[songmic]

 

Not for me - cant recall if the other comment was from the same Head-Fier though  

All this talk of the X as a V or U-shaped headphone brings me back to the HD800 - I believe this is my endgame headphone. When I want a 'fun' headphone, I reach for my Fidelio X1 - they're lighter and more comfortable than my Audeze cans and I just love the way Philips have voiced these cans.  The X is good for about an hour - from that point I have to make a decision re HD800 vs X1. 

Since this was my first comment regarding the 560's, I was clearly not the originator of your 'other' comment. I'm not sure what the implication of your comment was.

FWIW, I have no agenda and, in fact, own 3 of Fang's offerings...HE-4 (now THERE'S a V shaped Ortho), HE-400's and HE-6's. I was just disappointed by the sound and build quality of the 560's. The weight and comfort were nice tho. It's simply my opinion. If it's an unpopular one, so be it.

 
Your opinion regarding HE-560 refers to pre-revision HE-560, am I correct? The newer revision is said to sound better than the first batch.

 

[estreeter]

Since this was my first comment regarding the 560's, I was clearly not the originator of your 'other' comment. I'm not sure what the implication of your comment was.

FWIW, I have no agenda and, in fact, own 3 of Fang's offerings...HE-4 (now THERE'S a V shaped Ortho), HE-400's and HE-6's. I was just disappointed by the sound and build quality of the 560's. The weight and comfort were nice tho. It's simply my opinion. If it's an unpopular one, so be it.

 
It's neither popular nor unpopular and I have no problem whatsoever with the fact that two people have now expressed a similar opinion about a headphone that I've never even heard. 

 

[leesure]

Your opinion regarding HE-560 refers to pre-revision HE-560, am I correct? The newer revision is said to sound better than the first batch.

It was a copy sent to a reviewer for review. I haven't followed closely enough to know revisions. It was a few weeks ago.

FWIW, I heard the Oppo's the same day. They are another lighter, more comfortable ortho for which I had high hopes. While I preferred them to the 560’s, I found the mids to be a little dry and veiled.

I don't think the LCD-X's are perfect by any stretch, but I do think they are sonically the best ortho's on the market...and I prefer the ortho sound in general.

 

[leesure]

It's neither popular nor unpopular and I have no problem whatsoever with the fact that two people have now expressed a similar opinion about a headphone that I've never even heard. 

It was the "Not for me - cant recall if the other comment was from the same Head-Fier though " portion of your comment that gave me pause. I read that as an implication that I was running around the forum bad mouthing the 560’s with some agenda.

I just callz em like I hearz em. That's why I can never be a successful reviewer.

 

[groovyd]

I use the XC at work and the X at home but yeah working for a video gaming company the attitude is quite relaxed about things like this.  Pretty much everyone has on a pair of something all day.

 

[Focker]

  IMO, those comments are WAY off bass. And the LCD-X measure flat from 2kHz down to 20Hz and the treble is hardly "spiked" or tilted in anyway.

 
I agree. The X was the first headphone I bought where I hadn't seen the FR or any objective data before purchasing. When I saw the data it basically confirmed exactly what I had been hearing, which was a very neutral headphone that was a nice step up from the 2s in basically every area other than aesthetics. (Can't help it, I just loved the bamboo on the 2s..and I'm sure the Rosewood is even nicer.)  Even further supporting my assessment of the X, it exposed ALL of my other headphones for what they were, to the degree that I had a hard time rotating through my stash anymore. Not to say I didn't KNOW what my Grados and Beyers were before, because I did, but all of a sudden I had a headphone that was so much superior to everything else I had that I was focused more on their faults than their strengths, which is the exact opposite of how I had been enjoying them to that point. 
 
Even further, I then saw that most people whose opinions I respect and consider valid/accurate were echoing my own experience...so that's basically confirmation of my findings from three different sources, all of which basically said the same thing with very little variation. If someone has a pair that sounds u-shaped, something is amiss. 
 
By the way, Happy Fathers Day to all the Dads out there

 

[shultzee]

   
I agree. The X was the first headphone I bought where I hadn't seen the FR or any objective data before purchasing. When I saw the data it basically confirmed exactly what I had been hearing, which was a very neutral headphone that was a nice step up from the 2s in basically every area other than aesthetics. (Can't help it, I just loved the bamboo on the 2s..and I'm sure the Rosewood is even nicer.)  Even further supporting my assessment of the X, it exposed ALL of my other headphones for what they were, to the degree that I had a hard time rotating through my stash anymore. Not to say I didn't KNOW what my Grados and Beyers were before, because I did, but all of a sudden I had a headphone that was so much superior to everything else I had that I was focused more on their faults than their strengths, which is the exact opposite of how I had been enjoying them to that point. 
 
Even further, I then saw that most people whose opinions I respect and consider valid/accurate were echoing my own experience...so that's basically confirmation of my findings from three different sources, all of which basically said the same thing with very little variation. If someone has a pair that sounds u-shaped, something is amiss. 
 
By the way, Happy Fathers Day to all the Dads out there

Excellent post     

 

[Racy]

I agree. The X was the first headphone I bought where I hadn't seen the FR or any objective data before purchasing. When I saw the data it basically confirmed exactly what I had been hearing, which was a very neutral headphone that was a nice step up from the 2s in basically every area other than aesthetics. (Can't help it, I just loved the bamboo on the 2s..and I'm sure the Rosewood is even nicer.)  Even further supporting my assessment of the X, it exposed ALL of my other headphones for what they were, to the degree that I had a hard time rotating through my stash anymore. Not to say I didn't KNOW what my Grados and Beyers were before, because I did, but all of a sudden I had a headphone that was so much superior to everything else I had that I was focused more on their faults than their strengths, which is the exact opposite of how I had been enjoying them to that point. 

Even further, I then saw that most people whose opinions I respect and consider valid/accurate were echoing my own experience...so that's basically confirmation of my findings from three different sources, all of which basically said the same thing with very little variation. If someone has a pair that sounds u-shaped, something is amiss. 

By the way, Happy Fathers Day to all the Dads out there

Same to you, Happy listening fathers day, hope you got something new and good!

 

[musikaladin]

 

The HD800 is not a complete winner, but each excels in different genres.

On a side note, while I had initially preferred the LCD-X to HD800 for being more versatile, I'm coming back to HD800 every now and then because I began to feel that the LCD-X's mids sound somewhat laid-back. I don't know if it's just me, but I find the LCD-X's sound signature somewhat V-shaped, like my previously owned TH900. For me, the midrange is very important, and I prefer it to be forward-sounding than recessed. This is one area where the LCD-3 beats the LCD-X in my opinion... the LCD-X is not necessarily a more neutral sounding headphone than LCD-3 like many people say, but just a tad less warmer sounding one with stronger treble energy. The more neutral sounding HD800 seems to have better mids than LCD-X, too.

This is why I'm eager to try out the upcoming HE-560, and compare its midrange to that of LCD-X. I have an HE-560 pre-ordered.

It's not just you.  I'm in full agreement that the LCD-X is a u-shaped headphone, compared to other headphones and even compared to other Audeze headphones.  Its upper midrange is more recessed than the LCD-2, LCD-XC, HD650, HD600, HE-560.

Nevertheless I'm getting my particular LCD-X RMA'd to see if the replacement will be better sounding (if they do anything to it in the first place.)

...the discussion about the X's mid-range already started some thousands of posts earlier in this thread...
Some claimed it is V-shaped, some said it is veiled and somhow blur while the majority was always pointing out that the X's mids are amongst the most detailed and balanced they ever heard.

Now, my own story with the X covers all of it:
In the first 2 to 3 weeks it was quite V-shaped. Acually I liked it since it was still on the more balanced side of FRs compared to the HE400 or my Denons.

But then things changed. The mids became more prominent, louder, but at the same time somehow blur.... In other words more quantity and less quality. I wasn't amused. I then started playing round with different amps and did a real hard-core burn-in (white noise 24 hrs a day over several weeks ony interrupted by listening sessions).

Now, to make a long story short, after that burn-in and better matching with amps I do in fact agree with the above mentioned majority... Wonderful mids, all in all a very balanced headphone. Lightyears away from a V-shaped FR.

I got best results with transformer-coupled tube amps and lower output-impendance transistors (resulting in a reasonably high damping factor).
I idedified the critical point for output-impendance being approx at the 4 ohm range. Anything below that is doing very well if the amp can also deliver sufficient voltage... then sound nirvana should be just around the next corner.

Why my X tookT so long to finally "wake up" I have no idea. Maybe there are certain differences between production lots since most others around here obviously didn't need such excessive burn-in to get that result. Anyway, I am glad that my X is now performing to my expectations.

 

[Glam Bash]

Now, my own story with the X covers all of it:
In the first 2 to 3 weeks it was quite V-shaped. Acually I liked it since it was still on the more balanced side of FRs compared to the HE400 or my Denons.

But then things changed. The mids became more prominent, louder, but at the same time somehow blur.... 

Why my X tookT so long to finally "wake up" I have no idea. Maybe there are certain differences between production lots since most others around here obviously didn't need such excessive burn-in to get that result. Anyway, I am glad that my X is now performing to my expectations.

Thanks for this. I have about 60 hours on my X's and my listening sessions have been making me nutty. I am at the part where the midrange is kind of shouty.

 

[musikaladin]

Now, my own story with the X covers all of it:

In the first 2 to 3 weeks it was quite V-shaped. Acually I liked it since it was still on the more balanced side of FRs compared to the HE400 or my Denons.


But then things changed. The mids became more prominent, louder, but at the same time somehow blur.... 


Why my X tookT so long to finally "wake up" I have no idea. Maybe there are certain differences between production lots since most others around here obviously didn't need such excessive burn-in to get that result. Anyway, I am glad that my X is now performing to my expectations.

Thanks for this. I have about 60 hours on my X's and my listening sessions have been making me nutty. I am at the part where the midrange is kind of shouty.

If things do not get better with burn-in you could also try playing with amps... just have a look here and further follow the trace...

 

[Racy]

Thanks for this. I have about 60 hours on my X's and my listening sessions have been making me nutty. I am at the part where the midrange is kind of shouty.

My Xs took about 120 hours burn-in to " Wake - up", they were originally quite veiled, but now they have woken -up , I think they're unparalled amongst headphones of this class and price range. Detailed, natural and truthful!, They also see to be still improving!

 

[RCBinTN]

  with the X its like you're there !
 
 

Jay - catching up after 2-weeks in Germany - that was simply Awesome!!  My mouth was hanging open catchin' flies.  Thx.
RCBinTN

 

[RCBinTN]

It works, but is far from optimal. Once you've heard it on a proper rig, listening to them from an iPhone just sounds lifeless. For travel or bedside, might I recommend a HeadAmp Pico. It's a terrific DAC/Amp that allows you to get digital out of the iPhone using the lightning to USB adapter. The Amp section is plenty of power to bring the LCD-X(C) to life. And it's small enough to fit right inside the travel case.

Thanks for the tip!!  I also like the X sound straight from a laptop computer / USB dragonfly DAC.  Decent sound and easy travel since the laptop always goes with me.

 

[jaywillin]

 
Jay - catching up after 2-weeks in Germany - that was simply Awesome!!  My mouth was hanging open catchin' flies.  Thx.
RCBinTN

i did the same thing it was startling , HOLYS*&%^ !!  lol