You listened with the same source and rest of system for both phones?

Same system is obviously impossible for the headphones amplification requirements, but I'd like to know if the LCD-3 were powered by a tube amp

Edited October 17, 201114 yr by Torpedo

You listened with the same source and rest of system for both phones?

Source? unlikely. Rest of system? I'd hope not, thought it would have been fun to watch

So no Singlepower Concerto/Maestros there?

I think I was the only one who did this - smoking time )

same source, different amps , same music ..dB

Edited October 17, 201114 yr by dBel84

So no Singlepower Concerto/Maestros there?

well-played

Hears loud sucking sound emanating from somewhere near his wallet. Mutters, "Damn LCD-3 and Stax 009" to himself. Carries on, waiting for the next bit of exciting news from the headphone world. Reflects on Joseph Shumpeter's "creative destructionism" theory and wonders if he'll ever be able to truly enjoy his LCD-2 and Stax 007 again. But then flashes a quick smile, taking solace in the fact that he can still manage to enjoy his old hula hoop and his collection of Grados from time to time. Decides that anything is possible so long as he doesn't think too much about it, and just allows himself to get lost in the moment of the music. Yes, he still has his hula hoop, somewhere in his mom's attic probably. He's that old, and that sentimental.

There are quite a few that prefer the 007...

So no Singlepower Concerto/Maestros there?

I really need to find one of those for next to nothing. The empty tube socket was just too funny...

I am sure you do prefer the 007 for the type of music you listen to. I would as well.

If he didn't listen with the same source, power conditioning, cables (cough, cough) then his point about the bass is moot, just sayin'.

If he didn't listen with the same source, power conditioning, cables (cough, cough) then his point about the bass is moot, just sayin'.

do you include the headphone cable as well?

Only if it costs more than $300, anything below that is just plain worthless

I agree that the Stax is incredibly neutral (probably the closest thing to the definition of neutral that I can think of). That said, the bass reproduction of the LCD-3 is, in my mind, not just a question of exaggeration. While it's certainly on the warm side of neutral, there is bass and low bass information that is clearly present on the recording that is presented with an incredible amount of texture and detail that was (in my opinion, under show conditions, etc.) unmatched by the SR-009.

Agreed. The best test of this in my view is classical orchestral music with drums. Components that don't excel in bass tend to sound anemic on orchestral drums even if they sound ok on electronica, rap, etc. The LCD-2 bass sounds much closer to what I hear from my full-range speakers on orchestral drums. The SR-009 sound pretty anemic on this in comparison.

There are quite a few that prefer the 007...

ORLY? You mean besides yourself and the money-bags ESLs over on Head-Fi?

/kidding

visualguy what are your full range speakers?

visualguy what are your full range speakers?

Dali Helicon 800 mk2.

Oh cool I've demo'd those. Pretty nice speakers actually. Why are you using thier bass as reference material for what HP bass should sound like? IME dynamics typically exhibit more body in the bass region but electrostats present much more detail/texture/are less monotonic.

Oh cool I've demo'd those. Pretty nice speakers actually. Why are you using thier bass as reference material for what HP bass should sound like? IME dynamics typically exhibit more body in the bass region but electrostats present much more detail/texture/are less monotonic.

Well, take the first movement of Mahler's Symphony 3 with its copious use of drums (timpani, bass, snare, etc.) as an example. The SR-009 sound more detailed throughout the frequency range (including bass), but they just don't convey the mood of that movement right - it sounds too airy and light. The LCD-2 convey the right weighty atmosphere of this movement. It sounds best by far on the Helicons, but the LCD-2 come closer than the SR-009.

Well, take the first movement of Mahler's Symphony 3 with its copious use of drums (timpani, bass, snare, etc.) as an example. The SR-009 sound more detailed throughout the frequency range (including bass), but they just don't convey the mood of that movement right - it sounds too airy and light. The LCD-2 convey the right weighty atmosphere of this movement. It sounds best by far on the Helicons, but the LCD-2 come closer than the SR-009.

How would O2 fare in that comparison? I think I will play the Levine M3 after dinner

How would O2 fare in that comparison? I think I will play the Levine M3 after dinner

I listen to Chailly/Concertgebouw - what a magnificent performance and recording!

It has been a while since I listened to it on my SR-007mk1. If I remember correctly, I still preferred the LCD-2 on this music.

I've been to some concert halls and I have never heard one that sounded like the LCD-2, which are rich and warm, almost syrupy. A live performance sounds far more like the 009 IME.

Seems like you prefer a more euphonic sound visualperson. Nothing wrong with that.

The bass on the LCD-2 is awesome, I agree, but the 009 is far more accurate, neutral.

I listen to Chailly/Concertgebouw - what a magnificent performance and recording!

It has been a while since I listened to it on my SR-007mk1. If I remember correctly, I still preferred the LCD-2 on this music.

My problem with LCD-2 (r1) for any classical or jazz is their poor imaging and lack of spacial depth and muddling of some fine detail. I enjoy them most with hard rock.

My problem with LCD-2 (r1) for any classical or jazz is their poor imaging and lack of spacial depth and muddling of some fine detail. I enjoy them most with hard rock.

I didn't like the rev. 1 either - fine detail was indeed lacking. The rev. 2 are much better in that area. Soundstage and imaging still aren't great, but the tonality and detail are quite good.

I like the SR-009 when coupled with the right equipment, but on some music (like the Mahler piece I mentioned), the LCD-2 sound better in my opinion.

I just compared the Michael Tilson Thomas/SFO M3 in 24/96 (his interpretation is a bit Bernstein-esque; very dramatic and powerful, huge dynamic swings as well) on LCD-2 r1 (balanced w. Dynamite) and my severely under driven Stax O2 mk1 on the transformer box and I still end up preferring the O2 for this sort of grand symphony music. The O2 has quite good bass impact and I don't mind giving up that last bit of punch for the superior detail, fine nuance and stage depth. I think I have to hear a rev2 someday, since I prefer even my balanced HD580 to the LCD-2 for classical.

I think I have to hear a rev2 someday, since I prefer even my balanced HD580 to the LCD-2 for classical.

The rev. 1 are pretty horrible for classical and acoustic music in general because the rev. 1 gloss over some of the fine detail of the sound of acoustic instruments. The rev. 2 fix this.