New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Audeze LCD-X - Page 275

post #4111 of 5039
Quote:
Originally Posted by commtrd View Post
Are you running your LCD X balanced out of the Hugo? Is the Hugo configurable for SE or balanced? I am afraid my mind has now been infected with this irrational desire to obtain a Hugo and a LCD X... Darn you guys.

 

Resistance is futile...  :D

 

The Hugo is SE out only.  I'm using WyWires balanced 4-pin XLR to TRS adapter.  

 

 

... and I realize this is the LCD-X thread, but the Hugo mates superbly with the HD800 and UERM as well.

 

(and also directly powers speakers.  See the Hugo thread)


Edited by deadie - 5/21/14 at 11:31am
post #4112 of 5039

Received the LCD-X earlier today.  Some early impressions:

 

 

-First off, this is not Audeze's take on a neutral headphone, this is Audeze's take on a u-shaped headphone.  Tonal response similar to the HE-400 but less treble.

-Soundstage is ridiculously deep with good imaging capabilities, not too wide.

-Same smooth goodness and lack of grain you're used to with Audeze products

-Treble isn't as extended as it could be, slight spike at around 8-9khz that can come off as hard.

post #4113 of 5039
Quote:
Originally Posted by TMRaven View Post
 

Received the LCD-X earlier today.  Some early impressions:

 

 

-First off, this is not Audeze's take on a neutral headphone, this is Audeze's take on a u-shaped headphone.  Tonal response similar to the HE-400 but less treble.

-Soundstage is ridiculously deep with good imaging capabilities, not too wide.

-Same smooth goodness and lack of grain you're used to with Audeze products

-Treble isn't as extended as it could be, slight spike at around 8-9khz that can come off as hard.


Sounds like the synergy of your system with the X doesn't work. 

post #4114 of 5039

Nah the Synergy's fine.  No amp or dac is going to magically put 5db more upper mids on my LCD-X.  

post #4115 of 5039
Quote:
Originally Posted by elviscaprice View Post


Sounds like the synergy of your system with the X doesn't work. 

I find (like Tyll's innerfidelity.com review), the LCD-X are fantastically natural and the most "neutral" of Audeze's line up. I absolutely love their balanced sound.smily_headphones1.gif
post #4116 of 5039
Quote:
Originally Posted by TMRaven View Post
 

Received the LCD-X earlier today.  Some early impressions:

 

 

-First off, this is not Audeze's take on a neutral headphone, this is Audeze's take on a u-shaped headphone.  Tonal response similar to the HE-400 but less treble.

-Soundstage is ridiculously deep with good imaging capabilities, not too wide.

-Same smooth goodness and lack of grain you're used to with Audeze products

-Treble isn't as extended as it could be, slight spike at around 8-9khz that can come off as hard.

I found the LCD-X to require a few days to run in. Mine had little of the toe tapping musical qualities of the demo version I had auditioned. My LCD-3 sounded much better initially while running in. After 2-3 days, the thin uninvolving sound and treble hardness disappeared and I ended up preferring the LCD-X over the 3's by some margin.

post #4117 of 5039
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacedonianHero View Post


I find (like Tyll's innerfidelity.com review), the LCD-X are fantastically natural and the most "neutral" of Audeze's line up. I absolutely love their balanced sound.smily_headphones1.gif

 

+1

post #4118 of 5039

TMRaven "Received the LCD-X earlier today.  Some early impressions:"

 

That's the problem with early impressions. The X needs breaking in as much as any transducer will. Its FR levels out some - not all the way. Early impressions are meaningless.

 

"TMRaven: Nah the Synergy's fine.  No amp or dac is going to magically put 5db more upper mids on my LCD-X. "

 

That is true TM, however I assure you that different DACs appear to provide quite different FRs to the headphones because of impedance mismatches and other factors. For example, the Hugo provides greater extension at the top than many other DACs, that extension may not be measurable, yet it is easily audible. I had posted elsewhere about the need to use parametric EQ on EVERY headphone/EIM out there for the best sound. That suggestion will not be modified on this planet.

 

The X needs some boost at the top - generally abt +2dB at 1.6K and at 6K - these are octave wide boosts one overlapping the other. Other DACs-to-X will need slightly different curves for a similar response. Wires such as Moon's silver provides more sparkle at the top and Drew will recommend the appropriate wire for your DAC/amp. I have several Moons and am using Cardas right now.

 

Tyll had measured the LCD-X and had identified the regions needing "adjustment." My take on it is above. He is no fan of EQ and that's what makes horse races. I am a fan and I know EQ is necessary and indispensable - and exists on almost every studio recording extant...just a lot more of it.

 

To reject the notion of EQ is alike rejecting an extra grain of salt at your fave French restaurant after the chef had already put a handful of salt into the bouillabaisse.

 

Many people will barely be able to detect a +2dB change, yet that change will make platinum out of lead.

 

MacedonianHero above is correct. Among the Audeze line, the X is probably the best for general use on varied material, for classical lovers the 3, being smoother may be preferred.

 

As for DubstepGirl "some of the equipment here at the particle accelerator i work at uses FPGAs, I know next to nothing about it though :( "

 

I have a question for you: does the particle accelerator sound good?


Edited by AGB100 - 5/22/14 at 4:54am
post #4119 of 5039

I will give the LCD-X a couple more days of playtime to 'burn it in,' although I've never been a believer of that myth and I've never had any of my headphone change in sound over time.  The only thing that changed over time was myself getting used to their sound.  That won't be the case here because I'll be alternating it with the 560 as I compare and review them sometime down the line.

 

The amp can make a difference due to impedance mismatching, but this is a planar magnetic we're talking about.  There is no impedance mismatching.  I am a firm believer in EQ as well so giving 3-5 more db on the region from 2-4khz is no big deal at all.  It's how I was able to love the HE-400 for the past two years.

 

It's highly possible that-- with regards to Audeze's inability to make consistent sounding products-- that I've gotten a duller sounding LCD-X than others have.  Take a look at the two LCD-X's measured on IF and look at their raw uncompsenated frequency response charts.  One has a midrange that measures completely flat on the raw chart (very much akin to the HE-400, which means very recessed in that region), while the other measures +7db or so at 3khz, which is more inline with what an Audeze LCD2 would sound like.  Just so everybody knows, I've demo'd the LCD2 before and found it to have much more uppermidrange and much more flat throughout that area, and the LCD-XC I've demo'd recently had much more upper midrange and much more flat in that area as well.

post #4120 of 5039
Here's a few shots I'd like to share of my LCD-XS's perched on vibrant red Klutz Design can stand - quite a contrast between the two - hope you guys like smily_headphones1.gif



DSCF80122.jpg

DSCF80152.jpg
post #4121 of 5039

Wow nice pictures.

post #4122 of 5039

Just received my LCD-X's.

 

How does one get a frequency chart?  There was nothing with the headphones except a signed certificate and 2 small brochures (warranty and general LCD info).

 

Thanks!

post #4123 of 5039
Quote:
Originally Posted by R Scott Ireland View Post
 

Just received my LCD-X's.

 

How does one get a frequency chart?  There was nothing with the headphones except a signed certificate and 2 small brochures (warranty and general LCD info).

 

Thanks!

 

Send an email to their customer care, quoting your LCD-X serial number.

They sent mine within 1 working day, excluding the time difference.

Way much faster than the 5 working days that Sennheiser took me to send my HD800 freq chart

post #4124 of 5039

wonder why they don't just include a printout in the box.

post #4125 of 5039

Thanks guys!

 

Even if they don't include a printout, it would be nice if they let you know that it's available.

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