[TheMiddleSky]

Empy bass is satisfying enough. It doesn't leave the feeling that you are missing out on anything. That said, in direct comparison the LCD4 bass is tighter and cleaner. The Empyrean is a more opened and more natural sounding headphone compared to the LCD4, but the LCD4 wins when it comes to bass clarity and tightness.

Because in the end, we don't listen treble/mid/bass separately, but together at one time. The way manufacture able to blend them in good way is the real key. Clear itself, for me one of the most balance sounding in term of blending these 3 categories for dynamic driver headphone. The tonal balance is spot on.

I had LCD-X before, but if I have to choose now, I'd prefer Clear. Of course the weight of X take in to consideration as well, which is, I can't stand anymore. (I'm sensitive about comfort, even more than average people I guess). However, LCD-X creator package is really great in term of value (build quality and sound quality).

 

[betula]

Because in the end, we don't listen treble/mid/bass separately, but together at one time. The way manufacture able to blend them in good way is the real key. Clear itself, for me one of the most balance sounding in term of blending these 3 categories for dynamic driver headphone. The tonal balance is spot on.

I had LCD-X before, but if I have to choose now, I'd prefer Clear. Of course the weight of X take in to consideration as well, which is, I can't stand anymore. (I'm sensitive about comfort, even more than average people I guess). However, LCD-X creator package is really great in term of value (build quality and sound quality).

Yes, it is great to have this many choices on today's headphone market. The Clear is a good headphone, but I personally would pick the X over them any day despite the weight. To me the Clear is too bright and aggressive with bass roll off. (Although the bass is quite good for an open back dynamic headphone.) Bass slam and extension on the X is just much better. Different strokes for different folks I guess.
Your point on 'blending' bass, mids and treble is a valid one. This blending is called coherency and in my opinion this is where most TOTL headphones excel over their mid-fi cousins.

 

[340519]

Different strokes totally. I just sold my X and kept the Clears. The Clears are the clear winner in my book.

 

[ronhGA]

OK, I'll chime in just to even things out as I lean more towards the X rather than the Clear, FWIW.

 

[340519]

It's also because I have the xc which sounds similar, so I wanted to keep some dynamics around after selling the 800S.

 

[ronhGA]

It's also because I have the xc which sounds similar, so I wanted to keep some dynamics around after selling the 800S.

Understood. I'm keeping the HD 6xx (just because) and the Clear to balance out the X & XC. I'm going to sell the HD 58x & The AFO to thin the herd.

 

[340519]

Understood. I'm keeping the HD 6xx (just because) and the Clear to balance out the X & XC. I'm going to sell the HD 58x & The AFO to thin the herd.

Yeah I understand, I'm only keeping the three that I have now as I just dont have time to cycle through them all. I'm going for quality(what sounds right to me) over quantity.

 

[betula]

Understood. I'm keeping the HD 6xx (just because) and the Clear to balance out the X & XC. I'm going to sell the HD 58x & The AFO to thin the herd.

The AFO was quite a disappointment to me. I kept adjusting the cups around my ears for a good fit, the sound was too warm and woolly with a small soundstage and unimpressive bass performance for a planar. I think the 2C is a much better headphone than the AFO.

 

[ronhGA]

The AFO was quite a disappointment to me. I kept adjusting the cups around my ears for a good fit, the sound was too warm and woolly with a small soundstage and unimpressive bass performance for a planar. I think the 2C is a much better headphone than the AFO.

I use the HD 58x & AFO as my office phones and until about a month ago used the HD 6xx & Clear at home. Now my plan is to sell the 58x & AFO and use the 6xx at work. I might experiment with the XC at work, once I go back to the office.

When I got the AFO is thought it was an improvement over both the Sennheisers but I brought them home when the lockdown started and tried to listen to them at home but was greatly disappointed so they're gone soon.

First World problem, I know.

 

[betula]

I use the HD 58x & AFO as my office phones and until about a month ago used the HD 6xx & Clear at home. Now my plan is to sell the 58x & AFO and use the 6xx at work. I might experiment with the XC at work, once I go back to the office.

When I got the AFO is thought it was an improvement over both the Sennheisers but I brought them home when the lockdown started and tried to listen to them at home but was greatly disappointed so they're gone soon.

First World problem, I know.

Try the 2C for office use. If you like the X, I think the 2C is a good 'compromise'. Lighter weight and a smoother sound for those long office hours. Not as dynamic and refined as the X but still 100% Audeze sound.

 

[phthora]

Different strokes totally. I just sold my X and kept the Clears. The Clears are the clear winner in my book.

Hey, didn't you get an LCD-4 though? That doesn't count! Of course you got rid of the X then.

 

[340519]

Hey, didn't you get an LCD-4 though? That doesn't count! Of course you got rid of the X then.

Lol yeah

 

[angelus55]

thanks also i did not think to ask at the time, would you say the lcd-x has a bigger/wider soundstage then the lcd2 classics? most of what i read indicates they do, but a few opninions i saw said it was acctualy smaller then the classics but that did not seem to be the more common opinion

 

[johnzz4]

thanks also i did not think to ask at the time, would you say the lcd-x has a bigger/wider soundstage then the lcd2 classics? most of what i read indicates they do, but a few opninions i saw said it was acctualy smaller then the classics but that did not seem to be the more common opinion

I had the LCD2r2, which I believe the LCD2 Classic is largely based on. If they're similar, the LCDX has a substantially larger sound stage (almost to the size of the 4). Quite different sounding phones. The pre-fazor LCD2 had a rolled off treble and tons of bass. The X is much more neutral, has decent treble extension, more resolving and dynamic. Though the X is technically much better, the 2 had its own appeal. Again, this all assumes the LCD2r2 is truly similar to the LCD2 Classic.

 

[Swisshead]

I have had the LCD-X for 2 years and am very satisfied with it. It is an absolutely great listener. It has the typical Audeze sound, but not like an LCD-2 1. It plays very very bright, sometimes too bright. With tracks that are brightly mixed, it can quickly become too much. It's like a toddler screaming and you get a headache. It's extremely open and wide and delivers a lot of details, which can get tiring. Also sometimes too much in the mids and highs, which trump the bass, which then comes across weakly. You have to be aware of this when you buy it. It's one of the very bright types. If you like it rather dark and discreet, you won't be happy with it.

But there are many tracks for which it is absolutely perfect. Especially recordings that are dark and boringly mixed, sometimes the LCD-X is the only thing that helps to hear it properly. Therefore he stays with me, I love him a lot for his work. Where I hate him, live recordings that are brightly mixed, he becomes unbearable. After 10 minutes you have enough of it.That's the hour of the DC Audio A2c. He is in his element there.

For me, a listener you should definitely try out before you buy. It's not to everyone's taste. It's analytical, very broad, very open, extremely bright. But of course it has the famous Audeze bass, but it doesn't come across as well as it should, because there is a massive overlay of mids and highs. Test it.

That's why it's always nice to have several listeners, so for every purpose and every mood!