[801evan]

After much tweaking in my system, I find the LCD 3 linear, smooth and gives just enough bass where there is a fuller sound but not a dark heavy sound. The X seems to give more attention and more forward sound on the vocals that it sticks out for me. Though i think this makes the X has an edge in getting a more solid image, though artificial.

I tried the Sine for kicks after months of it being unused and it sounded broken by comparison to the X. I was shocked. I thought the Sine was excellent enough for what it is, but my acclimation to the LCD 3 wasn't something I expected when swapping HPs. It has even surpassed my Etymotics er4xr which I didn't even hope to expect. The er4xr sounds more congested (even if it isn't) on the upper mids and thinner than a real performance.

PS. I upgraded my cables to solid silver 24awg which gives a lovely upgrade and not lacking on the highs.

 

[mixman]

LCD-3 sound relative to LCD-X:

• More liquid (honestly, I think the 3 is class-leading in liquid sound in general)
• More air
• More laid-back/polite. Less punishing of bad recordings.

The X is probably "truer" in overall sound. Honestly, if you like the Audeze house sound than the 3 is a good addition. But if you want something more fun or different, I'd honestly suggest taking a look at something like ZMF headphones (if you want a darker tilt) or Focal I(f you want a brighter sound with incredibly speed and transients).

The reason I looked at the 3 was because it seems to retain the treble will having a more lush sound. I am looking for an even better soundstage and imaging yet somewhat detailed. I like the X sound and want more of it, if you know what I mean. I wonder is the MX4 that HP? Not sure I would want the LCD4 because many have said its a dark hp, even though it still is detailed. The only dark hp I wouldn't mind is the 2C.

 

[ChaChaRealSmooth]

The reason I looked at the 3 was because it seems to retain the treble will having a more lush sound. I am looking for an even better soundstage and imaging yet somewhat detailed. I like the X sound and want more of it, if you know what I mean. I wonder is the MX4 that HP? Not sure I would want the LCD4 because many have said its a dark hp, even though it still is detailed. The only dark hp I wouldn't mind is the 2C.

IMHO the 3 is the most "lush" sounding of all LCDs. It almost gives this sense of being the really warm because it sounds so liquid (but further listening reveals it really isn't the warmest). This isn't to say that the 3 is not resolving or lacks resolution; it has both in spades and is better than the 2 in those regards.

If you want a direct upgrade from the X the MX4 should be on the top of your audition list.

 

[wenbinbin2010]

IMHO the 3 is the most "lush" sounding of all LCDs. It almost gives this sense of being the really warm because it sounds so liquid (but further listening reveals it really isn't the warmest). This isn't to say that the 3 is not resolving or lacks resolution; it has both in spades and is better than the 2 in those regards.

If you want a direct upgrade from the X the MX4 should be on the top of your audition list.

I also agree that the MX4 is the best "upgrade" to the LCD-X if you are looking for better resolution. I put upgrade in quotes because there's aspects of the LCD-X that I liked better than the LCD-MX4, particular the bass fullness of the LCD-X. I love the LCD-3 and I think it has better soundstage and detail than the LCD-X, but the LCD-X is definitely more neutral with less rolled off treble. With all that being said, I actually liked the MX4 the least out of all Audeze LCD headphones...so YMMV and you should really demo before buying.

If you do try the LCD-3 though, make sure to get a newer version after the 2016 driver revision, which I believe have serial number 282***. I currently have two LCD-3s from 2015 and 2018. The 2015 is noticeably darker, which actually makes me prefer it.

 

[JLoud]

I currently own the LCD-3, LCD-4, and LCD-MX4. If you like the sound of the X, then the MX4 is probably the route to go. It is a faster, more detailed X. Same sound signature. The LCD-3 is lusher sounding. Just as detailed as the MX4 but not as neutral. Also I perceive the MX4 as faster. The LCD-4 is the fastest most detailed in my opinion. The mid range is gorgeous. The bass is typical Audeze but the most detailed bass of any of them. I like the LCD-3 for anything mastered a little bright. It just takes the harshness out. Overall favorite is the 4, but choice for mobile or low powered amps would be the MX4. All three sound different. That's why I kept all three.

 

[mixman]

I currently own the LCD-3, LCD-4, and LCD-MX4. If you like the sound of the X, then the MX4 is probably the route to go. It is a faster, more detailed X. Same sound signature. The LCD-3 is lusher sounding. Just as detailed as the MX4 but not as neutral. Also I perceive the MX4 as faster. The LCD-4 is the fastest most detailed in my opinion. The mid range is gorgeous. The bass is typical Audeze but the most detailed bass of any of them. I like the LCD-3 for anything mastered a little bright. It just takes the harshness out. Overall favorite is the 4, but choice for mobile or low powered amps would be the MX4. All three sound different. That's why I kept all three.

It seems like the MX4 doesn't get the same mention as the X, everyone I ask about it are like meh or just stay with the X. I would like something even more resolution, with a little better soundstage. I thought that may be the LCD3, but maybe that's the Clear or Utopia?

 

[wenbinbin2010]

It seems like the MX4 doesn't get the same mention as the X, everyone I ask about it are like meh or just stay with the X. I would like something even more resolution, with a little better soundstage. I thought that may be the LCD3, but maybe that's the Clear or Utopia?

I'd say definitely try to audition the LCD-3. Much closer in price to the LCD-X on the current used market. A little different in terms of warmth, but has the increased detail and soundstage that you're looking for.

Like I mentioned earlier, I much preferred both the LCD-X and the LCD-3 over the MX4, but that's just my opinion. The MX4's price can be prohibitive, unless you can get one for the past holiday sale price of $1500. I suspect the used prices for the MX4 will continue to drop as more of the holiday sale units enter the market.

 

[JM1979]

It seems like the MX4 doesn't get the same mention as the X, everyone I ask about it are like meh or just stay with the X. I would like something even more resolution, with a little better soundstage. I thought that may be the LCD3, but maybe that's the Clear or Utopia?

The LCD-3s have improved resolution and soundstage versus the X, in my experience.

You might also give the Ether 2s a try if you have some place close by that you can demo them. I think they have better resolution and transparency than my LCD-3s had.

 

[mixman]

If I do pick up an LCD3 I am going to try for a post 2016 version. 2018 is preferable, but cost be be too much. I have seen some 2016's go for as low as $850. I read that the Ether 2's were a little more dark sounding. Is that true?

 

[JM1979]

If I do pick up an LCD3 I am going to try for a post 2016 version. 2018 is preferable, but cost be be too much. I have seen some 2016's go for as low as $850. I read that the Ether 2's were a little more dark sounding. Is that true?

I found a pair of 2018 LCD-3s for $900 used. The Ether2s on the other hand are so new that they are going to be $2k or just under for a used pair. That might DQ them for you.

My experience is that the Ether 2s are a very warm headphone but not dark. I thought my LCD-3s were darker.

 

[mixman]

I found a pair of 2018 LCD-3s for $900 used. The Ether2s on the other hand are so new that they are going to be $2k or just under for a used pair. That might DQ them for you.

My experience is that the Ether 2s are a very warm headphone but not dark. I thought my LCD-3s were darker.

Great find on the LCD3. The good thing about Audeze HP's is that while they are warm, they have a lot of impact.

 

[JM1979]

Great find on the LCD3. The good thing about Audeze HP's is that while they are warm, they have a lot of impact.

Yeah, I love the Audeze house sound.

The mids of the LCD-3 and holographic sound is really special. Good luck finding a pair. It seemed like they were for sale on here pretty frequently at a good price.

 

[whirlwind]

This headphone is really musical, and I have been enjoying the heck out of mine.

I am listening to mostly blues, blues rock, classic rock...head bobbin' feet tappin'

 

[ModestMeowth]

Can someone with the carbon fiber headband let me know how many mil thick it is?

 

[forcepsmajor]

I've really enjoyed my LCD3. I find that I'm a little treble sensitive, and when I had both the LCD3 and HD 800 S side by side, I more often than not would be reaching for the LCD3. It has such great natural reproduction with a really pleasant timbre, even when listening to more contemporary highly compressed music, it still sounds as if you're listening to actual instruments. By comparison, the HD 800 S always sounded like I was listening to very good headphones, and at times could be a bit piercing and shrill, and the sound was a bit thin compared to the very full sound of the LCD3, and this was despite running them through a nice OTL tube amp. I have a hard time seeing myself getting rid of the LCD3, although my ZMF Verite should be here soon, and we'll have to see, they may end up for sale.