well... it's a pre-production version after all so things may change with the final revision. I did point these out to Mike to tamper his enthusiasm so we will see how the final review goes.

Thanks for the heads-up, plenty of material there for some bedtime reading! I still would like to see a measurement of the LCD3 with the firmer LCD2 pads if possible as switching the pads of my LCD2 R1 from the older "flat" pads to the new R2 pads yielded a lot of improvement sound-wise. Anyway, I honestly think that the LCD3 has a lot of potential. I would like to hear it again once they roll the "definitive" version.

Does it have a tendency to over-emphasize details? And how's the soundstage compared to the Reference 7.1?

Sorry, I don't really follow the LCD3 thread over there anymore but is yours the veiled or non-veiled version? I initially thought that this midrange veil issue is over-exaggerated but after comparing the LCD3 with several LCD2s then it became clear to me that it's a real thing.

Do we happen to know what DAC chip it uses? I think if I remember right, it uses an 8-channel DAC so that sounds like a Sabre to me but I'm not 100% sure.

Thanks for the detailed explanations, Birgir. I'm honestly still not sure about what course of upgrade to take. I've heard the 007 MK1 plenty of times and I'm probably in the minority that think that these are simply not engaging enough for me. I'm more of a Lambda guy after all so naturally the 009 seems more appropriate. Shame no one around has them so I can't personally take a listen!

Doesn't the Pinnacle have an output impedance of 16 ohm IIRC? Isn't that a little high for the LCD2/3?

Hi guys, reading the last couple of pages gave me an idea. Since I've always felt that the O2 MK1 is simply too warm/dark for me, would getting a MK2.5 sounds like a better course to pursue instead? And how to make sure that we're getting these newer MK2.5 instead of the older MK2? Lately I barely have any time to actually sit down and listen to my headphone setup so saving that dough for the SR-009 begins to make less and less sense with each passing day...

Dsavitsk, sorry for the late response but thank you for that enlightening post! I appreciate it very much. I guess it's the higher output impedance of these tube amplifiers that contribute to the smoother sound with the HD800 in the end, that explains a lot. That would also explain my agreement with Knuckledragger that the B22 sounds amazing with the HD600/650.

It was a bit of a generalization indeed but I've yet to hear a high-end tube amplifier that sounds rough in the upper mid to lower treble region. I've always thought that the smoothness in that area complements well with the HD800. Shame there is no Balancing Act around here but I've always thought that the Zana Deux is the best match I've ever heard for that particular headphone.

Except the HD800 doesn't have a smooth upper mid and treble. Quite grainy and peaky actually and that's why it works best with tube amplification to smooth the quirks out. So if we assume his impressions are accurate I wonder how painful the upper mid and lower treble of the HD700 are going to be, DT990-like?

Thank you everyone, much appreciated.

Does it have the honky midrange that a closed ATH headphone usually display in spades? The W1000X and W5000 have this "coloration" and thus can sound quite unnatural sometimes.

Am I the only one who thinks that this might be for the better in the long run for their brand name? With proper financial backing from Edifier and their distribution network (we're still waiting for a proper local distributor are we not?), who knows they can make the company competitive once more.

It's the best among the high-end amps that I've heard it with. The Zana Deux fared the poorest with the LCD2 doing a good imitation of a closed headphone in that combination, the WooAudio WA5 fared a little bit better but nowhere near what an $3k amp should sound like, the Apex Peak/Volcano probably came the closest with the Beta22 but I was a bit uncomfortable with its tendency to sound a bit shrilly (w/ Shuguang Treasure Tube). The quest for a tube amp that sound good with the LCD series continues. For now, I'm convinced that solid state seems to be the way to go with this particular headphone.

I haven't seen this DAC being talked about here so I will just leave this here. Designs-wise, the DAC interesting because apparently it uses 4 "industrial-grade" non-oversampling DACs (2 per channel) whatever they are and it doesn't have a digital filter. Price-wise, it seems reasonable enough. The most expensive model with black anodized case and external PSU will set you back €710 or a little less under $1000. Shame it's still single-ended and has no built-in USB. Here is the home-site and a white paper posted there detailing this NOS digital filter-less concept. I wonder what do our resident DAC experts like Filburt and Colin have to say about this as the concept is quite intriguing.