New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

AUDEZE LCD XC - Page 27

post #391 of 1791
Quote:
Originally Posted by twodog View Post
 


Second, I would love a shorter cable for my XCs since I am using them as portable phones like a maniac 😍

Moon-Audio will make em at any length you want.

The ALO Green Line isn't too long.

 

Also Cardas does the Clear at any length you'd like too - though I know its a lil pricey...

post #392 of 1791
Happy Christmas, uk time, everyone! Mike by lovely photos of these cables you refer to? Bet they look the business.
post #393 of 1791
Quote:
Originally Posted by twodog View Post


Second, I would love a shorter cable for my XCs since I am using them as portable phones like a maniac 😍
If anyone else is interested in custom cables that don't cost $100s I'll post photos when I get them. They will be durable and neutral.
post #394 of 1791
Quote:
Originally Posted by sbradley02 View Post


If anyone else is interested in custom cables that don't cost $100s I'll post photos when I get them. They will be durable and neutral.

Yeah I'd love to see those too!

Quote:
Originally Posted by deafanddumb View Post

Happy Christmas, uk time, everyone! Mike by lovely photos of these cables you refer to? Bet they look the business.

they do indeed!


Edited by mikemercer - 12/25/13 at 12:14am
post #395 of 1791

Grr!  I want a pair of Audeze, and in my opinion the XC look the best..  But are the XC's really less impactful and thinner sounding than the regular X version?  How are closed headphones lacking in that department compared to their open counterpart?

I love bass impact and extension just as much as I love mids and highs (maybe more so).  So if I don't want thinner, unimpressive bass and overall untactful sound when compared to other Audeze headphones, are the XC's really not for me?

They just look so beautiful and a closed planar magnetic piece of gear from Audeze sounds like such a punchy, fun experience for me.  Is this not the case?

post #396 of 1791
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rem1x View Post
 

Grr!  I want a pair of Audeze, and in my opinion the XC look the best..  But are the XC's really less impactful and thinner sounding than the regular X version?  How are closed headphones lacking in that department compared to their open counterpart?

I love bass impact and extension just as much as I love mids and highs (maybe more so).  So if I don't want thinner, unimpressive bass and overall untactful sound when compared to other Audeze headphones, are the XC's really not for me?

They just look so beautiful and a closed planar magnetic piece of gear from Audeze sounds like such a punchy, fun experience for me.  Is this not the case?

See above here:

 

post #307

 

According to that review, the LCD3/2 actually has more bass:

 

Quote:

The LCD-3 is the next step up, and top of the line, Audeze headphone. Ireviewed the LCD-3 and said, “I’m pretty hard to impress, especially when it comes to headphones, and these impressed me. They’re that good.”

Comparing the two back to back (or I guess technically, open-back to closed-back), I found the XC to be a little less open sounding. Obviously, right? Except, it was not nearly as different as I expected. Sure the LCD-3s are moreopen sounding, but the XCs are so open sounding that the two headphones are lot closer than you’d expect.

I also like that there’s a little more bass with the LCD-3s, the sound is a little warmer. This is more my preference in headphones, just so you know. There also seems to be a little more mid-treble with the LCD-XC, which might make it seem like it has a little less bass (in comparison to the treble).

There’s slightly more… effortlessness… to the LCD-3’s sound. It’s not a huge difference, but with the three Audeze headphones laid out in front of me (including the X’s), the 3’s are the ones I kept wanting to reach for.

So personally, I’d get the LCD-3s over the XCs, for that extra warmth and openness, but if you’re not interested in an open-back headphone then… don’t worry about the LCD-3.

 

 
post #397 of 1791
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rem1x View Post
 

Grr!  I want a pair of Audeze, and in my opinion the XC look the best..  But are the XC's really less impactful and thinner sounding than the regular X version?  How are closed headphones lacking in that department compared to their open counterpart?

I love bass impact and extension just as much as I love mids and highs (maybe more so).  So if I don't want thinner, unimpressive bass and overall untactful sound when compared to other Audeze headphones, are the XC's really not for me?

They just look so beautiful and a closed planar magnetic piece of gear from Audeze sounds like such a punchy, fun experience for me.  Is this not the case?

 

Seems like XC has the most bass out of three but the reason people think 3 and X has more impact is that XC also has more treble. 

 

Headphone is always relative..

 

 

 

Lets say there are two headphone has exactly same amount of bass and extension at central point 1khz.

 

One has little treble, the other has more treble, than 95% of people will think headphone with little treble has more bass.

 

 

Therefore as you can see, XC has the most treble out of all.

 

That's why people think XC has less impact and has thinner sound.


Edited by skfktkwjs - 12/26/13 at 1:38pm
post #398 of 1791
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rem1x View Post
 

Grr!  I want a pair of Audeze, and in my opinion the XC look the best..  But are the XC's really less impactful and thinner sounding than the regular X version?  How are closed headphones lacking in that department compared to their open counterpart?

I love bass impact and extension just as much as I love mids and highs (maybe more so).  So if I don't want thinner, unimpressive bass and overall untactful sound when compared to other Audeze headphones, are the XC's really not for me?

They just look so beautiful and a closed planar magnetic piece of gear from Audeze sounds like such a punchy, fun experience for me.  Is this not the case?

I don't find them less impactful at all!

The only area, to me, where they are slightly behind (enter the laws of physics) is in the out-of-you-head soundstaging that that X has.

BUT - w/ the new Fazor technology employed in both the X and XC - the XC's sound, to me, like the closest to open-backs in a closed-back design I've head thus far.

Followed (by a fair margin) by the Alpha Dogs.

 

Check out my Head-Fi user review of the LCD-XC HERE for more intel

I LOVE bass music (PlayMe Records - everything from Hecq to Burial and Computer Jay, Daedalus, etc.) 

 

and with this rig

OMFG - seriously, I'm been up ALL NIGHT listening to this incredible sonic pairing w/ my LCD-XC's (couldn't wake the wifey)

as I just got the McIntosh D100 yesterday...

and now I know why Jude included it in the Winter Buyers Guide! - and I haven't even checked out its own headphone amp yet!!

post #399 of 1791
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikemercer View Post
 

Yeah I'd love to see those too!

they do indeed!

Hey Mike, which double helix cable are they connected to your LCD XC?

post #400 of 1791
Quote:
Originally Posted by madcat View Post
 

Hey Mike, which double helix cable are they connected to your LCD XC?

hey!!

These are the Compliment(2) cables connected to my XC:

and, as I've mentioned before, as a reviewers rule of thumb I picked up from Harry Pearson - I never ask how much something is before I hear it.

I don't want the cost to affect my observations - so you know...

 

However, even if they cost a bunch, I'm buying my review sample!

These are my new at-home reference cable.

 

They just unleash the soul of the music:

KILLER low end, it slams and then dissipates quickly - it also ripples nicely

The mids are warm but not overly so... They're coherent and vibrant.

The highs are WIDE-OPEN and extended

post #401 of 1791
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikemercer View Post
 

hey!!

These are the Compliment(2) cables connected to my XC:

and, as I've mentioned before, as a reviewers rule of thumb I picked up from Harry Pearson - I never ask how much something is before I hear it.

I don't want the cost to affect my observations - so you know...

 

However, even if they cost a bunch, I'm buying my review sample!

These are my new at-home reference cable.

 

They just unleash the soul of the music:

KILLER low end, it slams and then dissipates quickly - it also ripples nicely

The mids are warm but not overly so... They're coherent and vibrant.

The highs are WIDE-OPEN and extended

I'm glad they are aren't the ones which start at $2,500...

post #402 of 1791
Quote:
Originally Posted by phototristan View Post
 

I'm glad they are aren't the ones which start at $2,500...

OOH

 

Me too!!!!

post #403 of 1791

How much are they and is there a link to the seller? Thanks!

post #404 of 1791
After going on Double Helix cables website today, I saw there's 20% off the Double Helix Complement(2) OCC Copper Cable, the price was $499, whereas ATM it's $399.20. I was planning on getting that cable after I'd got some decorating done to my home, but I decided to place an order for one now. I've ordered it with a 4 pin XLR and Y-Split Logo Heatshrink. I've also noticed they do DHC Ultrashort Adapters, so I'll be seeing about getting two next year.
post #405 of 1791

Really interesting information!  Thank you for the input and especially for the frequency graph.  You guys are def. right in saying that situations are relative and its cool too see the lcd-xc actually has "more" treble and bass than all the others, but it just seems less in comparison, due to the high amount of treble.  This has helped me even more on my search!  I think that I will probably go for the XC, but I will do a little more researching and wait for maybe a few more reviews to come out. 

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