or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Audeze LCD-X - Page 128

post #1906 of 8797
Quote:
Originally Posted by Questhate View Post
 

 

I thought the LCD-X needed 2 watts to sound good? 

Not the LCD-X...more so the LCD-3s IME. The LCD-X sound great out of a portable rig...but they do sound best on my GS-X MK2 so far of the amps I've tried.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by GalaxyGuy View Post
 

They sound amazing out of my WA22, which is not producing 2W.  Who knows, though, maybe they'd sound better out of a GS-X or beta22?  I am not going to find out anytime soon, but I am loving them with the WA22.

 

I bet that would be a great match. I really enjoyed the WA22 when I owned it. What tubes are you running with your LCD-X?

post #1907 of 8797
FWIW, the only thing holding me back from buying a WA22 fir the X's is my fear that the cost of the amp will be dwarfed by the cost of the tubes needed to make if sound its best.
Edited by leesure - 12/6/13 at 5:13pm
post #1908 of 8797
Quote:
Originally Posted by leesure View Post

FWIW, the only thing holding me back from buying a WA22 fir the X's is my fear that the cost of the amp will be dwarfed by the cost of the tubes needed to make if sound its best.

 

Lol, funny story I had a wa22 in the shopping cart and ready to order.... then I started adding up the costs of the tubes I wanted on the side then just said screw it, I'm just gonna wait for the GS-X

post #1909 of 8797
Quote:
Originally Posted by leesure View Post

FWIW, the only thing holding me back from buying a WA22 fir the X's is my fear that the cost of the amp will be dwarfed by the cost of the tubes needed to make if sound its best.

 

Yeah...I think the best tube compliment I had with the WA22 ran me close to $1k...ish.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by fortitude View Post
 

 

Lol, funny story I had a wa22 in the shopping cart and ready to order.... then I started adding up the costs of the tubes I wanted on the side then just said screw it, I'm just gonna wait for the GS-X

 

I think you made the right decision. :o

post #1910 of 8797

Do we really need a powerful amp for LCD-X? I mean, I am already having hard time finding difference between straight-out-from-my-smartphone and my desktop setup with beta22 which gives about 7 watt per channel at 22 ohm. The phone is already incredibly efficient, nearly as efficient as Grados. I remember purrin said somewhere he prefer running them with some portable amp...

post #1911 of 8797
You need a good amp, not necessarily a powerful one. But they do need a decent amount of power to sound good. The x seem to be alot easier to drive than the 3 and definitely the 2 which is the hardest to drive
post #1912 of 8797
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhamel View Post

 

:evil:  Let's see... 4 hours a day, keep it for 6 months... 720 hours.   Sell at 75% of new price (which is probably lowball).... $1700 - $1275.   Net cost... $425 - less than $0.60/hr.   Bargain!  :beyersmile:


LOL this got me excited for a second, then I realized It only works that way if you don't buy a new headphone to replace them.

post #1913 of 8797
Quote:
Originally Posted by wnmnkh View Post
 

Do we really need a powerful amp for LCD-X? I mean, I am already having hard time finding difference between straight-out-from-my-smartphone and my desktop setup with beta22 which gives about 7 watt per channel at 22 ohm. The phone is already incredibly efficient, nearly as efficient as Grados. I remember purrin said somewhere he prefer running them with some portable amp...

I've been wondering the same thing. At least I don't think they  need the kind of power other orthos require. I'm hoping for an amp that happens to be a great match, and is inexpensive (relatively). Power wise, I have my Oppo headphone amp (on the BDP105) at around 50 or so in level for the LCD-Xs. With the Paradox, the level is into the 90s. 

post #1914 of 8797

I think this has been addressed.

post #1915 of 8797
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacedonianHero View Post
 

Not the LCD-X...more so the LCD-3s IME. The LCD-X sound great out of a portable rig...but they do sound best on my GS-X MK2 so far of the amps I've tried.

 

 

I bet that would be a great match. I really enjoyed the WA22 when I owned it. What tubes are you running with your LCD-X?

WE422a rectifier, TS 6F8G drivers and WE421a power tubes.  So, yes...around $1k.  With the full tube complement its the same price as a GS-X MK2.  Dunno...I kind of like the Woo.  Maybe I'll get a solid state amp one of these days, but I'm happy with tubes for the time being.

post #1916 of 8797
Quote:
Originally Posted by GalaxyGuy View Post
 

WE422a rectifier, TS 6F8G drivers and WE421a power tubes.  So, yes...around $1k.  With the full tube complement its the same price as a GS-X MK2.  Dunno...I kind of like the Woo.  Maybe I'll get a solid state amp one of these days, but I'm happy with tubes for the time being.

They are some nice tubes! My favourites for the LCD-3 were: EML 5U5G Mesh Plate, Sylvania 5692s and TS5998 of the ones that I tried.

post #1917 of 8797
Quote:
Originally Posted by manbear View Post
 


LOL this got me excited for a second, then I realized It only works that way if you don't buy a new headphone to replace them.

 

Details, details.  :D   

post #1918 of 8797
Quote:
Originally Posted by wnmnkh View Post
Do we really need a powerful amp for LCD-X? I mean, I am already having hard time finding difference between straight-out-from-my-smartphone and my desktop setup with beta22 which gives about 7 watt per channel at 22 ohm. The phone is already incredibly efficient, nearly as efficient as Grados. I remember purrin said somewhere he prefer running them with some portable amp...

 

High power is technically either lots of voltage or current, not both because they're inversely related mathematically (P = VI), so the answer is yes, a powerful amp is needed to properly drive the LCD-X. One that outputs high current, not necessarily high voltage, because most portable devices w/ headphone jacks aren't capable of outputting very much current.

 

Low-impedance efficient headphones aren't necessarily easy to drive, they're just easy to get loud—and in fact, they're usually harder to drive than high-impedance inefficient headphones, because the majority of amps don't output very much current at low impedance.

post #1919 of 8797
Quote:
Originally Posted by Asr View Post

 

Low-impedance efficient headphones aren't necessarily easy to drive, they're just easy to get loud—and in fact, they're usually harder to drive than high-impedance inefficient headphones, because the majority of amps don't output very much current at low impedance.

 

I agree. People generally seem to think that high impedance headphones are harder to drive. It is true for some headphones, like the notoriously hard to drive HD800, but the reason HD800 is hard to drive is not necessarily because of its high impedance. For example, the 600 ohm Beyer T1 is easier to drive than the 300 ohm HD800. In fact, high impedance headphones have an advantage over low impedance headphones when it comes to amp picking; their high impedance ensures a high damping factor and thus low distortion with a wider range of amps.

 

With a high impedance headphone, you can use a tube amp with a high output impedance (e.g. OTL amps) as well as transformer-coupled tube amps and solid-state amps. With a low impedance headphone, however, OTL amps are not recommended at all and even some transformer-coupled tube amps still have a high output impedance, limiting one's choice to solid-state.

post #1920 of 8797
Quote:
Originally Posted by GalaxyGuy View Post
 

WE422a rectifier, TS 6F8G drivers and WE421a power tubes.  So, yes...around $1k.  With the full tube complement its the same price as a GS-X MK2.  Dunno...I kind of like the Woo.  Maybe I'll get a solid state amp one of these days, but I'm happy with tubes for the time being.

:veryevil: 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: High-end Audio Forum