I’ve listened to both, and while there's definitely some variation, I feel my 4z’s are just a bit faster with slightly tighter bass. The original LCD-4s, on the other hand, have a more lush sound and are more versatile for pairing with different amps. In terms of resolution, they’re quite similar, offering almost the same overall impressions. Some people say the originals are better, but that really depends on the gear, the listener, and other factors.Even though I'm loving the multiple clarity and power improvements on the 2/4 having come from the Mytek Stereo96, there was a 'meatiness' to the output on that thing that I do miss. I'll try to describe it subjectively - it's like the lower mids and lows would almost grab and envelope you. The 2/4 is way cooler and more matter-of-fact than this.
I can easily imagine a system where one can have both properties.
Maybe I would prefer the 4, I'd still like to hear it.
I should probably keep telling myself I have everything I need right now! - eek, I don't wanna BECOME like one of you people. Heaven forbid!
Audeze LCD-4z - Impressions Thread
- Thread starter XERO1
- Start date
Yes there is definitely more speed on the 4z whilst the 4 is lusher and fuller in the midrange with more natural instrumental timbre and detail. I only compared both on one chain though.
Richy Hughes
100+ Head-Fier
A small update on my last post. I've started using the balanced output of the ADI-2/4 Pro SE (such a mouthful) but in LOW-power mode instead of high. And I've been finding there is a bit of a sonic difference there. Initially I had preferred the high power because it seemed to make a little bit more out of the transients, and this was back when I was using it single ended. But now that I'm using the 4.4 connection I'm realising that conversely, low power mode has a fuller sound that is less 'cool' and less - for want of a better word - less 'strained'. I can see opportunity for either with the 4z, but I think I might be using it in low power mode a lot more in the near future. It's not that they are lacking in speed, snap and slam now by any stretch either.
In balanced low power mode, according to my reading of the graphs in the manual it's still capable of outputting 750/800 mw @ 15ohms, so not close to current starving the 4z anyway.
I'm thinking maybe that the high power mode would work better with much more resistant loads, regardless of chosen output level. I think I had defaulted to high because I thought that opening it up to a potential of close to 2 watts would help, but maybe that's just not the case with this system, and there's a power range where it is just much more comfortable to work within.
(EDIT - a little later.... now I'm trying 'auto' mode on the ADI-2/4 - and actually I'm not sure if it was some kind of placebo before with the power mode thing (which is difficult to test, at least in balanced... maybe if I set up two single ended in H / L respectively at balanced gains?)
In any case, I'm using auto ref mode atm - and for what it's worth, for most modern 'hot' mastered music, I would seem to be in IEM mode most of the time!
In balanced low power mode, according to my reading of the graphs in the manual it's still capable of outputting 750/800 mw @ 15ohms, so not close to current starving the 4z anyway.
I'm thinking maybe that the high power mode would work better with much more resistant loads, regardless of chosen output level. I think I had defaulted to high because I thought that opening it up to a potential of close to 2 watts would help, but maybe that's just not the case with this system, and there's a power range where it is just much more comfortable to work within.
(EDIT - a little later.... now I'm trying 'auto' mode on the ADI-2/4 - and actually I'm not sure if it was some kind of placebo before with the power mode thing (which is difficult to test, at least in balanced... maybe if I set up two single ended in H / L respectively at balanced gains?)
In any case, I'm using auto ref mode atm
- and for what it's worth, for most modern 'hot' mastered music, I would seem to be in IEM mode most of the time!
Last edited:
Richy Hughes
100+ Head-Fier
I can't remember if I mentioned this here, but I have wondered how much of the speed+tight / lush+full tradeoff that people talk about may also be attributed at least in part to the minor variations in tone and body resonance with the thick and gently resonant ebony wood rings offering a shade more hold/decay, versus the light and sporty magnesium alloy. (Imagine how different a Bösendorfer might sound if the frame were made of magnesium alloy instead of spruce
hahaha)I know that there were a small number of pairs made in the earlier days where people were requesting the 200ohm driver in the magnesium body. That versus an original 4 could also be an interesting comparison, although I also expect unit to unit variation on the drivers may also hamper the apples to apples view to some degree.
Last edited:
Richy Hughes
100+ Head-Fier
When I was making my enquiries prior to my 4z purchase, I did ask about whether the 15ohm could be put in a wood-ring chassis but I was told that they only offered 'transplants' for a limited time and that due to changes in tooling etc, it probably wouldn't even be possible any more.
Audeze did make some headphones that had the LCD 4 drivers in the 4z housing. I asked them if I bought an LCD 4z and gave them both headphones, if they would be able to swap the drivers. They refused and told me only some "musical professionals" got this hybrid headphone which is very disappointing. Why not just give us the option? I can assure you that most of the Audeze owners/fans prefer their old house sound over something like the LCD 5. Why kill the LCD 4 whilst all their other mainline LCD's such as the 2 and 3 have been on sale for much longer than the 4 and are not discontinued.I can't remember if I mentioned this here, but I have wondered how much of the speed+tight / lush+full tradeoff that people talk about may also be attributed at least in part to the minor variations in tone and body resonance with the thick and gently resonant ebony wood rings offering a shade more hold/decay, versus the light and sporty magnesium alloy. (Imagine how different a Bösendorfer might sound if the frame were made of magnesium alloy instead of spruce
I know that there were a small number of pairs made in the earlier days where people were requesting the 200ohm driver in the magnesium body. That versus an original 4 could also be an interesting comparison, although I also expect unit to unit variation on the drivers may also hamper the apples to apples view to some degree.
Audeze never gave us an honest answer for this betrayal lol. Anyway, I'm just glad to own another pair and at least Audeze give us the option to buy new drivers if a failure occurs.
Richy Hughes
100+ Head-Fier
Yeah at first I was told that they never offered this, but then I sent screenshots from this very thread, one of them from senior Audeze staff. Then they spoke to senior staff and told me it was a limited time thing and the rest of what I paraphrased above.
It could very reasonably just be that the agent I was talking to joined at some point after this had happened.
I'm just going to count my blessing that I was able to get a brand new 4z at a substantial discount. It's an amazing set of headphones.
Richy Hughes
100+ Head-Fier
If anyone looking, some B-Stock 4Z in the Audeze sale now for $2499 if you're quick 
That is a real bargain.
I see the OG LCD-4 disappeared within a few minutes!
That is a real bargain.
I see the OG LCD-4 disappeared within a few minutes!
omgitsowl
New Head-Fier
Hi all, I'm new here and this seems to be the liveliest LCD-4z thread on the whole internet and here's my 4z story, sorry if it's too long.
I've had the LCD-X (2022) for a couple years now, most of the time I've used it with the RME ADI-2 and it's been ok, but you always want to improve something, some time ago I got a Schiit Mjolnir 3 and the LCD-X's sound just great with it. But you always want something even better!
Having listened in local stores all that was available from planar headphones Meze, Abyss, Audeze, DCA, HiFiMan, only a bundle of Audeze 4z and Niimbus 5pro caused some kind of response from me, it sounded like LCD-X but on steroids in the lower frequencies. However, the Diana MR sounded pretty good too, but not as tight and beefy as the 4z, but much more comfortable and light in use.
Since 4z in our region are quite expensive, about 4500-4800$ it was a problem. But after some time, I managed to get them on the secondary market in near mint condition for about 2700$, which was a real bargain. I was happy until I did a head-on comparison on my circuit, in short, the LCD-X's sounded much better and more detailed, wider and more open, i was very disappointing.
The strange thing is that Mjolnir3 is harder to drive the 4z than the X, the volume knob has to be turned from 11 o'clock to 2 or even 3 to get the same volume as the LCD-X, while the RME head-amp is a bit easier, but you still need +4-6db to get the same volume as the X.
The second interesting feature was that the 4z sounded better with the regular cable that comes with the LCD-X than with the expensive silver cable that comes with the 4z. Just a little bit, but the response in the mid-high frequencies becomes better, cymbals and violins sound a little bit more natural and brighter, and this is on a regular cable.
If I put the “silver” cable in LCD-X, then to my ears nothing changes at all.
So now I'm try to decide what to do with the 4z, try to change the ear pads to the new (maybe it helps a little), try to sell the 4z or settle down and keep them for the collection for some unknown reason.
On one hand they have great sound, great bass and not bad detail, but on the other lack of mid/high frequencies makes them quite dark, with a narrow stage and distant vocals compared to the LCD-X.
I've had the LCD-X (2022) for a couple years now, most of the time I've used it with the RME ADI-2 and it's been ok, but you always want to improve something, some time ago I got a Schiit Mjolnir 3 and the LCD-X's sound just great with it. But you always want something even better!
Having listened in local stores all that was available from planar headphones Meze, Abyss, Audeze, DCA, HiFiMan, only a bundle of Audeze 4z and Niimbus 5pro caused some kind of response from me, it sounded like LCD-X but on steroids in the lower frequencies. However, the Diana MR sounded pretty good too, but not as tight and beefy as the 4z, but much more comfortable and light in use.
Since 4z in our region are quite expensive, about 4500-4800$ it was a problem. But after some time, I managed to get them on the secondary market in near mint condition for about 2700$, which was a real bargain. I was happy until I did a head-on comparison on my circuit, in short, the LCD-X's sounded much better and more detailed, wider and more open, i was very disappointing.
The strange thing is that Mjolnir3 is harder to drive the 4z than the X, the volume knob has to be turned from 11 o'clock to 2 or even 3 to get the same volume as the LCD-X, while the RME head-amp is a bit easier, but you still need +4-6db to get the same volume as the X.
The second interesting feature was that the 4z sounded better with the regular cable that comes with the LCD-X than with the expensive silver cable that comes with the 4z. Just a little bit, but the response in the mid-high frequencies becomes better, cymbals and violins sound a little bit more natural and brighter, and this is on a regular cable.
If I put the “silver” cable in LCD-X, then to my ears nothing changes at all.
So now I'm try to decide what to do with the 4z, try to change the ear pads to the new (maybe it helps a little), try to sell the 4z or settle down and keep them for the collection for some unknown reason.
On one hand they have great sound, great bass and not bad detail, but on the other lack of mid/high frequencies makes them quite dark, with a narrow stage and distant vocals compared to the LCD-X.
Last edited:
Richy Hughes
100+ Head-Fier
Hey @omgitsowl - interesting that you dropped this here just now, someone asked me about the same comparison on the 4 thread. I hadn't actually done a proper back-to-back until this weekend. Maybe you'd find this interesting...
https://www.head-fi.org/threads/audeze-lcd-4.782442/post-18468764
The summary is that I partly know what you mean, certainly about what advantage the X has over the 4Z. However I think I found many other advantages in a head-to-head which leant towards the 4Z, when neither set were EQd. Other than the rather considerable difference in the top end, I thought the 4Z were better in most every other regard. I've resisted EQing for years, but I think I'm ready to EQ up the top end on the 4Z.
Another thing to mention is that driver response can vary quite a lot from unit to unit. If you cycle up a couple of pages on the link I offered here, you'll find a bit of discussion about this too.
With regards to power, yeah - I found myself pushing another 5dB into the 4Z. However, if you look at the specs on the Audeze site, you will find that this is expected.
https://www.head-fi.org/threads/audeze-lcd-4.782442/post-18468764
The summary is that I partly know what you mean, certainly about what advantage the X has over the 4Z. However I think I found many other advantages in a head-to-head which leant towards the 4Z, when neither set were EQd. Other than the rather considerable difference in the top end, I thought the 4Z were better in most every other regard. I've resisted EQing for years, but I think I'm ready to EQ up the top end on the 4Z.
Another thing to mention is that driver response can vary quite a lot from unit to unit. If you cycle up a couple of pages on the link I offered here, you'll find a bit of discussion about this too.
With regards to power, yeah - I found myself pushing another 5dB into the 4Z. However, if you look at the specs on the Audeze site, you will find that this is expected.
Last edited:
Most significant change in sonics is when they changed the default pads in the 2021 version of the HP. The older version certainly had the issues outlined by @omgitsowl . Many users looked to the EQ profile on roon provided by Audeze to correct it. The new pads of 2021 version largely balances out the issues with FR and I no longer need the EQ profile on roon to enjoy the headphones.
I know this personally because I initially had the old version with the original before opting in for the new pads.
The older, original version of the 4z can be identified by the yellow grilles instead of the copper mesh in the 2021 revision.
omgitsowl
New Head-Fier
Yeah, I was thinking about EQ too, although I'm not a big fan of it.
Before Mjolnir3 I used to use EQ for X to make the sound not so “flat”, but after the separate amplifier appeared, EQ disappeared by itself, for me the sound with it seemed kinda synthetic or something "not right".
Maybe with 4z the situation will be repeated and I will use EQ, or maybe I'll just get used to the fact that the sound of 4z is as it is and deal with it.
Maybe a balanced cable for them, which I will get the other day, will improve the situation.
But for now it is still a mystery to me why the 4z require so much more power from the amplifier, despite their 15 ohms, than the X does.
omgitsowl
New Head-Fier
Well, i've got a copper mesh on my 4z, but Audeze support told me that according serial number mine 4z is 2020 year.
But compare the pads on my LCD-X (2022) and the 4z, the leather on the X is stiffer, the profile is a little higher, and the pads themselves are a little stiffer.
Last edited:
LCD-X is 103db/mw sensitivity
LCD-4z is 98 db/mw sensitivity
5db difference in sensitivity is significant and means will requires a lot more power to run it.
Last edited:
Users who are viewing this thread
