New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Audeze LCD-X - Page 65

post #961 of 9092
Dammit, if I keep reading this thread my LCD-2 purchase is going to become an LCD-X purchase.
post #962 of 9092

mmm... need to find a place where to audition audeze gear near my region...

 

sold lcd2.2 looking to upgrade... obviously to lcd3... but now audeze complicated it

 

putting it simply lcd2.2 just didn't do it for metal for me, hd800 was closer to be an allrounder... beyer t1's quickness and edginess was just unbeatable...

 

lcd-x quicker/edgier than hd800? or maybe even than beyer t1?

 

anyone compared the lcd-x to hifiman he-6?

post #963 of 9092
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taowolf51 View Post

Dammit, if I keep reading this thread my LCD-2 purchase is going to become an LCD-X purchase.

 

 

Isn't that what Head-Fi is for?  :D

 

upgrade fever...

 

I think this will be the Audeze for me as an alternative to HD800/T1.

 

MH, I assume you are basing your impressions off of the gs-x mkII?

post #964 of 9092
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Eddy View Post

My partner's in Canada. I'll just have him pay you a visit and serve up his own "restraining order." very_evil_smiley.gif

se

If you do, my fridge is stocked with good old Canadian beer. smily_headphones1.gif
post #965 of 9092
Quote:
Originally Posted by roskodan View Post

anyone compared the lcd-x to hifiman he-6?

Interested in this myself
post #966 of 9092
Quote:
Originally Posted by roskodan View Post
 

mmm... need to find a place where to audition audeze gear near my region...

 

sold lcd2.2 looking to upgrade... obviously to lcd3... but now audeze complicated it

 

putting it simply lcd2.2 just didn't do it for metal for me, hd800 was closer to be an allrounder... beyer t1's quickness and edginess was just unbeatable...

 

lcd-x quicker/edgier than hd800? or maybe even than beyer t1?

 

anyone compared the lcd-x to hifiman he-6?


Can't compare the HE-6 to the X myself, but I have the LCD 2.2, T1 have heard the HE-6 and HD800 extensively at a friends home and the HE-6 is extraordinary in speed and has the well extended treble required to do aggressive heavy metal justice. I'd be buying a HE-6 myself if I didn't have the HD800 and Alpha dog (for work) on the radar to buy. Even so it does well for lots of types of music.

post #967 of 9092
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saren View Post
 


Can't compare the HE-6 to the X myself, but I have the LCD 2.2, T1 have heard the HE-6 and HD800 extensively at a friends home and the HE-6 is extraordinary in speed and has the well extended treble required to do aggressive heavy metal justice. I'd be buying a HE-6 myself if I didn't have the HD800 and Alpha dog (for work) on the radar to buy. Even so it does well for lots of types of music.

 

I heard the HE-6, LDC 2, and X side-by-side, and agree with your assessment.

post #968 of 9092
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saren View Post

I'd be buying a HE-6 myself if I didn't have the HD800 and Alpha dog (for work) on the radar to buy. Even so it does well for lots of types of music.

 

 

what do you mean, he-6 covers both hd800 and Alpha Dogs?

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ultrabike View Post

 

I heard the HE-6, LDC 2, and X side-by-side, and agree with your assessment.

 

you agree about he-6 over lcd-x for metal?

post #969 of 9092
Quote:
Originally Posted by roskodan View Post
 

you agree about he-6 over lcd-x for metal?

 

 

I agree in that the HE-6, while brighter, has smoother treble and better bass than the X. I feel the LCD-X, unlike the LCD-2 and HE-6 requires very good seal to get deep bass. Velour pads are probably out of the question for the LCD-X or possible 80 Hz bass roll off may occur. I also feel the HE-6 has better speed than the LCD-X and does great with lots of types of music.

 

One thing unique to the LCD-X is it's fairly low impedance and high sensitivity for a planar. That may not be a big problem for high impedance amps since it's mostly resistive, but not sure.

 

This would be speculation, but from what I've seen, the X might be using a thinner diaphragm.


Edited by ultrabike - 11/9/13 at 6:20pm
post #970 of 9092

Thanks for the comparison Ultrabike. Interesting to hear about that roll off. I'd still be interested in getting to Addicted to Audio to audition the X though.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by roskodan View Post
 

 

 

what do you mean, he-6 covers both hd800 and Alpha Dogs?

 

 

 

I mean that I would be buying the HE-6 asap if it were not for the fact HD800 and Alpha's are on the list to get first. Mainly due to the fact that I listen to a lot of ambient electronic and classical to boot so the HD800 would be very desirable. The Alpha's are needed as a non leaking pair to use in my office. I'd buy the HE-6 later on. I'm a collector like that :tongue_smile: 


Edited by Saren - 11/9/13 at 6:19pm
post #971 of 9092
The roll off may not happen at all if perfect seal is achieved, in agreement IF measurements and my initial impressions. However, when measuring with a leaky baffle, they roll off at 80 Hz unlike most other planars. They seem to behave like stats to some degree. Note the "blip" around 30 Hz in the IF measurements:
 
 
They had great bass response IMO, but not as good as what I heard from the HE-6s, or the LCD-2s.

Edited by ultrabike - 11/9/13 at 6:36pm
post #972 of 9092
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacedonianHero View Post
 

In case anyone is interested, innerfidelity.com posted the LCD-X measurements. They are excellent (as I've come to expect from Audeze):

 

http://www.innerfidelity.com/images/AudezeLCDX.pdf

 

The one thing that initially jumped out for me is the 300Hz square wave plot is the best I've seen from an Audeze headphone. Notice how the square wave settles right down after the first overshoot. On the LCD-2 there were 2 overshoots, both about the same; and it was improved on the LCD-3 (though still there to a lesser degree). On the LCD-X, looks to be completely cured. It can partly explain the amazing imaging and instrumental separation that I'm hearing with the LCD-X.

+1  :o2smile:

post #973 of 9092

Just to throw in my two cents, the HE-6s where always a rung down from the HD800s as "brighter" sounding headphones go. I've owned both for at least a year, but I still own the HD800s. ;) 


Edited by MacedonianHero - 11/9/13 at 6:52pm
post #974 of 9092

I agree that the HE-6 is brighter than the LCD-X. But I did not found the HE-6 fatiguing. 

 

I felt the stock HD800 were more analytic and dry than both the HE-6 and the LCD-X.

 

The LCD-X are not bad at all, however I found their treble a little weird. :wink:  I don't think it takes a year to figure that out. :wink: 


Edited by ultrabike - 11/9/13 at 6:59pm
post #975 of 9092

Yeah, that's definitely not how I hear it (or the measurements from Tyll illustrate it). They are simply not bright and their treble is a good step up from the LCD2/3s and especially the HE-6s to my ears with my rig. Definitely much less treble energy than the HE-6s and I've literally had the LCD-X on my head for hours with zero fatigue. The HE-6s had about a 45 min maximum for me for that reason. 

 

Sorry, but I simply can't agree with this as I've had the LCD-X here for about a week (sorry, but meet conditions are far from ideal...mine especially, so I really tend to only go for social purposes as a result).


Edited by MacedonianHero - 11/9/13 at 7:02pm
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: High-end Audio Forum