1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.

    Dismiss Notice

Audeze LCD-4

Discussion in 'High-end Audio Forum' started by matias, Sep 28, 2015.
132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141
143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152
  1. rgs9200m
    OK, thanks! Will do.
  2. Jalo

    I really like the way you clarify and describe the sound characteristic of the LCD4. Even though traditionally people relate the term sound staging to the width, height, and depth of the sound, but sound resolution and sound placement definitely are party of what make up a sound stage, and I think the term sound image may be even better in capturing what you are describing. With your description above, readers should not be mislead as to what you mean. I particularly liked your comparisons to the HEK and R10.
  3. aklein55
    I own the Stax SR-009/Woo Audio WES/Wyrd4Sound DAC, JH 16 Pro/JH - 3A/Chord Hugo DAC, and Audeze LCD-XC/Meitner MA-2 DAC/Rogers EHF-200 Amp .  They are all really different sound presentations.  The Stax are unbelievably fast and holographic, but lack slam and low-bass response.  The JH aren't very linear and tend to overwhelm the vocals - but have great slam and good imaging.  The Audeze are really warm and work well with the Rogers tube amp - love the overall soundstaging and bass response.  A warm and live sound. 
  4. paulchiu
    I look forwards to adding the LCD-4 in 2016 but my experience with the LCD-2 and three versions of the LCD-3 have cemented the idea that imaging is not Audeze's greatest strength.  Realism, power, presence and real physical impact are what come to mind when I think of LCD-3.  I added HE1000 last month and it creates a better illusion of a stereo image.  Last week, I added the PS1000e and that image is even more like speakers in a small room.  Unlike the HD800's really wide rendition of stereo (in the head), the PS1000e's depiction was more forceful, has some of the power of a LCD-3.  Instruments does appear magically out of place versus HD800 with the PS1000e.  This effect was repeated with many tracks.  I could say the HE1000 had this quality, but not as much as a PS1000e when compared with the HD800.  
    I am hoping LCD-4 does have even better out of head trickery, as the biggest problem with the PS1000e is the weight.  More specifically, the weight is all in the aluminum silver cups.
    Like many here, I continue to seek for the headphone that mimics the stereo imaging of a fine pair of speakers in a large room.  I like to have that feeling without having to use software and gear like the smyth a8 realiser.
    Ideallyif an in-ear like a Telos can sound like the LCD-3 or PS1000e, that would be the dream.
  5. rgs9200m
    Thank you Jalo! I appreciate the kind comments.
    Yep, the way an image stands out (or not) or is defined or has natural borders is one of the hardest things to get right in a headphone and I think is a key factor in making a phone sound natural.
    That like I (sort of) said is what made the R10 special.
    I feel the LCD4 has this strength.
    And to Paul, I think the PS1Ke, HEK, and LCD4 are now the leaders in the quest for a speaker-like experience. They all do it differently, but to my ears the LCD4 is the best of the 3 for this.
    (I know people feel the HD800 does this well, but I don't hear the large resonant bass foundation in these that I feel is needed for this effect.)
  6. masterfuu
    I bet you that it's about 5% better then HD650 and that there is no headphone on the planet that can beat HD800. Once the new headphone smell wears off let's revisit this statement.
    drhoooon likes this.
  7. rgs9200m
    Fair enough Masterfuu. The new toy syndrome is real I have to admit. And now that you mention it, I can't resist sniffing the LCD4s, because OMG they do have a really nice aroma. I hope that's not influencing my judgment on their sonics too much, but you never know... 
  8. paulchiu
    I share the point on the HD800.  With ensemble strings, it can be wonderful with fiddlers wonderfully placed.  Listening to Also Sprach Zarathustra, 'NO' with the HD800.  The LCD-3 is so much better but lack the spaciousness.
    From what I read from your piece, the LCD-4 maybe the goto for this kind of music.
  9. jibzilla
    I have seen almost every 007mk1/009 owner say that they can not pick a fav. on the BHSE. The 009 is very amp slutty, worse than even an Lcd-2 [​IMG]. Barely noticed any difference going from just a 727ii all the way up to a full size mjolnir kgsshv. The 007mk1 scaled tremendously well though switching amps and along with the hd800 are the best amp scaling headphones ever made. The kgsshv Carbon is suppose to correct that with the 009 but I have not heard it yet.
    Where the 009 blows away all other headphones is its ability to scale with source. As good as my Metrum Pavane is it is really just the starting point as far as source goes for the sr-009. Connect the 009 to say a $20k esoteric dac or $15k bardo tt setup like I listened to and the 009 firmly sits as the king. Where I dubbed the hd800/Teton drool worthy the 009/Bardo is even beyond that, mind bending is the best I can come up with. 
    While the 009 might be the king it takes allot (at least $10k well built source) for it to best headphones like the Lcd-x, hd800 and 007mk1. 
    It will be interesting to see how the lcd-4 sounds with a five figured source. 
  10. bmichels
    what is a " bardo tt " ? 
  11. jibzilla
    This DSC_0455-copy.jpg   I was Lucky enough to have a dealer that lived about 30 miles away and wanted to see what all the hubbub was about with the 009.
  12. rgs9200m
    Thank you Paul. And yep, nothing like the 2001 music (and what a great movie -- and the book was great too, even). And I can't listen to the Blue Danube w/o those images in my imagination.
    paulchiu likes this.
  13. paulchiu
    Yes, the SR-009 sounds even better teamed with the Nagra HD DAC either through a plain Stax 007tII or the BHSE with stock EL34.  Rolling into a quad set of 1958 Amperex Bugle Boys did not greatly improve the sound but the vocals became more lush.  I don't think the $1000-$2,500 cost for the NOS set is justifiable.  Then again, for those who must have the best.  Give the Bugle Boys a try.
    After about a month plus with the Nagra HD DAC, I start thinking what if I rolled the ECC82 to a 1950s Mullard Black Sable.  Wonder how big that sound stage could become.
  14. jlbrach
    I'd say about 30% better than the HD800, or 40-50% better than HEK/LCD3/Stax009.
    sadly i have started to wonder if some of the posters here even have or have listened to the equipment they speak of in such over the top terms.....perhaps we should ask posters reviewing items to show a picture of their headphone or any other item to verify....i am kidding,just barely
  15. rgs9200m
    No, I never comment on any I don't own, and most of them for a long time with lots of use. A few times in the past, I commented on something that I formerly owned for a fairly long time (a few months).
    I used to own the R10 for years, but not anymore, and I said that.
    Also, I tried to explain that what I was talking about as soundstage was probably different than usual (sorry for that, that was misleading).
    And people hear things differently. Someone on the Pioneer Master1 thread said he was "disgusted" by the HE1000 (but I don't think he owned them), and that sounded sort of nuts to me, but who am I to say what he hears in the end?
    Bob Katz in his talk with Tyll said anyone who likes the SR009 "must be deaf" (and that the Oppo PM1 was so bad it wasn't even worth talking about).
    Someone on the Tidal thread said that 320 lo-fi from any service sounded as good as anything, and that also seemed way off to me.
    This is a subjective business.
    RCBinTN likes this.
132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141
143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152

Share This Page