Audeze LCD-1

[SilverEars]

I know how it measures, and I also know that it uses the LCD4 film. I heard one once without Cipher and although the FR is pretty whacked out that way, I could tell detail was superb. I'll reserve final judgement for when I review it, however. As for your other comments, *directly* from the Audeze site:

https://www.audeze.com/products/lcd-i4


If dealers aren't selling them that way or are plugging them directly into amps, something is wrong and they've been misinformed, IMO.

That maybe what states on the webpage, but I'm speaking of how the items were sent. The LCDi4 cables wasn't in the packaging, and I have actually asked the sales person if it's necessary, and they stated no. Stated it's fine without. I had to request the cipher cable to get one, and it wasn't part of the packaging.

Amazon listing says * Special Lightning cable optionally available to Apple users. Contact Audeze direct for cipher cable

Detail is not superb. It's fuzzy due to it's response. It's a bit hazy in the mids, and of course upper-mids are hardly there due to the driver, and you should know that area contributes largely for details. I don't know what your idea of details is if you think LCDi4 is detailed.

 

[feanorean]

Probably better to wait a bit as I'm buying my own Mobius this coming week. Not for comparison to LCD1 mainly, but to see where it goes as a software platform

That rig is Audeze's own GRAS KEMAR, as I mentioned previously. The Mobius has a similar FR when running in hi res stereo and Default EQ preset, but the LCD1 has better stage and detail. LCDi4 is not designed to be used without the EQ provided by the Cipher cable. It measures very strangely when running direct from an amp. LCD1 is more neutral (to the Audeze house curve) than many of the "big" LCDs as well. However if you are more of a fan of diffuse field tuning you might still not like it. It is not targeted at a DT880-like sound, for example.

I did like the soundstage on the DT880 and the linear bass response but alas I gave them to a friend. Will need to audition the LCD-1 before deciding on it or perhaps the DT1990 instead. Thanks for the info!

 

[MRC001]

... if people can't hear the difference between the infinite clarity of a typical Planar and the compressed and lightly distorted analog sound of a Dynamic, (speaker) then this explains why they think they can compare the 2 as if this is logical and accurate. ...

You said it. Though I have heard bad headphones in either design, comparing the best of each, I've never heard a dynamic having the neutrality and transparency of the best planars.

 

[omniweltall]

You said it. Though I have heard bad headphones in either design, comparing the best of each, I've never heard a dynamic having the neutrality and transparency of the best planars.

Utopia is the most detailed headphone I've ever heard. HD800 is another very resolving can.

I find good dynamic cans usually scale with better gears. Planars usually just need enough power in order to shine.

 

[FullBright1]

You said it. Though I have heard bad headphones in either design, comparing the best of each, I've never heard a dynamic having the neutrality and transparency of the best planars.

Transparency, Articulation, .. that sense of air around all the musical particles... Planar's just bring it, and i really like Dynamic Headphones, but, Planars are a different animal

I hope the LCD-1 arrive to me pretty soon. Really looking forward to experiencing what they can offer.
According to the Factoid's they should be pretty easy to drive. It'll be interesting to hear how they handle a tube amp and an analog only device as their supplier of power.
I have a Headroom Max, that is of the last generation, and it tends to make headphones that sound good, sound really really good.
My initial impression of the LCD1, based on the Audeze into page, was that it was tuned for crisp high freq enjoyment, as its main appeal, so im hoping this isn't the case, and that it sounds instead like a LCD-X.
Anytime i want to explore that planet, i can just buy the next Hifiman release.
Im thinking that The Fireflies Tuber will sound good thru the LCD-1s.
I like Oppo gear, so i have one of their SE upgraded CD Players that will also find itself in the chain that powers the LCD-1s.
Should be a good time.
Im looking forward to having it.

 

[MRC001]

Utopia is the most detailed headphone I've ever heard. HD800 is another very resolving can. ...

A lift in the upper mids / lower treble (as the HD800 has around 6 kHz) exaggerates the sense of detail. It's useful to differentiate "macro" detail like this, from "micro" detail, which is reproducing those barely perceptible subtle details buried several layers down in the sound.

Yet to me, "transparency" is something else, referring to how realistic is the headphone compared to the actual sound of live unamplified voices and acoustic instruments. Some people call this "removing the box from the sound" or similar words. Transparency and resolution are usually correlated, yet independent. A headphone can be more resolving than it is transparent (like HD800), or more transparent than it is resolving (like LCD-2).

... I find good dynamic cans usually scale with better gears. Planars usually just need enough power in order to shine.

This is true. One contributing factor is the impedance vs. frequency curve. Planars are flat which is easier for an amp to drive. Dynamics can have big swings, which can be more difficult for amps.

 

[Mhog55]

Can anyone who has these compare them with the Sine? Sound and drive ability.... I found the Sine okay, accept the almost non existent low end. Could have been a fitment issue, but I just couldn't find it no matter which pads I tried. I'm hoping for a planar Msr7b on steroids. That would really hit the spot for me.

 

[mobbaddict]

Utopia is the most detailed headphone I've ever heard. HD800 is another very resolving can.

I find good dynamic cans usually scale with better gears. Planars usually just need enough power in order to shine.

I can see how one would consider the Utopia or the HD800 as the kings of detail, as they do have a very specific sparkle in their sound signature. However one could also feel that this level of detail is being forced, as opposed to the effortless sound of electrostatics/planars (that's how i felt about both of them actually). I think that's the key quality to understand when it comes to electrostats and planars, they let the detail flow even at moderate volume. Really curious to see how the LCD 1 behaves in this respect (i haven't seen a lot of comments about its technical abilities yet).

 

[MyPants]

My set shipped today and is scheduled for delivery Friday. If it comes early enough in the day I want to get the unboxing/first impressions video out pretty much immediately so we can start building out a range of opinions.

 

[Mad Lust Envy]

A lift in the upper mids / lower treble (as the HD800 has around 6 kHz) exaggerates the sense of detail. It's useful to differentiate "macro" detail like this, from "micro" detail, which is reproducing those barely perceptible subtle details buried several layers down in the sound.

Yet to me, "transparency" is something else, referring to how realistic is the headphone compared to the actual sound of live unamplified voices and acoustic instruments. Some people call this "removing the box from the sound" or similar words. Transparency and resolution are usually correlated, yet independent. A headphone can be more resolving than it is transparent (like HD800), or more transparent than it is resolving (like LCD-2).


This is true. One contributing factor is the impedance vs. frequency curve. Planars are flat which is easier for an amp to drive. Dynamics can have big swings, which can be more difficult for amps.

This. I think people confuse transparency with detail retrieval. Any good headphone can be exaggerated to highlight minute details with prominence in mid/treble ranges.

The LCD-1's accuracy isn't about that. It sounds accurate, tonally correct, and not specifically highlighting or emphasizing any one thing. Some things can sound warm, if the source file is warm, etc.

 

[Chris Kaoss]

so we can start building out a range of opinions.

The more the better. ( in most cases^^ )
Looking forward to your impressions.

 

[trellus]

My set shipped today and is scheduled for delivery Friday. If it comes early enough in the day I want to get the unboxing/first impressions video out pretty much immediately so we can start building out a range of opinions.

When did you order? I ordered Oct 16 at 7:56 AM, even before I got an email from them announcing them, but I’m still not showing them shipped yet. Looking forward to your impressions!

 

[FullBright1]

When did you order? I ordered Oct 16 at 7:56 AM, even before I got an email from them announcing them, but I’m still not showing them shipped yet. Looking forward to your impressions!

Yes, i also ordered them the day they were available to order. "16th".
I appreciate that Audeze sent many sets out to be reviewed, while asking the actual buyers to wait a few weeks to get theirs, but, im kinda hoping they will get going and ship to all those who purchased, our Headphones.

 

[PointyFox]

All headphones retrieve details. They do so at different volumes depending on the detail's frequencies. This is called the headphone's frequency response.

This shouldn't be confused with "resolving ability" or "technicality". For those, we should look at things like response time, damping, and distortion when playing simultaneous frequencies.

 

[FullBright1]

All headphones retrieve details. They do so at different volumes depending on the detail's frequencies. This is called the headphone's frequency response.

.

Ummmmm.

Im sure that the definition you are citing is the authorized and accepted version. But i don't really think of it that way.
For me, "freq response" is not explained as "detail retrieval", but rather as "detail reproduction", via the Headphones.
IN other words, the way the headphone reproduces sound frequencies, is its "frequency response".
Maybe this is really just.... "6 in one hand and a half a dozen in the other",.... but, for me, i understand the concept better, when i think of "freq response" as the reproduction of frequencies, vs, the retrieval of said...