[EagleWings]

When u used the i4 with both the LPG and the WM1Z even if the volume was ok, it felt something was missing, the sound was not full.

with the Hugo2 power is there and the sound is clear, full of details and nice wide sound stage. what I like using the h2 are the details and the level of resolution the combo can provide.

I also used once the wm1z to drive the Cavalli Liquid carbon, with this combination, the sound is warmer, full body, very pleasant to listen too.

Gotcha, thanks.

 

[lithiumnk]

Good to know, I was actually considering a used Kann for a traveling companion of the i4.

Did you try to use the balance output too, on paper the Kann is extremely powerful compared to any dap?

I have not tried the balanced output. I think that it does not matter how much voltage in being pumped into LCD i4...unbalanced high gain is 4vrms. AK Kann has no problem in driving the lcd i4. But the resolution, imaging, soundstage etc. do not scale with increase in the volume on Kann. There is an increase in loudness.The quality of the amplification matters imho. I have not tried the lcd i4 with tube amplifiers like Cavalli audio/wa 8. Which one you prefer Hugo2/tube amplifiers?

 

[kubig123]

Thank for your feedback

The cavalli liquid carbon is not a tube amp, but still have the Cavalli signature that is warmer compared to other amps.
It's a very nice amp, unfortunately I don't use it too much.

 

[jonstatt]

After reading a few driver failure reports, it has me worried. With the LCD-4 they added a gasket to allow air to escape when putting the headphones on your ear and avoid outward pressure on the thin membrane.

I am wondering if the same issue is back with the LCD-i4, that if the silicone tips make a good seal in the ear that there is too much resulting pressure on the membrane upon insertion into the ear. Would Audeze kindly comment? Is it better to use a smaller tip so such a tight seal doesn't occur?

 

[HiFiGuy528]

These Comply foam tips are a must! On the stock tips, the left side didn't fit me so they made "rattling" noises (the tips does, not the i4). The Comply T600 tips solved it and it's very comfy now. Next step is to get a 4.4mm balanced cable from @scootermafia.

 

[commtrd]

Norne Therium cable highly recommended.

 

[junix]

These Comply foam tips are a must! On the stock tips, the left side didn't fit me so they made "rattling" noises (the tips does, not the i4). The Comply T600 tips solved it and it's very comfy now. Next step is to get a 4.4mm balanced cable from @scootermafia.

How do you like the i4 with the Comply?

I personally don’t like the sound of the combination, IMHO the bass looses texture and becomes slightly too thick.
But maybe I should give it another try!?

 

[EagleWings]

LCD i4 vs Tia Fourte & U18 Tzar.

Comparing the i4 with IEMs is not actually fair, as the i4 seems to fall in a different category according to its design, construction and use case. Someone used the terminology 'In-Ear Headphone' to describe the i4 and, I think the person was spot on because, the presentation of the i4 is much larger than regular IEMs out there. But if there are 2 IEMs that could compete, it would be the Tia brothers from 64Audio.

Fourte and U18 are IEMs that defy the limitations of IEMs to present a very large stage. While their stages are probably the best in class, they can’t quite keep up with the stage of the i4. According to its open back design and the driver size, i4 presents a larger stage. But the real strength of the i4’s design lies in the size of the instrument images it creates in the stage. They are open and large, almost close to the size of images created by full-size HPs. In contrast, Fourte’s and U18’s instrument images are still small, but that is to be expected.

In terms of resolution, Fourte and U18 have much better perceived resolution as they have very good isolation. Isolation is critical when it comes to being able to hear low-key high frequency details. And since isolation is not a feature of i4’s design, i4 can appear less resolving. But the true capability of the i4 driver can be heard when listening to the bass notes. It is highly resolving and very fast as well. The Tia twins also have an enhanced lower and upper treble that help with the resolution ad detail retrieval. But because of the treble enhancement, the Tia twins sound over-articulated and artificially detailed.

Getting into the signature and individual aspects of the tuning can result in a wall of text. So, to keep it short; U18 and the Fourte have very energetic characters with good bass and sparkly treble. They are well suited for electronic music. Between the Fourte and the U18, U18 has better balance in the tuning which makes it more versatile. But still neither can recreate a natural timbre as their mid-range lacks naturalness and the treble is over detailed. And so they are not great for classical. The i4 without EQ sounds dull, as it lacks the upper midrange presence. But engage the DSP or EQ provided/recommended by Audeze, and the tuning gets close to a headphone target curve, which makes the i4 sound very natural and accurate in its timbre. The balance in the signature makes it very versatile and is capable of handling any genre of music you throw at it.

Oh, one more thing. Fourte’s bass is a highly resolving bass. Its treble adds definition and texture making it a very technical bass and yet, it retains the characteristics of the DD like the liquid decay, good rumbles and extension. It is not an accurate bass presentation but is one geared towards fun and amusement. I4’s bass presentation on the other hand is more accurate. It is a clean bass that does dynamics and extension so well, without having the need to be enhanced. I would rate both the bass equally but for different reasons.

Hope that helps!

 

[lithiumnk]

LCD i4 vs Tia Fourte & U18 Tzar.

Comparing the i4 with IEMs is not actually fair, as the i4 seems to fall in a different category according to its design, construction and use case. Someone used the terminology 'In-Ear Headphone' to describe the i4 and, I think the person was spot on. Because the presentation the i4 provides is much larger than regular IEMs out there. But if there are 2 IEMs that could compete, it would be the Tia brothers from 64Audio.

Fourte and U18 are IEMs that defy the limitations of IEMs to present a very large stage. While their stages are probably the best in class, they can’t quite keep up with the stage of the i4. According to its open back design and the driver size, i4 presents a larger stage. But the real strength of the i4’s design lies in the size of the instrument images it creates in the stage. They are open and large, almost close to the size of images created by full-size HPs. In contrast, Fourte’s and U18’s instrument images are still small, but that is to be expected.

In terms of resolution, Fourte and U18 have much better perceived resolution as they have very good isolation. Isolation is critical when it comes to being able to hear low-key high frequency details. And since isolation is not a feature of i4’s design, i4 can appear less resolving. But the true capability of the i4 driver can be heard when listening to the bass notes. It is highly resolving and very fast as well. The Tia twins also have an enhanced lower and upper treble that help with the resolution ad detail retrieval. But because of the treble enhancement, the Tia twins sound over-articulated and artificially detailed.

Getting into the signature and individual aspects of the tuning can result in a wall of text. So, to keep it short; U18 and the Fourte have very energetic characters with good bass and sparkly treble. They are well suited for electronic music. Between the Fourte and the U18, U18 has better balance in the tuning which makes it more versatile. But still neither can recreate a natural timbre as their mid-range lacks naturalness and the treble is over detailed. And so they are not great for classical. I4 on the other hand sounds lifeless without EQ. But engage the DSP or the EQ provided or recommended by Audeze, and the tuning gets close to a headphone target curve, which makes the i4 sound very natural and accurate in its timbre. The balance in the signature makes it very versatile and is capable of handling any genre of music you throw at it.

Oh, one more thing. Fourte’s bass is a highly resolving bass. Its treble adds definition and texture making it a very technical bass and yet, it retains the characteristics of the DD like the liquid decay, good rumbles and extension. It is not an accurate bass presentation but is one geared towards fun and amusement. I4’s bass presentation on the other hand is more accurate. It is a clean bass that does dynamics and extension so well, without having the need to be enhanced. I would rate both the bass equally but for different reasons.

Hope that helps!

Great Comparison! Thanks!

 

[junix]

LCD i4 vs Tia Fourte & U18 Tzar.

Comparing the i4 with IEMs is not actually fair, as the i4 seems to fall in a different category according to its design, construction and use case. Someone used the terminology 'In-Ear Headphone' to describe the i4 and, I think the person was spot on because, the presentation of the i4 is much larger than regular IEMs out there. But if there are 2 IEMs that could compete, it would be the Tia brothers from 64Audio.

Fourte and U18 are IEMs that defy the limitations of IEMs to present a very large stage. While their stages are probably the best in class, they can’t quite keep up with the stage of the i4. According to its open back design and the driver size, i4 presents a larger stage. But the real strength of the i4’s design lies in the size of the instrument images it creates in the stage. They are open and large, almost close to the size of images created by full-size HPs. In contrast, Fourte’s and U18’s instrument images are still small, but that is to be expected.

In terms of resolution, Fourte and U18 have much better perceived resolution as they have very good isolation. Isolation is critical when it comes to being able to hear low-key high frequency details. And since isolation is not a feature of i4’s design, i4 can appear less resolving. But the true capability of the i4 driver can be heard when listening to the bass notes. It is highly resolving and very fast as well. The Tia twins also have an enhanced lower and upper treble that help with the resolution ad detail retrieval. But because of the treble enhancement, the Tia twins sound over-articulated and artificially detailed.

Getting into the signature and individual aspects of the tuning can result in a wall of text. So, to keep it short; U18 and the Fourte have very energetic characters with good bass and sparkly treble. They are well suited for electronic music. Between the Fourte and the U18, U18 has better balance in the tuning which makes it more versatile. But still neither can recreate a natural timbre as their mid-range lacks naturalness and the treble is over detailed. And so they are not great for classical. I4 on the other hand sounds lifeless without EQ. But engage the DSP or EQ provided/recommended by Audeze, and the tuning gets close to a headphone target curve, which makes the i4 sound very natural and accurate in its timbre. The balance in the signature makes it very versatile and is capable of handling any genre of music you throw at it.

Oh, one more thing. Fourte’s bass is a highly resolving bass. Its treble adds definition and texture making it a very technical bass and yet, it retains the characteristics of the DD like the liquid decay, good rumbles and extension. It is not an accurate bass presentation but is one geared towards fun and amusement. I4’s bass presentation on the other hand is more accurate. It is a clean bass that does dynamics and extension so well, without having the need to be enhanced. I would rate both the bass equally but for different reasons.

Hope that helps!

Man, I was searching for this all around the web!

I have the i4 for when I'm alone (home/hotel..) and am looking forward to audition Tzar/Fourté for on the go listening.
Thnx!

 

[musicday]

LCD i4 vs Tia Fourte & U18 Tzar.

Comparing the i4 with IEMs is not actually fair, as the i4 seems to fall in a different category according to its design, construction and use case. Someone used the terminology 'In-Ear Headphone' to describe the i4 and, I think the person was spot on because, the presentation of the i4 is much larger than regular IEMs out there. But if there are 2 IEMs that could compete, it would be the Tia brothers from 64Audio.

Fourte and U18 are IEMs that defy the limitations of IEMs to present a very large stage. While their stages are probably the best in class, they can’t quite keep up with the stage of the i4. According to its open back design and the driver size, i4 presents a larger stage. But the real strength of the i4’s design lies in the size of the instrument images it creates in the stage. They are open and large, almost close to the size of images created by full-size HPs. In contrast, Fourte’s and U18’s instrument images are still small, but that is to be expected.

In terms of resolution, Fourte and U18 have much better perceived resolution as they have very good isolation. Isolation is critical when it comes to being able to hear low-key high frequency details. And since isolation is not a feature of i4’s design, i4 can appear less resolving. But the true capability of the i4 driver can be heard when listening to the bass notes. It is highly resolving and very fast as well. The Tia twins also have an enhanced lower and upper treble that help with the resolution ad detail retrieval. But because of the treble enhancement, the Tia twins sound over-articulated and artificially detailed.

Getting into the signature and individual aspects of the tuning can result in a wall of text. So, to keep it short; U18 and the Fourte have very energetic characters with good bass and sparkly treble. They are well suited for electronic music. Between the Fourte and the U18, U18 has better balance in the tuning which makes it more versatile. But still neither can recreate a natural timbre as their mid-range lacks naturalness and the treble is over detailed. And so they are not great for classical. I4 on the other hand sounds lifeless without EQ. But engage the DSP or EQ provided/recommended by Audeze, and the tuning gets close to a headphone target curve, which makes the i4 sound very natural and accurate in its timbre. The balance in the signature makes it very versatile and is capable of handling any genre of music you throw at it.

Oh, one more thing. Fourte’s bass is a highly resolving bass. Its treble adds definition and texture making it a very technical bass and yet, it retains the characteristics of the DD like the liquid decay, good rumbles and extension. It is not an accurate bass presentation but is one geared towards fun and amusement. I4’s bass presentation on the other hand is more accurate. It is a clean bass that does dynamics and extension so well, without having the need to be enhanced. I would rate both the bass equally but for different reasons.

Hope that helps!

Well written, thank you.
Now if someone doesn't mind the lack of noise isolation of i4 , we can assume this is the best IEM/in ear universal headphone for it's size, correct?

 

[kubig123]

LCD i4 vs Tia Fourte & U18 Tzar.

Comparing the i4 with IEMs is not actually fair, as the i4 seems to fall in a different category according to its design, construction and use case. Someone used the terminology 'In-Ear Headphone' to describe the i4 and, I think the person was spot on because, the presentation of the i4 is much larger than regular IEMs out there. But if there are 2 IEMs that could compete, it would be the Tia brothers from 64Audio.

Fourte and U18 are IEMs that defy the limitations of IEMs to present a very large stage. While their stages are probably the best in class, they can’t quite keep up with the stage of the i4. According to its open back design and the driver size, i4 presents a larger stage. But the real strength of the i4’s design lies in the size of the instrument images it creates in the stage. They are open and large, almost close to the size of images created by full-size HPs. In contrast, Fourte’s and U18’s instrument images are still small, but that is to be expected.

In terms of resolution, Fourte and U18 have much better perceived resolution as they have very good isolation. Isolation is critical when it comes to being able to hear low-key high frequency details. And since isolation is not a feature of i4’s design, i4 can appear less resolving. But the true capability of the i4 driver can be heard when listening to the bass notes. It is highly resolving and very fast as well. The Tia twins also have an enhanced lower and upper treble that help with the resolution ad detail retrieval. But because of the treble enhancement, the Tia twins sound over-articulated and artificially detailed.

Getting into the signature and individual aspects of the tuning can result in a wall of text. So, to keep it short; U18 and the Fourte have very energetic characters with good bass and sparkly treble. They are well suited for electronic music. Between the Fourte and the U18, U18 has better balance in the tuning which makes it more versatile. But still neither can recreate a natural timbre as their mid-range lacks naturalness and the treble is over detailed. And so they are not great for classical. I4 on the other hand sounds lifeless without EQ. But engage the DSP or EQ provided/recommended by Audeze, and the tuning gets close to a headphone target curve, which makes the i4 sound very natural and accurate in its timbre. The balance in the signature makes it very versatile and is capable of handling any genre of music you throw at it.

Oh, one more thing. Fourte’s bass is a highly resolving bass. Its treble adds definition and texture making it a very technical bass and yet, it retains the characteristics of the DD like the liquid decay, good rumbles and extension. It is not an accurate bass presentation but is one geared towards fun and amusement. I4’s bass presentation on the other hand is more accurate. It is a clean bass that does dynamics and extension so well, without having the need to be enhanced. I would rate both the bass equally but for different reasons.

Hope that helps!

Thank you for the comparison, really helpful.

Based on your listening, which one, between the U18 and the Fourte has the best midrange and treble?

 

[lithiumnk]

Well written, thank you.
Now if someone doesn't mind the lack of noise isolation of i4 , we can assume this is the best IEM/in ear universal headphone for it's size, correct?

I totally agree with your statement.

 

[Solarium]

Reading this thread ignites my curiosity for these... I've always wanted LCD's as headphones but they were way too heavy for my neck. My neck pain doesn't even allow me to use HD800's anymore, which were my long time favorites. I absolutely loved planar magnetics before when I tried the Hifiman HE400's back when they first came out, but of course I had to sell them because they were too heavy. Now I can only use IEM's for my desktop due to the weight, I don't even use them for isolation. In fact I would actually prefer the open back design for a better soundstage. I'm currently using Noble Encores which I love, but would love to try out these too for the planar magnetic sound. I've read some comparisons between the Encore's and the LCDi4's, would anyone be willing to provide some more detailed comparisons?

Also, more importantly, how do you guys feel about the comfort of these? Comfort of the Encore's has been a big issue for me. Even if I get the right fit with the right sound, they tend to hurt my ears after an hour or so. My SE846's were great, I can wear them 8 hours straight. My previous Westone UM Pro 50's were even better, they were in fact the most comfortable IEM's I've ever had the pleasure of wearing. I put them on and they disappear and I can literally have them on 24/7. I just don't want to shell out $2k+ for IEM's that I have to resell after finding that they don't fit me well.

 

[kubig123]

Reading this thread ignites my curiosity for these... I've always wanted LCD's as headphones but they were way too heavy for my neck. My neck pain doesn't even allow me to use HD800's anymore, which were my long time favorites. I absolutely loved planar magnetics before when I tried the Hifiman HE400's back when they first came out, but of course I had to sell them because they were too heavy. Now I can only use IEM's for my desktop due to the weight, I don't even use them for isolation. In fact I would actually prefer the open back design for a better soundstage. I'm currently using Noble Encores which I love, but would love to try out these too for the planar magnetic sound. I've read some comparisons between the Encore's and the LCDi4's, would anyone be willing to provide some more detailed comparisons?

Also, more importantly, how do you guys feel about the comfort of these? Comfort of the Encore's has been a big issue for me. Even if I get the right fit with the right sound, they tend to hurt my ears after an hour or so. My SE846's were great, I can wear them 8 hours straight. My previous Westone UM Pro 50's were even better, they were in fact the most comfortable IEM's I've ever had the pleasure of wearing. I put them on and they disappear and I can literally have them on 24/7. I just don't want to shell out $2k+ for IEM's that I have to resell after finding that they don't fit me well.

I have to say the i4 is not the most comfortable iems especially if you use the ear-hooks, after a couple of hours they start bothering me.
Since you liked the 846, may I suggest the KSE1500?
Otherwise if you want a planar than you should consider the UM Me.1m, even if they are a step below the i4, comfort wise they are one of the best iem I tried.