or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Audeze LCD-X - Page 38

post #556 of 8778
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dubstep Girl View Post
 

 

its the room + a i think its a phone camera. anyways the pads are definitely brown and not grey lol.

 

i was at the chicago meet.

 

i got to compare LCD-3, LCD-X, LCD-2r2, LCD-2r1 on the Master 8, the GSX MK2, and the Mjolnir/Gungnir stack. it was nice having all the audeze's there.

 

anyways, the LCD-X are great, but its up to you to decide. i felt the LCD-X was more like an upgrade to the LCD-2. the LCD-X definitely had the audeze warmth, it was slightly darker and more neutralish like the LCD-2, but not as dark. the treble is better on LCD-X, its not as colored. and its nothing like the LCD-3, the LCD-3 seemed just a tiny tiny bit more resolving, but its too close to call, mostly, the LCD-3 is smoother, bigger soundstage, slightly leaner in a way i think. but very similar. the LCD-3 is creamy, smooth, more colored, and lighter on the bass than the LCD-X, but more resolving (slightly), and liquidy. 

 

the LCD-X goes more towards the LCD-2 sound. being more neutral as in more treble and less dark and closed in. theres no congestion, but the soundstage is smaller than the LCD-3. the bass, its awesome! its more than the LCD-3, its like the LCD-2 bass, but deeper and more extended. in some ways, i prefer the X and am considering it. its that magic middle i wanted, that more forward, more slam, more attack, less creamy sounding LCD-3, but i also really like how good the LCD-3 sounds, wider, more smooth, more liquid, so "yummy" as Tyll describes it.

 

anyways, its too close to call. i think the LCD-3 is still the flagship, but i kinda like the bass of the LCD-X more, it hits harder with that similar slam and sound of the LCD-2. the LCD-X is much more like the 2 than the 3, but they're all so similar, definitely the same house sound.

 

now as for the rev 1..... its more forgiving, but its also less resolving and a step below the others. it sounded great on the mjolnir/gungnir though. i know people rave about this combo, i think it suits the LCD-2 better than the LCD-3 or LCD-X but thats just imo.

 

anyways, if you are a LCD-3 owner. the X is great, but its too close that its not worth selling the 3 probably unless you like the slightly more LCD-2-esque presentation and are willing to trade some of the LCD3's liquidity and spaciousness for the extra bass and slightly more forward/punchy sound of the LCD-2. performance-wise, the LCD-X isn't better, the LCD-3 isn't better. i prefer both in different ways since they overlap. i like the LCD-3s overall refinement more, but i like the energy bass and neutrality (as in colorations, not neutral as in freq response) that the LCD-X carries. i am thinking of owning both, but they're too close sounding that i feel that i'd be happy with either one. and it'd be silly to own both.

Was there a big difference between the amps?

post #557 of 8778
Quote:
Originally Posted by DairyProduce View Post
 

Was there a big difference between the amps?

 

gsx mk2 and master 8? 

 

no. everything is similar in performance, just wider soundstage, more treble on master 8. slightly warmer, smaller soundstage, more musicality and imaging on gsx mk2. 

 

with master 8, the LCD-X sounded more neutral almost like hd 600 ish. with GSX MK2, they where punchy and more LCD-2 like. 

 

anyways with both, i found more bass over LCD-3, slightly less creamy liquid colorations, slightly smaller soundstage, but more punch, slam, forwardness. 

 

performance wise, i think the LCD-3 is like 3% more resolving, yeah its a really small improvement but not sure. the headphones weren't fully burnt in.


Edited by Dubstep Girl - 11/2/13 at 7:18pm
post #558 of 8778
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dubstep Girl View Post
 

 

 

i was at the chicago meet.

 

i got to compare LCD-3, LCD-X, LCD-2r2, LCD-2r1 on the Master 8, the GSX MK2, and the Mjolnir/Gungnir stack. it was nice having all the audeze's there.

 

anyways, the LCD-X are great, but its up to you to decide. i felt the LCD-X was more like an upgrade to the LCD-2. the LCD-X definitely had the audeze warmth, it was slightly darker and more neutralish like the LCD-2, but not as dark. the treble is better on LCD-X, its not as colored. and its nothing like the LCD-3, the LCD-3 seemed just a tiny tiny bit more resolving, but its too close to call, mostly, the LCD-3 is smoother, bigger soundstage, slightly leaner in a way i think. but very similar. the LCD-3 is creamy, smooth, more colored, and lighter on the bass than the LCD-X, but more resolving (slightly), and liquidy. 

 

the LCD-X goes more towards the LCD-2 sound. being more neutral as in more treble and less dark and closed in. theres no congestion, but the soundstage is smaller than the LCD-3. the bass, its awesome! its more than the LCD-3, its like the LCD-2 bass, but deeper and more extended. in some ways, i prefer the X and am considering it. its that magic middle i wanted, that more forward, more slam, more attack, less creamy sounding LCD-3, but i also really like how good the LCD-3 sounds, wider, more smooth, more liquid, so "yummy" as Tyll describes it.

 

anyways, its too close to call. i think the LCD-3 is still the flagship, but i kinda like the bass of the LCD-X more, it hits harder with that similar slam and sound of the LCD-2. the LCD-X is much more like the 2 than the 3, but they're all so similar, definitely the same house sound.

 

now as for the rev 1..... its more forgiving, but its also less resolving and a step below the others. it sounded great on the mjolnir/gungnir though. i know people rave about this combo, i think it suits the LCD-2 better than the LCD-3 or LCD-X but thats just imo.

 

anyways, if you are a LCD-3 owner. the X is great, but its too close that its not worth selling the 3 probably unless you like the slightly more LCD-2-esque presentation and are willing to trade some of the LCD3's liquidity and spaciousness for the extra bass and slightly more forward/punchy sound of the LCD-2. performance-wise, the LCD-X isn't better, the LCD-3 isn't better. i prefer both in different ways since they overlap. i like the LCD-3s overall refinement more, but i like the energy bass and neutrality (as in colorations, not neutral as in freq response) that the LCD-X carries. i am thinking of owning both, but they're too close sounding that i feel that i'd be happy with either one. and it'd be silly to own both.

 

 

Wow, great feedback as always, DG. This makes me think the X may be more my cup of tea than the 3s. I loved the 2s, to the point where I really didn't find fault with them whatsoever...I decided to send them back only because I want to experience the best Audeze has to offer and to upgrade to either the 3s or the Xs. 

 

Do you feel the Xs have that aesthetic beauty that the 2s and 3s have? Even with just the bamboo, I thought the 2s were just beautiful headphones in person....much nicer looking than in the pics. 

 

Really eager to read about MH's impressions next week! 

post #559 of 8778
Quote:
Originally Posted by Focker View Post
 

 

 

Wow, great feedback as always, DG. This makes me think the X may be more my cup of tea than the 3s. I loved the 2s, to the point where I really didn't find fault with them whatsoever...I decided to send them back only because I want to experience the best Audeze has to offer and to upgrade to either the 3s or the Xs. 

 

Do you feel the Xs have that aesthetic beauty that the 2s and 3s have? Even with just the bamboo, I thought the 2s were just beautiful headphones in person....much nicer looking than in the pics. 

 

Really eager to read about MH's impressions next week! 

thanks!

 

oh yes they're beautiful.. very solid looking. 

 

the ones there where black with vegan. im sure the grey with black leather are just as nice. beautiful heaedphones.

post #560 of 8778
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dubstep Girl View Post
 

thanks!

 

oh yes they're beautiful.. very solid looking. 

 

the ones there where black with vegan. im sure the grey with black leather are just as nice. beautiful heaedphones.

 

Nice, that's what I figured. When you start getting up into the $1500+ territory, it's nice to have the build and aesthetics up to par with the price! lol

 

As hard as it was, I'm glad I sent the 2s back...sounds like this will be a worthwhile upgrade no matter which one I go with. 

post #561 of 8778

Nice review Dubstep Girl!  That's the kind of comparison we've all been waiting for. 

 

I'm also local to Chicago and really wanted to go to the meet, but I'm getting slammed at work and knew I wouldn't make it, sigh...

post #562 of 8778
Thanks for sharing your thoughts Dubstep Girl. Looks like lcdx definite has better treble. What's about speed, veil of lcdx when compare to lcd2 and lcd3

thanks
post #563 of 8778

I guess LCD-XC wasn't at the meet.  

post #564 of 8778
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dubstep Girl View Post
 

 

gsx mk2 and master 8? 

 

no. everything is similar in performance, just wider soundstage, more treble on master 8. slightly warmer, smaller soundstage, more musicality and imaging on gsx mk2. 

 

with master 8, the LCD-X sounded more neutral almost like hd 600 ish. with GSX MK2, they where punchy and more LCD-2 like. 

 

anyways with both, i found more bass over LCD-3, slightly less creamy liquid colorations, slightly smaller soundstage, but more punch, slam, forwardness. 

 

performance wise, i think the LCD-3 is like 3% more resolving, yeah its a really small improvement but not sure. the headphones weren't fully burnt in.


Wow finally a comparison of the 2 heavy weights. Cool DG. So you think they're equivalent? Or do you prefer the GSX?

post #565 of 8778
DG,
Excellent impressions, thanks. Kinda helped me rule out the X (for now anyway). I ordered the XC hopefully for a different kind of Audez'e sound so here's waiting for it eith fingers crossed.
post #566 of 8778
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dubstep Girl View Post

 

i was at the chicago meet. etc...

 

GREAT. You feel it is better than the LCD-2 and is an equal-in-quality alternative to the LCD-3. I feel I may prefer some attack and bass compared to soundstage and resolution (Saving $246 bonus!). I've had to make that choice before. What's important is that while the LCD-X has more bass and smaller soundstage, it doesn't sound closed in. I am sensing two different takes on the Audeze sound and I am sure both are great.

 

What is intriguing is if the LCD-X will sound good with the V200 amp. I could just sell my LCD-2 without upgrading my equipment. I will wait and see if they work together.

post #567 of 8778

Hmm I think the X would make a nice replacement for my He 400 :3 

post #568 of 8778
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dubstep Girl View Post

 

i got to compare LCD-3, LCD-X, LCD-2r2, LCD-2r1 on the Master 8, the GSX MK2, and the Mjolnir/Gungnir stack. it was nice having all the audeze's there.

 

anyways, the LCD-X are great, but its up to you to decide. i felt the LCD-X was more like an upgrade to the LCD-2. the LCD-X definitely had the audeze warmth, it was slightly darker and more neutralish like the LCD-2, but not as dark. the treble is better on LCD-X, its not as colored. and its nothing like the LCD-3, the LCD-3 seemed just a tiny tiny bit more resolving, but its too close to call, mostly, the LCD-3 is smoother, bigger soundstage, slightly leaner in a way i think. but very similar. the LCD-3 is creamy, smooth, more colored, and lighter on the bass than the LCD-X, but more resolving (slightly), and liquidy. 

 

the LCD-X goes more towards the LCD-2 sound. being more neutral as in more treble and less dark and closed in. theres no congestion, but the soundstage is smaller than the LCD-3. the bass, its awesome! its more than the LCD-3, its like the LCD-2 bass, but deeper and more extended. in some ways, i prefer the X and am considering it. its that magic middle i wanted, that more forward, more slam, more attack, less creamy sounding LCD-3, but i also really like how good the LCD-3 sounds, wider, more smooth, more liquid, so "yummy" as Tyll describes it.

 

anyways, its too close to call. i think the LCD-3 is still the flagship, but i kinda like the bass of the LCD-X more, it hits harder with that similar slam and sound of the LCD-2. the LCD-X is much more like the 2 than the 3, but they're all so similar, definitely the same house sound.

 

now as for the rev 1..... its more forgiving, but its also less resolving and a step below the others. it sounded great on the mjolnir/gungnir though. i know people rave about this combo, i think it suits the LCD-2 better than the LCD-3 or LCD-X but thats just imo.

 

anyways, if you are a LCD-3 owner. the X is great, but its too close that its not worth selling the 3 probably unless you like the slightly more LCD-2-esque presentation and are willing to trade some of the LCD3's liquidity and spaciousness for the extra bass and slightly more forward/punchy sound of the LCD-2. performance-wise, the LCD-X isn't better, the LCD-3 isn't better. i prefer both in different ways since they overlap. i like the LCD-3s overall refinement more, but i like the energy bass and neutrality (as in colorations, not neutral as in freq response) that the LCD-X carries. i am thinking of owning both, but they're too close sounding that i feel that i'd be happy with either one. and it'd be silly to own both.

 

 

A few questions:

 

LCD-X = Smaller Sound Stage but less closed in?  Does this mean it has more air - or ???

 

LCD-3 = More colored and more resolving?  More resolving where - Treble, Mids, Bass? 

 

This is subjective I know. However, less colored = more resolving, more colored = less resolution - no?

 

Speed.  Which one seems to have more speed?

post #569 of 8778
Quote:
Originally Posted by preproman View Post
 

 

 

A few questions:

 

LCD-X = Smaller Sound Stage but less closed in?  Does this mean it has more air - or ???

 

LCD-3 = More colored and more resolving?  More resolving where - Treble, Mids, Bass? 

 

This is subjective I know. However, less colored = more resolving, more colored = less resolution - no?

 

Speed.  Which one seems to have more speed?

curious about this as well 

post #570 of 8778

Can anybody with the X or XC post the frequency response chart?

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