Hypothetically speaking, if one were to EQ LCD-4 to match LCD-5 in tonality, they are both equally transparent and resolving, but where LCD-5 will pull ahead is in clarity so some micro details come through better on LCD-5 than they do on LCD-4. LCD-5 also has a more natural soundstage (spherical) and more focused. LCD-4 has slightly more bass quantity than LCD-5 but LCD-5 has slightly better bass quality. LCD-5 is a bit more punchy in the mids. I would not call LCD-4 muddy with or without EQ if properly driven (but then I am biased)I think calling the LCD-4 muddy after listening to the LCD-5 is a bit much. LCD4 is one of the lowest distortion headphones in the world. It simply has a big depression in the upper mids/lower treble which makes it sound more subdued. I have EQed my LCD4 with fantastic results.
Audiophiles always seem to exaggerate the improvements with every new release. With EQ my guess is that the LCD4 and LCD5 will be very very close in performance.
@KMann can shed some light on this if he chooses.
For example my ''lowly'' HD800S from an RME ADI2 matches the detail levels of my SR009S (from the Carbon amp). The only big difference is in the bass where the electrostatic driver (with EQ ) has bottomless bass extension which the HD800S cannot match.
Almost everything I describe above were a result of conscious effort we made to improve on LCD-4. The earpads play a big role in this to reduce reflections and so do the new magnetic circuit design that has increased spacing that improves imaging and clarity and the parallel uniforce trace patterns that not only help us reduce impedance but it also has added benifit of smoother treble also reduces the rigidity of the diaphragm.
Last edited: