New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Audeze LCD-X - Page 57

post #841 of 4568

I'm really curious about the LCD-XC too!  I understand there's trade-offs with closed back phones, but all the places I listen would benefit from some sound isolation, either for my sake or others.  Small movements in classical really can't be enjoyed without a quiet background.

 

I have the LCD-2, LCD-3 and HE-500 arriving tomorrow from the headphone library.  If I like the LCD line (and can stand the weight on my head) I'm tempted to order the LCD-XC so I'll have all three Audezes to compare. 

 

At that point of course, I'll be committed to spending at least the cost of the LCD-XC with them since they only give credit on returns, but somehow I don't think that will be problem...


Edited by PuffyElvis - 11/7/13 at 9:01am
post #842 of 4568
Quote:
Originally Posted by Olias of Sunhillow View Post
 

 

Agree 100%. XC owners (all six of you, perhaps), don't be shy!

 

I'm debating the XC to complement my HD800, or the X as a complement/potential replacement.

 

These are a pair of loaner pairs I've got in my hands for a brief moment :-

 

 

Cos it's still taking me a little bit of time to warm up to the XCs but I must say slowly it has. The only other closed-back cans I have have very different signatures (i.e. the TH-900 & Signature DJ).

 

Probably the first thing that I've noticed in comparison to the TH-900 at least (aside from the obvious FR styles) is the XCs have quite an intimate presentation. However to my ears they do have a decent headroom and depth. With the ALO Ref (8??) cables and off the ALO Studio 6 sourced from the Resonessence Labs Invicta v1.0, these cans have actually quite a bit of detail which I didn't really pick up before in some of my regular vocal jazz tracks. That was a rather pleasant surprise.

 

I quite enjoy the mids and the treble range of these cans. Vocals sound clear and natural and the highs are crystal clear and airy too. Cymbals sound crisp but not artificially accentuated. I'd personally like a little more bass extension and impact but they're not basslight cans.

 

They seem to be reasonably fast cans keeping up with the pace. I think I do prefer rock and some kinds of vocal jazz on these cans, but have the TH-900 for the hip hop, R&B, etc.

post #843 of 4568

How well do the LCD-XC pull off the, "I'm really an open back headphone" bluff? 

post #844 of 4568

Regarding weight thought I would mention that I wear a pair of Thunderpants weighing 1.3 lbs dozens of hours a week and have never had an issue with the weight (they have LCD-2 pads BTW). Definitely a personal tolerance thing, but folks who are scared of the Audeze weight should try them before deciding whether it's an issue.

post #845 of 4568

When you say you would prefer more bass extension and impact, are you comparing to the other LCDs or the TH900?

post #846 of 4568

Puffy Elvis asked,

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by PuffyElvis View Post
 

How well do the LCD-XC pull off the, "I'm really an open back headphone" bluff? 

 

... and AnakChan replied

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by AnakChan View Post
 

Probably the first thing that I've noticed in comparison to the TH-900 at least (aside from the obvious FR styles) is the XCs have quite an intimate presentation. However to my ears they do have a decent headroom and depth.

 

The TH900 is pretty good in the soundstage department, even rivaling some open-backs (not quite at HD800 or HE-6 level, but wider and deeper than the LCD-2, for instance), so based on what he said, I guess the LCD-XC is not as wide as the TH900, but has a comparable sense of spaciousness above and below. The intimacy he speaks of might partially be due to the relative narrowness, but I wager it's more a bi-product of the FR and tonal balance, since Audeze mids tend to be quite forward and weighty. Just my assumption, though.


Edited by kurochin - 11/7/13 at 9:57am
post #847 of 4568

Heard the LCD-X, LCD-2 (good one), and HE-6 at the SD meet. Liked the HE-6 best, and the LCD-X least.

 

I did feel that HE-6 was brighter than the LCD-X and LCD-2, and the LCD-X felt brighter than the LCD-2. However, the HE-6 was not annoyingly bright or fatiguing to me. The LCD-X treble and upper midrange, while probably less bright than the HE-6, seemed a bit weird. On some passages it was great, in some others not so much. Perhaps some unevenness going on there. The LCD-2 at the meet did not seem to have these issues.

 

I also felt the HE-6 has a less scooped mid-range than the Audeze cans. All three of these options had well extended and relatively even bass to low-mid range response IMO.

 

The HE-6 was the hardest to drive.

 

Heard the LCD-X and LCD-2 out of an Denon CD player > EC 2A3 mkIV amp:

 

 

and the HE-6 out of audio-gd NFB-7.32 > Krell KAV-400xi

 

 

The LCD-2 is IMO much better looking than the LCD-X and HE-6.


Edited by ultrabike - 11/7/13 at 11:38am
post #848 of 4568

^^ I've always thought the lcd-2 was a good looking hp, but if I'm honest the lcd-x looks nicer still. The looks on the he-6 do nothing for me. 

post #849 of 4568

It's weird, cause I can't seem to get a feel for what I think of the X's styling. The Xc is friggin amazing looking...I wish I could see the regular X in person. I keep thinking it looks like the Audeze Military speical. 

post #850 of 4568

I'm really, really tempted to buy an LCD-XC.  I sold all my gear, and all I have for headphones now is a pair of monoprice in-ears.  I miss my LCD-2s desperately, but I want something with isolation.  Someone push me over the edge (or pull me back) and make up my mind!

 

  1. What kind of portable amp would I need for the XC?  I'd like to use it in the library and at work.
  2. I had an LCD-3 for a week or so, and never with a decent amp, so I'm more familiar with the capabilities of the LCD-2.  Will this slake my thirst for Audeze?  Should I just get an LCD-3 and let the outside world be damned?  Will I be able to drive an XC better than the LCD-3 on the go?
  3. Does it seem like the wood cups will be prone to scratches?
  4. Should I just get a T70p and spend the difference on strippers and couples counseling?

 

Someone make this easier for me.

post #851 of 4568
Quote:
Originally Posted by dan.gheorghe View Post
 

Included that in the review. 

 

 

I'd love to read some detailed impressions of the bass performance, quality, & quantity - especially compared to the LCD-2.r2/3. 

 

 

Related - I'm reading these types of comments regarding the bass of the LCD-X/xc

 

http://www.forbes.com/sites/geoffreymorrison/2013/11/03/audeze-lcd-xc-review

 

"I also like that there’s a little more bass with the LCD-3s [vs the LCD-XC], the sound is a little warmer."

 

...

 

http://stereos.about.com/od/accessoriesheadphones/fl/Audeze-LCD-XC-Headphone-Review.htm

 

"Tonally, the LCD-XC sounds close to flat -- but not quite flat. The bass has a subtly pumped-up quality, nowhere near as punchy as most closed-back headphones deliver, but not as dead-flat as bass of the LCD-X and HE-500."

  

  


Edited by the-kraken - 11/7/13 at 12:05pm
post #852 of 4568

I wish I could audition all the LCDs in the Boston-Providence area.

 

Anyone have all of them?

post #853 of 4568

Interesting reviews. Thanks for sharing them...

 

I'll be interested to see more reviews from some of the heavy hitters. 

post #854 of 4568
Quote:
Originally Posted by cizx View Post
 
  1. Should I just get a T70p and spend the difference on strippers and couples counseling?

 

 

 

LOL, sounds like the Monoprice are driving you to desperation. :L3000:

post #855 of 4568
Quote:
Originally Posted by Focker View Post

It's weird, cause I can't seem to get a feel for what I think of the X's styling. The Xc is friggin amazing looking...I wish I could see the regular X in person. I keep thinking it looks like the Audeze Military speical. 

Yeah, losing the organic element of the wood is a real change up. The wood on the XCs looks absolutely gorgeous, but I don't have any need for a closed phone.

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