[514077]

Outstanding review! Utopias are not bright sounding headphones quite the opposite they are smooth and exceptionally detailed without a hint of harshness. I love them but that might change when my LCD-4 arrives Monday.

Wouldn't mind hearing on your take of the 4Z/X; whether it's a worthy upgrade.

 

[2thfixr]

I can compare 4 vs X but not 4Z

 

[514077]

I can compare 4 vs X but not 4Z

Thanks. I'll take what I can get.

 

[2thfixr]

You and me both brother.

 

[davidimdpt]

Just got the FR of my 4z

 

[Hifiearspeakers]

Just got the FR of my 4z

Typical Audeze. Look at that midrange black hole! I don’t understand why they would let the midrange of a $4000 headphone drop off of a cliff. No wonder Tyll ripped them. Smh.

 

[Dobrescu George]

It really depends non how that measuremenbt is compensated

 

[llamaluv]

Just got the FR of my 4z

I'm sensitive to the upper mid-range personally, so I find it notable and potentially attractive that the upper mid-range downward slope starts a little early (~850hz) compared to various other headphones.

In contrast, the frequency graph of my MX4 (before I sent it off to greener pastures) shows a more pronounced upper midrange hump, and one that extends higher (~1100hz) before starting its drop. This may seem like a subtle difference, but I can say from experience that that particular MX4 unit could be pretty piercing in the upper midrange. So I'm always taking special note of what a frequency graph shows between like 750hz and 2khz.

Also, I notice that the 4Z graph posted above looks really quite similar to graphs I see of the 4-OG (which makes sense).

I'm assuming that half-way useful comparisons can be made between different Audeze graphs in terms of accuracy, consistency, etc. Hopefully that's true.

 

[2thfixr]

Wouldn't mind hearing on your take of the 4Z/X; whether it's a worthy upgrade.

Got my LCD-4s yesterday. Spent some time with them but need more time before comparing the 2. Initial impressions are that the LCD-4s have amazing soundstage and imaging compared to the X. Each instrument is placed in it's own place on the soundstage and it's distinct and separated. The X is quite good but the imaging isn't quite to the level of the 4. Room is smaller and instruments sort of bleed together. The 4 has a midrange dip around 1-5k that's noticeable compared to my X and my Utopias. Takes some of the edge off guitars and cymbals which I'm on the fence about. On one hand it sounds more musical on the other hand I feel like I'm missing detail. This is where I'm going to need more time. According to Audeze 80-100 hrs break in is optimal so they may open up as they get broken in.

Pro LCD-4 vs LCD-X

Stunning esthetic - the high polish ebony wood and chrome trim makes them look amazing- carbon fiber headband is all win.
Amazing bass response, smooth highs with no noticeable peak that I can sense.
Due to the midrange dip it's completely black during transients or dead periods in a recording. This can be a pro or a con but until break in I'll call it a pro... the X can pick up hiss in recordings because the dip isn't as severe. Only way to describe this is the LCD 4 feels like a pitch black room and because of the tremendous resolution of the LCD-4 that room has precisely placed instruments that are completely separated. The X sounds like a smaller dusty room with instruments that sort of blend together. The Xs sound good but it doesn't have the incredible layered and detailed sound of the 4.

Con LCD-4 vs LCD-X

Expensive!
Midrange dip that is not as obvious on the LCD-X. So at this point it's a pro but I'll still call it a con until the 4s are broken in.
LCD-X seems to have a touch more detail around guitars and cymbals at this point which is ironically less warm and musical IMO but detail is detail.

They're distinctly different headphones. Similar Audeze sound but different sound presentation. If soundstage and imaging is your thing... hands down 4. If you want reference studio monitoring sound then X is for you. Is it worth the money to choose the 4 vs the X? Yes, imaging is incredible. If you're on a budget, the X is a great set of headphones for the money. Drew at Moon Audio recommended the Black Dragon cable so I got one. Best $350 I ever spent, really smooths out the sound of the X so maybe factor that into your budget.

One last thing, I don't know how much of a difference it makes but the stock cable that comes with the LCD-4 is $600 so possible that is causing some of the difference in SQ between the 4 and X. Maybe snake oil? LOL!

 

[Hifiearspeakers]

Got my LCD-4s yesterday. Spent some time with them but need more time before comparing the 2. Initial impressions are that the LCD-4s have amazing soundstage and imaging compared to the X. Each instrument is placed in it's own place on the soundstage and it's distinct and separated. The X is quite good but the imaging isn't quite to the level of the 4. Room is smaller and instruments sort of bleed together. The 4 has a midrange dip around 1-5k that's noticeable compared to my X and my Utopias. Takes some of the edge off guitars and cymbals which I'm on the fence about. On one hand it sounds more musical on the other hand I feel like I'm missing detail. This is where I'm going to need more time. According to Audeze 80-100 hrs break in is optimal so they may open up as they get broken in.

Pro LCD-4 vs LCD-X

Stunning esthetic - the high polish ebony wood and chrome trim makes them look amazing- carbon fiber headband is all win.
Amazing bass response, smooth highs with no noticeable peak that I can sense.
Due to the midrange dip it's completely black during transients or dead periods in a recording. This can be a pro or a con but until break in I'll call it a pro... the X can pick up hiss in recordings because the dip isn't as severe. Only way to describe this is the LCD 4 feels like a pitch black room and because of the tremendous resolution of the LCD-4 that room has precisely placed instruments that are completely separated. The X sounds like a smaller dusty room with instruments that sort of blend together. The Xs sound good but it doesn't have the incredible layered and detailed sound of the 4.

Con LCD-4 vs LCD-X

Expensive!
Midrange dip that is not as obvious on the LCD-X. So at this point it's a pro but I'll still call it a con until the 4s are broken in.
LCD-X seems to have a touch more detail around guitars and cymbals at this point which is ironically less warm and musical IMO but detail is detail.

They're distinctly different headphones. Similar Audeze sound but different sound presentation. If soundstage and imaging is your thing... hands down 4. If you want reference studio monitoring sound then X is for you. Is it worth the money to choose the 4 vs the X? Yes, imaging is incredible. If you're on a budget, the X is a great set of headphones for the money. Drew at Moon Audio recommended the Black Dragon cable so I got one. Best $350 I ever spent, really smooths out the sound of the X so maybe factor that into your budget.

One last thing, I don't know how much of a difference it makes but the stock cable that comes with the LCD-4 is $600 so possible that is causing some of the difference in SQ between the 4 and X. Maybe snake oil? LOL!

From your description, it sounds like the LCD 4 would be the perfect sound if it had linear mids instead of a Grand Canyon drop off. What a shame.

 

[davidimdpt]

This is the response I got from Audeze regarding the 20 db drop from 1kHz to 4.5kHz.

"I double-checked with our CTO, and here are his comments: "This is quite normal. Neumann test head has built in filters which result in graphs shaped like this."

Graphs only tell us a limited amount about how headphones really sound, and differences in measurement technique, headphone placement, etc all play a big part in how the graphs look. Test equipment only goes so far to approximate how we hear, and especially with headphones, each listener's experience is very different from what the measurements present. We could go on all day about Harman curves and the like, but most importantly: how do they sound to your ears? If they sound good and involve you in the music, that's what we're aiming for.

I hope this helps!"

 

[Hifiearspeakers]

This is the response I got from Audeze regarding the 20 db drop from 1kHz to 4.5kHz.

"I double-checked with our CTO, and here are his comments: "This is quite normal. Neumann test head has built in filters which result in graphs shaped like this."

Graphs only tell us a limited amount about how headphones really sound, and differences in measurement technique, headphone placement, etc all play a big part in how the graphs look. Test equipment only goes so far to approximate how we hear, and especially with headphones, each listener's experience is very different from what the measurements present. We could go on all day about Harman curves and the like, but most importantly: how do they sound to your ears? If they sound good and involve you in the music, that's what we're aiming for.

I hope this helps!"

I’ve read multiple reviews and watched several reviews on Youtube. The midrange drop is real and can easily be heard. It’s not measurement “trickery”. That drop off is also standard Audeze house sound. Even though the LCD X has less of it, it still has it. They all do. But I was hoping they fixed it on the 4. But it doesn’t sound like they did. That’s just too much missing detail.

 

[franz12]

I’ve read multiple reviews and watched several reviews on Youtube. The midrange drop is real and can easily be heard. It’s not measurement “trickery”. That drop off is also standard Audeze house sound. Even though the LCD X has less of it, it still has it. They all do. But I was hoping they fixed it on the 4. But it doesn’t sound like they did. That’s just too much missing detail.

Yes. Audezes have arguably the best bass among others, but they always come with a dip in the upper mid and low treble. Disappointing..

 

[Dobrescu George]

I heard a lot of headphones, and I heard and compared LCD-MX4 to LCD-2 today, man, I don't hear any dip anywhere, it sounds simply natural and how it should

As I keep saying, when reading a graph, you need to know how it was compensated, and if, because that can make a world of a difference.

 

[Hifiearspeakers]

Yes. Audezes have arguably the best bass among others, but they always come with a dip in the upper mid and low treble. Disappointing..

The bass on the LCD X is some of the best bass I’ve ever heard. If that headphone only had more present upper mids and more treble extension, it would be the best headphone under $1500 by a wide margin.