[groovyd]

i must have gotten lucky, mine was smooth as silk right out of the box and still is.  never really had a significant burn in, slightly but not so much like my T1 did.

 

[podeschi]

i must have gotten lucky, mine was smooth as silk right out of the box and still is.  never really had a significant burn in, slightly but not so much like my T1 did.

Agree mine was smooth as silk no sibilance whatsoever. XC was a bit bright at first but calmed down after 100 hours burn in via burn in cd.

 

[screwdriver]

in my system - no siblance since new - 
maybe its my system and maybe the other headphones i owned that time that im used to .

 

[Kiwikat]

I had no sibilance either.  Between a day of pink noise and a new cable, the highs have thankfully lost some of their sparkle.  My ears are quite sensitive to high frequency sounds, so I am glad they settled down.

 

[TonyNewman]

Originally Posted by johncarm /img/forum/go_quote.gif
 
However, reading above in this thread, it looks like a lot of people feel the treble on the X is harsh right out of the box. I've got it burning in with pink noise right now and I'll give it 100 hours then listen again.

 
100 hours burn in made all the difference for mine, and they are still getting better and better.

 

[Crashem]

Agree mine was smooth as silk no sibilance whatsoever. XC was a bit bright at first but calmed down after 100 hours burn in via burn in cd.

What burn in cd are you using? I typically just use tone generator to do pink or white noise. But recently using isotek as major changes in system and need multiple parts to burn in.

 

[BeyerMonster]

  Before I bought my own LCD-X, I rented an LCD-3 and brand new LCD-X from thecableco.com to sample with my Schiit stack, and to compare with the LCD2.2 I owned at the time. The 2.2 and 3 had already been burned in, so I had the new X burn in over a weekend for 50 hours.
 
My findings were that the 2.2 and the 3 matched best with Mjolnir/Gungnir, in terms of refining their best attributes, (bass for 2.2, mids for 3) but I still preferred the X over the others overall. My one minor complaint is that the highs on the X seemed just a bit forward and harsh with this setup, a small concession to make for the complete tonal clarity and balance. That, and I probably listen at too-high volumes anyway.

IMO, it's not that the X is bright or harsh, it's the Gungnir.

 

[podeschi]

What burn in cd are you using? I typically just use tone generator to do pink or white noise. But recently using isotek as major changes in system and need multiple parts to burn in.

I use isotek or esoteric. Either work. Put on repeat.

 

[Advert]

Hi guys,

I've just tried lcd x with calyx M


Impressive!

 

[the8o88y]

  IMO, it's not that the X is bright or harsh, it's the Gungnir.

 
Correct, with that setup, either or both Mjolnir and Gungnir made the LCD-X highs seem slightly bright and harsh as indicated in my post, and up to that point I hadn't tested the X on any other setup.
 
When I tried the X with my current setup, the experience was taken to the next level. Everything is more refined, more 'real.'

 

[commtrd]

How does the sound staging (in particular) on the X compare with LCD3? I was reading thru the earlier posts on this thread and it was stated that the X has a SMALLER soundstage than does the 3s?!?
 
I was under the impression that the X had improved sound staging so kind of confused now. Maybe I should just rent the X for a while to enable comparison with my 3s before making the final plunge. I think the X is more the direction I would like to end up at but not if the sound stage is even smaller than the LCD3 sound staging. I do know I would like more micro detail, airiness, soundstaging, while maintaining the excellent bass and mids with some more sparkle in the highs as well. Guess I am just kind of apprehensive about turning loose my LCD3s as they really are nice phones especially with the M/G stack I have now.

 

[Tumi96]

Sorry if this has been asked and answered, but why are people interested in the LCD-X when for basically the same money they can have the LCD-3s?

 

[tvolpe1600]

They are both reference flagships but have different sound signatures. Another way of looking at your question is you can have the 3 for 300 less if you prefer the signature of the X.

 

[podeschi]

Sorry if this has been asked and answered, but why are people interested in the LCD-X when for basically the same money they can have the LCD-3s?

I listened to both. LCD 3 has amazing midrange but I went for X which had better (open and extended) treble.

 

[Tumi96]

I listened to both. LCD 3 has amazing midrange but I went for X which had better (open and extended) treble.

Thanks