[franz12]

I picked up a Cavali Tube Hybrid also but haven't tried it yet. I did some testing between Ether C Flow, HD800S and LCD-X on a Jotunheim with Pro-Ject S2 DAC and MQA files. Also tried them with the Meridian 2 DAC and MQA files. Didn't care for the sound signature of the Ether C compared to the other 2. Like I said though, the sheer power of the Rag opened them up and I'd like to think the Yggdrasil had something to do with it as well. The Ygg/Rag combo is perfect for the Ether C Flow. I had the Hugo 2 also and didn't care for the way it presents music. Too cold and sterile which is even worse for the Ether C Flow IMO.

yup. I can imagine that it does not pair well with Jotunheim. It needs some tube magic or something similar to inject a life into it.

 

[llamaluv]

Cavalli tube hybrid transformed ether c flow to another level

The Ygg/Rag combo is perfect for the Ether C Flow

It needs some tube magic

I want to "amplify" the point about the Ether C Flow opening up with tube amps. When sticking to solid state, I almost wanted to return them. On the Kenzie Encore, they sound just gorgeous. I now have them hooked up to a WA8 at work, and it's currently my favorite setup. Makes me continuously want to turn up the volume.

 

[davidimdpt]

I'm currently using a lyr 3 with a bimby and the Ethers sound great with this combo but the 4Z sounds even better.

 

[franz12]

I'm currently using a lyr 3 with a bimby and the Ethers sound great with this combo but the 4Z sounds even better.

No doubt. It is Audeze's flagship at 4k. I am looking forward to hearing it, but unfortunately, my 4k should be poured into buying good speakers. I will wait until its price hits somewhere around 2k-2.5k

 

[2thfixr]

Burn in shmurn in... I listened to a well burned in set of Ether C flows at the Schiitr and they sounded the same as the new pair I had. Not my cup of tea with anything other than the Yggy/Rag combo. Haven’t tried them with a tube amp so can’t comment on that but I’d imagine it would sound better.

In all fairness Rob didn't burn in the ethers for more than a few hours if I recall before deciding to return them. He felt that way with his new X but decided to burn them in for significantly more hours because he liked a pair of X's that he had previously. After the burn in he liked it a lot more. I think he didn't give his either CS enough time. The reviews mostly concur that the ether c flows are better than the XC and the flows better than the X. I do still like my ether C flows for their accurate neutral sound but the LCD 4 Z has a very musical warm sound that is also very detailed that is very pleasing.

 

[davidimdpt]

lol

 

[XERO1]

The LCD-4Z page on the Audeze website is up!

https://www.audeze.com/products/lcd-collection/lcd-4z

 

[Eduardo C]

Good. Now I only need to know the weight in order to make a decision.

 

[llamaluv]

Well, the weight of the LCD-MX4 was listed on the Audeze website (briefly -- it's since removed) at 570 grams, so I wouldn't be expecting anything too dramatic...

 

[2thfixr]

Well, the weight of the LCD-MX4 was listed on the Audeze website (briefly -- it's since removed) at 570 grams, so I wouldn't be expecting anything too dramatic...

It’s not. The 4Z is still a heavy headphone. IMO the point of the 4Z is for those that need portability and/or low impedence. That’s it. It’s not that light it’s just better for use outside of the home. The gimbals are beefier, finish is more durable, slightly smaller so more portable and a touch lighter. It’s not feather light by any means so don’t expect a plastic body HD650 on your head.

 

[514077]

Anyone conserned about the possibility of driver failure? Remember the 100 ohm drivers. And now, there's a radically new 15-ohm release. If in the event I can eventually afford it, there'll be time to get a feel for the durability of the product. Good luck.

 

[Nautrachkfriend]

Anyone conserned about the possibility of driver failure? Remember the 100 ohm drivers. And now, there's a radically new 15-ohm release. If in the event I can eventually afford it, there'll be time to get a feel for the durability of the product. Good luck.

On the official Audeze website it says, "The LCD-4z features our most advanced diaphragm design; our exclusive nano-scale film actually weighs less than the air it displaces." So yeah I'm kind of worried about what the durability will be like. It's kind of crazy to think of how thin of a substance is actually being used in these headphones. Seems like if something was that thin it would be very easily breakable... I'm not a scientist by any means, just my thoughts. - I could be entirely wrong too, maybe it's the strongest material known to man.

 

[MikeRight]

The LCD-4Z page on the Audeze website is up!

https://www.audeze.com/products/lcd-collection/lcd-4z

Thanks for the link.
Again the info published by Audeze is so confused for me.

Firstly they write: "the LCD-4z maintains the sound signature of LCD-4".
and then "This model does not replace the original 200 ohm LCD-4, but offers a perfect solution for users seeking more head room".

I think this point is the most important one.
Is the sound signature maintained or not?
Are any differences between the 4Z with wood finish and the 4Z with the magneisum one?

I think we will need more reviews to know that

 

[514077]

Thanks for the link.
Again the info published by Audeze is so confused for me.

Firstly they write: "the LCD-4z maintains the sound signature of LCD-4".
and then "This model does not replace the original 200 ohm LCD-4, but offers a perfect solution for users seeking more head room".

I think this point is the most important one.
Is the sound signature maintained or not?
Are any differences between the 4Z with wood finish and the 4Z with the magneisum one?

I think we will need more reviews to know that

That line could mean: "Don't think you're gonna get us to replace your 200 ohms drivers with 15 ohm ones. Different ballpark, friends."

 

[XERO1]

I would be surprised if there were any significant differences is SQ between the 4 and the 4Z. I think the 4Z is intended to be a more ‘DAP friendly’ version of the difficult-to-drive 4.