[boxster233]

Well, you're missing my point tho.


Point is: Human hearing seems to vary more from person to person than visuals. Because of this, there's room for more snake oil and hiding price premiums from consumers. With other electronics there are literally objective benchmarks to compare because those metrics are more generally agreed upon (pixel count, dynamic range, color accuracy, refresh rate, input latency, frames per second, etc).

RTX 3090 is 10% better than 3080 at XYZ workload.
Now, tell me how much better is the LCD-5 over the LCD-X? How do you even go about trying to objectively quantify that..?

And even now, all I know about the LCD-5 is that Currawong thinks they're a highly resolving Super HD650 (and I trust his opinion, he's a great reviewer). But to understand that, one would have had to first experienced the HD650.
Every audio review has subjective comparisons, which one would to have intimate knowledge these products to understand. Only some include measurements (which are only relevant to other measurements from the same exact setup).
In comparison, every GPU review instead has objective benchmarks comparing frames per second power, temperature, etc. People would roll their eyes if you started giving a ton of subjective impressions of a GPU.

To come full circle, Audeze could've charged $6k, had a mastering engineer on video say they prefer it over their $15k monitors and called it a day. People would've still lined up to buy them without knowing a whole lot about them. There's a psychological tendency to think items that cost more are of higher quality, and this industry seems to capitalize on that more often.

You’re making points that aren’t really that important. The nvidia analogy doesn’t work as well as things like sports cars.

 

[betula]

This has been the most diverse thread lately from banking to cars and global economy issues.
It is all interesting, but what about all those poor dudes who come here for information about the LCD5? I think they don't necessarily want to read through all of this.

 

[adrianm]

You’re making points that aren’t really that important. The nvidia analogy doesn’t work as well as things like sports cars.

I think they're all valid points, coming from someone who sees most recent flagships as overpriced, but didn't bat an eye on buying a 3080 TI for 1.6k, purely for gaming, not mining. The metrics that add up to a pleasant gaming experience are easily quantifiable (an 80% increase for me), while in the audio industry things are a lot more opaque, and let's face it, 80% of stuff out there are just " different" , not "better ".
The LCD-5 do seem objectively better than the 4, not only the X.

 

[dfiled]

Amen

This has been the most diverse thread lately from banking to cars and global economy issues.
It is all interesting, but what about all those poor dudes who come here for information about the LCD5? I think they don't necessarily want to read through all of this.

 

[ThanatosVI]

I think they're all valid points, coming from someone who sees most recent flagships as overpriced, but didn't bat an eye on buying a 3080 TI for 1.6k, purely for gaming, not mining. The metrics that add up to a pleasant gaming experience are easily quantifiable (an 80% increase for me), while in the audio industry things are a lot more opaque, and let's face it, 80% of stuff out there are just " different" , not "better ".
The LCD-5 do seem objectively better than the 4, not only the X.

Actually it seems like the LCD-5 is just different from the LCD-4 not objectively better.

 

[thermos]

Actually it seems like the LCD-5 is just different from the LCD-4 not objectively better.

I guess it depends what you are looking for, to me they are clearly objectively better. I just got a pair of 5s and have been listening, and they are much more resolving than my 4z and much more tonally accurate. Mind bendingly good to me. Again, I am a mastering engineer so accuracy is really important to me. I have been eqing previous Audeze to make them work for mastering, and they did wonderfully. However, when you have a headphone thats this close to tonally accurate already its just a better tool.

Listening to a song I've heard probably 300 times, I hear ADC converter clipping on the master in places I never heard it before. Actually I kind of hear it the whole time, its nuts! So along with the tonally more accurate picture of the 5s, they seem to just present more detail. To me that means objectively better.

I could see how some would prefer the laid back Audeze house sound of 5 years ago, but man these are just technically so superior. These are CRBN, really next level for Audeze.

Also, the low end is amazing. Not a concern at ALL.

 

[Alcophone]

Listening to a song I've heard probably 300 times, I hear ADC converter clipping on the master in places I never heard it before. Actually I kind of hear it the whole time, its nuts!

Can you share a few songs on streaming services where you notice these issues, ideally with timestamps?

 

[thermos]

Can you share a few songs on streaming services where you notice these issues, ideally with timestamps?

Aphex Twin Syro, basically hear ADC converter clipping the whole time. I also used to clip converters to get level so I know what that sound is. Most of the time you can do so transparently and no one will hear it, and I always heard it in spots on this record for sure. But now I can hear it essentially the whole record on the 5s. Not only that but electrical hum that was faint before is now completely clear, basically every detail of every track. It's NUTS.

That's one record. I have a few other records I listen to that I was involved with on some kind of level that I always reference, and again I hear more artifacts than I have in the 10-15 years I've been using them for reference. I really can't say these are just different than past Audeze, they are clearly way way way way better.

 

[PeteSTRADAMUS]

Stop making me want to build amps I'll never have time to finish. I still have boards here for amps from years ago.

The interesting thing is, I hadn't expected, say, Fleetwood Mac to be a good match, but it is pretty good with the LCD-5, mainly because of the excellent bass. But it comes with the same issues of having a "flat" tuning, in that I wish that there was a bit more sparkle in the highs. I'm one of those people who prefers a slight drop at 4kHz. Otherwise vocals and instruments sound "forward" in an uncomfortable way to me -- a bit too "raw".

Thanks. The stand was from Codia in South Korea, but they no longer make them last I checked.

Not yet. The penalty for getting a review out faster is that I don't get to cover everything I would have liked to.

I figured that I'm going to have a mix of people watching, from newer people to those who had "been around the block" so-to-speak, so I dropped that summary in there for the latter to quickly figure out whether or not to drop the $$ or not.

I think my pair must be softening up a bit (or else my head is) because it is bothering me less than it did before.

Ha! Not quite, but that is pretty funny. I don't pay any attention to timestamps except for chapter markers and video length. The original takes added up to close to 30 minutes before I cut out all the unnecessarily stuff.

Currawong, how did clarity and detail compare to Susvara?????

 

[PeteSTRADAMUS]

This has been the most diverse thread lately from banking to cars and global economy issues.
It is all interesting, but what about all those poor dudes who come here for information about the LCD5? I think they don't necessarily want to read through all of this.

Hahaha. Yes, we covered almost everything.

 

[Securitiesfraud]

Currawong, how did clarity and detail compare to Susvara?????

That's something I would really like to know

 

[04gto]

I guess it depends what you are looking for, to me they are clearly objectively better. I just got a pair of 5s and have been listening, and they are much more resolving than my 4z and much more tonally accurate. Mind bendingly good to me. Again, I am a mastering engineer so accuracy is really important to me. I have been eqing previous Audeze to make them work for mastering, and they did wonderfully. However, when you have a headphone thats this close to tonally accurate already its just a better tool.

Listening to a song I've heard probably 300 times, I hear ADC converter clipping on the master in places I never heard it before. Actually I kind of hear it the whole time, its nuts! So along with the tonally more accurate picture of the 5s, they seem to just present more detail. To me that means objectively better.

I could see how some would prefer the laid back Audeze house sound of 5 years ago, but man these are just technically so superior. These are CRBN, really next level for Audeze.

Also, the low end is amazing. Not a concern at ALL.

Thank you for this. Moderate speculation and guessing is fun for a little while, but enough. The discussion needed this. Not only from an individual who uses headphones in his profession. But also from someone (like myself) WHO HAS ACTUALLY HEARD them and is not just talking from a hole on their backside. Hopefully sometime soon I will own a set and be able to truly appreciate all that the LCD-5 can offer.

 

[arrakian]

… it may ruin me. My music and sources will be turned to crap because I'll discover every little flaw possible

The only thing really wrong with seeing flaws is when you feel you have to correct every one of them. There is an album I like that obviously either the mastering, or recordin engineer didn’t know what they were doing (highs are terrible). I’m still able to look past that F-up and enjoy the music (just reduce the treble).

 

[arrakian]

Thank you for your review, @Currawong. Funny how the Hugo2 is the only trans/portable in your mix to push the LCD-5. And here I was thinking the Hugo3 should have more “umph”.

 

[Undun]

Thank you for your review, @Currawong. Funny how the Hugo2 is the only trans/portable in your mix to push the LCD-5. And here I was thinking the Hugo3 should have more “umph”.

Hugo3??