[Torq]

  So... I decided to list my LCD-4 given I don't really have time to listen to music. I ignored all the lowballers, and even some who got close to my asking price, since I don't really need the money nor was I looking to replace them with something else. Today was a great day to give them one more listen, and lo and behold, turns out it's dead on the right channel. Amp is fine, cable is fine (tested with different amp and also cables) so I can only surmise it's a dead driver. Naturally, I closed my for sale listing and I will contact Audeze for a fix.
 
However, I find the failure utterly disappointing, shouldn't happen to a low-run, boutique product - presumably attention is given to quality control. I guess I thought wrong. 
 
I haven't followed this thread closely or recently, but in case there have been driver failure reports regarding the LCD-4, count one more.

That's really unfortunate.
 
Do you know which version of the driver you have ... the original 100 ohm or the new "supposed to fix failure issues" 200 ohm version?

 

[mwilson]

 
That's really unfortunate.
 
Do you know which version of the driver you have ... the original 100 ohm or the new "supposed to fix failure issues" 200 ohm version?

 
I have no idea; I wasn't told one way or another.

 

[mwilson]

OK I see what you mean (I read some posts regarding such). I would think mine are 100 ohm since I got them at launch. However, wouldn't 200 ohm presumably be harder to drive? Meaning more volume required of my amp? Some of these posts also reference a decreased sensitivity? And also a different sound signature? Surely all this cannot be true???

 

[Torq]

   
I have no idea; I wasn't told one way or another.

 
If your serial number is, or is prior to, 4142270 then you have the 100 ohm version.
 

  OK I see what you mean (I read some posts regarding such). I would think mine are 100 ohm since I got them at launch. However, wouldn't 200 ohm presumably be harder to drive? Meaning more volume required of my amp? Some of these posts also reference a decreased sensitivity? And also a different sound signature? Surely all this cannot be true???

 
The 200 ohm version is harder to drive.  In addition to the increase in impedance they're less sensitive - that's based on Audeze's own published specs. The math says they require 2.3x more power to drive to the same levels as the original version.  They certainly are power-hungry.
 
Audeze say the newer driver sounds better.  I can't comment on that as I've never heard the 100 ohm versions, but clearly even Audeze say they sound different, so it's reasonable to assume so.
 
Here's Audeze's original post on the matter:
 

  In the next few weeks, we’ll be contacting our original LCD4 owners to offer a product update at no charge. The new driver uses an even thinner film, yet is stronger, and there are a few other incremental design changes as well. The impedance is now 200 ohms, and the sensitivity is about 97dB. This design and materials change makes them even more accurate! If you’re an LCD 4 owner with a serial number of 4142270 or below, you should expect a call or email from our customer service department in the next few weeks to arrange your update. If you don’t hear from us (because the product is not registered) by March 4, please write to support@audeze.com.
 

 

[mwilson]

I read Audeze's post and I was never contacted. The serial number of my LCD-4 falls under the recall. Since I purchased directly from them, and even got a follow-up message with the FR chart, they definitely have my info, yet I was never contacted.
 
This can't be good for their reputation, launching a relatively expensive item and not more than a few months in specs have to be materially changed due to design failures? And failing to notify customers subject to said recall?

 

[yc1204]

  I read Audeze's post and I was never contacted. The serial number of my LCD-4 falls under the recall. Since I purchased directly from them, and even got a follow-up message with the FR chart, they definitely have my info, yet I was never contacted.
 
This can't be good for their reputation, launching a relatively expensive item and not more than a few months in specs have to be materially changed due to design failures? And failing to notify customers subject to said recall?

I think they only contacted people who registered online

 

[mwilson]

  I think they only contacted people who registered online

A recall is a recall. You reach out to affected customers using their contact information. There exists a record of purchase, with full contact information.

 

[Hifi59]

What DAC did you use? I found a very big difference between Burson (which I owned for a long time) and Master 9. Indeed, Burson was a little more energetic but kind of 2d compared to m9 which was also leagues ahead in terms of transparency and authority. 


Master 9 scales more with a better DAC than Burson

Schiit Gungnir(multibit) dac and also Sony Dap ZX-2 . M9 did have better transparency, but not authority in any sense of the word. The owner of the Master 9 said bass authority was not its strength. It was perfectly adequate but the Burson even more so.

 

[dan.gheorghe]

Schiit Gungnir(multibit) dac and also Sony Dap ZX-2 . M9 did have better transparency, but not authority in any sense of the word. The owner of the Master 9 said bass authority was not its strength. It was perfectly adequate but the Burson even more so.

 
Did you try M9 from balanced output? I also tested both amp with lots of headphones. Couldn't go back to Burson....

 

[Hifi59]

Did you try M9 from balanced output? I also tested both amp with lots of headphones. Couldn't go back to Burson....

We listened balanced. SE was meh! It just may be you(and others I'm sure) take a liking more to that holographic signature that the m9 has. I heard it and understand that position. It's nice. It's just that the energy, the leading edge attack and bass authority of the Burson that gets my toes tapping night after night. To me, this trumps the additional 3D imaging and transparency of the M9. It does this without the onset of listening fatigue also. I listen for hours almost every night. I never tell myself, ok, I've had enough. It just keeps delivering. Having said this, I've only used the following headphones with my Burson. LCD 2f, 3f, 4 , Hifiman he-1k, he-560, Zmf Omnis , Alpha Dogs and Oppo PM-2. I loved the way they all sounded on the Burson. I didn't care much for the Sennheiser HD-800 on the Burson nor did I care for the Fostex Th-900 before they were fully broken in. After about 150 HR break in, they sounded great on the Burson.

 

[draytonklammer]

Using a loan pair of LCD-4s (300+hours run in) with a Dave (200+ hours run in), and using AK380 (16/44 ALAC) as source, and something is missing from the top end. I've got the loan for a week so I will persevere but already missing the sound of my HE1000, which I'm determined not to listen to until near the end of the loan when I should have achieved brain run in with the LCD-4s.

Weird, when I was demoing the LCD-4 and Abyss versus my HE-1000 I preferred the LCD-4 by a good bit compared to the HE-1000.

 

[draytonklammer]

So I have been playing around with the EQ Tyll used.
 
Tyll, I disagree with dropping the ~16k peak.
 
I will say, the ~5k gain and ~60hz gain are alright with me though. Gave an extra big of edge to these headphones.
 
Without EQ I would still give the sound quality a higher rating than the HE-1000. With it, they pull ahead more.

 

[zardon]

  So I have been playing around with the EQ Tyll used.
 
Tyll, I disagree with dropping the ~16k peak.
 
I will say, the ~5k gain and ~60hz gain are alright with me though. Gave an extra big of edge to these headphones.
 
Without EQ I would still give the sound quality a higher rating than the HE-1000. With it, they pull ahead more.

Its difficult to say which is 'better', they have very different amplifier needs, one is 35ohm (+-3) (90dBa) and the other 200ohm (96-97dBa). I have spent so much time with both headphones and have tried now more than 30 amplifiers with each of them. My opinion has shifted between them so many times now and I am at the point that I rate both equally as world class headphones. Its a pretty poor conclusion to make because I always have a favourite between two headphones, but the HE1000 and LCD4 are both incredible in their own way.
 
Only thing I would say is that the LCD4 is not worth the extra £1,100 that they charge in the UK for it over the HE1000. I am also hoping Audeze work on the weight and headband/clamping more in future revisions. The HE1000 is infinitely more comfortable.

 

[draytonklammer]

For myself and everyone I know who has tested with me in person on my setup we enjoyed the LCD-4.
Might just be my setup. We found it closer, more detailed and more fun.
 
The HE-1000 decimates the LCD-4 in comfort.

 

[Fifinder]

Got my LCD-4 late last week and haven't spent as much time with them as I would've liked. I only have four hours or so on them. My initial impression was very good but I wasn't blown away. I dug the extra bass extension and slam over those of the LCD-3, 'phones which I owned and listened to (and liked a lot) from January to early April. The spatial clues are clearly better on the LCD-4 too.
 
Still, only two days ago I had a feeling of moderate disappointment over the improvements. Not worth the extra $2,000, I thought. I skipped listening yesterday due to work.
 
Well, I just took the phones to my other listening station (bedroom) and queued up Marcus Miller's Cousin John (via Tidal). Then Mighty Sam McClain's Give It Up To Love.
 
HOLY COW. I've never heard headphones sound like this before. Authoritative bass in the extreme, impressive left-to-right soundstage, smooth on the whole but suitably aggressive when the music calls for it. Voices sound as if the vocalists are singing to you from a few feet away, in your own room.
 
Kanye West's Love Lockdown? Same.
Lyle Lovett's Blues Walk? Same.
Lionel Loueke's Tribal Dance? Same.
Nick Cave's Red Right Hand? Same.
Michael Hedges' Because It's There? Same.
 
Not sure what's going on. I'm using qualitatively lesser amplification than I was two days ago (Lyr 2 amp vs Ragnarok previously). Maybe it's my mood. Maybe the LCD-4 needed last week's break-in period. Maybe my power lines are temporarily cleaner. Who knows. I'm loving what I'm hearing now.

One odd thing I'm noticing is that the LCD-4 is more sensitive to mastering volumes than any other headphone I've used. What's the "right" volume for me on one track dips down to "much too soft" or goes up to "way too loud" on subsequent recordings.
 
Regardless: I'm now feeling that the upgrade was indeed worth the money, and then some.