[LaCuffia]

I used to have the Elear and auditioned the Utopia for a few days. I just find the build quality a bit overrated and the comfort level is okay but not ideal. The ear pads are nice but I couldn’t take the downward pressure of the headband after a while. I’d imagine the Clear is essentially the same as the Elear.

In contrast I really like the snug yet roomy feel of the LCD-2C. The headband design is much better. It’s also more solidly built than the Focal line (no creaks or squeaks) and looks nicer.

 

[DrSeven]

@Eylrik indeed in a perfect world I'd also keep them both as they are both some sexy beasts

 

[hanouk]

Hi guys
I received the LCD-2C a few days ago. I already own a LCD-2 (late 2016 Fazor), here are my impressions (I run them on an Audio-GD NFB11.28).

2 pics here : https://imgur.com/a/ZbcbZFT

Build / Comfort :

- Feels more solid / sturdy in the hands than the wooden Fazor
- Is only 35g lighter than the Fazor (545g for the LCD-2C, 580g for the Fazor Shedua), I measured them on my food scale without cables. The Bamboo Fazor is probably lighter.
- Comfort is not that better : the headband is much better and distributes well weight. But there is a difference in the pads (look my second pic) : the pads of the Classic are quite thicker than the lambskin pads of the Fazor. Maybe 0.5-0.7cm difference in thickness. As a result, I have more pressure around the ears compared to the Fazor. Also the lambskin pads are softer. Since I use a wool headband on my Fazor (which helps for any hotstop on top of the head), I'd say the comfort is very similar for both headphones (for me).
- You can see that the black nylon rings of the Classic are thinner than the wooden rings of the LCD-2F. My guess is that Audeze probably made the rings thinner to compensate the thicker pads.
- The braided cable is easier to manipulate and the Y finish of better quality, but I've never had issue with the ribbon cable of the Fazor.
- The packaging, I guess most people know that the Pelican hard case is absent with the Classic.

Sound
- I find them to sound different in tone / frequency response, but they are overall close in detail retrieval, speed, imaging and soundstage.
- The thing that surprised me the most is the bass : both have a similar impact. The bass is tight and perfectly extended, without any additional slam or midbass impact. From comments, I was expecting maybe
a bit more power from the Classic. I even made a test where I powered the Classic to my NFB11 (an amp with plenty of power for them), and the Fazor to my Fostex HP-A4 (a small USB-powered amp that gives
10 times less power than the NFB). The results quite surprised me : even underpowered, the Fazor slams as much as the Classic.
- The midrange and treble are different from one to another.
- The midrange of the Fazor is rich and forward (relatively to the Classic) with enough energy for jazz or female vocals. The LCD-2C midrange is more laid-back, a bit more liquid/smooth. And yes, the upper-midrange
is a bit more dipped than the Fazor.
- While I find the mids of the Classic very laid-back, sometimes they sound a bit slow to me, but I must not be wrong ; the Classic is very resolving can, it's just that the overall response is very smooth.
- Same thing for the treble, the Fazor has much more upper-treble (above 10 khz) as well as mid-treble. Both are overall recessed in the lower-treble.
- Soundstage and speed are about the same, sometimes I find the Classic to have a better sense of depth because of the more dipped middle and upper midrange.

Overall I like both of them. I see the LCD2-F as an allrounder with a touch of warmth, whereas the LCD-2C is the more coloured laid-back variant, because of the more recessed clarity/presence region.

I made a comparison of the 2 LCD with other "warm" headphones here : https://www.reddit.com/r/headphones/comments/8jd8u4/comparison_of_warm_open_cans_hd650_nighthawks/

 

[franz12]

Hi guys
I received the LCD-2C a few days ago. I already own a LCD-2 (late 2016 Fazor), here are my impressions (I run them on an Audio-GD NFB11.28).

2 pics here : https://imgur.com/a/ZbcbZFT

Build / Comfort :

- Feels more solid / sturdy in the hands than the wooden Fazor
- Is only 35g lighter than the Fazor (545g for the LCD-2C, 580g for the Fazor Shedua), I measured them on my food scale without cables. The Bamboo Fazor is probably lighter.
- Comfort is not that better : the headband is much better and distributes well weight. But there is a difference in the pads (look my second pic) : the pads of the Classic are quite thicker than the lambskin pads of the Fazor. Maybe 0.5-0.7cm difference in thickness. As a result, I have more pressure around the ears compared to the Fazor. Also the lambskin pads are softer. Since I use a wool headband on my Fazor (which helps for any hotstop on top of the head), I'd say the comfort is very similar for both headphones (for me).
- You can see that the black nylon rings of the Classic are thinner than the wooden rings of the LCD-2F. My guess is that Audeze probably made the rings thinner to compensate the thicker pads.
- The braided cable is easier to manipulate and the Y finish of better quality, but I've never had issue with the ribbon cable of the Fazor.
- The packaging, I guess most people know that the Pelican hard case is absent with the Classic.

Sound
- I find them to sound different in tone / frequency response, but they are overall close in detail retrieval, speed, imaging and soundstage.
- The thing that surprised me the most is the bass : both have a similar impact. The bass is tight and perfectly extended, without any additional slam or midbass impact. From comments, I was expecting maybe
a bit more power from the Classic. I even made a test where I powered the Classic to my NFB11 (an amp with plenty of power for them), and the Fazor to my Fostex HP-A4 (a small USB-powered amp that gives
10 times less power than the NFB). The results quite surprised me : even underpowered, the Fazor slams as much as the Classic.
- The midrange and treble are different from one to another.
- The midrange of the Fazor is rich and forward (relatively to the Classic) with enough energy for jazz or female vocals. The LCD-2C midrange is more laid-back, a bit more liquid/smooth. And yes, the upper-midrange
is a bit more dipped than the Fazor.
- While I find the mids of the Classic very laid-back, sometimes they sound a bit slow to me, but I must not be wrong ; the Classic is very resolving can, it's just that the overall response is very smooth.
- Same thing for the treble, the Fazor has much more upper-treble (above 10 khz) as well as mid-treble. Both are overall recessed in the lower-treble.
- Soundstage and speed are about the same, sometimes I find the Classic to have a better sense of depth because of the more dipped middle and upper midrange.

Overall I like both of them. I see the LCD2-F as an allrounder with a touch of warmth, whereas the LCD-2C is the more coloured laid-back variant, because of the more recessed clarity/presence region.

I made a comparison of the 2 LCD with other "warm" headphones here : https://www.reddit.com/r/headphones/comments/8jd8u4/comparison_of_warm_open_cans_hd650_nighthawks/

then you put lcd2c on sale...probably you prefer lcd2f to lcd2c.

 

[hanouk]

After thinking, yes slight preference for the LCD-2F.
I totally see people prefering the slightly darker sound of the Classic.

 

[nicknack40]

Not sure what is wrong with your LCD2-C I don't find them laid back at all very fun sounding CAN if you ask me. i use mine for most Genres ive listened to. And there great for EDM with there great tight Bass. and comfort wise there fantastic

 

[nicknack40]

, yes slight preference for the LCD-2F.

Slight? sounds more like alot LOL

 

[hanouk]

I slightly prefer the Fazor because of the presence region which is more energetic.
I hesitated so much that I even put on sale my Fazor yesterday, and then cancelled the sale.

 

[betula]

Hi guys
I received the LCD-2C a few days ago. I already own a LCD-2 (late 2016 Fazor), here are my impressions (I run them on an Audio-GD NFB11.28).

2 pics here : https://imgur.com/a/ZbcbZFT

Build / Comfort :

- Feels more solid / sturdy in the hands than the wooden Fazor
- Is only 35g lighter than the Fazor (545g for the LCD-2C, 580g for the Fazor Shedua), I measured them on my food scale without cables. The Bamboo Fazor is probably lighter.
- Comfort is not that better : the headband is much better and distributes well weight. But there is a difference in the pads (look my second pic) : the pads of the Classic are quite thicker than the lambskin pads of the Fazor. Maybe 0.5-0.7cm difference in thickness. As a result, I have more pressure around the ears compared to the Fazor. Also the lambskin pads are softer. Since I use a wool headband on my Fazor (which helps for any hotstop on top of the head), I'd say the comfort is very similar for both headphones (for me).
- You can see that the black nylon rings of the Classic are thinner than the wooden rings of the LCD-2F. My guess is that Audeze probably made the rings thinner to compensate the thicker pads.
- The braided cable is easier to manipulate and the Y finish of better quality, but I've never had issue with the ribbon cable of the Fazor.
- The packaging, I guess most people know that the Pelican hard case is absent with the Classic.

Sound
- I find them to sound different in tone / frequency response, but they are overall close in detail retrieval, speed, imaging and soundstage.
- The thing that surprised me the most is the bass : both have a similar impact. The bass is tight and perfectly extended, without any additional slam or midbass impact. From comments, I was expecting maybe
a bit more power from the Classic. I even made a test where I powered the Classic to my NFB11 (an amp with plenty of power for them), and the Fazor to my Fostex HP-A4 (a small USB-powered amp that gives
10 times less power than the NFB). The results quite surprised me : even underpowered, the Fazor slams as much as the Classic.
- The midrange and treble are different from one to another.
- The midrange of the Fazor is rich and forward (relatively to the Classic) with enough energy for jazz or female vocals. The LCD-2C midrange is more laid-back, a bit more liquid/smooth. And yes, the upper-midrange
is a bit more dipped than the Fazor.
- While I find the mids of the Classic very laid-back, sometimes they sound a bit slow to me, but I must not be wrong ; the Classic is very resolving can, it's just that the overall response is very smooth.
- Same thing for the treble, the Fazor has much more upper-treble (above 10 khz) as well as mid-treble. Both are overall recessed in the lower-treble.
- Soundstage and speed are about the same, sometimes I find the Classic to have a better sense of depth because of the more dipped middle and upper midrange.

Overall I like both of them. I see the LCD2-F as an allrounder with a touch of warmth, whereas the LCD-2C is the more coloured laid-back variant, because of the more recessed clarity/presence region.

I made a comparison of the 2 LCD with other "warm" headphones here : https://www.reddit.com/r/headphones/comments/8jd8u4/comparison_of_warm_open_cans_hd650_nighthawks/

Very good and useful comparison on the link. Thanks! I can agree with 90% of what you say there.

 

[dfarina]

Hi guys
I received the LCD-2C a few days ago. I already own a LCD-2 (late 2016 Fazor), here are my impressions (I run them on an Audio-GD NFB11.28).

2 pics here : https://imgur.com/a/ZbcbZFT

Build / Comfort :

- Feels more solid / sturdy in the hands than the wooden Fazor
- Is only 35g lighter than the Fazor (545g for the LCD-2C, 580g for the Fazor Shedua), I measured them on my food scale without cables. The Bamboo Fazor is probably lighter.
- Comfort is not that better : the headband is much better and distributes well weight. But there is a difference in the pads (look my second pic) : the pads of the Classic are quite thicker than the lambskin pads of the Fazor. Maybe 0.5-0.7cm difference in thickness. As a result, I have more pressure around the ears compared to the Fazor. Also the lambskin pads are softer. Since I use a wool headband on my Fazor (which helps for any hotstop on top of the head), I'd say the comfort is very similar for both headphones (for me).
- You can see that the black nylon rings of the Classic are thinner than the wooden rings of the LCD-2F. My guess is that Audeze probably made the rings thinner to compensate the thicker pads.
- The braided cable is easier to manipulate and the Y finish of better quality, but I've never had issue with the ribbon cable of the Fazor.
- The packaging, I guess most people know that the Pelican hard case is absent with the Classic.

Sound
- I find them to sound different in tone / frequency response, but they are overall close in detail retrieval, speed, imaging and soundstage.
- The thing that surprised me the most is the bass : both have a similar impact. The bass is tight and perfectly extended, without any additional slam or midbass impact. From comments, I was expecting maybe
a bit more power from the Classic. I even made a test where I powered the Classic to my NFB11 (an amp with plenty of power for them), and the Fazor to my Fostex HP-A4 (a small USB-powered amp that gives
10 times less power than the NFB). The results quite surprised me : even underpowered, the Fazor slams as much as the Classic.
- The midrange and treble are different from one to another.
- The midrange of the Fazor is rich and forward (relatively to the Classic) with enough energy for jazz or female vocals. The LCD-2C midrange is more laid-back, a bit more liquid/smooth. And yes, the upper-midrange
is a bit more dipped than the Fazor.
- While I find the mids of the Classic very laid-back, sometimes they sound a bit slow to me, but I must not be wrong ; the Classic is very resolving can, it's just that the overall response is very smooth.
- Same thing for the treble, the Fazor has much more upper-treble (above 10 khz) as well as mid-treble. Both are overall recessed in the lower-treble.
- Soundstage and speed are about the same, sometimes I find the Classic to have a better sense of depth because of the more dipped middle and upper midrange.

Overall I like both of them. I see the LCD2-F as an allrounder with a touch of warmth, whereas the LCD-2C is the more coloured laid-back variant, because of the more recessed clarity/presence region.

I made a comparison of the 2 LCD with other "warm" headphones here : https://www.reddit.com/r/headphones/comments/8jd8u4/comparison_of_warm_open_cans_hd650_nighthawks/

Did you give the LCD-2C at least 100 hours to burn in?I don't want to start a debate here,but I think mine has smoothed out a tad over time.I did order a set of real leather ear pads from Audeze,prob the only thing I missed from my 3 previous LCD-2's I've had in the passed.Audeze said the leather pads will not effect the sound on the LCD-2C.

 

[LaCuffia]

Aren’t the pads glued though? It would seem to be a pain to replace. I really like the stock pads though. Real leather can get a little too warm.

 

[dfarina]

Aren’t the pads glued though? It would seem to be a pain to replace. I really like the stock pads though. Real leather can get a little too warm.

Double sided tape,doesn't look to be to difficult at all.

 

[DrSeven]

@Fegefeuer as I didn't find enough comparison between the LCD2 C and the X/ XC I decided to order a XC ( as the consensus is that the X and XC sound very similar - they have the same driver after all - and more people seem to prefer the XC) and now do a comparison of the clear, xc, LCD 2c and the t1. I also wanna find out how much the margin is between the XC and the LCD2 C.
Regards

Edit: I miss David Mahler doing all this work for us xD

 

[Sound Eq]

sorry to ask i know that eq lcd2c was mentioned before any recs for eqing the lcd2c so i can try

 

[Sound Eq]

did anyone try what changing the pads to real leather audeze pads would change in the sound of lcd2c