[InstantSilence]

That's a great comparison and mostly I agree too!

Except about your power "problem". I don't think what makes both different is because your amp need less power to drive them. But they are different because they simply not the same headphone, different driver system (even though perhaps the diaphragm exactly the same) and different tuning.

Not to mention both LCD 4 series have significant different impedance, which is one amp may behave differently when drive each of them. (There is an amp that produce much ampere at low impedance but low voltage for high impedance headphone and vice versa).

Comfort wise, true, 4Z is more similar to MX4 in this regard, which is much more acceptable for me than LCD-4.

Also, I don't think LCD-4 is fully above 4Z in term of sound quality. They have their own advantage, just at different part. Personally coming from Diana V2, I feel midrange is more accurate at 4Z rather 4.

How do the abyss cans sound in comparison, I love the low treble dip in 4z but I also love the resolution

 

[TheMiddleSky]

How do the abyss cans sound in comparison, I love the low treble dip in 4z but I also love the resolution

My plan was to use 4Z for some hours before AB with Diana, however because you ask, so now I do quick swap to Abyss. First thing I notice: OMG how light Diana is!

Diana has "harder hitting impact" through all spectrum (treble mid bass), but quantity wise from lower treble to upper mid, Audeze slight offering more. At not so good recording, 4Z will pronounce "sharp" sounding more than Diana. Although the different is not much. At excellent recording (kind of chesky record), the difference seems minimal here.

Upper bass and lower midrange is thicker at 4Z as we all can expect. Both give full body sound, but audeze is thicker. At the center of midrange Diana is fuller though.

Both rather intimate sounding, but Diana perform with more spacious soundstage both depth and width, while audeze produce bigger instrument feel (hopefully make sense to you).

 

[sahmen]

I have the LCD4 in dark ebony wood and the 4z to do a direct comparisons. I have the option of keeping one.

The 4z is more energetic and forward in the mids and highs. For electronic music I am in favour of the LCD4 however the 4z gives the impression of better resolution because of the bump in top-mid presence. The LCD4 has a wider soundstage than the 4z, this is immediately noticeable. The LCD4 feels expansive and 4z intimate in comparison.

The problem with the 4z as I see it is that it is too easy to drive. The LCD4 can draw a lot of power and as a result it scales to the point you can feel this power. That is not to say the 4z does not scale from better sources also but I can't drive the pot of the amp to the 12-3 o'clock range or 2/3 range where most sources operate best because the 4z gets so loud so quickly. Where as with the LCD4 I can comfortably drive them with the intended range of the source. What this means in terms of what it does to the sound is evident straight away but I'm not knowledgeable enough to explain what it's actually doing. It's as if the LCD4 can make use of this power where as the 4z cannot and this is why the 4z was designed to run off low powered devices. When driving the LCD4 into the 2/3 range of the source the bass is visceral, it is a different experience than the 4z. It rumbles, it kicks, it pounds, it feels physical and I don't get this sensation with the 4z. The soundstage opens up in a way that the 4z does not.

The weight difference between the 4z and LCD4 is substantial. For longer listening sessions the 4z is a better choice however I have a neck rest on my chair and when I'm sitting on my couch it's not really an issue. Personally I wouldn't wear the 4z or LCD4 for more than a couple hours. They're both heavy but the LCD4 much more so.

So in the end I think the 4z offers a different flavour but personally I think the LCD4 does offer better sound quality if you have a good amp or source.

So you have both cans to test on your own rigs so that you can choose one of them? Sounds like this is one of those "let your ears be your guide" moments. In a sense you're very lucky to have this opportunity. I also had to make the choice between these two, but without having heard either of them in person, i.e.by flying blind, since I was ordering by mail. I chose the 4 partly for reasons of the higher impedance and the wider soundstage you have mentioned, but I would have ideally liked to hear both of them first.

Luckily, the 4 turned out to be very pleasing to my ears, with no downsides for me. The weight does not bother me at all, as I can listen to it for several hours each day (on consecutive days, if I like), without ever feeling any strain. My main concern has become rather guarding against too frequent use, in order to slow down the inevitable "wear and tear" process, so I am happy to have other comparably excellent alternative options that enable me to rotate cans.

With all that said, I still remain curious about the sound of the 4z, although the sense I get is that it might have more in common with the 4 than not, regardless of what genuine differences might distinguish one from the other.

 

[mixman]

That's a great comparison and mostly I agree too!

Except about your power "problem". I don't think what makes both different is because your amp need less power to drive them. But they are different because they simply not the same headphone, different driver system (even though perhaps the diaphragm exactly the same) and different tuning.

Not to mention both LCD 4 series have significant different impedance, which is one amp may behave differently when drive each of them. (There is an amp that produce much ampere at low impedance but low voltage for high impedance headphone and vice versa).

Comfort wise, true, 4Z is more similar to MX4 in this regard, which is much more acceptable for me than LCD-4.

Also, I don't think LCD-4 is fully above 4Z in term of sound quality. They have their own advantage, just at different part. Personally coming from Diana V2, I feel midrange is more accurate at 4Z rather 4.

While I agree with the tonal assessments that the 4z is more energetic in the upper mids, I do think ultimately the 4 has slightly better resolution. I heard more clarity with the 4 than with the 4z. I was a big fan of the 4z before my comparison, but after if I ever purchased a 4/4z I would have to go with the 4, despite the added weight and the difficulty of driving it.

 

[SteveM324]

I heard both at Axpona before making a purchase. I liked the 4z better than the 4 because I preferred its midrange and imaging by a slight margin. Later that year, I bought the 4z. Since then, I've had the chance to compare the two in my system and I think I made the right choice for my preferences. The weight difference of about 135g is significant to me. I feel that the 4z is heavy at 600g so I won't be buying a headphone that weighs more than it.

 

[TheMiddleSky]

Between 4 and 4Z definitely a tough call, and I'm fully understand if one person prefer one to each other.

One definite plus point for 4 is it has more euphonic sound that super easy to enjoy. While at 4Z, the more accurate midrange tonality can be an advantage too.

Let's say I listen to 10 female singer (Norah Jones, Diana Krall, Patricia Barber, Jennifer Warnes, Inge Marie, Katie Melua, Rebecca Pidgeon ,Sara K, etc, well you know, the usual "female voice club"), while both headphones perform really well, but I can listen truer to the singer with 4Z.

With 4 I can differentiate each singer easily, but there's always that LCD-4 kind of character that stick with each singer's voice. Some may called this as 4Z has less coloration than 4 in midrange section. But, at the same time, like I wrote above, 4Z also has less soulful effect compare to 4.

note: both are LCD 4 series, so actually the differences are not that much.

 

[SteveM324]

Between 4 and 4Z definitely a tough call, and I'm fully understand if one person prefer one to each other.

One definite plus point for 4 is it has more euphonic sound that super easy to enjoy. While at 4Z, the more accurate midrange tonality can be an advantage too.

Let's say I listen to 10 female singer (Norah Jones, Diana Krall, Patricia Barber, Jennifer Warnes, Inge Marie, Katie Melua, Rebecca Pidgeon ,Sara K, etc, well you know, the usual "female voice club"), while both headphones perform really well, but I can listen truer to the singer with 4Z.

With 4 I can differentiate each singer easily, but there's always that LCD-4 kind of character that stick with each singer's voice. Some may called this as 4Z has less coloration than 4 in midrange section. But, at the same time, like I wrote above, 4Z also has less soulful effect compare to 4.

note: both are LCD 4 series, so actually the differences are not that much.

I agree. I'm big on female vocals and in fact, I'm a big fan of Jennifer Warnes, Rebecca Pidgeon, Patricia Barber, Diana Krall, Sara K and Norah Jones. I haven't listened to Katie Melua or Inge Marie so I'll have to check them out if they're available on Qobuz. I also like Jacintha, Melody Gardot, and Linda Ronstadt.

 

[TheMiddleSky]

I agree. I'm big on female vocals and in fact, I'm a big fan of Jennifer Warnes, Rebecca Pidgeon, Patricia Barber, Diana Krall, Sara K and Norah Jones. I haven't listened to Katie Melua or Inge Marie so I'll have to check them out if they're available on Qobuz. I also like Jacintha, Melody Gardot, and Linda Ronstadt.

Haha seems like we listen to pretty much same singers. I also know Jacintha and Linda as well. Will try to search for Melody Gartot.

Back to headphones, Diana V2 is definitely at more midcentric type compare to 4Z, and make them different enough to excel at different songs. However, I found one song that I really like since few months ago that sound goddess at both headphones!

 

[cangle]

Does anyone use the 4z with the thx mass drop 789

Yes I do and I have the RME ADI-2 as my dac. What would you like to know?

 

[koven]

I agree. I'm big on female vocals and in fact, I'm a big fan of Jennifer Warnes, Rebecca Pidgeon, Patricia Barber, Diana Krall, Sara K and Norah Jones. I haven't listened to Katie Melua or Inge Marie so I'll have to check them out if they're available on Qobuz. I also like Jacintha, Melody Gardot, and Linda Ronstadt.

Sophie Milman is another good vocalists in this category..

 

[SteveM324]

Sophie Milman is another good vocalists in this category..

Thanks for the recommendation! I see a few of her albums on Qobuz so I'll take a listen tonight.

 

[SupperTime]

would anyone say the hugo 2 is too bright for the 4z? or sharpt peaky treble?
i wonder if most folks that have the 4z if they use portable stuff or desktop..

 

[Jon L]

Haha seems like we listen to pretty much same singers. I also know Jacintha and Linda as well. Will try to search for Melody Gartot.

Might like some Laura Marling then.

 

[Kozwoz]

It's very difficult to choose between the 4z and LCD4... The 4z is without a doubt brighter and the LCD4 as @TheMiddleSky said more euphonic. I don't find the LCD4 bright at all and a lot of my complaints about the 4z being too forward are non existent on the LCD4. The 4z sounds more resolving to my ears due to increased clarity in the upper mids even with a smaller soundstage and less depth compared to the LCD4.

I think in reality both headphones need a lot of power. Yes you can plug the 4z into your phone and it sounds OK but I think it still needs a powerful amp - above 1W. The difference between playing the 4z off a low powered device and a capable amp is huge IMO. I think this becomes even more important if you choose to EQ either of these headphones as good gain structure is essential. If you want boost the low end you'l have cut the pre-gain to compensate for clipping and then you'l want more from your amp and this isn't something that can be achieved easily from a low powered device. These headphones totally transform with EQ and you can really push them in this regard and they won't distort.

If I choose the LCD4 they'l never leave my desk and if keep the 4z they'l never reach their real potential using a low powered device. Also - theres nothing portable about having to carry around a source and an amp and headphones that are too big and or fragile to put in your bag. If anything I think the 4z looks sexier than the LCD4. I have the new ebony wood iteration of the LCD4 and the wood is so dark that it almost looks like plastic.

 

[TheMiddleSky]

Might like some Laura Marling then.

oh wow, she has seductive vocal indeed, also the recording quality is great, despite only youtube file