New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Audeze LCD-X - Page 41

post #601 of 5040
Quote:
Originally Posted by dleblanc343 View Post

Purrin, do you really prefer the LCD2 to the LCDX? You mentioned so elsewhere, and I guess it's kind of disappointing to hear :/

 

Yes. At the end of the day where I lay the two headphones down side by side - and taking the influence of price OUT of the equation, and I ask myself which one, I'd pick the LCD2.2. The LCD2.2 is a consistent performer regardless of recording. It's voicing is more coherent and seems according to a specific vision. The LCD-X is a good headphone, but it sounds (and looks) more like the entry level headphone to the house of Audeze. IMHO, YMMV, FWIW, my 2 cents, PWNED, WTF, etc.


Edited by purrin - 11/3/13 at 11:20am
post #602 of 5040
Quote:
Originally Posted by purrin View Post
 

 

Yes. At the end of the day where I lay the two headphones down side by side - and taking the influence of price OUT of the equation, and I ask myself which one, I'd pick the LCD2.2. The LCD2.2 is a consistent performer regardless of recording. It's voicing is more coherent and seems according to a specific vision. The LCD-X is a good headphone, but it sounds (and looks) more like the entry level headphone to the house of Audeze. IMHO, YMMV, FWIW, my 2 cents, PWNED, WTF, etc.

LOL!!!:biggrin:

post #603 of 5040
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dubstep Girl View Post
 

 

nope. i said the LCD-X is LIKE the LCD-2 BECAUSE it is more aggressive. the LCD-2 is also more aggressive and forward than LCD-3, which is more laid-back.

 

i dont think LCD-x is more aggress or forward than LCD-2, they are almost the same in that regard. the LCD-X has better treble and more coherency, resolution, etc. like the LCD-3, its better than LCD-2, though they sound similar. the LCD-X is alot like LCD-2 but better and not as dark and closed in and congested. however, it is NOT laidback and creamy like LCD-3, but it also doesn't have as good of a soundstage as LCD-3.

 

the LCD-3 and LCD-X overlap each other in performance, neither is better neither is worse. i see it more like HD 600 is the LCD-X and HD 650 is the LCD-3, its the best analogy i can give.

 

 

Ok thanks, that's more understandable. 

post #604 of 5040
Quote:
Originally Posted by alota View Post
 

LOL!!!:biggrin:

+1 :biggrin: 

post #605 of 5040
Quote:
Originally Posted by purrin View Post
 

 

Yes. At the end of the day where I lay the two headphones down side by side - and taking the influence of price OUT of the equation, and I ask myself which one, I'd pick the LCD2.2. The LCD2.2 is a consistent performer regardless of recording. It's voicing is more coherent and seems according to a specific vision. The LCD-X is a good headphone, but it sounds (and looks) more like the entry level headphone to the house of Audeze. IMHO, YMMV, FWIW, my 2 cents, PWNED, WTF, etc.

 

Is it possible that the LCD-X was created an intentional homage to The Great Gatsby?

 


Edited by Kirosia - 11/3/13 at 12:54pm
post #606 of 5040
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirosia View Post
 

 

Is it possible that the LCD-X was created an intentional homage to The Great Gatsby?

 

I approve this post! Or rather I support it greatly! 

post #607 of 5040
Quote:
Originally Posted by purrin View Post
 

 

Yes. At the end of the day where I lay the two headphones down side by side - and taking the influence of price OUT of the equation, and I ask myself which one, I'd pick the LCD2.2. The LCD2.2 is a consistent performer regardless of recording. It's voicing is more coherent and seems according to a specific vision. The LCD-X is a good headphone, but it sounds (and looks) more like the entry level headphone to the house of Audeze. IMHO, YMMV, FWIW, my 2 cents, PWNED, WTF, etc.

I don't have enough time with the X to say I agree but I can see where you're going with this. After 3 days I think I'm starting to like the X better than the 2.2 mostly because it sounds more resolving/transparent and spacious (and probably because I spent a lot of money on it ;) . I can't yet pin down the coherency of the sound but it sounds technically superior.

post #608 of 5040

I was just at the Ultrasone website and saw a new entry, Edition 12.  Open design and priced at $1700.  Has anyone heard this can or compared to the LCD-X at the exact same price?

post #609 of 5040
Quote:
Originally Posted by RCBinTN View Post
 

I was just at the Ultrasone website and saw a new entry, Edition 12.  Open design and priced at $1700.  Has anyone heard this can or compared to the LCD-X at the exact same price?

... Hmm I'm curious 

post #610 of 5040

8khz peak = no way for me, way too hard for these ears. 

I do prefer the materials and style of the LCD-X though.

post #611 of 5040

For those who have tried the LCD-X, what was your first impression in relation to the LCD-2/3? 

 

Were you surprised at how similar it was?  Or perhaps that it wasn't an improvement over the LCD-3?

post #612 of 5040
Quote:
Originally Posted by PuffyElvis View Post
 

For those who have tried the LCD-X, what was your first impression in relation to the LCD-2/3? 

 

Were you surprised at how similar it was?  Or perhaps that it wasn't an improvement over the LCD-3?

 

post #554 and onwards didn't satisfy you? :blink: 

post #613 of 5040
Quote:
Originally Posted by RCBinTN View Post
 

I was just at the Ultrasone website and saw a new entry, Edition 12.  Open design and priced at $1700.  Has anyone heard this can or compared to the LCD-X at the exact same price?

 

It has been out for a while (the fact you guys do not know Ultrasone has released a new Edition headphone shows how unpopular Ultrasone these days around the world except in Japan.)

 

The real newest entry is Edition 5, which I believe the successor of Edition 8.

post #614 of 5040

I’m confused by all these impressions. I was hoping for a mix of LCD-3 and a little bit of HD800 (minus the sound stage to be realistic). Or a clearer LCD-3 with less "Mr. Bean sound" and more higher mids and treble. But now I wonder if it’s harder to hear tiny details in the sound with LCD-X than with LCD-3? How is low level room reverb presented compared to LCD-3? Anyway, I’ll find out when I get mine in late November...

post #615 of 5040
You're not the only one who's confused CanDude wink.gif

Clearer data needed. Maybe the LCDX is a different animal again from Audez'e which is taking time to pin down? Or, it's got overlaps with both LCD3 and 2 and this is making it hard to hear how it differs this early in its history.

Purrin's given some very nice, precise observations (on another site more than here) along with his plots beerchug.gif
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: High-end Audio Forum