New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Audeze LCD-X - Page 22

post #316 of 5039
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tedman View Post
 

I have been using the HD650 as my reference headphones.  I think I paid $400 for those.  I compared them at CanJam to the Audeze and just broke down yesterday and ordered the LCD-X...  I can't believe I spent so much $$ on a pair of headphones, but couldn't stop thinking about them.  I don't know what it costs to make them but, for me, they just blew the HD650 out of the water.  I mean, holy cow, $1600 for a pair of headphones... After looking at the piles of equipment at the bottom of some of these posts, I don't feel QUITE as bad.  :bigsmile_face:   For me it came down to wanting the emotional response I got through listening to the Audeze bad enough to pony up.  This far away from the show in terms of time, the HD650 still sounds great, but there was some magic going on there with the Audeze that is hard to forget.

Yes, I know what you mean about some magic going on. I checked out a pair of LCD2s a couple months back, and was quite taken by how 'real' some music sounded. Been mostly into home hi fi since the mid '70s, many different systems including SE amps, planar speakers....you name it. Was always taken aback when the delivery of the music borders on sounding like real people singing or real instruments playing in front of you. That sort of illusion can be addicting. The difference between really great reproduction, and sounding lifelike. Reason I hesitated in purchasing the LCD2s was due to the clamping force and hardness of the earpads against the head. Was difficult to forget about that entirely and just get into the music. Did you find the comfort level of the LCD-X to be acceptable? Any comparisons between the X and the LCD2s? I assume if you did have time to compare, that you must have preferred the X since that is what you ordered. 

post #317 of 5039
Quote:
Originally Posted by SMG52 View Post
 

Yes, I know what you mean about some magic going on. I checked out a pair of LCD2s a couple months back, and was quite taken by how 'real' some music sounded. Been mostly into home hi fi since the mid '70s, many different systems including SE amps, planar speakers....you name it. Was always taken aback when the delivery of the music borders on sounding like real people singing or real instruments playing in front of you. That sort of illusion can be addicting. The difference between really great reproduction, and sounding lifelike. Reason I hesitated in purchasing the LCD2s was due to the clamping force and hardness of the earpads against the head. Was difficult to forget about that entirely and just get into the music. Did you find the comfort level of the LCD-X to be acceptable? Any comparisons between the X and the LCD2s? I assume if you did have time to compare, that you must have preferred the X since that is what you ordered. 

Good question on the comfort... I did find them comfortable, but the jury is still out for now - I guess I will find out.  I did not find the earpads too hard at all, but the clamping force was comfortable also on the pairs I auditioned.  A little while listening at CanJam is definitely not long enough for me to be able to tell yet.  They are all heavy compared to what I am used to with the HD650, but I don't think that will be a problem.  If it is, maybe it would be possible to hang upside down while listening and get some spinal traction going at the same time.   Clamping force I would guess could be adjusted with some bending?  That is what I did with the HD650 anyway.  I ordered the lamb skin and I'm not sure how that will be once it gets hot.  My guess is probably not great in the heat.

 

I did compare briefly to the LCD2's and 3's and I personally preferred LCDX over both.  I was instantly addicted to the speed, bass, mids and thought there was a well balanced amount of upper frequency "air" on the X compared to the others. Honestly, I needed more quiet than was available to give these three excellent headphones a proper comparison.  It was kind of noisy. The XC was fun to listen to also - it seemed very similar but with a little of the closed headphone sound (not much) and and slightly more bass.

 

Compared to all the Audeze, when I put the HD650 back on, they seemed very colored to me, which I really never noticed before.  

post #318 of 5039
When i got the 2s, the hd 650s where clearly more colored.
post #319 of 5039
What did u think of bass on the x's?
post #320 of 5039
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dubstep Girl View Post

What did u think of bass on the x's?

I loved the bass on the X's.  I thought it was deep, tight, full and dynamic.  I love bass and It is probably the biggest reason I purchased them.    The Audeze's all seemed to have great bass and the only meaningful comparison in terms of bass that I was able to make between the various Audeze products, within the time I was there and the level of noise, was that the XC seemed to have more of it than the others.

 

What made you upgrade from the 2's to the 3's?

post #321 of 5039

just a better headphone all around.

 

i do miss my LCD-2 though, they have a nice bass punch that the LCD-3 doesn't have. the LCD-3 is lighter in the bass, but the LCD-3 is so much better in everything else, transparency, musicality, texture, timbre, etc. its a much better headphone, the soundstage is good on LCD-3 unlike LCD-2.

 

if LCD-X can somehow fall in between both of them, that would be great!

post #322 of 5039

I don't know how I missed this, but here are the impedances for the Audeze line:

 

LCD-2: 60 Ohms

LCD-3: 45 Ohms

LCD-X: 22 Ohms

LCD-XC: 22 Ohms

 

That makes the LCD-X series the most current hungry of the entire line! 

 

Though I still don't completely understand the explanation that low impedance headphones are both easier to drive but require more current.  I mean I understand the math, I just don't really understand the math.

post #323 of 5039

It has to do with the fact that you need a higher voltage to drive a high impedance phone, which usually means a higher powered amplifier.

 

i.e. to drive 1 amp through 1 ohm requires 1 volt.

To drive 1 amp through 10 ohms takes 10 volts.

 

If you have a small amp with 10v operating voltage, in a perfect world, it could supply 1 amp into a 10 ohm load. (assuming it is engineered for that current output).

If the headphones are 10 ohm, it could supply the 1 amp. (i.e. 10 watts)

If the headphone is 100 ohms, the current is now only 1 tenth of an amp (100mA)

 

So, to supply the 1 amp to the 100 ohm headphone would require 100 Volt power supply.

That equates to 100 Watt power output,

 

In real life, the headphones don't require so much current, but to supply a 600 Ohm headphone adequately, it works best to have a higher powered amplifier to supply the needed current.

post #324 of 5039
Quote:
Originally Posted by wink View Post
 

It has to do with the fact that you need a higher voltage to drive a high impedance phone, which usually means a higher powered amplifier.

 

i.e. to drive 1 amp through 1 ohm requires 1 volt.

To drive 1 amp through 10 ohms takes 10 volts.

 

If you have a small amp with 10v operating voltage, in a perfect world, it could supply 1 amp into a 10 ohm load. (assuming it is engineered for that current output).

If the headphones are 10 ohm, it could supply the 1 amp. (i.e. 10 watts)

If the headphone is 100 ohms, the current is now only 1 tenth of an amp (100mA)

 

So, to supply the 1 amp to the 100 ohm headphone would require 100 Volt power supply.

That equates to 100 Watt power output,

 

In real life, the headphones don't require so much current, but to supply a 600 Ohm headphone adequately, it works best to have a higher powered amplifier to supply the needed current.


The thing is that high impedance headphones sensitivity in db per mW arent radically higher than lower impedance cans. which shows that they typically need quite a bit less current to reach similar volumes.

 

That said, I think it's quite a bit easier to make a headphone amp that can put out a lot of voltage than to make one that puts out a lot of current

post #325 of 5039
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tedman View Post
 

I loved the bass on the X's.  I thought it was deep, tight, full and dynamic.  I love bass and It is probably the biggest reason I purchased them.    The Audeze's all seemed to have great bass and the only meaningful comparison in terms of bass that I was able to make between the various Audeze products, within the time I was there and the level of noise, was that the XC seemed to have more of it than the others.

 

 

Am I reading this as XC having the most bass out of all 3 Audeze cans?

post #326 of 5039
Quote:
Originally Posted by TMRaven View Post
 

 

Am I reading this as XC having the most bass out of all 3 Audeze cans?

Yes, that was my personal experience.  We'll have to see if others agree.  Funny thing is - I asked the folks at Audeze about this (if they thought the XC had more bass) and they said it was the same, but that is not what I heard.  It was somewhat noisy there, so I suppose it is possible that I was able to hear more bass because of some external noise attenuation or that it just had a different quality of bass being a closed headphone.  But the perception was definitely one of more bass compared to the others.

post #327 of 5039

Is it really possible to get a good feel for headphones at a show and/or in a noisy environment? Even when I have the TV on at home it affects the sound of my headphones...I would imagine it's significantly tougher to make an accurate assessment at RMAF or whatever. 

post #328 of 5039
Quote:
Originally Posted by Focker View Post
 

Is it really possible to get a good feel for headphones at a show and/or in a noisy environment? Even when I have the TV on at home it affects the sound of my headphones...I would imagine it's significantly tougher to make an accurate assessment at RMAF or whatever. 

 

I think it depends if one is familiar with the downstream and the music. If so, likely yes. In that case and with headphones, I think you can get a decent impression.

 

However, that's exactly the caveat. When I heard the HE90s on some really boring Sennheiser music and blah source (it was to make the HD800s shine) I was very underwhelmed. Second time around, big difference.


Edited by negura - 10/24/13 at 9:05am
post #329 of 5039
Quote:
Originally Posted by Focker View Post
 

Is it really possible to get a good feel for headphones at a show and/or in a noisy environment? Even when I have the TV on at home it affects the sound of my headphones...I would imagine it's significantly tougher to make an accurate assessment at RMAF or whatever. 

I brought my own gear and music and they let me plug in to that - so I did feel I was able to get a good impression relative to what I am used to with my HD650.  But I agree it was pretty difficult to make an accurate and detailed assessment - especially between different models with the same house sound in that environment.  It seems like it is necessary to really live with something for a while to get a good, well-rounded sense of its strengths and weaknesses with plenty of quiet.  I still learned enough to make it worth going and to justify purchasing the X's to myself though.

post #330 of 5039

First batch of LCD-X currently being built for shipment next week.  Perhaps some actual reviews will appear in the thread. :gs1000smile:

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