[acia]

When I demoed the 10 vs 20 I most compared them using the standard cable. The 20 just doesn't sound quite right for me vs the 10. The 10 however, sounds a lot different and better with the cipher cable which is what I used to compare with the LCDi4.

I will go again and have the 20 auditioned but this time with cipher cable.

for myself, first audition over 2 hours, using just samsung s4, then macbook paired with mojo.

second audition, using ak380, same conclusion. the presentation of 20 seems to be pushing things right in front of your face. as live concert goer myself, i know the presentation of 10 looks more like real-life experience.

another buddy of mine pointed out that for plugs in the the range of usd 1500, would have the same details as the 20, but won't have the feeling of pushing things to you.

 

[ciukas]

New Roon update with preloaded Audeze presets including the LCDi4. Nice upgrade to the UI with a nice LCDi4 icon instead of the generic speakers one. I found I needed to dial back the crossfeed on the Hugo 2 to 1 instead of 2 when using the LCDi4 preset.

 

[Zarium]

Cross-posting this from the iSine thread, in hopes of getting more responses.

To those who have experienced both the iSine 10/20 and LCD i4: Does the tuning of the i4 mimic that of the iSine 20 (non-cipher)? I find the iSine 20 out of my iPhone 6S+ 3.5mm quite terrible (yes, terrible) with bloated mids and it's like a completely different headphone compared to when used with the Cipher cable. It seems like it was made to be used with the Cipher cable because the disparity is so huge. I wouldn't have bought the iSine had I heard them through only the 3.5mm cable out of my iPhone.

Now, my question: Does the i4 straight out of an iPhone sound similarly to an iSine straight out of an iPhone 3.5mm, or is it really different?

I currently own the iSine 20 with Cipher and it's nothing short of amazing (still experimenting with using earlocks/earhooks and the different sized tips), but with all these people saying the i4 is simply leagues ahead and superlative compared to the iSine 20 I can't help but be curious as to just how much better it is. I know all about how it's all diminishing returns etc., so I'll definitely temper my expectations when I audition it this weekend, but perhaps some opinions from those who've tried both? I've read the thread and from what I understand the i4 have incredible potential -- you just need to feed it well. My predicament is that I'd like it to at least perform at least almost as well as an iSine + Cipher when run out of an iPhone's 3.5mm jack alone just so it's a viable option for mobile use to make it worthwhile selling off my iSine and getting the i4 (although, maybe not that much of a deal breaker since I have CIEMs which are more suited to the task). Another thing to consider, I suppose, is with the i4 that I won't get to take advantage of the 10-band EQ in the Audeze app, and I like my music bass-heavy.

I have a Chord Mojo for non-mobile listening situations. Yes, it's portable, but...eh. I don't like lugging around that much weight in my pockets.

I understand that the i4 has an incredibly high ceiling where you can keep upgrading the source/amp and it'll just keep getting better and better; but I'm not quite in a position for that just yet. As long as it's way better out of the Mojo vs iSine 20 Cipher, I think I'll be placing an order. Then eventually I'll get a Hugo 2, etc. to really make it shine.

(Half hoping to be disappointed this weekend just so I don't have to spend my money!)

 

[headwhacker]

for myself, first audition over 2 hours, using just samsung s4, then macbook paired with mojo.

second audition, using ak380, same conclusion. the presentation of 20 seems to be pushing things right in front of your face. as live concert goer myself, i know the presentation of 10 looks more like real-life experience.

another buddy of mine pointed out that for plugs in the the range of usd 1500, would have the same details as the 20, but won't have the feeling of pushing things to you.

Without the cipher cable the iSines just have weird response compared to any headphone. I think comparison between the iSines and the LCDi4 should involve the cipher cable. This is why we have a huge discrepancy of impressions when it comes to iSines. Many I think only heard the iSines with the standard cable and already made their final opinion. iSines with cipher and LCDi4 with Hugo/mojo would be the better comparison.

If I compared the isine10 using the standard cable with LCDi4, I would have been blown away and bought the LCDi4 without hesitation.

 

[sorrick]

Cross-posting this from the iSine thread, in hopes of getting more responses.

To those who have experienced both the iSine 10/20 and LCD i4: Does the tuning of the i4 mimic that of the iSine 20 (non-cipher)? I find the iSine 20 out of my iPhone 6S+ 3.5mm quite terrible (yes, terrible) with bloated mids and it's like a completely different headphone compared to when used with the Cipher cable. It seems like it was made to be used with the Cipher cable because the disparity is so huge. I wouldn't have bought the iSine had I heard them through only the 3.5mm cable out of my iPhone.

Now, my question: Does the i4 straight out of an iPhone sound similarly to an iSine straight out of an iPhone 3.5mm, or is it really different?

I currently own the iSine 20 with Cipher and it's nothing short of amazing (still experimenting with using earlocks/earhooks and the different sized tips), but with all these people saying the i4 is simply leagues ahead and superlative compared to the iSine 20 I can't help but be curious as to just how much better it is. I know all about how it's all diminishing returns etc., so I'll definitely temper my expectations when I audition it this weekend, but perhaps some opinions from those who've tried both? I've read the thread and from what I understand the i4 have incredible potential -- you just need to feed it well. My predicament is that I'd like it to at least perform at least almost as well as an iSine + Cipher when run out of an iPhone's 3.5mm jack alone just so it's a viable option for mobile use to make it worthwhile selling off my iSine and getting the i4 (although, maybe not that much of a deal breaker since I have CIEMs which are more suited to the task). Another thing to consider, I suppose, is with the i4 that I won't get to take advantage of the 10-band EQ in the Audeze app, and I like my music bass-heavy.

I have a Chord Mojo for non-mobile listening situations. Yes, it's portable, but...eh. I don't like lugging around that much weight in my pockets.

I understand that the i4 has an incredibly high ceiling where you can keep upgrading the source/amp and it'll just keep getting better and better; but I'm not quite in a position for that just yet. As long as it's way better out of the Mojo vs iSine 20 Cipher, I think I'll be placing an order. Then eventually I'll get a Hugo 2, etc. to really make it shine.

(Half hoping to be disappointed this weekend just so I don't have to spend my money!)

I find the Audeze i4 stock tuning to be just about perfect for my tastes, which was not the case for me with the isine 20 (although the 20s sound great out of the cipher cable, esp with eq). The i4 out of a mojo is, to my ears, a very big step up from the isine 20 with cipher (or eq'd isine 20 out of a mojo) in basically every regard sonically, and I'm not the only person that feels that way. Same sport, different league.

 

[Zarium]

I find the Audeze i4 stock tuning to be just about perfect for my tastes, which was not the case for me with the isine 20 (although the 20s sound great out of the cipher cable, esp with eq). The i4 out of a mojo is, to my ears, a very big step up from the isine 20 with cipher (or eq'd isine 20 out of a mojo) in basically every regard sonically, and I'm not the only person that feels that way. Same sport, different league.

Thanks for the reply. I see you own a Dragonfly Red...how does the i4 perform out of it?

 

[ciukas]

After a few hrs listening to the new LCDi4 Roon preset, it is clear that it is much improved upon the original convolution filter. Any initial drawbacks I perceived in the first convolution filter are now gone- no more slight loss in transparency and distinct feeling I'm using a filter. The new preset adds quite a bit more depth to the vocals... much smoother overall, better forward imaging as well. Also greater presence to the mids and much improved body to percussion instruments such as bass drums, cymbals, etc. Pianos are a little smoother. Quite a bit of oommph in the lower end. Trebles are pulled back a little... Result is a much greater overall musical experience, it's an absolute must add for the type of music I listen to.... but I've tested nearly every genre and wow... I'm quite blown away at how good the new preset is. It's indispensable, to the point where I just can't listen to the stock tuning anymore. Finally, I also pulled back on the crossfeed setting in the Hugo 2 because vocal imaging is better, and crossfeed 2 adds too much bass bloom. Setting crossfeed back to 1 also allows a slightly larger soundstage. It's all a win win situation. Thank you so much @Audeze !!!

 

[AxelCloris]

After a few hrs listening to the new LCDi4 Roon preset, it is clear that it is much improved upon the original convolution filter. Any initial drawbacks I perceived in the first convolution filter are now gone- no more slight loss in transparency and distinct feeling I'm using a filter. The new preset adds quite a bit more depth to the vocals... much smoother overall, better forward imaging as well. Also greater presence to the mids and much improved body to percussion instruments such as bass drums, cymbals, etc. Pianos are a little smoother. Quite a bit of oommph in the lower end. Trebles are pulled back a little... Result is a much greater overall musical experience, it's an absolute must add for the type of music I listen to.... but I've tested nearly every genre and wow... I'm quite blown away at how good the new preset is. It's indispensable, to the point where I just can't listen to the stock tuning anymore. Finally, I also pulled back on the crossfeed setting in the Hugo 2 because vocal imaging is better, and crossfeed 2 adds too much bass bloom. Setting crossfeed back to 1 also allows a slightly larger soundstage. It's all a win win situation. Thank you so much @Audeze !!!

Well, I know what I'm doing at the office today...

 

[Junmoe62]

You will lose warranty on the cable. Headphone should still be covered.

Ok, good to know, thanks for the information!

 

[Junmoe62]

Are you aware of someone doing this re-termination?
I like how the LCDi4 sounds with the balanced cable I got, but it's a bit on the stiff side, I would certainly try out the included cable should it be possible to have it re-terminated. Otherwise, Audeze, pls release a balanced solution soon, such a product deserves a native solution from your side!

I don't know where you are living, but in China's major cities, it seems relatively easy to find places to do that. Most shops can do it or have contacts to do it.
Sorry if it doesn't really answer your question.
You can also do it yourself, that's not really hard to do, but I recon that's a little scary to do modifications on such pricey gear!

 

[Junmoe62]

Cross-posting this from the iSine thread, in hopes of getting more responses.

To those who have experienced both the iSine 10/20 and LCD i4: Does the tuning of the i4 mimic that of the iSine 20 (non-cipher)? I find the iSine 20 out of my iPhone 6S+ 3.5mm quite terrible (yes, terrible) with bloated mids and it's like a completely different headphone compared to when used with the Cipher cable. It seems like it was made to be used with the Cipher cable because the disparity is so huge. I wouldn't have bought the iSine had I heard them through only the 3.5mm cable out of my iPhone.

Now, my question: Does the i4 straight out of an iPhone sound similarly to an iSine straight out of an iPhone 3.5mm, or is it really different?

I currently own the iSine 20 with Cipher and it's nothing short of amazing (still experimenting with using earlocks/earhooks and the different sized tips), but with all these people saying the i4 is simply leagues ahead and superlative compared to the iSine 20 I can't help but be curious as to just how much better it is. I know all about how it's all diminishing returns etc., so I'll definitely temper my expectations when I audition it this weekend, but perhaps some opinions from those who've tried both? I've read the thread and from what I understand the i4 have incredible potential -- you just need to feed it well. My predicament is that I'd like it to at least perform at least almost as well as an iSine + Cipher when run out of an iPhone's 3.5mm jack alone just so it's a viable option for mobile use to make it worthwhile selling off my iSine and getting the i4 (although, maybe not that much of a deal breaker since I have CIEMs which are more suited to the task). Another thing to consider, I suppose, is with the i4 that I won't get to take advantage of the 10-band EQ in the Audeze app, and I like my music bass-heavy.

I have a Chord Mojo for non-mobile listening situations. Yes, it's portable, but...eh. I don't like lugging around that much weight in my pockets.

I understand that the i4 has an incredibly high ceiling where you can keep upgrading the source/amp and it'll just keep getting better and better; but I'm not quite in a position for that just yet. As long as it's way better out of the Mojo vs iSine 20 Cipher, I think I'll be placing an order. Then eventually I'll get a Hugo 2, etc. to really make it shine.

(Half hoping to be disappointed this weekend just so I don't have to spend my money!)

Sorry for the 3 posts in a row but I couldn't find how to do several quotes in 1 post.

Anyway, to try answering your question, to me the i4 is much better than the iSine 20 with the Cipher cable which is much better than without the Cipher.
To my ears, the sound signature is more to my liking and the details retrieval, the soundstage width, depth, positioning and precision are without a doubt on another level. I don't know with which iPhone you're planning on using it, but with my iPhone SE it's doing surprisingly good! They do sound very slightly better with my ibasso DX200 in single ended(detail, soundstage,tightness), but i found it hard to point out the difference. I mean from iSine 20 with Cipher to i4 here that's a very noticeable difference, while from iPhone SE to DX200 in single ended output, that's really incremental I feel... and DX200 is a reasonably well regarded DAP.

After if you have the opportunity to try by yourself, you might make a better opinion of the difference, and have a different conclusion than mine, so I really advise you to go try them out, especially at that price!

 

[Zarium]

Sorry for the 3 posts in a row but I couldn't find how to do several quotes in 1 post.

Anyway, to try answering your question, to me the i4 is much better than the iSine 20 with the Cipher cable which is much better than without the Cipher.
To my ears, the sound signature is more to my liking and the details retrieval, the soundstage width, depth, positioning and precision are without a doubt on another level. I don't know with which iPhone you're planning on using it, but with my iPhone SE it's doing surprisingly good! They do sound very slightly better with my ibasso DX200 in single ended(detail, soundstage,tightness), but i found it hard to point out the difference. I mean from iSine 20 with Cipher to i4 here that's a very noticeable difference, while from iPhone SE to DX200 in single ended output, that's really incremental I feel... and DX200 is a reasonably well regarded DAP.

After if you have the opportunity to try by yourself, you might make a better opinion of the difference, and have a different conclusion than mine, so I really advise you to go try them out, especially at that price!

Thank you, thank you for the valuable insight.

If there aren't any delays the shop should have them on hand tomorrow, so I'll finally be able to demo them myself. I can't wait -- and I'm only hoping there won't be too many people showing up to demo it too.


P/S: To quote multiple posts in a single post, use the "+Quote" button for each post instead of "Reply". It'll collate all the posts you clicked "+Quote" for into the quick reply box below.

 

[Eide]

After a few hrs listening to the new LCDi4 Roon preset, it is clear that it is much improved upon the original convolution filter. Any initial drawbacks I perceived in the first convolution filter are now gone- no more slight loss in transparency and distinct feeling I'm using a filter. The new preset adds quite a bit more depth to the vocals... much smoother overall, better forward imaging as well. Also greater presence to the mids and much improved body to percussion instruments such as bass drums, cymbals, etc. Pianos are a little smoother. Quite a bit of oommph in the lower end. Trebles are pulled back a little... Result is a much greater overall musical experience, it's an absolute must add for the type of music I listen to.... but I've tested nearly every genre and wow... I'm quite blown away at how good the new preset is. It's indispensable, to the point where I just can't listen to the stock tuning anymore. Finally, I also pulled back on the crossfeed setting in the Hugo 2 because vocal imaging is better, and crossfeed 2 adds too much bass bloom. Setting crossfeed back to 1 also allows a slightly larger soundstage. It's all a win win situation. Thank you so much @Audeze !!!

I´ve used Audezes convolution filter in Roon and loved it, but as you say, this new preset is even better and more refined. With the convolution filter I had to crank up the bass using EQ, but this preset is just perfect. A small "problem" is that I now feel I miss out listening to LCDi4 from anything else than Roon. Lucky for me, listening from Roon is 95% of my listening time. For listening on the go, I use my Noble Encore.

So the message is clear, if you haven´t heard LCDi4 with the new presets in Roon, you´re missing out big time!

 

[edwardsean]

I'm a big fan of both the i4 and convolution. However, I've resisted getting on Roon because of the subscription aspect. The Audeze convolution filters are really intriguing me though. Can someone describe a littler further how the convolution processing is being used by Audeze for the i4. is it just EQ or is it also adding some kind of virtualization like a surround or a speaker/room emulation impulse response.

 

[EndGameSearch]

I'll defer to others for a more detailed description since I have less than a hour of listening time with this update but it is an improvement. I wouldn't necessarily say it is better than the convolution previously pointed to on this thread since that would infer there were issues with that one. It's simply a different approach that effects both sound stage and placement. It's really an attractive shift in placement that opens up the sound stage and further exploits the airiness of the i4's. It's not akin to OOYH but it's a very nice alternative turning. The 14 day trial is still available so I would give it a shot.