jmills8
Previously known as bmiamihk, jmills2
Why not go by which sounds best to your brain ? His best can be your worst.
Audeze LCD-4
- Thread starter Matias
- Start date
-
- Tags
- audeze-lcd-4
TubedB
New Head-Fier
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2015
- Posts
- 4
- Likes
- 2
Used to own an LCD-2 and then left the hobby. Getting back into it now, and picked up the LCD-4. Fantastic headphones! If you have the power to drive them, you really can't go wrong.
johnzz4
500+ Head-Fier
This may be why the Wells Audio Headtrip sounds so good with 50 wpc at 8 ohms and +30dB of gain. I tried several amps before landing on that one. Perhaps other more cost-effective speaker amps would also sound quite good, but never explored that path myself.
I recently bought the LCD 2 Fazor (2019) and I'm already looking forward to the LCD 4, which I wanted to buy all along but needed an open back to keep me busy in the meantime.
I saw some of the comments regarding EQ here. I would say the LCD 2 EQs very well with the oratory profile and there isn't really any detail or timbre loss. In fact there seems to be some resolution gain since that EQ brings up the upper mids and fixes the stock thin sound. Other EQ methods may in fact be too aggressive indeed (Sonarworks sucks) but I've had a great experience with oratory's profile and I wish he'd EQ the LCD 4 too.
The one thing I'm worried about is that high end headphones tend to be too revealing. Even the LCD 2 completely ruins some of the music that I might have liked to listen to. I can hear grain in microphones, clipping, too much dynamic range compression in EDM, etc. It really messes with my ears, like when a producer turns up a snare sound too loud or he uses too much compression but he doesn't realize it and on my end with my Audeze HPs I can hear how the instruments are struggling to play as loud as possible. I do still look forward to the LCD 4 since they're supposed to be smoother and more detailed and most importantly, more dynamic. I just expect to be even more shocked at how badly produced most music is upon hearing them for the first time.
I saw some of the comments regarding EQ here. I would say the LCD 2 EQs very well with the oratory profile and there isn't really any detail or timbre loss. In fact there seems to be some resolution gain since that EQ brings up the upper mids and fixes the stock thin sound. Other EQ methods may in fact be too aggressive indeed (Sonarworks sucks) but I've had a great experience with oratory's profile and I wish he'd EQ the LCD 4 too.
The one thing I'm worried about is that high end headphones tend to be too revealing. Even the LCD 2 completely ruins some of the music that I might have liked to listen to. I can hear grain in microphones, clipping, too much dynamic range compression in EDM, etc. It really messes with my ears, like when a producer turns up a snare sound too loud or he uses too much compression but he doesn't realize it and on my end with my Audeze HPs I can hear how the instruments are struggling to play as loud as possible. I do still look forward to the LCD 4 since they're supposed to be smoother and more detailed and most importantly, more dynamic. I just expect to be even more shocked at how badly produced most music is upon hearing them for the first time.
marcan
500+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2004
- Posts
- 643
- Likes
- 153
Planar are revealing even if they can be on the dark side because they are very fast and have a very low distortion.
Having the experience with both LCD2 and LCD4, the LCD4 is dramatically more revealing so if you hear some nasty production/mastering choices (and bad mastering is all over) I'm afraid you will hear it more clearly.
So you will tend to choose well produced/mastered music or you will have to accept some tracks as it is.
Regarding eq, LCD's can handle it because of the low distortion but I really hope you will not need it for the LCD4.
Having the experience with both LCD2 and LCD4, the LCD4 is dramatically more revealing so if you hear some nasty production/mastering choices (and bad mastering is all over) I'm afraid you will hear it more clearly.
So you will tend to choose well produced/mastered music or you will have to accept some tracks as it is.
Regarding eq, LCD's can handle it because of the low distortion but I really hope you will not need it for the LCD4.
LCD-2 is fairly close to my preferences. LCD-4 should be closer but I am way more bothered by thin sound than by using EQ.
Do any of you use audezes presets? What do you think?
marcan
500+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2004
- Posts
- 643
- Likes
- 153
I don't like thin sounding hp's as well, that's why I love the Audeze LCD house sound and if it was thin sounding I wouldn't buy it in the first place.
ChijiroKuro
100+ Head-Fier
Happy Holidays to all!!
Finally: I have the LCD-4 with the Moon 430HA and I like it in low gain (in Lo = +/- 50 and Hi = +/- 45). As a source I use a Linn KDS Katalist (balanced out) and the result is "brutal" to my brain (of course
). I have my other TOL headphones for sale, easy.
Cheers!!!
C.K.
Finally: I have the LCD-4 with the Moon 430HA and I like it in low gain (in Lo = +/- 50 and Hi = +/- 45). As a source I use a Linn KDS Katalist (balanced out) and the result is "brutal" to my brain (of course
). I have my other TOL headphones for sale, easy.Cheers!!!
C.K.
I use the Audeze Reveal preset. As a plug-in installed in Audirvana. It has settings for all the Audeze headphones. You can download it for free from Audeze. Has settings to tweak it to your preference.
Even though I said eq will drop quality, tonality is super important and if you don't have a setup to counter the 4khz dip then pushing it up a few db will help. It's why I won't get the Raals, even though they're excellent at every frequency, the sub bass is non existent which robs it of enjoyment and realism and can't be fixed. I also can never really be happy with anything other than low gain on the amp but if you're amp is not powerful then again compromises will have to be made.
The lcd4 scales ridiculously.
They sound the way they do, because their potential needs to be fully realised, look at the distortion plots and sub stax driver thickness. It's why you will hear some reviewer will say it's more detailed than the hd800 even though the latter is purely analytical and gives no musical enjoyment. At it's best it can sound like an abyss phi tc with a more laid back signature, both are in a bass class of their own unmatched. At their worst they sound like what negatives reviews say, small soundstage, sucked out lower treble, slow fat bass which I've heard on some setups.
The lcd4 scales ridiculously.
They sound the way they do, because their potential needs to be fully realised, look at the distortion plots and sub stax driver thickness. It's why you will hear some reviewer will say it's more detailed than the hd800 even though the latter is purely analytical and gives no musical enjoyment. At it's best it can sound like an abyss phi tc with a more laid back signature, both are in a bass class of their own unmatched. At their worst they sound like what negatives reviews say, small soundstage, sucked out lower treble, slow fat bass which I've heard on some setups.
Last edited:
Do you know what the difference in sound is, on the two filters you can choose?
I believe it is one filter profile and you adjust how and you adjust how aggressive you want it implemented. I run 100% wet. This is essentially the way Audeze intended it. If you want to dial it back you adjust it down.
You own the 1266 as well? How does it compare with the LCD 4? I'm primarily interested in resolution and dynamics comparisons.
I own both as well and the 1266 is better. You just need the power to run them I’m currently using gsx mini.
Users who are viewing this thread
