[Barry S]

If you buy a flagship headphone, you need to be prepared to find a matching amp and upgrade your DAC if necessary. The LCD-X can easily sound bad with a poorly matched amp or substandard DAC. If you're complaining about recessed treble with the Rega, that tells me it's got problems, because the upper end and soundstage are where older/low-end DACs fall apart. I've heard the straight Concero with the LCD-X, and it's a superb performing DAC. So you have the DAC covered.
 
The right amp is 50% technical performance and 50% sound signature to tune the headphone to your liking. You should be able to find an amp that will sweeten the mids, but maintain detail and a large soundstage. Maybe the V200 would fit the bill with the LCD-X, but how will you know? I'd pick an open headphone 100% of the time when isolation isn't an issue.

 

[F1REStarter]

I already have the V200 and had it with the Rega DAC when it was still around. The only other source I tried the V200/LCD-X with was the Schiit Bifrost, and that to me was much better than the Rega in that it sounded less congested and analog sounding, two things I really don't prefer when I'm listening to music through headphones. The only saving grace of the Rega was its musicality really, otherwise it's really not all that great of a source. I am excited for the Concero HD however. Been hearing lots of great things about it, especially paired with the V200.

 

[daerron]

 

Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!

So I've totally gotten rid of my blasphemous Rega DAC and placed my order for a Concero HD. I've returned the LCD-X to Audeze already and gotten a full refund and am now highly pursuing the LCD-XC, which I've committed at the moment to ordering on Monday. I may have made the -X return a little too soon, but my initial problem with the LCD-X, although a really superb headphone, was that the clarity in the mids could have been better, and clarity overall actually and not having such a warm 'analog' sound to everything which I attributed to the Rega DAC/V200 combination. I blame the Rega DAC mostly for everything that went wrong with my experience with the LCD-X basically. Hell, even the Bifrost sans Uber mode was more listenable. Right now I'm curious to find out how the LCD-XC/V200/Concero HD will sound, but now I'm really curious as to how the LCD-X/V200/Concero HD pairing will sound as well. If you were in my situation, which of the two headphones would you choose for the setup I'm going to have? I started gravitating towards the XC after I read about the stuff I liked about it: clearer more focused midrange, more forward midrange and treble, less laid-back sound and overall bass quantity/quality. But looking back at the LCD-X I was stunned at how much potential the things had and how much potential I was missing out on because of the limitations of my setup. Now that I'm going to have a DAC superior to the Rega, will things be just that much better if I go back to the X? Isolation isn't a major concern of mine and could live without it. Any input would be appreciated. Thanks for all your well informed responses to my posts.

 

 
Since you have already returned the LCD-X first check out the LCD-XC. Having a headphone setup that needs a lot of optimization could be very frustrating. There's a good chance that you might like the LCD-XC better in any event and if you don't like it I'll definitely rather point you in the direction of the Hifiman HE-6. 
 
The Concero is has nice clarity in the mids and I'm sure that will be the same for the HD version (and reviews claim it to be more lit up, whatever that means), but I wouldn't blame everything on the Rega DAC, its not a blasphemous DAC as you stated, it was just a system mismatch. The V200 is a warm sounding solid state amp, so it might even mean swapping the V200 for something else. For leaner sounding solid state gear I still think the Rega is quite nice, especially with a good USB->SPDIF converter.

 

[zorin]

 

Mini-review - LCD-X & B.M.C. PureDAC​

 
I spent about a week with the B.M.C. PureDAC and LCD-X.  Prior to getting the PD, I was using a DACport with the -X.  I just sent the PD back to Moon-Audio, and I'm back to the DACport...
 
The problem with the PureDAC was strictly with its USB implementation.  I didn't have a lot of success getting it working reliably with Windows or Mavericks, and that's the only reason I sent it back.  When it did work, it sounded great.  I think it sounded better with ASIO and Foobar2000 in Windows than with Audirvana on the Mac, but that could be in my mind.
 
The LCD-X out of the balanced headphone jack on the PureDAC sounded good.  It wasn't amazing, but it was good.  It seemed to lack some authority, and definitely sounded better at higher volumes than lower.  I think they need more juice than the PD can put out to sound their best.  At least I hope that's the case, because if this is their best, then I don't find them as amazing as everyone else does.
 
With the volume up a little higher than I like to listen, DSD64 (.DSF) files sounded amazing.  

• Diana Krall's The Girl in the Other Room made me think she was actually in THIS room, sitting on my lap, singing to me.  (If this review offends Elvis Costello, I'm sorry.  Blame Audeze.)  
• Michael Jackson's Thriller in DSD was equally amazing, though I got some dropouts in Windows with this one on Foobar and JRiver.  When it played, it was great.  Crystal clear, dynamic, and detailed.  This level of performance makes me wish I had a better amp than the built-in PD to test with.

 
I cannot fault the DAC section of the PD, as it's clearly more detailed and smoother than the CEntrance DACport.  It's been a while since I've had a Gungnir, but this seems to be smoother and warmer than I remember that being, too.  I think if BMC can do something about USB reliability, improve the headphone amp, and keep the price the same, this thing would be well worth the money.  Even without the headphone amp section, the PureDAC would be worth it with a more stable USB implementation.  I haven't heard many good DACs, though, so I might not know what I'm missing.  Compared to Gungnir, Bifrost, and the DACport, this is clearly in a different class.
 
Compared to the LCD-2, the -X is, just as everyone said, more neutral and less dark.  More detailed.  Compared to the HD 800, it's less harsh and more enjoyable.  Compared to the Beyerdynamic T1, it's more neutral and, I think, less musical (but I really love the tonality of the T1).
 
On standard redbook audio, the PD & -X combo was good, but again, not amazing.
 
Some of the specific albums I tested:
 

• My Chemical Romance's first album, I Brought You My Bullets, You Brought Me Your Love, sounded like a mess on these.  (This was, however, also the case with the T1 and the HD 800.  I stopped listening to their music with those headphones, and pretty much only enjoy MCR in the car now.)  All the instruments crashed together and spilled into each other, and everything was blurry.  This album, strangely, has a Dynamic Range Meter score of 10 (according to the foobar plugin), which is probably an arbitrary number in this case.  I usually take that number as a general indicator of the quality of a recording, but it doesn't always hold true.  Then again, maybe this is what MCR is SUPPOSED to sound like.  If so, I'm sad.  If not, I'm still sad.  I like(d) that band.
• Adele's 21 sounded mediocre.  This album has a DR of about 6, though, so it's probably not the best recording.  Clarity was okay on this one, though.  I don't remember listening to it with the older headphones.
• Tom Waits, Heartattack and Vine.  This album is well recorded, and this was the biggest disappointment for me with this setup.  This is where the lackluster dynamics of the PD's headphone output gave me sadpants.  It's also one of the examples where ASIO in Windows sounded better than Audirvana on my Macbook Air.  *shrug*  I'm willing to chalk this up to expectation bias or reverse placebo or something.  I don't know.  One of my requirements for a good setup is that this album sound as good as I think it should.  I still haven't heard it sound better than it did with my T1.

 
That's about all I have time for now... I'm searching for either a buyer for my LCD-X or a better setup to drive it.  White people problems plague me.

I found Beyer T1 to be superior to LCD2 / LCD2.2 in sound and especially superior in euphony / musicality aspect of its sound presentation. If you also find T1 to be better than LCDX in what counts the most in any headphones, that is the heart warming musical sound, then the writing is on the wall - the Audez'e planars do not surpass the best electrodynamic headphones, T1 [ and most probably HD800 and the new K812 as well ]. Thanks for your courage to say it.

 

[Currawong]

  ...the Audez'e planars do not surpass the best electrodynamic headphones, T1 [ and most probably HD800 and the new K812 as well ]. Thanks for your courage to say it.

 
He said "This is where the lackluster dynamics of the PD's headphone output gave me sadpants.". This is the same as what I've found with all the Audeze planars if they are used from an amp that doesn't have the use of planars in mind in the design -- the sound is disappointing. Likewise high-impedance headphones such as the HD-800s from amps that can't consistently provide good voltage swing -- the soundstage sounds collapsed. I'm lucky though, in that I have amps here that do well with both.

 

[zorin]

I found them a bit tizzy and I was using a warm amp. I had a love/hate relationship with the Beyer T1.

What was the serial number ? Above about the serial number 3950 when the Beyerdynamic retuned the T1's driver T1 have an excellent treble; "tizzy" only on badly mastered "tizzy" wrecked tracks / albums. On well recorded music T1 and its treble just sings, sings great. A lot of the studio mastering of popular music in the last twenty years has been grossly substandard. In the domain of the classical music things are much better but the standards has slipped there too. One's arsenal of headphones should include a pair of headphones that have anemic treble presentation so that one can listen to shrill albums. Otherwise with well recorded tracks T1's treble and its euphony reigns supreme.

 

[zorin]

 
Dubstep Girl
Beyer T1 is not tizzy or unrefined with the right amp. Unfortunately the ps1000 is horribly bright and grainy regardless of amp, its one of the worst headphones ive heard and it cost me the most as well.
 
figaro69 
I'm in total agreement...sounds like dubstep girl's ears and mine are shaped the same way!!!

Another vote from me. Good news, you have normal ears and hearing.

 

[F1REStarter]

   
Since you have already returned the LCD-X first check out the LCD-XC. Having a headphone setup that needs a lot of optimization could be very frustrating. There's a good chance that you might like the LCD-XC better in any event and if you don't like it I'll definitely rather point you in the direction of the Hifiman HE-6.
 
The Concero is has nice clarity in the mids and I'm sure that will be the same for the HD version (and reviews claim it to be more lit up, whatever that means), but I wouldn't blame everything on the Rega DAC, its not a blasphemous DAC as you stated, it was just a system mismatch. The V200 is a warm sounding solid state amp, so it might even mean swapping the V200 for something else. For leaner sounding solid state gear I still think the Rega is quite nice, especially with a good USB->SPDIF converter.

 
Thanks, yeah I just decided to go ahead and go with the XC for now. If it turns out it's not to my liking then at least I know my system was the best it could sound for that configuration and that I still have the X to fall back on.

 

[Articnoise]

   
He said "This is where the lackluster dynamics of the PD's headphone output gave me sadpants.". This is the same as what I've found with all the Audeze planars if they are used from an amp that doesn't have the use of planars in mind in the design -- the sound is disappointing. Likewise high-impedance headphones such as the HD-800s from amps that can't consistently provide good voltage swing -- the soundstage sounds collapsed. I'm lucky though, in that I have amps here that do well with both.

I agree on this, even then I don’t have any own experience of the HD 800 specific!  

 

[zorin]

   
He said "This is where the lackluster dynamics of the PD's headphone output gave me sadpants.". This is the same as what I've found with all the Audeze planars if they are used from an amp that doesn't have the use of planars in mind in the design -- the sound is disappointing. Likewise high-impedance headphones such as the HD-800s from amps that can't consistently provide good voltage swing -- the soundstage sounds collapsed. I'm lucky though, in that I have amps here that do well with both.

I was referring to  cizx's comments that the Audez'e headphones he tried do not sound as musical as T1 - Quotes : "Compared to the Beyerdynamic T1, [LCD-X] is more neutral and, I think, less musical (but I love the tonality of the T1)"..."I still haven't heard [the album] sound better than it did with my T1."
Doesn't matter what amp is used, any Audez'e headphones do not have as good 'euphonic' sound as T1. It is even unfair to compare them, the electrodynamics will always trump the planar magnetics in this aspect of sound presentation and on top of it T1 is a master in its class. If I had to give an analogy to tell the difference between an Audez'e headphones and T1 of the ease-of-flow and liveliness of sound then I would say an Audez'e headphones' sound is like a dance of a fat leaden footed dancer and the T1's sound is like a dance of a young and graceful ballet dancer in her prime. Planar magnetics do have leaden tonality compared to the electrodynamic headphones. This shows that there are no perfect headphones, each headphones technology has its advantages and disadvantages and it is left to each one to decide what kind of sound one wants to hear.

 

[dan.gheorghe]

  I was referring to  cizx's comments that the Audez'e headphones he tried do not sound as musical as T1 - Quotes : "Compared to the Beyerdynamic T1, [LCD-X] is more neutral and, I think, less musical (but I love the tonality of the T1)"..."I still haven't heard [the album] sound better than it did with my T1."
Doesn't matter what amp is used, any Audez'e headphones do not have as good 'euphonic' sound as T1. It is even unfair to compare them, the electrodynamics will always trump the planar magnetics in this aspect of sound presentation and on top of it T1 is a master in its class. If I had to give an analogy to tell the difference between an Audez'e headphones and T1 of the ease-of-flow and liveliness of sound then I would say an Audez'e headphones' sound is like a dance of a fat leaden footed dancer and the T1's sound is like a dance of a young and graceful ballet dancer in her prime. Planar magnetics do have leaden tonality compared to the electrodynamic headphones. This shows that there are no perfect headphones, each headphones technology has its advantages and disadvantages and it is left to each one to decide what kind of sound one wants to hear.

Actually ... on the contrary...I think all audezes are more musical(especially lcd3, followed by lcd-x) than both T1 and HD800... "T1 is a master in it's class" ....  Valid  for LCD-3 and LCD-X too.
 

 If you also find T1 to be better than LCDX in what counts the most in any headphones, that is the heart warming musical sound, then the writing is on the wall - the Audez'e planars do not surpass the best electrodynamic headphones, T1 [ and most probably HD800 and the new K812 as well ].

.....  "in what counts the most in any headphones" -> this is subjective. As I said in one of my reviews on lcdx vs hd800 and lcd3:
 

Ah…The voices on LCD-X, the smooth and transparent treble, clean as a whistle, the incredible openness due to the air at the top and the treble, ah..the very engaging and deep bass from the X.
Then HD800 invades my mind :  Ah, the details & micro-details, the layering and depth, the dynamics and micro-dynamics.
And then it gets “better” as LCD-3 gets into my head too and it starts to become crowded there: Ah… that excellent deep bass with full tonality, that euphonic, organic & visceral sound with wonderful instrument extension .

 

[megawhacko]

Got my LCD-X in a few weeks ago. Here's a picture  
 

 

[DoctaCosmos]

mega whacko is that a performa3 speaker behind you?

 

[MacedonianHero]

  I was referring to  cizx's comments that the Audez'e headphones he tried do not sound as musical as T1 - Quotes : "Compared to the Beyerdynamic T1, [LCD-X] is more neutral and, I think, less musical (but I love the tonality of the T1)"..."I still haven't heard [the album] sound better than it did with my T1."
Doesn't matter what amp is used, any Audez'e headphones do not have as good 'euphonic' sound as T1. It is even unfair to compare them, the electrodynamics will always trump the planar magnetics in this aspect of sound presentation and on top of it T1 is a master in its class. If I had to give an analogy to tell the difference between an Audez'e headphones and T1 of the ease-of-flow and liveliness of sound then I would say an Audez'e headphones' sound is like a dance of a fat leaden footed dancer and the T1's sound is like a dance of a young and graceful ballet dancer in her prime. Planar magnetics do have leaden tonality compared to the electrodynamic headphones. This shows that there are no perfect headphones, each headphones technology has its advantages and disadvantages and it is left to each one to decide what kind of sound one wants to hear.

Sorry, but I owned and enjoyed the T1s for many years. I actually owned the first pair sold in Canada in January of 2010.  That said, the LCD-X are the better headphones even though I still hold the T1s in high regard.

 

[megawhacko]

mega whacko is that a performa3 speaker behind you?

They are a pair of emotiva stealth 8s.