Main Deck > Discussion for Registered Members Only

LCD3 FR Comparison Among Different Iterations

(1/5) > >>

Marvey:
LCD3 FR Comparison Among Different Iterations




The attached measurements were measured "free-air" and with no compensation applied to the bass. The free-air measurements for some reason or another tend to more easily show differences in bass response. These LCD3 measurements are comparable to each other in this graph only. Do not compare to other measurements seen elsewhere or even here.

The treble dip and peak are measurement artifacts which I suspect are caused by the grills openings of the driver. They should be ignored. Minor 1/6 octave curve smoothing was applied.

LIGHT BLUE = LCD3 #1V. My original veiled pair. Sounded excessively bassy like too much room gain or speakers shoved against the wall. Again, note the graphs above are free-air and not compensated, so a drop in measured response (compared to a sealed measurement on a dummy head) is expected. I just recently (March 22, 2012) heard another HF's veiled pair from the original run, and it sounded exactly like this one. So similar in fact that I did not bother to take measurements.

PURPLE = LCD3 #2V. Another earlier production veiled or perhaps "semi-veiled pair." It's got a 2-3kHz peak followed by a drop. I enjoyed this one better than my veiled pair #1V above, but enough to really love it. BTW, there were some audible resonances at 2-3kHz with this pair.

ORANGE = LCD3 #3. My current non-veiled, "fast" sounding pair. It has the least amount of bass. The FR extends to 3.5kHz before the drop. I should have another one of these coming in for measurements soon. This pair had a measurable resonance at 3.5-4kHz. I did not bother me though - but I find that most people are not bothered by a resonances between 4-5kHz.

YELLOW = An LCD2r2. For reference. There's a slight resonance near 8kHz is is audible. This may bother some people more than others.

Will post on HF after the usual commentary and peer review here. Maybe...


SEE UPDATE FOR THE NEW LCD3: http://www.changstar.com/index.php/topic,190.msg2072.html#msg2072

Marvey:
One thing I should mention. I did feel the overall FR was audibly smoother with the veiled pair from the early run. The un-veiled pairs don't sound as smooth (I'm running one of my more laid back driver tubes in the BA,) but I'll easily take one of these new improved pairs over the old veiled pairs.

Maxvla:
Interesting bump at 3.5KHz on the good pair. That's an unusual spot to have a peak. What types of sounds are brought out most in that area? Too high to greatly affect vocals, I'd think. Are there any resonances there with waterfall measurements? Graph shows the good pair to be the least neutral. From 1.5KHz to 7KHz the good pair is wildly different from the rest, peaking at 3.5 where the 2nd pair is in a valley and vice versa at 10-11KHz.

Hm.. according to http://www.independentrecording.net/irn/resources/freqchart/main_display.htm most of the things listed are in their harmonic stage at 3.5KHz, perhaps this is why the pair sounds faster as the harmonics are being brought forward a good deal. And the dip after that is in the range of sibilance and edge which is handy.

mwilson:
Interesting. Must spend some more time tomorrow with a rested mind looking at the chart.

rhythmdevils:
More evidence that it's not an FR issue?  I think there's something different about how the drivers are operating in the better pairs.  I don't imagine a little less bass and a little more upper mids would have such an effect on you Purrin.  I haven't heard them myself though. 

I also don't think it's on account of the damping change.  I think that's more a reflection of the drivers operating differently and needing less damping. 

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page