[drwlf]

@Globox Somebody else could chime in on that as I'm lacking the experience, perhaps the seal indeed would be different with the vegan pad. Insight on the sonic differences between the pads would be appreciated as well, haven't read a comprehensive comparison of the two.
Isn't Globox from Rayman?

 

[Globox]

Ok thanks.
Yep Globox is from Rayman

 

[SomeGuyDude]

From what I understand, the Vegan pads will results in a slightly lessened bass response because the seal isn't as tight, and it might eliminate the "crinkle" sound.

It's definitely common in Audezes. My current X doesn't have the issue, but my old LCD-2 definitely had it. Basically I just find a spot where it's comfortable and then don't mess with it.

 

[Globox]

Ok thanks, I guess I'll buy the vegan then

 

[CarlosUnchained]

Copied from my post in the Watson thread:

Well, I went today to try the Watson. Here it is.

First say that the venue was noisy and I had to crank up the volume more than usual. Take that in account while reading.

I have to say that this amp is engaging and really fun. Lots of power to spare.
The sound signature of this tube hybrid is warmish, not too detailed and pretty generous with instrument separation and soundstage. I would really like to come back and have a more quiet environment.

So to describe it better I compared it with the Phatlab PHAntasy and Sassy (What, right?). PHAntasy was a pure tube portable amp clearly underpowered for the LCD-X, more detail delivered but less bass extension and a lot of distortion when cranked up. The Sassy was a hybrid tube portable amp with lots of power as the Watson. Really close to the Watson, maybe a tad less warm a more detailed.

The Watson does have some flaws though.

The bass seemed a bit out of control sometimes depending on the song (the noise around may be to blame).
At low (very low) volume there's big channel imbalance, still out of the range of normal listening (or maybe in, screw the noise).
The volume pot is not very accurate as you have a small range where the pot turns but the volume does not change.
Also concerning the volume pot, it wobbles up and down a bit when putting pressure with one finger to turn it. It's not really sturdy and make the whole thing look cheap.
The noise floor level is there, not as high as to be concerning though (or maybe it was the surroundings, who knows? not me).

Anyway, price for performance I think it's great. LCD-X really welcomes those 2Watts per channel.
Tell me if I'm wrong, but for 150€ I believe you cannot get that amount of power in any other amp.

Ah, it's as beautiful as an open design can be.

 

[Lohb]

Copied from my post in the Watson thread:

Well, I went today to try the Watson. Here it is.

First say that the venue was noisy and I had to crank up the volume more than usual. Take that in account while reading.

I have to say that this amp is engaging and really fun. Lots of power to spare.
The sound signature of this tube hybrid is warmish, not too detailed and pretty generous with instrument separation and soundstage. I would really like to come back and have a more quiet environment.

So to describe it better I compared it with the Phatlab PHAntasy and Sassy (What, right?). PHAntasy was a pure tube portable amp clearly underpowered for the LCD-X, more detail delivered but less bass extension, veiled and a lot of distortion when cranked up. The Sassy was a hybrid tube portable amp with lots of power as the Watson. Really close to the Watson, maybe a tad less warm a more detailed.

The Watson does have some flaws though.

The bass seemed a bit out of control sometimes depending on the song (the noise around may be to blame).
At low (very low) volume there's big channel imbalance, still out of the range of normal listening (or maybe in, screw the noise).
The volume pot is not very accurate as you have a small range where the pot turns but the volume does not change.
Also concerning the volume pot, it wobbles up and down a bit when putting pressure with one finger to turn it. It's not really sturdy and make the whole thing look cheap.
The noise floor level is there, not as high as to be concerning though (or maybe it was the surroundings, who knows? not me).

Anyway, price for performance I think it's great. LCD-X really welcomes those 2Watts per channel.
Tell me if I'm wrong, but for 150€ I believe you cannot get that amount of power in any other amp.

Ah, it's as beautiful as an open design can be.

Isn't the LCD-X rated 20 Ohm and the Watson is specifically rated 30 Ohms and UP ?
The power output/bass control and dynamics would 'drop off a cliff' below 30 ohms....

LCD 2/3/4 OK based on impedance.....
X/XC no based on impedance after going through current LCD series impedance spec lists.
Based on synergy and subjective impressions on 2/3/4 is another layer (I doubt 4 owners would even consider it based on price).
So looking compatible based on specs. anyway, for 2/3 owners.

 

[CarlosUnchained]

@Lohb

Yes, you may be right. As I said the low end seemed out of control with songs focused on that range. In others seemed perfectly fine though.

But again, venue noise made things harder to discern. Try it for yourself and let us know

 

[SomeGuyDude]

Isn't the LCD-X rated 20 Ohm and the Watson is specifically rated 30 Ohms and UP ?
The power output/bass control and dynamics would 'drop off a cliff' below 30 ohms....

LCD 2/3/4 OK based on impedance.....
X/XC no based on impedance after going through current LCD series impedance spec lists.
Based on synergy and subjective impressions on 2/3/4 is another layer (I doubt 4 owners would even consider it based on price).
So looking compatible based on specs. anyway, for 2/3 owners.

I don't know squat about how all of this works, but what you're saying does seem to make some sense to me. Using the X with the Watson sounded amazing to my ears, but it felt like it was a VERY narrow band of "usable area" on the volume knob.

 

[drwlf]

As the search isn't working atm, are people using tube/lisst/hybrids with the LCD-X, and with what results?
Been eyeing on the Pro iCan, as there's been some favorable impressions with the LCD-X (musicality being breathed into them caught my eye for example).

Unrelated to that, as my endgame ponderings; I guess V281 as it's cheap in Europe, or just go with the Milo and succumb to lowering the digital volume for proper volume range. 18w and 20ohm just can't work that well otherwise I have seemed to generate an impulse to hear it, with other current/upcoming cans.

 

[CarlosUnchained]

As the search isn't working atm, are people using tube/lisst/hybrids with the LCD-X, and with what results?
Been eyeing on the Pro iCan, as there's been some favorable impressions with the LCD-X (musicality being breathed into them caught my eye for example).

I've been eyeing the iCan too, but the lowest price is still too high. I'm also interested in iDSD Black Label. For ⅓ the price you get some nice features and plenty of power. I wonder how it pairs with the Xs.

 

[drwlf]

I've been eyeing the iCan too, but the lowest price is still too high. I'm also interested in iDSD Black Label. For ⅓ the price you get some nice features and plenty of power. I wonder how it pairs with the Xs.

It's just that sometimes I wouldn't mind added warmth/distortion/harmonics when I feel like it, and a one-box solution would obviously be lovely, but not required, hence my question.

 

[Globox]

As the search isn't working atm, are people using tube/lisst/hybrids with the LCD-X, and with what results?

I am using it with tubes right now. Was using LISST earlier... Both are quite good ! I fill like it is a little bit better with tubes but not so sure.
I feel like with the LCD-x, when used with a good amplifier ($500 and up), you get much more from upgrading DAC than upgrading amp.
Basicaly, if I had, let's say $5000 for DAC + amp, I would probably spend $800 for the amp and $4200 for the DAC.

 

[sheldaze]

Although a little higher end, I listened to three tube amplifiers yesterday though my LCD-X:

• DNA Stratus
• Eddie Current Zana Deux S
• Linear Tube Audio MicroZOTL2 with upgraded Illuminati power supply

All three sounded fantastic through the LCD-X. I think whether or not an amplifier will work with the LCD-X is less to do with tube versus solid state, and more to do with the design of the amplifier and if it can output at a lower impedance.

That said, due to the flat input impedance of the LCD-X, I was able to get more volume control on the Stratus by setting it to a higher output impedance. The Stratus was still quite in control of the sound, and this simply gave me more granular volume (I could turn up to 5 instead of 1).

In short, LCD-X sounds fine in my experience on tubes

 

[SomeGuyDude]

I am using it with tubes right now. Was using LISST earlier... Both are quite good ! I fill like it is a little bit better with tubes but not so sure.
I feel like with the LCD-x, when used with a good amplifier ($500 and up), you get much more from upgrading DAC than upgrading amp.
Basicaly, if I had, let's say $5000 for DAC + amp, I would probably spend $800 for the amp and $4200 for the DAC.

I definitely feel like going from using a cheap mic interface to the Deckard made a heck of a difference in terms of upgrading the DAC end of things.

And I agree, the X is easy enough to drive that I don't think there's much need for the colossal amps out there. That said, if I won the lottery or something I would have a Hugo TT on my desk RIGHT NOW.

 

[Globox]

I definitely feel like going from using a cheap mic interface to the Deckard made a heck of a difference in terms of upgrading the DAC end of things.

And I agree, the X is easy enough to drive that I don't think there's much need for the colossal amps out there. That said, if I won the lottery or something I would have a Hugo TT on my desk RIGHT NOW.

Well, if I won the lottery, I would go for a HiFiMAN Shangri-La . That said, I don't think you could get much better from the LCD-x with another amp. The Deckard is probably perfect for the X... Well not "perfect", it needs some balanced input and output !