[TMRaven]

The LCD-X has a treble peak around 8-9khz, and it does bring out some excess sibilance.  I'd consider that just as much of a coloration as the LCD2, which tended to have rolled off treble.  Now it's nothing too major, and a lot of people will pass it off as such, but the fact remains that it's still there.

 

[ohotonge]

The LCD-X has a treble peak around 8-9khz, and it does bring out some excess sibilance.  I'd consider that just as much of a coloration as the LCD2, which tended to have rolled off treble.  Now it's nothing too major, and a lot of people will pass it off as such, but the fact remains that it's still there.

Well, that's weird becuase I don't see any excessive treble peak when compared with other lcds, at least in my case.

[/IMG]

The latter is lcd-3 and the former is lcd-x.
May be, there are products variation.

 

[tvolpe1600]

I was expecting to hear some treble intensity based on early reviews but was surprised at their warmth.

 

[RCBinTN]

   
Sibilance is the "S" sound, which happens to be centered in the treble around 7 to 8 KHz.
 
"Lack of integration of sibilance" means that the singing voice has the illusion of being two sources of sound--one source producing the "S" and the other source producing the rest of the voice.
 
I don't think the LCD-X is accurate, at least not at 100 hours of burn-in. It doesn't integrate sibilance as well as, say, the HE-500 (which I pick as an example because it's around the same brightness).
 
A "harsh treble" is any of a variety of distortions which make treble sounds unpleasant. Some people don't really notice this, or tolerate all kinds of sounds. If the recording has a harsh treble, then a problem in the headphone like lack of integration of sibilance will exaggerate that harshness.
 
Let's give the X another 100 hours of burn-in.

IMO the X sound very pleasant including the 7-8 KHz region.
 

 

[TonyNewman]

 
IMO the X sound very pleasant including the 7-8 KHz region.
 

 
+1.
 
I am perceiving a slight prominence in this region, but I am thinking this has more to do with my ears (and human sensitivity to higher pitched sounds in general) than any fault in the LCD-X.
 
I picked a test track with plenty of high pitched output - 'Goldfinger' as sung by Shirley Bassey. Plenty of strong female vocals and high pitched brass in this track - and I cannot hear any hint of sibilance (as defined in an earlier post) on my Vega/Taurus setup. The high vocals and brass are very prominent in this track, even dominant, but that is how the track is supposed to be (I think).
 
I then swapped out my Vega DAC for my Simaudio Moon 100D and ran the track again (and again and again ...). Considerable loss of presence, detail and separation - but not a hint of sibilance.
 
I then ran the output from the 100D into my WA6 and tried again. This time I did detect a few brief moments of separation of the 'S' sound from the rest of the vocals. Very brief and not very pronounced, but it was there.
 
I then went back to the Vega/Taurus rig and listened very carefully to the moments in the track where the 100D/WA6 displayed some sibilance. Nada - absolutely nothing. Everything was tight and controlled.
 
If the LCD-X is prone to sibilance I can't detect it on the Vega/Taurus, and only briefly when using the 100D/WA6.
 
EDIT - after some further comparisons with my HE6 (a much more neutral and even headphone IMHO), I would change my view from a slight prominence to a significant prominence in the upper mids / lower treble. I am not sure if this is a good or a bad thing yet - on some tracks it works well, others not so much.

 

[sling5s]

I'm hoping in the future to get the LCD-X and Chord Hugo.  Currently have the LCD-2. 
I'm still wondering though, which is better for rock, LCD-3F or LCD-X?  I'm assuming LCD-X because of it's greater treble presence and (less than LCD-3 but nevertheless) harder hitting bass.

 

[commtrd]

 

 
IMO the X sound very pleasant including the 7-8 KHz region.
 

 
+1.
 
I am perceiving a slight prominence in this region, but I am thinking this has more to do with my ears (and human sensitivity to higher pitched sounds in general) than any fault in the LCD-X.
 
I picked a test track with plenty of high pitched output - 'Goldfinger' as sung by Shirley Bassey. Plenty of strong female vocals and high pitched brass in this track - and I cannot hear any hint of sibilance (as defined in an earlier post) on my Vega/Taurus setup. The high vocals and brass are very prominent in this track, even dominant, but that is how the track is supposed to be (I think).
 
I then swapped out my Vega DAC for my Simaudio Moon 100D and ran the track again (and again and again ...). Considerable loss of presence, detail and separation - but not a hint of sibilance.
 
I then ran the output from the 100D into my WA6 and tried again. This time I did detect a few brief moments of separation of the 'S' sound from the rest of the vocals. Very brief and not very pronounced, but it was there.
 
I then went back to the Vega/Taurus rig and listened very carefully to the moments in the track where the 100D/WA6 displayed some sibilance. Nada - absolutely nothing. Everything was tight and controlled.
 
If the LCD-X is prone to sibilance I can't detect it on the Vega/Taurus, and only briefly when using the 100D/WA6.
 
EDIT - after some further comparisons with my HE6 (a much more neutral and even headphone IMHO), I would change my view from a slight prominence to a significant prominence in the upper mids / lower treble. I am not sure if this is a good or a bad thing yet - on some tracks it works well, others not so much.

So would you say the X still have just a touch of that good ol' Audeze warmth? Just extremely curious about what to expect when the new phones show up. Would be nice if they still have some of the warmth, beautiful mids, along with some increased capability in the treble region, a bit more neutrality, and staging etc. I have read all the reviews but can't recall any addressing just how much of the Audeze house sound remains with the X.

 

[MacedonianHero]

 
So would you say the X still have just a touch of that good ol' Audeze warmth? Just extremely curious about what to expect when the new phones show up. Would be nice if they still have some of the warmth, beautiful mids, along with some increased capability in the treble region, a bit more neutrality, and staging etc. I have read all the reviews but can't recall any addressing just how much of the Audeze house sound remains with the X.

I would definitely say so....and in the bass department... they (LCD-3 and LCD-X) both go equally low and hit hard (like all Audeze headphones). But the LCD-3's bass does linger longer with more bloom. I preferred the slightly "tighter" presentation of the LCD-X. 

 

[TonyNewman]

 
So would you say the X still have just a touch of that good ol' Audeze warmth? Just extremely curious about what to expect when the new phones show up. Would be nice if they still have some of the warmth, beautiful mids, along with some increased capability in the treble region, a bit more neutrality, and staging etc. I have read all the reviews but can't recall any addressing just how much of the Audeze house sound remains with the X.

 
 

  I would definitely say so....and in the bass department... they (LCD-3 and LCD-X) both go equally low and hit hard (like all Audeze headphones). But the LCD-3's bass does linger longer with more bloom. I preferred the slightly "tighter" presentation of the LCD-X.

I can't compare the LCD-X to the LCD-3 or LCD-2, as I have never heard those phones. Compared to the HE6 it definitely has some colouration and some upper mid / lower treble prominance. Both my HD800 and HE6 sound closer to neutral to my ears. I think the LCD-X has a great sound, but it isn't neutral, and might not suit everyone for everything.
 
These phones seem to need a long burn in. I have over 150 hours on my LCD-X and I am still noticing some improvement.

 

[MacedonianHero]

   
 
I can't compare the LCD-X to the LCD-3 or LCD-2, as I have never heard those phones. Compared to the HE6 it definitely has some colouration and some upper mid / lower treble prominance. Both my HD800 and HE6 sound closer to neutral to my ears. I think the LCD-X has a great sound, but it isn't neutral, and might not suit everyone for everything.
 
These phones seem to need a long burn in. I have over 150 hours on my LCD-X and I am still noticing some improvement.

 
Yeah, we're going to have to disagree...I think the HD800/HE6s have some issues with the upper mids/lower treble (while the LCD-X sound more natural). The upper mids/treble are the areas I'd like to change most on the HD800/HE-6s...not a lot mind you.

 

[commtrd]

 

 
So would you say the X still have just a touch of that good ol' Audeze warmth? Just extremely curious about what to expect when the new phones show up. Would be nice if they still have some of the warmth, beautiful mids, along with some increased capability in the treble region, a bit more neutrality, and staging etc. I have read all the reviews but can't recall any addressing just how much of the Audeze house sound remains with the X.

I would definitely say so....and in the bass department... they (LCD-3 and LCD-X) both go equally low and hit hard (like all Audeze headphones). But the LCD-3's bass does linger longer with more bloom. I preferred the slightly "tighter" presentation of the LCD-X. 

Great! Sounds like I made the right decision then as it seems to tick all the boxes I was looking for. Hopefully it will not require a couple hundred hours to settle in and start rockin' right...

 

[TonyNewman]

   
Yeah, we're going to have to disagree...I think the HD800/HE6s have some issues with the upper mids/lower treble (while the LCD-X sound more natural). The upper mids/treble are the areas I'd like to change most on the HD800/HE-6s...not a lot mind you.

All my headphones (HE6/HD800/LCD-X) are quite new and are still changing with burn in. My view might easily change in a few weeks, but right now I am hearing a more 'even' sound from the HE6 and HD800. Something about LCD-X seems to give a boost to the upper mids / lower treble region. This is often a good thing to my ears - female vocals in particular have a presence and definition that is just stunning.
 
The (mild) colouration I quite like.

 

[screwdriver]

   
Yeah, we're going to have to disagree...I think the HD800/HE6s have some issues with the upper mids/lower treble (while the LCD-X sound more natural). The upper mids/treble are the areas I'd like to change most on the HD800/HE-6s...not a lot mind you.

i did find this on the hd800 i rented for 2 weeks . i stopped using the lcd-x for 2 weeks straight to get me used to the sound of the sennheiser . I was wishing i would like the h800  and at the same time feeling bad too coz ill spend another $1499 if i did . I can now rest peacefully at night knowing i tried it and i dont have to buy it .

 

[Racy]

My X 's left channel just popped a couple of times and died ! Anybody else had this problem?

 

[screwdriver]

My X 's left channel just popped a couple of times and died ! Anybody else had this problem?

not yet - hope not for me .. update us on the problem man.....