TheFrator
100+ Head-Fier
I have a Mojo 2 arriving later this week and plan to test my pair on them. Will let you know.
Audeze LCD-5 Review, Measurements, Interview
- Thread starter jude
- Start date
shwnwllms
1000+ Head-Fier
It’s up to Roon to include them in a future update (which historically can take time). You can use the convolution files that KMann posted and just create a new convolution filter in Roon (or your software EQ filter of choice) in the meantime.
Asking you guys first. I found the LCD5 to excel in 90s hip hop. It accentuates vocals (mid forward) and is amazing for slam and realistic drum timbre.
Is the Meze Elites better than the LCD for this specific genre? Which one portrays vocals better? Thanks.
Is the Meze Elites better than the LCD for this specific genre? Which one portrays vocals better? Thanks.
I have hugo2 and I tried LCD-5 with it. I think it sounds pretty good. But note I'm not the camp that thinks "you can't use 5k headphones with your phone". I use Susvara straight out of computer headphone jack and I think it sounds pretty beautiful too.
Any statement about how well something drives LCD-5 doesn't really carry meaning unless there's a horizontal comparison. Trying things out and see if you like it is the best way. Hunt for used if you want to be economical. If I have to put some sort of gauge on my experience, I think the gap between going from computer headphone jack to 1k chain is comparable to the gap between 1k and 10k chain, and many people will disagree with it and I think they are all correct. To me what matters is hitting the spot where the music moves you in ineffable ways. It may be the mids, or the bass, or the soundstage.
Great post. I've never felt compelled to spend thousands on amps/dac combos either. Tbh, when I'm home I use my Focusrite Clarett+ audio interface and I've had zero problems driving any of the headphones I've owned up to this point.
Could I theoretically get better person from a more expensive chain? Sure, but I feel happy with what I use now in combination with EQ.
TheMiddleSky
Headphoneus Supremus
Just to share my finding as what I wrote in MM-500 thread:
Had LCD-5 before, and have chance to try MM-500 today, side by side with LCD-5 and Abyss Diana (Phi and TC).
In short: Definitely a sublime headphone for the price!
In reminds me a lot of LCD-5, but, this is a big "but", MM-500 is like LCD-5 with proper EQ already installed.
Too much midrange of LCD-5 is gone now, and instead, there is more airy feeling on treble area, combine with a little more punch and heft at bass area. Listen to MM-500 is like listening to nice near field studio monitor speaker. Highly accurate decay and transient, no big boom bass, no harsh sharp treble, just a transparent and fluid transient.
LCD-5 may still hold the flagship status as produce more micro detail, wider and better height in soundstage (about same depth). However, lack of treble air, and too much midrange quantity in LCD-5 become deal breaker to me. I sold LCD-5 already, and never expected to like the new tuning of Audeze. MM-500 may change my mind!
I can imagine, if only MM-500 came first to the market, LCD-5's sales (with price more expensive about $2800) may take really big hit. MM-500 definitely much closer in performance than $2800 gap.
p.s: Abyss Diana TC and Phi may have better clarity and detail with bigger soundstage, but they seem colder and thinner sounding at midrange area, and "too analytic" for lesser than great recording quality, make MM-500 more versatile headphone overall.
Tested with Chord TT2.
Had LCD-5 before, and have chance to try MM-500 today, side by side with LCD-5 and Abyss Diana (Phi and TC).
In short: Definitely a sublime headphone for the price!
In reminds me a lot of LCD-5, but, this is a big "but", MM-500 is like LCD-5 with proper EQ already installed.
Too much midrange of LCD-5 is gone now, and instead, there is more airy feeling on treble area, combine with a little more punch and heft at bass area. Listen to MM-500 is like listening to nice near field studio monitor speaker. Highly accurate decay and transient, no big boom bass, no harsh sharp treble, just a transparent and fluid transient.
LCD-5 may still hold the flagship status as produce more micro detail, wider and better height in soundstage (about same depth). However, lack of treble air, and too much midrange quantity in LCD-5 become deal breaker to me. I sold LCD-5 already, and never expected to like the new tuning of Audeze. MM-500 may change my mind!
I can imagine, if only MM-500 came first to the market, LCD-5's sales (with price more expensive about $2800) may take really big hit. MM-500 definitely much closer in performance than $2800 gap.
p.s: Abyss Diana TC and Phi may have better clarity and detail with bigger soundstage, but they seem colder and thinner sounding at midrange area, and "too analytic" for lesser than great recording quality, make MM-500 more versatile headphone overall.
Tested with Chord TT2.
brams
100+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2009
- Posts
- 426
- Likes
- 375
Recently picked up a LCD-5 and was initially dissapointed using the stock copper cable. Iˋm probably just repeating what has already been stated in the thread many times over, but the problem in my opinion is that the stock copper cable cuts down the treble too much relative to the midrange and highlights the contrast between the upper mids and the rest of the response. The focus on the midrange also highlights the total absence of any upper bass bloom and results in a very flat listening experience.
As a last ditch effort before moving these along I switched to a Silver Coated Copper cable (no-name custom cable from a local builder) and was surprised how much of a difference opening up the treble just slightly made. I am now enjoying these quite a bit. Knowing what I know now, for my listening tastes if I was to purchased these new I would have gone with Audezeˋs silver plated copper. Definitely more on the analytic side, but sometimes thatˋs exactly what I need. Very picky of the entire chain as well, but when everything gels the result is quite impressive. For portable use I am using the Questyle QPM and Fiio M17 with very good results.
As a last ditch effort before moving these along I switched to a Silver Coated Copper cable (no-name custom cable from a local builder) and was surprised how much of a difference opening up the treble just slightly made. I am now enjoying these quite a bit. Knowing what I know now, for my listening tastes if I was to purchased these new I would have gone with Audezeˋs silver plated copper. Definitely more on the analytic side, but sometimes thatˋs exactly what I need. Very picky of the entire chain as well, but when everything gels the result is quite impressive. For portable use I am using the Questyle QPM and Fiio M17 with very good results.
chargedcapacitor
500+ Head-Fier
The treble is lacking because there is a large hole in the treble frequency response. Not because of a copper cable. So unless your cable has a built in crossover, you won't be getting the 5 dB of treble needed to make it neutral. The best option to get a brighter tonality from the LCD-5 is to use EQ.
Come on, join the EQ dark side. We don't bite.
brams
100+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2009
- Posts
- 426
- Likes
- 375
Alteady love the rollicking nature of this thread!
I actually did not need or want 5db of EQ ... just needed it opened up slightly as I said in my post. The cable did that (or perhaps the stock cable was defective). Whatever the reason I'm happy now and am surprised how little a change it took to completely change my opinion.
I actually have nothing against EQ as those who have seen my posts about my T+A Solitaire P can attest. I just find it strange that any headphone at this level (all of which are ridiculously overpriced btw) would need EQ to make it listenable for most. Like buying a Ferrari and needing to install a chip just to make it enjoyable to drive. Why not push back on the manufacturer to fix this? Then anyone who wants to EQ further for personal tastes can go for it.
No need to worry ... I'm here lead you all to the promised land of sanity!
chargedcapacitor
500+ Head-Fier
I know plenty of sports car owners, and none of them are running stock
rreynolds
100+ Head-Fier
When I first received and listened to the LCD-5, I couldn't understand the hate it received. The detail retrieval alone floored me, regardless of it's overly mid-forward presentation. Classic Rock with dual rhythm guitars sounded fantastic, same with drum reproduction. When I finally got around to EQ'ing, HOLY crap. I've never heard a headphone awaken as much as the LCD-5 w/ EQ. It throws the AB 1266 TC into 3rd, takes 2nd behind the Susvara in my opinion. The capability of that driver is unreal.
brams
100+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2009
- Posts
- 426
- Likes
- 375
Not surprising really. Audeze has a house sound and had garnered a lot of followers who liked that type of signature. The LCD-5 is about as far from that tuning as you can get and requires a synergistic chain (and apparently EQ) to really show what it can do. Very bold/risky move for Audeze to make for their flagship.
Not everyone gels with a super detailed, neutral, unforgiving sound. As someone who does and is a firm fan of the etymotic type of tuning, for a long time I had a hard time understanding that. Also, many do not like to EQ because they think it might have adverse sonic effects (it can, but only if overdone), they might make things worse (quite possible if they still do not like the settings proposed by someone else and try adjusting further without understanding what they are doing), they think it will change the inherent character of the headphone (not in my experience if used judiciously) or they just don't see why they should have to EQ a TOTL headphone used in a high end chain.
If the general agreement is that it sounds a lot better with EQ why didn't Audeze just tune it closer to that ideal?
shwnwllms
1000+ Head-Fier
Because the Audeze target curve is designed to give the most accurate, detailed response that translates closest to speakers in the real world. Audeze’s philosophy is that tuning to a more neutral tuning, or a target curve such as Harman can actually diminish the technical capabilities of the headphone (by having negative effects on phase response etc)
Their solution is to offer a Reveal+ plugin. You get the best of both worlds. A technical marvel where nothing is sacrificed in order to achieve a target curve and a more neutral tuning should you choose to apply it. (Also most people hear things differently to begin with so making a headphone that takes EQ well ensures you can tailor it to your own personal preferences without a loss of fidelity)
Source:
https://www.audeze.com/blogs/techno...lem-with-frequency-graphs-and-eq-compensation
chargedcapacitor
500+ Head-Fier
None of Audeze's headphones have been close to neutral tuning; the LCD-5 and MM500 have been the closest to neutral high end open backs they've made. They have always (and still) follow the same principle to make the lowest distortion, highest technically performing headphone they can, and tune it as well as possible without compromising on the first two goals.
Users who are viewing this thread
