[FullBright1]

Count me as another actual LCD-1 owner who doesn’t hear “V-shape” with these. I don’t hear sucked out or recessed mids AT ALL.

Other's do.
So, how would you describe the LCD-1's midrange?
Is there a set of headphones that you own, that remind you of the LCD-1s midrange?
Audeze describes the sound of these headphones as "clinical" and "Pristine", yet very natural.
Do you agree?

 

[trellus]

Other's do.
So, how would you describe the LCD-1's midrange?
Is there a set of headphones that you own, that remind you of the LCD-1s midrange?
Audeze describes the sound of these headphones as "clinical" and "Pristine", yet very natural.
Do you agree?

Actually, I found them to be similar in frequency response to my HD 600, in fact as I recall I mentioned earlier in this thread that when listening to these, the HD 600, and EL-8 Open (2015), I found the LCD-1 to be more similar than not to the HD 600, with both of those sounding different from the EL-8 FR-wise, except that I found the timbre right be more natural on the HD 600 and the soundstage to be a little larger on the HD 600.

EDIT: To be clear, I haven't done extensive A/B'ing between just the HD 600 and LCD-1, and in the specific instance I am citing here (an earlier impression in this thread), I was actually more interested in the difference between the LCD-1 and my EL-8, and I was immediately struck with how the tonal balance was quite immediately recognizably different between the LCD-1 and EL-8, so I brought in the HD 600 as my reference, and that's how I decided that the LCD-1 were more tonally "correct", and it was the EL-8 that as "off" tonally -- and that's when I also noticed the difference in timbre and size of soundstage between the LCD-1 and HD-600.

But, that was also mostly in a part of a song which didn't feature a lot of information down low, so I wasn't making a statement about the bass extension, which on other songs (some EDM, for example), I definitely recall the LCD-1 having more information down low -- when called for, but not when it's not there.

And in that brief comparison, I would also note that the LCD-1 sounded faster and had an upper hand in detail retrieval -- not by miles, but perceptible.

 

[FullBright1]

Actually, I found them to be similar in frequency response to my HD 600, in fact as I recall I mentioned earlier in this thread that when listening to these, the HD 600, and EL-8 Open (2015), I found the LCD-1 to be more similar than not to the HD 600, with both of those sounding different from the EL-8 FR-wise, except that I found the timbre right be more natural on the HD 600 and the soundstage to be a little larger on the HD 600.

Yes i remember your commentary.
I like the HD600., am not a fan of the EL8 series.

 

[trellus]

Yes i remember your commentary.
I like the HD600., am not a fan of the EL8 series.

Yes, well, at least when I go back to my personal reference for "correct" tonal balance, the HD 600, I definitely find the EL-8 to be "off" tonally, yet, I actually enjoy the EL-8 Open quite a bit notwithstanding, as it still presents a "flavor" that I find pleasing and enjoyable with a lot of music.

I'm not sure I'm good at describing how something still sounds pleasing to me because it's not just based on "correct" tonal balance to my ears, because if that was the case, I wouldn't like the EL-8 Open (2015), and sometimes when my brain is tuned into that "incorrect" tonal balance from my reference, going back to the reference sound can sound a little boring ... until my head is dialed backed into that, and so going from the EL-8 back to the LCD-1, I sometimes would think, "ah, that's not as 'special'", but that would disappear in less than a few minutes and then it could sound again exciting and lively again -- depending, of course on the source material itself, is the song itself recorded, mixed, mastered to capture an exciting sound?

Other's do.
Audeze describes the sound of these headphones as "clinical" and "Pristine", yet very natural.
Do you agree?

I forgot to answer this part, but the short answer is, "yes."

You're making me want to go back and do more extensive A/B'ing between my reference (HD 600) and the LCD-1 to add a little more to my impressions, but just from the brief bit of comparison, yes, I'd say that sums it up -- the LCD-1 sounds similar in tonal balance to the HD 600, so "natural" in that sense, and timbre is actually pretty good, though in my view not quite as natural as the HD 600.

But yes, also, it seems snappier, more precise, the drivers just sound faster -- with some EDM, for instance, I felt it "popped" a little more, whereas the sound lingered just a little more on the HD 600 -- which might be an advantage on some source material, perhaps, but less so on other where you want speed.

 

[Mad Lust Envy]

I haven't heard the HD600 (just the 650), and I get a feeling the LCD-1 would absolutely fall more in line with the 600 than the 650, for sure. I brought up the AKG K612 because that's another very flat, deep extending headphone that isn't traditionally bass heavy in the least, but the deep extension actually surpasses the bassier K712 that in some instances, I'd say the K612 is a better headphone than it's more expensive brother. The LCD-1 is in that type of balancing which I believe people wanting a more realistic sound will really appreciate. Tonal characteristics aren't the same, but natural linearity is more alike than not. The LCD-1 however has much, MUCH better bass definition and clarity. The K612 tended to break and distort. The LCD-1 doesn't.


Here is a track that is BRUTALLY over emphasized in bass, and I have not heard a headphone portray the notes with any semblance of clarity... except the LCD-1. I'm posting it as an example. Put almost any headphone to the test, and watch it buckle under the pressure of the overbearing bass the track demands. It's questionable, but it's to prove a point.



This track is not kind to ANY headphone. Yet, the LCD-1 is the only one from recent memory that can handle it with some control and restraint. This leads to another strength of the LCD-1, which is... here, I'll talk about it briefly...the midrange. The LCD-1 allowed me to actually hear the vocals in this track, which is almost always absolutely buried by the bass on other headphones.

To me the midrange is picture perfect in emphasis. Yes, some people may like a more forward or lush presentation. To me, however, I feel the LCD-1 exhibits a pure sense realistic presence in the mix. The tonal character isn't as organic as say an HD650, but I can't say there's a deficiency in the LCD-1's midrange where it counts. There is some sizzle is S notes, and I'm sure once I test out frequencies there are gonna be problem areas where it may be a tad sharp or metallic, but for now, as someone using the LCD-1 passively throughout my day without dissecting its traits, I'm incredibly pleased with its midrange presence and quality overall.

Treble is another area that I feel is in a good range between being detailed, and not bordering on being too hot. This one will take me a little longer to sink my teeth into as I haven't paid the most attention to it. In a way, that's a good thing. It's not veiled, and it hasn't caused me to remove the headphones due to severe hotness up top.

Anyways, just more random musings.

 

[trellus]

I haven't heard the HD600 (just the 650), and I get a feeling the LCD-1 would absolutely fall more in line with the 600 than the 650, for sure. I brought up the AKG K612 because that's another very flat, deep extending headphone that isn't traditionally bass heavy in the least, but the deep extension actually surpasses the bassier K712 that in some instances, I'd say the K612 is a better headphone than it's more expensive brother. The LCD-1 is in that type of balancing which I believe people wanting a more realistic sound will really appreciate. Tonal characteristics aren't the same, but natural linearity is more alike than not. The LCD-1 however has much, MUCH better bass definition and clarity. The K612 tended to break and distort. The LCD-1 doesn't.


Here is a track that is BRUTALLY over emphasized in bass, and I have not heard a headphone portray the notes with any semblance of clarity... except the LCD-1. I'm posting it as an example. Put almost any headphone to the test, and watch it buckle under the pressure of the overbearing bass the track demands. It's questionable, but it's to prove a point.



This track is not kind to ANY headphone. Yet, the LCD-1 is the only one from recent memory that can handle it with some control and restraint. This leads to another strength of the LCD-1, which is... here, I'll talk about it briefly...the midrange. The LCD-1 allowed me to actually hear the vocals in this track, which is almost always absolutely buried by the bass on other headphones.

To me the midrange is picture perfect in emphasis. Yes, some people may like a more forward or lush presentation. To me, however, I feel the LCD-1 exhibits a pure sense realistic presence in the mix. The tonal character isn't as organic as say an HD650, but I can't say there's a deficiency in the LCD-1's midrange where it counts. There is some sizzle is S notes, and I'm sure once I test out frequencies there are gonna be problem areas where it may be a tad sharp or metallic, but for now, as someone using the LCD-1 passively throughout my day without dissecting its traits, I'm incredibly pleased with its midrange presence and quality overall.

Treble is another area that I feel is in a good range between being detailed, and not bordering on being too hot. This one will take me a little longer to sink my teeth into as I haven't paid the most attention to it. In a way, that's a good thing. It's not veiled, and it hasn't caused me to remove the headphones due to severe hotness up top.

Anyways, just more random musings.

Boy, you're not kidding about that song from Flying Lotus -- it sounded like there was some distortion in the recording itself, to the point where I looked for it (in vain, sadly) on Tidal so I could circumvent what I thought might be some compression artifacts from YouTube, but the best I could get was AAC/256 on iTunes store, which sounded not-a-whole-lot-but-a-little better than the YouTube rendering.

It sounded very similar on the LCD-1 and my Shure SRH1840 -- my HD 600 are at home, not here, unfortunately, but the SRH1840 are similar in FR but with less bass extension and not quite as much treble extension either. The LCD-1 did give a little more information down low than the SRH1840, but that was no surprise.

I don't know anyone who would characterize the SRH1840 as "V-shaped", so I hope this helps even just a little to lay to rest the unfounded fears of a V-shaped FR on the LCD-1.

But man, that is not an easy listen, lol... and I paid $0.99 to experience the mild pain haha

 

[Mad Lust Envy]

Yeah, the track in itself is distorted. Such is the nature of its genre. But even with that, the LCD-1 was able to extract information that is just plain hard with other headphones. Dynamic headphones in particular don't take kindly to that one. Hahaha.

 

[dsrk]

This thread has been running very hot, I am really interested in the impressions of FullBright1 when he gets his LCD1.

 

[FullBright1]

This thread has been running very hot, I am really interested in the impressions of FullBright1 when he gets his LCD1.

SHE will do her best to review them truthfully.
IVe no axe to grind, tho i wonder why my FDX 2nd day order, from OCT 17, is not yet shipped..................
I actually never buy a gear "come and get the brand new gear" from the Maker's website, as it always turns into a Kickstarter "hurry up and wait" situation.
I did this time, and thats the last time.
Hopefully Major Dan @ AEON Express has ample supply ready to go to meet the demand.
I would assume he does..

If i love the LCD1s, or , if i dont... will be made very clear in my review.
Audeze tries to make very fine products, so, im sure that they designed the best sounding LCD1 that they possibly could.
Audeze has also super-hyped the sound quality of these headphones in their Advertisement of them on the LCD-1 Page.
They have especially stressed that these are a superior set of studio quality, world class, (Audiophile) headphone monitors.
They have never even hinted that the $399 price to sound ratio should even be considered in the conversation.
It will take me 5 songs and less then 20 mins to know.
Audeze does not even request the 150hr Burn-In Dance that Fang from Hifiman wants you to dance before you decide how they sound, or at least i have not seen them suggest this on their LCD-! page.
So, right out of the box, apparently, is going to deliver the goods.
Looking forward to finding out.

 

[Beagle]

Many Sony and Audiotech headphones would come to mind regarding what experienced listeners to headphones would consider a "V" shape sound sig.
So, to say the "V" shape is not found in any headphones, because you live in the world of Graphs, instead of the world of audiophile listeners, is really the utter nonsense, actually.
Here, go and get your B&W PM7s, or your AudioTech MSR7s, or your Hifiman HE560s. and learn about "V" shaped sound.
Let us know.

Good grief. Do you stay up all night concocting this utter rubbish? And you don't even own the LCD-1, yet you continue to spout off as an authority and speculate on things you obviously know nothing about, all the while talking down to others like they know nothing.

This thread has been running very hot, I am really interested in the impressions of FullBright1 when he gets his LCD1.

He'll say they're V-shaped, followed by 'told ya so'.

 

[FullBright1]

Good grief. Do you stay up all night concocting this utter rubbish? And you don't even own the LCD-1, yet you continue to spout off as an authority and speculate
.

Two things come to mind.
1.), im talking with someone on a Headphone forum who says that a "v" shaped sonic signature does not exist within headphone sound. And i guess you'll say the same thing about floor standing speakers.
So thats a first,.....
I think i can hear TYLL having a laughing seizure somewhere out there... So, keep the jokes coming, as we could all use the entertainment.
2nd) I am an authority on reference sound quality, as this is my Job Skill, but, im not an authority on the literal sound of a set of LCD-1s.
Regarding them, im just speculating here based on comparing all the reviews .
Understand tho, im not really reading them, im just looking for similarities between them all.
So far......no one has been intoxicated by the LCD-1s astounding world class incredibly beyond comprehension midrange quality., or they would have SAID SO. beagle.
Try to understand that.... = CLUE <
Not one person on this Forum. And you didnt notice this, but then, you also dont notice a "V" shape sound sig.
Keep in mind tho, that we are early in the game, and all the batters have not yet had a chance to swing at the ball.
Including me.

 

[Soundizer]

Im not going to read the reviews for you ok? But if you care to look back some pages, starting with the first member who received them, and if you then follow to the next and the next, review, you'll see the pattern. You'll now how many are comparing the LCD-1 unfavorably to the HD600 series. You'll note the people who are talking about an aggressive "harsh" treble. ITs all there, but you have to read it. I did.
If you want to get it really up to speed, then go to my very first or 2nd post, before anyone had these, and you'll see that i was speculating that they were going to be more about the treble........And i felt this on Oct 17th as the review blub that Audeze had on their LCD1 page, back on the 17th of OCT, when I bought mine, spoke about the Treble. I read their posted statement by a reviewer, a "professional studio person" who stated the LCD1 had exceptional treble.....That was the part of his review that Audeze posted as their high-lighted quote. Nothing about the bass.. Nothing about the Midrange,...just that statement about the treble. Maybe they have posted a lot more comments now, but on OCT 17, there was the quotation about the Treble, that caused me to pay attention.
So, i concluded then, that i was going to get a treble bright headphone, probably with decent bass. And as the members here started to get theirs, they started to talk about the treble, and the bass, as i suspected.

See, Im use to reading a lot of reviews. So, years and years of this type of study allows me to discern from what is being discussed, if anything is being said over and over. I note this. I pay attention to this detail, as its what really matters a lot more then the headband, the wire, the scaleability, the build quality, or if the cups are removable.
And with these headphones, people are talking NOT ABOUT THE MIDRANGE. JUST READ THE REVIEWS, HIP HOPSCRIBE......... and the Midrange is what defines a "reference" sound.
AUDEZE has listed and sold these headphones as being a "Reference Sound".. They are listed as one of 4 reference headphones on their inventory page.
I'll get mine eventually, then i'll know if they are what i suspect.
Review to follow.

Although the marketing language may pitch it as Reference Sound, Audeze have decided to price it according to the value it delivers. The price is much lower than the rest of the Audeze LCD range. Your expectations might be too high. My expectations are that it is a better wired version of Mobius.

 

[Fizzley]

On topic:
I have been following this thread since the first page and plan to demo these headphones prior to purchase like others have mentioned doing. Making assumptions based on somebody else's first thoughts will most likely result in poor results.

@Soundizer I completely agree that the price to value performance has to be taken into consideration. Audeze wouldn't shoot themselves in the foot by making a headphone that is priced lower and performs better than the more expensive options in their lineup.

 

[MRC001]

... So far......no one has been intoxicated by the LCD-1s astounding world class incredibly beyond comprehension midrange quality., or they would have SAID SO. beagle. ...

Absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence. Often, what grabs people's attention on initial impression is artificial emphasis that sounds worse in the long run. The fact that nobody's mentioned the midrange could be a good thing. Maybe it is just right, not sucked out, not emphasized, not distorted. Maybe the music they're listening to isn't ideal for critical comparisons of midrange. It's also common for recordings to get midrange and vocals wrong anyway, compressed, EQed or processed so they sound "off". A headphone with good mids should reveal these flaws, not paper over them.

This is why I'd love to see measurements to complete the picture from the subjective reviews.

 

[trellus]

Absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence. Often, what grabs people's attention on initial impression is artificial emphasis that sounds worse in the long run. The fact that nobody's mentioned the midrange could be a good thing. Maybe it is just right, not sucked out, not emphasized, not distorted. Maybe the music they're listening to isn't ideal for critical comparisons of midrange. It's also common for recordings to get midrange and vocals wrong anyway, compressed, EQed or processed so they sound "off". A headphone with good mids should reveal these flaws, not paper over them.

This is why I'd love to see measurements to complete the picture from the subjective reviews.

There's a raw FR graph posted earlier in the thread, not sure if you've seen that one: https://www.head-fi.org/threads/audeze-lcd-1.917165/#post-15249344