[dfiled]

I've shot an LCD-5 vs. Susvara video. As is only appropriate, people who are supporting my video reviews get to see it first.

I’m looking forward to this video with great anticipation. Do you know when you’ll be making is available to the general public?

 

[KMann]

Even if you don't use Harman as a target for design, it seems this one is your closest yet.

I am sure, not too late in the future, a site or two will make the measurement, then 'predict' a preference score and suggest a EQ curve to get a perfect score. It is quite possible LCD-5 will get less than stellar score just because the bass shelf was not matched or treble beyond 6khz was not matched exactly.

Most standard rigs with anthropometric pinna, when there is a good seal would have measurements that are representative of how a headphone sounds up to about 3khz, if you ignore the bass shelf on Harman curve (that listeners preferred virtualized via their non planar headphone, not necessarily known for their bass performance), a subjectively flat response will indeed sound close to the Harman target without bass shelf through about 3khz (i.e., near perfect flat bass which starts to gradually increase till you hit about 3kHz) there is no surprise there. Measurements beyond 3kHz of what is subjectively flat varies quite a bit with both headphone and measurement rigs, and the Harman target even on 45CA is not representative of this as there is not enough body of knowledge based on real headphones (not virtual) to support such claims.

 

[chargedcapacitor]

@chargedcapacitor

How would you compare the MX4 to the LCD5?

Aside from what I've already mentioned in my previous impressions of the two, the LCD-5 has MUCH better dynamics. It's the most immediately obvious difference between the two, besides the LCD-5's increase in mid energy. Percussions hit much harder; even at lower volumes the LCD-5 beats the MX4 in that regard. The LCD-R was the same way, so maybe it has to do with the new parallel uniforce technology. The LCD-5 also presents vocals in a much cleaner and lifelike way, in my opinion. Other major differences between the two could be explained by differences in FR, which is very subjective. Over all, the LCD-5 sounds more detailed and neutral.

 

[All Day Breakfast]

I don't know if the earpads and band have broken in or I have become accustomed to the clamp force, but I now find the LCD-5 more comfortable than I did at first. I can wear them for longer sessions with less fatigue than I could with my LCD-R's. My only gripe is wiping the earpads after use isn't as quick and easy due to the inward curved cups.

Curiously I’ve just been watching Andrew Park’s latest YouTube post and he’s wearing the LCD 5 and had earlier reported the clamping force to be too much but, he said in the video, after wearing them 2 hours straight they were quite alright and felt they were comfortable enough and would be for most people.

 

[joe]

Sorry for any confusion guys. It was earlier in the thread. If your post is still up, you're good.

 

[dcguy73]

My daily driver is also currently a HE1000SE, which I bought about 6 months ago. I absolutely LOVE them! I have a Schitt Lokius, which allows me to EQ any track very easily and quickly to my exact preference.

Anyway, to the matter at hand: I have an LCD-5 on order (Audeze have said I will be the first person in the UK with them).

For me, comfort is very important.

As a (formerly?) fellow fan of the HE1000se, who had a chance to try the LCD-5, answer me this if you would be so kind:

Should I stick with what I know and love and basically go with an ignorance is bliss approach and just cancel my order for the LCD-5?

For context, I got the Susvara on home trial a few months ago - and I know this is heresy around these parts - but I preferred the HE1000se and sent the Susvara back.

Right now, I am very happy with my current setup and honestly it sounds like endgame stuff to me (once it's all set up correctly). And by endgame I mean I cannot currently imagine a better sound experience than I have and I don't feel anything is lacking in any area.

I put in an order for the LCD-5 mainly because I felt I just HAD to hear the new headphone on the block. And then if they impressed me enough, I would keep them. If not, Audeze's 30 day returns policy would be put to use.

However, it sounds like from your experience with LCD-5 that because the tuning is so different to the Hifiman sound, there is a not-insignificant chance that Audeze's latest creation will ruin the enjoyment I am currently getting from the HE1000se, which are relatively new cans for me.

So what do reckon I should do?

Stick with what I have and ride off into the sunset for as long as that might last, or go ahead and run the chance of ruining the HE1000se sound for myself, then try to recoup the costs by selling it for maybe 60% of what I paid, and then be left with the LCD-5, which is the superior headphone, but would need a few grand to make up the difference in cost and also less comfortable.

Or would it make sense for one to keep both? I would be happy to do that if they both work well in tandem, each one doing something different enough from each other to justify owning both, but neither 'ruining' the sound of the other.

What are you currently thinking for yourself? Keep both? Sell the HE1000se? Return the LCD-5?

Cheers!

Gosh, don’t cancel your order on account of one person’s opinion, especially mine. I’m not a professional reviewer and I certainly don’t play one on TV.

It’s more of a vanilla and chocolate thing, two different flavors of headphones. One is not necessarily better than the other.

I’m not about to sell the HE-1000SE on account of owning the LCD-5. I think they complement each other nicely. If I want to be closer to the sound and have it be softer and more romanticized, I pick up the HE-1000SE. If I want to step back a little from the sound and hear music in a more balanced way, I pick up the LCD-5.

You’ve got the Lokius, so you’re good. The LCD-5 responds extremely well to EQ.

 

[Resolve]

a site or two will make the measurement, then 'predict' a preference score and suggest a EQ curve to get a perfect score

This is something I asked Dr. Olive about in the live stream we did recently. In my view there are situations where you could have more deviation (scoring worse in predicted preference), but actually having a better received result simply because you balance out a set of boosted harmonics with additional deviations. I can think of a number of real-world examples of this, where a deviation at say 3khz or 5khz would sound significantly worse if there wasn't also an additional deviation above that. Obviously I can't be sure of this without having done the kind of testing needed, but this is one of the reasons why I don't do the preference score thing. I'll have to watch it back and see what he said but if I recall he seemed to indicate that the statistical model didn't have the granularity to be able to account for some of these things, and maybe applied more to deviations in wider bands.

 

[betula]

I do not know. All these talks about measurements, targets, graphs... I get the idea of pursuing objectivity, but is objectivity not a mirage when it comes to summit-fi headphones? Witnessing all the different tastes in summit-fi, objectivity might be a mirage imo regardless how that Harman curve bends.

 

[jlbrach]

I must admit, I am immediately turned off when the conversation comes to measurements...sure, I want to know how easy or difficult it is to drive a HP or how much power an amp can output but in terms of how a HP sounds or what people like I couldnt care less how it measures....much of my favorite equipment measures pooely and some of the best measuring equipment to me sounds awful...I am glad that all HP's are tuned differently and that a person can choose an abyss TC sound over a susvara sound etc...I am not interested in EQ'ing one HP to sound like another either,otherwise I would buy the other HP....we all hear things differently no matter the measurement and we all have different preferences...that is good

 

[Resolve]

I must admit, I am immediately turned off when the conversation comes to measurements...sure, I want to know how easy or difficult it is to drive a HP or how much power an amp can output but in terms of how a HP sounds or what people like I couldnt care less how it measures....much of my favorite equipment measures pooely and some of the best measuring equipment to me sounds awful...I am glad that all HP's are tuned differently and that a person can choose an abyss TC sound over a susvara sound etc...I am not interested in EQ'ing one HP to sound like another either,otherwise I would buy the other HP....we all hear things differently no matter the measurement and we all have different preferences...that is good

One thing to keep in mind is that frequency response targets (of any kind) are not there to say "you should like this". You like what you like. It's just that if you're trying to figure out whether you'll like something before you buy it, seeing how a headphone measures in relation to a known reference point - a target of some kind - helps you do that. For example, Jude showed the LCD-5 in relation to the Sennheiser HD650 on the B&K 5128 rig. Now, you don't have to like the HD650, but it gives you a reference point for the LCD-5's balance relative to a widely known headphone. Moreover, that measurement also doesn't suggest that the LCD-5 should have been tuned to match the HD650. It's merely there to help us get some indication of its relative tonal balance before hearing it.

With evaluations that use Harman, you can treat it the same way - just with a reference curve that we know most people prefer (that's anchored to flat-measuring speakers in a room), rather than a given headphone. This doesn't mean all headphones have to match the target or that all headphones should be tuned in the same way or with the same audience in mind.

 

[Tachyon88]

@Resolve I feel exactly the same way, but no point in responding to someone who doesn't care about understanding things.

 

[Resolve]

@Resolve I feel exactly the same way, but no point in responding to someone who doesn't care about understanding things.

Well... I'm not sure that's the case, but for me it would actually feel better to be able to communicate with someone who was resistant to the idea, otherwise there's no opportunity for shared dialogue or progress haha.

 

[Tachyon88]

Well... I'm not sure that's the case, but for me it would actually feel better to be able to communicate with someone who was resistant to the idea, otherwise there's no opportunity for shared dialogue or progress haha.

Where old school and the new school collide !

 

[jlbrach]

One thing to keep in mind is that frequency response targets (of any kind) are not there to say "you should like this". You like what you like. It's just that if you're trying to figure out whether you'll like something before you buy it, seeing how a headphone measures in relation to a known reference point - a target of some kind - helps you do that. For example, Jude showed the LCD-5 in relation to the Sennheiser HD650 on the B&K 5128 rig. Now, you don't have to like the HD650, but it gives you a reference point for the LCD-5's balance relative to a widely known headphone. Moreover, that measurement also doesn't suggest that the LCD-5 should have been tuned to match the HD650. It's merely there to help us get some indication of its relative tonal balance before hearing it.

With evaluations that use Harman, you can treat it the same way - just with a reference curve that we know most people prefer (that's anchored to flat-measuring speakers in a room), rather than a given headphone. This doesn't mean all headphones have to match the target or that all headphones should be tuned in the same way or with the same audience in mind.

fair enough, if the measurements are used to give a generic outlook that is fine...like saying one car has a harder ride while another is more cushy...fair enough...but when people write reviews that are wedded completely to measurements I immediately stop reading(one particular group)...I think measurements in audio equipment have become a crutch..with some reviewers and people I get the sense that they look at charts,decide the HP is good or bad before listening and then write the review to justify the measurements,FWIIW I do not have an issue with measurements in general nor am I one who will not listen...I am really referring to the extreme

 

[KMann]

This is something I asked Dr. Olive about in the live stream we did recently. In my view there are situations where you could have more deviation (scoring worse in predicted preference), but actually having a better received result simply because you balance out a set of boosted harmonics with additional deviations. I can think of a number of real-world examples of this, where a deviation at say 3khz or 5khz would sound significantly worse if there wasn't also an additional deviation above that. Obviously I can't be sure of this without having done the kind of testing needed, but this is one of the reasons why I don't do the preference score thing. I'll have to watch it back and see what he said but if I recall he seemed to indicate that the statistical model didn't have the granularity to be able to account for some of these things, and maybe applied more to deviations in wider bands.

I was listening in on the live stream too thanks for doing it.

It is not a question of the preference score can be manipulated in some way by cancelling out deviations in on part of the spectrum with others. The underlying issue is much more basic than that. The preference score assumes, a measured deviation for a headphone is close to the subjective deviation, what is the margin of error across headphones in how they deviate from a target on a given measurement rig from subjective/perceived differences? This cannot be evaluated using a single headphone that just mimics other headphones (https://www.aes.org/e-lib/browse.cfm?elib=16874) like most of the Harman studies do. More studies like those conducted by Christensen, Anders (https://www.aes.org/e-lib/browse.cfm?elib=16877) are needed. Where a set of headphones of different types were measured on a measurement rig and on real human heads at the ear drum and the EQ to a target curve based on a measurement rig were compared to EQ made from real heads. If EQ based on a measurement rig to a target curve are to be trusted, the study should have shown it would not matter if it is based on real heads or a measurement rig. While I do not say the study is complete since current measurement rigs have advanced, the study concluded:

In closing, the acoustic influence of the headphone can only be removed if the equalization is based on individual measurement of its transfer function. The measurements are similar across human subjects up to about 2 kHz, but from 2 to 10 kHz the variation increases from about 2 dB to 10 dB. Our dummy head measurements are similar to the real-ear measurements up to 3-4 kHz, but in the region 5-8 kHz we found that they over-estimate the average real-ear response by approximately 5 dB.