or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Audeze LCD-X - Page 25

post #361 of 8647
Quote:
Originally Posted by PuffyElvis View Post
 

I keep seeing different different colors for the LCD-X.  Website has blue, Headroom has silver, the photo above looks black... What color is the aluminum baffle and ring?

 

The ring comes in either gun-metal grey or black.  Picture here isn't great lighting but the black ring is shown on the right.

 

post #362 of 8647

Where's the option for black on their site?  I only see gun-metal gray.  

post #363 of 8647

I got a chance to try the LCD-X (and XC) at the Philly meet, and it was my favorite at the show! It beat out the LCD-3, HD800, HE-6, STAX SR-009 (powered by a Blue Hawaii), and an Abyss (powered by the Woo 234 monoblocks)! I tried the LCD-X with the Woo WA6-SE and the Woo 234 monoblocks.

 

Of course, this is more of an opinion, it was far from the most accurate at the show, but it has a certain seductive quality that's nearly impossible to ignore.


Edited by Taowolf51 - 10/27/13 at 8:49pm
post #364 of 8647
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taowolf51 View Post
 

I got a chance to try the LCD-X (and XC) at the Philly meet, and it was my favorite at the show! It beat out the LCD-3, HD800, HE-6, STAX SR-009 (powered by a Blue Hawaii), and an Abyss (powered by the Woo 234 monoblocks)! I tried the LCD-X with the Woo WA6-SE and the Woo 234 monoblocks.

 

Of course, this is more of an opinion, it was far from the most accurate at the show, but it has a certain seductive quality that's nearly impossible to ignore.

 

How long did you try it for? Do you actually think the difference between the LCD-X and the other flagships are that big?

post #365 of 8647

LCD-X...the STAX killer!!!!

 

:D

post #366 of 8647

Only in your dreams................

post #367 of 8647

i doubt its better than stax, he-6 (maybe), and hd 800, but im sure its better than abyss.

post #368 of 8647
Quote:
Originally Posted by DairyProduce View Post
 

 

How long did you try it for? Do you actually think the difference between the LCD-X and the other flagships are that big?

 

I probably listened to it for longer than any other headphone at the meet, though that isn't truly long enough (I like to listen to headphones for a long time before forming a solid opinion).

 

My response to most of the headphones at the meet was "That sounds nice, I enjoyed that.", while my response to the LCD-X was an immediate "I NEED this headphone!" I also was able to A/B the LCD-X and LCD-3, and listened to the same track on both the LCD-X and SR-009.

 

The LCD-X was one of the least accurate of the high-end headphones I tried (with the exception of the other Audeze headphones there, it was one of the more accurate Audeze headphones), but had a certain seductive quality and very euphonic sound. The way it presented music made everything sound far more dramatic (without really having a sharp "exciting" type sound). Compared to the LCD-3, it was far less warm and more accurate, but didn't lose any of the seductive qualities of the LCD-3 had (in fact, it may have had more of those qualities).

 

The best quality of the X, though, is the microdetails. Every *single* little detail is front and center and very clear, almost shockingly so.

 

I am more interested in the euphonic type sound, if you want a purely accurate setup, you probably won't like the LCD-X (or really any Audeze headphone), but as far as my preferences go, the LCD-X hit every note the way I wanted it to.

 

I wasn't the only one that was really impressed by the X, it was one of the more popular headphones at the meet, and the people I talked to at the meet thought it was the best in the Audeze line.


Edited by Taowolf51 - 10/27/13 at 9:25pm
post #369 of 8647

I think what he's trying to say is that it's subjectively better for him, like it conforms to his tastes in headphones/music the best. I have high hopes for the LCD-X as well, hopefully it can just be my end game and I don't need anything even more expensive. I'm not very hard to please given that the LCD-2/HE-500 aren't even summit-fi and I'm pretty content with them.

post #370 of 8647
Quote:
Originally Posted by M-13 View Post
 

I think what he's trying to say is that it's subjectively better for him, like it conforms to his tastes in headphones/music the best. I have high hopes for the LCD-X as well, hopefully it can just be my end game and I don't need anything even more expensive. I'm not very hard to please given that the LCD-2/HE-500 aren't even summit-fi and I'm pretty content with them.

 

hmm , kinda like i prefer T1 over HD 800 and LCD-3, though its not necessarily better.

post #371 of 8647
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taowolf51 View Post

I got a chance to try the LCD-X (and XC) at the Philly meet, and it was my favorite at the show! It beat out the LCD-3, HD800, HE-6, STAX SR-009 (powered by a Blue Hawaii), and an Abyss (powered by the Woo 234 monoblocks)! I tried the LCD-X with the Woo WA6-SE and the Woo 234 monoblocks.

Of course, this is more of an opinion, it was far from the most accurate at the show, but it has a certain seductive quality that's nearly impossible to ignore.

Setting aside the very different voicing of the non-Audeze flagships, can you elaborate on the differences between the LCD-X and the LCD-3?
post #372 of 8647
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taowolf51 View Post
 

I got a chance to try the LCD-X (and XC) at the Philly meet, and it was my favorite at the show! It beat out the LCD-3, HD800, HE-6, STAX SR-009 (powered by a Blue Hawaii), and an Abyss (powered by the Woo 234 monoblocks)! I tried the LCD-X with the Woo WA6-SE and the Woo 234 monoblocks.

 

Of course, this is more of an opinion, it was far from the most accurate at the show, but it has a certain seductive quality that's nearly impossible to ignore.

Very excited to hear that, hope my LCD-X will be shipped this week.  :popcorn:

post #373 of 8647
Quote:JWahl
 Therefore a 600 ohm headphone will require far less current to achieve the intended voltage gain setting.

Very true, however, to supply that current, it needs sufficient voltage to do it into that 600 Ohms.

 

If all amps had unlimited current availabilty, it wouldn't be a problem.

 

A monoblock or transconductance amp are no problem here.

 

The problem otherwise is twofold.

 

1. An amp with low output voltage, which can't provide enough current to the headphone.

2. An amp with a high enough voltage, but cannot provide the required current. Perhaps due to the amp's internal impedance being too high.

 

Case 1. An amp with 10V rail voltage (assuming perfect transference) can only supply 100mA into a 100 Ohm headphone, or 20mA into a 500 Ohm headphone.

If the 500 Ohm headphone requires 30mA to reach 100dB, there will be severe clipping well before the sound reaches that level, or, distortion due to voltage clipping on the peaks of the output.

 

Case 2. An amp with 10 Ohms inrternal impedance will only deliver half the power into a 10 Ohm headphone as the amp sees a 20 Ohm load.. A 100 Ohm headphone has things better, but in effect the amp sees a 110 Ohm load instead of 100 Ohms.

post #374 of 8647
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taowolf51 View Post
 

...The LCD-X was one of the least accurate of the high-end headphones I tried (with the exception of the other Audeze headphones there, it was one of the more accurate Audeze headphones)...

 

 

What's accurate in your mind?

post #375 of 8647
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dubstep Girl View Post
 

i doubt its better than stax, he-6 (maybe), and hd 800, but im sure its better than abyss.

 

 

I never said better, I said I preferred it to those other headphones. I rarely like to say things are truly "better", especially when comparing high-end headphones.

 

The Abyss was pretty disappointing in my opinion, though.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dubstep Girl View Post
 

 

hmm , kinda like i prefer T1 over HD 800 and LCD-3, though its not necessarily better.

 

 

The T1 was also at the show, actually. I quite liked it, though still preferred the X. The T1's ability to reproduce horn instruments really impressed me.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Barry S View Post


Setting aside the very different voicing of the non-Audeze flagships, can you elaborate on the differences between the LCD-X and the LCD-3?
 
The first thing that struck me when going from one to the other was how much warmer the LCD-3 was. The LCD-X made the 3 sound almost too warm. The LCD-3 also didn't have the incredible microdetail of the X. The 3 is the more relaxed of the two, and the X is the more accurate, clean, and energetic of the two, but also sounds more balanced and accurate (though not as balanced and accurate as other flagships). If I was listening to music that really wanted that warm relaxed presentation, I could see the LCD-3 being the best choice, but for everything else I would see myself preferring the X. The album I spent most of my time with was Radiohead's Kid A album played through Oppo blu-ray/SACD/DVD-A/CD players on the WA6-SE and WA5 and a CD player/DAC I do not know the name of with Jack's 234 monoblocks. With the STAX, it was a lossless file being played through one of Justin's DACs I do not know the name of.

 

EDIT:

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by TMRaven View Post
 

 

 

What's accurate in your mind?

 

 

I would consider accurate to be what I consider to be most sonically equivalent to a live performance. Anything warmer than purely accurate is a "warm" headphone, anything colder than accurate is a "cold" headphone. As far as FR, accurate would be a very linear FR.

 

I would say the SR-009 with the Blue Hawaii was the closest to what I consider to be purely accurate, you can base it off of that.


Edited by Taowolf51 - 10/27/13 at 9:48pm
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: High-end Audio Forum