Separate names with a comma.
That shallow drop starting at 1.5k is unacceptable to me tho i like the flatness before that.. maybe some EQ could fix the 1.5khz to 10khz drop... anybody can fix with EQ and tell us how it sound afterward?
also the LCD-X stay flat in the midrange longer.. but the bass to mid transition drop tho
Hmm. Human perception is more sensitive to the vocal range, so if the curve were flat through that region, then those frequencies would be unduly emphasized. This is why many headphones have a dip there on FR graphs. I don't hear any unduly emphasized or unduly recessed frequencies with the LCD-4.
FR graphs only tell a part of the story and are easy to misinterpret. I've heard headphones that measure great and sound awful as well as headphones that measure poorly and sound fantastic. This is just my opinion; I'm biased, like everyone else, and I haven't heard everything in the world, but I don't find that the LCD-4 needs any fixing with EQ.
Even though I'm a Tidal fan, I've been going through my catalog of live recordings I saved on youtube, and even all of these, which were somewhat dull and uninvolving before, have new life in them and basically sound fantastic with the LCD4.
And now that it's breaking in (and I guess the cable too), the glare I mentioned is gone in all the listening I did today (a few hours; I can't put them down). The fatigue is gone, and now it's just great. I can't believe youtube sounds so good, mostly at their 480p level. IMO the LCD4 is a breakthrough headphone.
Can anyone give me an idea of the LCD4 soundstaging in percentage compared to any other can?
I heard them all except for these...
I'd say about 30% better than the HD800, or 40-50% better than HEK/LCD3/Stax009.
50% better soundstaging than the HE1000? In a headphone from Audeze? I haven't even heard the LCD-4 yet but even I would have to highly question that statement.
Especially when you consider he grouped the LCD-3, HE1000, and SR-009 together in sound stage. The LCD-3 is at least a level below both the HE1000 and SR-009 in that regard.
The few comparisons I've seen between the LCD-4 and HE1000 say that the LCD-4 has a very good sound stage (I think I've seen some say it's much better than the LCD-3 in this respect), but the HE1000 is still better. At least one said the HE1000 sounds more distant as a result and the LCD-4 more intimate.
That sounds like a fair assessment. Better soundstaging than the HE1000 or SR-009 and HD-800 seems ludicrous, especially given Audeze's house sound favors impact and not soundstaging. From what I've heard the LCD-4 is more of the house sound but better, but I don't see how it could better all 3 of those headphones when that is one of the characteristics they all have in common, great soundstaging.
I like the HEK tonality a lot, along with the bass, but I personally don't hear a great deal of layering and image specificity. It's more blended to me. Very pleasantly blended, and refined though and I really like these phones.
Those were things I heard best in the Sony R10s I used to have for a few years and now hear very well in the LCD4.
As for the 009, superb detail, but again, not a lot of depth (but I just have a KGSShv mini, so this may be better on a BHSE, so I guess I should correct that part of my statement).
I actually do hear some depth and a sense of an open field on my LCD3, but not in the league of the LCD4.
So that is why I grouped the HEK, 009, and LCD3 together in terms of soundstaging. It's a gross grouping. They are NOT equivalent in this area and vary in the different aspects of spatial affects and thus have very different soundstaging signatures.
Soundstaging has many aspects as I see it, like imaging with air around each musical object, depth of field, and open-field sensation, and also how much it is comparable to speakers.
All of these phones handle all of these qualities differently, so just saying which is "better" in soundstaging overall is of course a gross generalization.
And percentages are also pretty non-sensical with all these things going on, but I just tossed all those doubts to the wind to try to answer the question.
I do not hear the the LCD4 as more intimate; I hear it as more open-sky sound. The HEK has a nice big resonant bass, but I do not hear that as open space.
But my instinct and sense of the LCD4 is I am hearing all sorts of surprising spatial cues and a pretty cavernous sound that really impresses me overall in this area more than the other phones I mentioned.
And again, what really got me is the way some sounds like strings or a vocal in the distance or a drum seems to come from a very specific place in a sphere of sound (or at least a large, open stage area) in
a way that very much reminded me of the Sony R10. And this was a key part of the R10 magic for me.
I may need more time with them to sort these impressions out, but all I can say is that I kept saying to myself that "wow this sound is over here a bit to the left and is close in" and "that sound is way over there up to the right" and on an on etc...
And I really enjoyed this and felt it made for some fun listening and I had a sense it was very realistic.
So that is why I jumped on this question.
And that's the way it is.
I feel that your statement is 30% more confusing than your previous statement but 40% less confusing than anything from Tony in Michigan if that makes any sense. And that's the way it is.
Thanks for the feedback.
'hard to be coherent about high end audio impressions comparing 5 headphone simultaneously from memory at 1am...
How about: Soundstaging is real good. Buy these asap. ? That should be clear.
If you've heard the LCD-X, they're very similar.
I'm just giving you a hard time, any feedback is appreciated in all honesty since not everyone will get a chance to own or even hear these, and from all the feedback I've seen so far, despite the price they do seem like fantastic headphones.
But since Audeze isn't known for great soundstaging, and headphones like the HE1000, SR-009 & HD-800 are generally regarded as some of the finest when it comes to soundstaging, that statement about them being 30-40% better at soundstaging made me raise my eyebrow. I think sometimes the exaggeration gets out of hand on Head-Fi and I'd hate to see someone be misled into buying an Audeze headphone expecting reference soundstaging since that's not exactly what they are known for, just like I wouldn't want to see someone buy and HD-800 and think they are getting monster basshead headphones. Just trying to keep expecations realistic is all, but carry on and enjoy your LCD-4's, (oh, and pics would be nice )