after the australian importer (addicted to audio) sold its demo unit of the 4z i spoke to another seller (minidisc - probably 2nd biggest here behind the importer) who also sold their demo 4z and they are under the impression that the 4z has been discontinued.
because the 4z is still on audeze website i am wondering if it’s days are limited and/or if it is only made to order with stock levels being kept at a minimum by audeze themselves
Let's be honest, the LCD-4 fans didn't have anything new for many years.
LCD-5, MM-500 all cater to the neutral studio sound signature, not to die hard classic LCD Fans.
I'd really appreciate a new LCD release that caters to the old sound signature. However I still don't like that the old units get discontinued even before a worthy replacement from the same brand has been released.
Especially since it makes it really hard to compare any new release to the discontinued headphones at shows or dealers.
Imo LCD-4 series is already so good, that the new headphones being an upgrade is a 50/50 chance at best.
Let's be honest, the LCD-4 fans didn't have anything new for many years.
LCD-5, MM-500 all cater to the neutral studio sound signature, not to die hard classic LCD Fans.
I'd really appreciate a new LCD release that caters to the old sound signature. However I still don't like that the old units get discontinued even before a worthy replacement from the same brand has been released.
Especially since it makes it really hard to compare any new release to the discontinued headphones at shows or dealers.
Imo LCD-4 series is already so good, that the new headphones being an upgrade is a 50/50 chance at best.
LCD-5 and LCD-4/4z have such different sound signatures you can't call it a direct upgrade.
LCD-5 is more linear and neutral FR, and is all about speed. On the otherhand LCD-4 has that trademark audeze sound, is a touch slower, but places more emphasis on dynamics. I am not saying LCD-4 is slow, its just a hair less speedy than its supposed successor.
It would be fairer to compare LCD-5 with Diana TC.
I can critical listen, I can relax and chill listen, I can crank 'em up, my 4z is such an awesome headphone it would be hard to imagine how Audeze could "upgrade" their performance. Weight wise they never bother me, the new pads are superb, I just don't really have any critique or even suggestions for how to improve upon these. Maybe the only way to materially make these better would be to utilize a much more friendly pad-swapping solution if at all possible. Possibly just a smidge more mids to treble tuning to enhance sound stage to some degree?
Also the 4z have very nice detail retrieval IMHO, likely not on the level of the LCD5, but beyond adequate nonetheless. Really it all boils down to what an individual prefers to hear, and also hugely upon the components up-stream of the headphones. Having had most of the previous iterations of Audeze headphones over the years, my bias is still towards the trademark Audeze house sound with that beautiful bass. Some (a lot of reviewers LOL) seem to be all about detail retrieval above all else. Such that a lot of audiophiles seem to want to get into studio monitor type headphones like mixing engineers need to use to do their thing. Which do not yield the most listenable experience year-over-year and across all genres and quality of recordings.
I can critical listen, I can relax and chill listen, I can crank 'em up, my 4z is such an awesome headphone it would be hard to imagine how Audeze could "upgrade" their performance. Weight wise they never bother me, the new pads are superb, I just don't really have any critique or even suggestions for how to improve upon these. Maybe the only way to materially make these better would be to utilize a much more friendly pad-swapping solution if at all possible. Possibly just a smidge more mids to treble tuning to enhance sound stage to some degree?
Also the 4z have very nice detail retrieval IMHO, likely not on the level of the LCD5, but beyond adequate nonetheless. Really it all boils down to what an individual prefers to hear, and also hugely upon the components up-stream of the headphones. Having had most of the previous iterations of Audeze headphones over the years, my bias is still towards the trademark Audeze house sound with that beautiful bass. Some (a lot of reviewers LOL) seem to be all about detail retrieval above all else. Such that a lot of audiophiles seem to want to get into studio monitor type headphones like mixing engineers need to use to do their thing. Which do not yield the most listenable experience year-over-year and across all genres and quality of recordings.
Wow pretty impressive roster of gears there. But no, while attending a live event, the energy and volume and everything else present kind of overwhelms as a rule. It's all in there. Just saying that a lot of people seem really intent on getting the ultimate best detail retrieval above all else. Possibly I am interpreting that incorrectly. As an example, the newer iterations of Audeze (LCD5 etc) are more oriented towards what mixing engineers would need to work with. More clinical mid-forward presentation with much less emphasis on maintaining the previous Audeze house sound as it were. Whereas I am used to the older LCD3 pre-fazor, LCD-X, LCD4z type of presentation. Someday I would like to audition LCD5 just to personally assess that sound signature, but I really prefer overall listenability with great bass from subs to mids as a platform base to build on. Saying that, still do not want the mids scooped out for the "V" type presentation either if any of that makes sense at all.
I wonder, if audeze may follow the path of Vision Ears, that always have Duo Flagship, one for consumer (audiophile) and one for pro audio use. I can imagine it will become a really exciting news if Audeze release the successor of LCD-4 series.
I also understand that Audeze got big success with their low end model, may "shift" their focus on mass market rather create a new TOTL.
I'm still loving my LCD-4z. Sold off all my other headphones, so 4z is running solo these days. Just my type of sound. If Audeze ever did release an upgrade to this style of sound, I'd give it a demo, but it would have to be really good for me to switch.
I've never heard LCD4 in my system, so that is the only headphone that has me wondering a bit. But as I recall from my research prior to buying 4z, the sound is very similar, so that is the only reason I have not tried LCD4.
I had many audeze, LCD x, lcd 3, lcd xc and finally the lcd 4z which became my favorites, when the LCD 5 came out I made the mistake of selling the LCD 4z, I had the LCD 5 for a while, incredible ,but the I never liking the changed of the sound, too many mids, very fast, very transparent and with an incredible reading of transients, but a little hard for me, I bought the Meze Elites at the same time, also very good,but yesterday after having sold the LCDs 5 , I handed over the Meze Elites, good but very soft , a bit slow, great scene but a bit boring at the end, I got my pair of LCD 4z back, they are the headphones that more suit my liking
What I love about the LCD-4z is that it has the Audeze house sound that we fell in love with the LCD-2 back in the day, but the technical capabilities of a TOTL HP.
What I love about the LCD-4z is that it has the Audeze house sound that we fell in love with the LCD-2 back in the day, but the technical capabilities of a TOTL HP.
Hi, noticed you have Atrium C in your item list...could u please provide some comparisment thoughts with LCD4z? i aknowledge its not really fare comprarisment open vs closed but still can u copmare them in tonality, timber, speed, resolution, detail retrieval, transparacy?? do they compliment each other or similar? and sub question why did you prefer Atrium vs Verite C?
Hi, noticed you have Atrium C in your item list...could u please provide some comparisment thoughts with LCD4z? i aknowledge its not really fare comprarisment open vs closed but still can u copmare them in tonality, timber, speed, resolution, detail retrieval, transparacy?? do they compliment each other or similar? and sub question why did you prefer Atrium vs Verite C?
Atrium Closed (AC) is a great complement to the 4z. The AC is a sit-back relaxing listening experience, whereas 4z is an engaging lean-forward type of enjoyment.
Both kind of have a v-shaped sound signature in FR (on lambskin pad), but they could not sound any more different. If you like bass you’re in for a treat. Not quite the same sub bass extension as a planar, but very good attempt for a DD driver. Being a biocell driver means timbre sounds very natural. When getting AC, be conscious of the hardness of the woodcups, normally you choose which one you like the looks the most. With AC, the wood makes a significant influence to the sound signature compared to the rest of the ZMF line up. Not as significant as a pad change, but still noticeable.
4z excels in separation, clarity, imaging and detail retrieval. It is really good at dissecting the details in the mix really clearly and instruments are well separated. AC is not that far behind in those technical areas, but these details are not as laser etched and separated. Micro details pop a lot more clearly in 4z. AC focuses more on recreating the sense of atmosphere of the recording and the placement of the instruments within the stage.
AC sounds like a very open headphone despite being closed. I feel like sitting in the 5th row in a auditorium, whereas 4z is front row in comparison. Atrium Open I feel like I’m on the back row experiencing the reverb of the auditorium and its sense of mass.
I had a chance to test Verite Closed (VC) but I much preferred the relaxed nature of the AC. I felt that the intensity I could have had in the VC, I already had in the 4z. I really wanted a closed back HP that offered a relaxing, non fatiguing sound signature to complement the 4z.
Atrium Closed (AC) is a great complement to the 4z. The AC is a sit-back relaxing listening experience, whereas 4z is an engaging lean-forward type of enjoyment.
Both kind of have a v-shaped sound signature in FR (on lambskin pad), but they could not sound any more different. If you like bass you’re in for a treat. Not quite the same sub bass extension as a planar, but very good attempt for a DD driver. Being a biocell driver means timbre sounds very natural. When getting AC, be conscious of the hardness of the woodcups, normally you choose which one you like the looks the most. With AC, the wood makes a significant influence to the sound signature compared to the rest of the ZMF line up. Not as significant as a pad change, but still noticeable.
4z excels in separation, clarity, imaging and detail retrieval. It is really good at dissecting the details in the mix really clearly and instruments are well separated. AC is not that far behind in those technical areas, but these details are not as laser etched and separated. Micro details pop a lot more clearly in 4z. AC focuses more on recreating the sense of atmosphere of the recording and the placement of the instruments within the stage.
AC sounds like a very open headphone despite being closed. I feel like sitting in the 5th row in a auditorium, whereas 4z is front row in comparison. Atrium Open I feel like I’m on the back row experiencing the reverb of the auditorium and its sense of mass.
I had a chance to test Verite Closed (VC) but I much preferred the relaxed nature of the AC. I felt that the intensity I could have had in the VC, I already had in the 4z. I really wanted a closed back HP that offered a relaxing, non fatiguing sound signature to complement the 4z.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
