[betula]

LCD-X on today's market from a bass fan's point of view:

The LCD-X is a seriously good choice in 2020 for £1150 new (or around £800 used). Let's have a quick look at the competition and alternative choices depending on sound preference:

ZMF Aeolus: £1200, beautifully made, very musical sounding pair of headphones. Needs better amping, bass rolls of as it does with all dynamic drivers.

ZMF Auteur: £1600, beautifully made. Slightly more detailed than the Aeolus but still needs better amping and also has the inherent dynamic driver bass roll off.



Focal Clear: £1400. Clean, clear, dynamic. A bit forward and aggressive to me, with not the biggest soundstage. Bass rolls off as it does with all dynamic drivers.



Alright then, so what is the planar competition if I can't be satisfied with dynamic driver bass? Let's see:

The LCD-X easily outperforms sub £1000 planars like the Sundara or LCD2C, so I won't mention those.



HiFiMan Arya: build quality is less convincing than it is on the Audeze, but the Arya is indeed a nice sounding headphone. Spacious, natural, hard to find a true fault. Also has the much wanted planar bass extension. So why the X and not the Arya for me? Because of the bass slam and energy. The Arya sounds more spacious and more natural, but doesn't have the bass slam and energy, lacks the punchiness of the LCD-X which I enjoy so much with my electronic music. It is a matter of taste I guess.

HiFiMan HE6SE: £1500, needs serious amping. Small soundstage, a more conventional sound compared to the new line of HiFiMan (HEX, HEK, etc.) Good, but nothing exceptional on today's market. The LCD-X sounds bigger, punchier, more spacious.



Empyrean: £2700 yes, this is flagship territory. And I won't deny, the Empyrean sounds leagues better than the LCD-X in everything. Except bass slam and bass punch. And the Empyrean can cost thousands (!) more. (Budget and preference plays a big role here.)



My point is, if you are after the best bass extension, energy and slam looking for a relatively efficient planar under £2000, the LCD-X is hell of a choice these days. It is of course somewhat of a personal taste and choice, but I never enjoyed my electronic music more and knowing it cost fracture of a flagship setup makes me even happier.

So what do I think the LCD-X offers in the light of the short evaluation of these other truly wonderful headphones?



Price for performance: £1150 new is a good price for this performance. £700-800 secondhand for a good and relatively new unit is a steal. Relatively easy to drive: forget DAPs, but you also won't need to spend thousands on DAC/amp combos to bring out the best of these. Bass performance is pretty much as good as it gets with headphones. I could only mention Abyss or LCD4 as truly better bass performers and that says a lot! (Yes, the HE1000V2 or 1000SE has bass too, but I don't find that as satisfying and as meaty as Audeze bass.) Mids and treble, sure there are more lifelike mids for £1200 (Aeolus). More pleasing, more natural and more spacious treble (Arya). But none of them has the brain shaking bass punch and slam of the 106mm Audeze transducers. Yes the LCD-X is relatively heavy, but god I can confirm the LCD-X is a bass connoisseurs delight on a relative budget. (Written by someone who likes his bass deep, punchy and well-refined.)

 

[Tuneslover]

LCD-X on today's market from a bass fan's point of view:

The LCD-X is a seriously good choice in 2020 for £1150 new (or around £800 used). Let's have a quick look at the competition and alternative choices depending on sound preference:

ZMF Aeolus: £1200, beautifully made, very musical sounding pair of headphones. Needs better amping, bass rolls of as it does with all dynamic drivers.

ZMF Auteur: £1600, beautifully made. Slightly more detailed than the Aeolus but still needs better amping and also has the inherent dynamic driver bass roll off.



Focal Clear: £1400. Clean, clear, dynamic. A bit forward and aggressive to me, with not the biggest soundstage. Bass rolls off as it does with all dynamic drivers.



Alright then, so what is the planar competition if I can't be satisfied with dynamic driver bass? Let's see:

The LCD-X easily outperforms sub £1000 planars like the Sundara or LCD2C, so I won't mention those.



HiFiMan Arya: build quality is less convincing than it is on the Audeze, but the Arya is indeed a nice sounding headphone. Spacious, natural, hard to find a true fault. Also has the much wanted planar bass extension. So why the X and not the Arya for me? Because of the bass slam and energy. The Arya sounds more spacious and more natural, but doesn't have the bass slam and energy, lacks the punchiness of the LCD-X which I enjoy so much with my electronic music. It is a matter of taste I guess.

HiFiMan HE6SE: £1500, needs serious amping. Small soundstage, a more conventional sound compared to the new line of HiFiMan (HEX, HEK, etc.) Good, but nothing exceptional on today's market. The LCD-X sounds bigger, punchier, more spacious.



Empyrean: £2700 yes, this is flagship territory. And I won't deny, the Empyrean sounds leagues better than the LCD-X in everything. Except bass slam and bass punch. And the Empyrean can cost thousands (!) more. (Budget and preference plays a big role here.)



My point is, if you are after the best bass extension, energy and slam looking for a relatively efficient planar under £2000, the LCD-X is hell of a choice these days. It is of course somewhat of a personal taste and choice, but I never enjoyed my electronic music more and knowing it cost fracture of a flagship setup makes me even happier.

So what do I think the LCD-X offers in the light of the short evaluation of these other truly wonderful headphones?



Price for performance: £1150 new is a good price for this performance. £700-800 secondhand for a good and relatively new unit is a steal. Relatively easy to drive: forget DAPs, but you also won't need to spend thousands on DAC/amp combos to bring out the best of these. Bass performance is pretty much as good as it gets with headphones. I could only mention Abyss or LCD4 as truly better bass performers and that says a lot! (Yes, the HE1000V2 or 1000SE has bass too, but I don't find that as satisfying and as meaty as Audeze bass.) Mids and treble, sure there are more lifelike mids for £1200 (Aeolus). More pleasing, more natural and more spacious treble (Arya). But none of them has the brain shaking bass punch and slam of the 106mm Audeze transducers. Yes the LCD-X is relatively heavy, but god I can confirm the LCD-X is a bass connoisseurs delight on a relative budget. (Written by someone who likes his bass deep, punchy and well-refined.)

How does the bass of the X compare with the 2C?

 

[betula]

How does the bass of the X compare with the 2C?

Much cleaner with better extension.
2C bass is still fun though.

 

[whill]

Coming from Beyerdynamic T1 2nd Gen, i can say that T1 bass are a bit bloated and less defined compared to LCD X. T1 also have recessed mids compared to LCD X. In terms of treble, LCD X is less pronounced compared to T1, it is a little bit peaky on poor recordings but not as excessive and sibilant as T1.

It was a blind buy with LCD X since i do not have any place to demo. My ideal sound signature is almost in line with T1 but not with bloated bass, recessed mids and sibilant treble. When i got the LCD X i was surprised that it was not as "dark" i envisioned it to be and very much inline with the stated prefered sound signature.

Current set up are:

Tablet (UAPP) > NAD D1050 (XLR) > Auralic Taurus MKII (XLR) > Audeze LCD X (SE) / Beyerdynamic T1 2nd Gen (Balanced)
> Rotel RDD 1580 (SE) > Burson Soloist SL (SE) > Audeze LCD X (SE) / Beyerdynamic T1 2nd Gen (SE)

 

[Swisshead]

Betula, thank you very much for the beautiful report. I can so absolutely confirm. Only use it for trance, it's unbeatable. Not to forget the extreme bass speed, the accuracy, the power, yes, there is nothing better in this price range. Drive it balanced on the iCan, it goes one step further than on the ADI. Performance is even better.

Where I hate it is with extremely aggressive mixed pop songs. That's where it gets aggressive, because it's a bright headphone. I prefer other headphones. It works, too, but you just have to take the highs down massively.

 

[betula]

Betula, thank you very much for the beautiful report. I can so absolutely confirm. Only use it for trance, it's unbeatable. Not to forget the extreme bass speed, the accuracy, the power, yes, there is nothing better in this price range. Drive it balanced on the iCan, it goes one step further than on the ADI. Performance is even better.

Where I hate it is with extremely aggressive mixed pop songs. That's where it gets aggressive, because it's a bright headphone. I prefer other headphones. It works, too, but you just have to take the highs down massively.

The X feels bright after conventionally darker and warmer headphones like the LCD2, LCD3. I also found some treble peaks quite prominent at the beginning. The more I listen however the tamer the treble becomes. The X is still an Audeze, meaning it is a darker/warmer approach of neutral with astonishing bass performance. Focal treble bothers me. HD800 treble bothers me. The X has the maximum level of treble which I can still find enjoyable. Just the right spot of being detailed but not harsh or aggressive. Anything more than thins I would find unbearable, but the X's treble is still bearable with the maximum amount of detail and without sounding harsh.

I don't listen to aggressive pop songs, I mostly listen to chilled out psychedelic ambient. And the X is fabulous with that kind of music.

 

[Swisshead]

Betula, yes for aggressive pop songs I use the NightHawk. That's perfect. That's the dullest thing I've ever heard.

 

[betula]

Betula, yes for aggressive pop songs I use the NightHawk. That's perfect. That's the dullest thing I've ever heard.

I really liked the Nighthawks back then. I think they are uniquely great headphones. But as I moved on to better sounding headphones I was never able to go back to them, even though I tried a couple of times. I used to love the Nighthawks but after the LCD2C they just sounded a dark/warm congested mess. Perhaps it is time to give them another try just for fun. Or for the sake of nostalgia.

 

[Swisshead]

So the NightHawk doesn't even sound bad, for the terrace even surprisingly good. It harmonizes very well with the Cobalt. It does not need much power. It is always a change to other headphones.

 

[Swisshead]

Betula, have you ever heard the Rad-0? As opposed to the X? I'd still be very interested in that.

At the moment Corona sale for 2000USD.

 

[betula]

Betula, have you ever heard the Rad-0? As opposed to the X? I'd still be very interested in that.

At the moment Corona sale for 2000USD.

I am very interested in the Rad-0, but after hearing the LCD4 and knowing the Rad-0 has a much smaller transducer I am not that interested anymore...

 

[borrego]

I am very interested in the Rad-0, but after hearing the LCD4 and knowing the Rad-0 has a much smaller transducer I am not that interested anymore...

I actually find the RAD-0's driver size being almost "optimal" for balance between bass/mid/treble textures. The RAD-0's higher strength magnets (N52 comparing to Audeze's N50) concentrating on smaller driver size give better resolution/textures (comparing to Audeze) for woodwind and brass intruments. Hifiman's woodwind and brass reproduction is even worse, sounding fake.

I agree the LCD-X is a good buy given the current price. I find the XC an even better buy as I can convert to X with set of grills, easily having both the closed and open version.

 

[whill]

Hi,
So last night, I did a comparison of the LCD X using 2 amps which are Auralic Taurus MKII and Burson Soloist SL, I just wanted to share my impressions:

Burson Soloist SL (Single Ended)
Now, I know why many are saying that this is a good combo. With a full bass, meaty mids and an open treble it really makes the music more palpable. One of the key genres with this combo are Jazz, Acoustic / Live and other well mastered Pop genre. Of course, poorly mastered music will definitely sound either peaky or either congested.

Auralic Taurus MKII (Single Ended)
Pairing this amp with LCD X honestly gave me a mixed impressions and feels it the amp sounded anemic. Switching back and forth with Burson, the Auralic sounded lean in comparison. The bass is not as full, the mids are a bit far away from you (compared to "more in your face" in Burson) and the treble it is a bit more pronounced but it does have more air into it. I tried playing different genres to confirm this and it did, Burson really sounded full compared to Auralic. Does it really mean, that the Burson outshines the Auralic for a lot less money? Things changed when I played orchestral music, it as from a Mcintosh Demo Disc and sadly forgot the name. While listening that certain passage from Auralic, I can really feel the openness, wide presentation and fast transients - so I decided to use the same piece with Burson and it came to me that this is where the difference of 2 amps lies.

Auralic is really in control of the LCD X while Burson's control is a little bit looser - this is the best that I could describe the two in layman's terms. Auralic's presentation using LCD X is "linear-wide", the bass is tight, fast paced, mids are a little bit farther giving a somewhat wider presentation and treble is smooth, a nice zing to it but never became troublesome. Burson's presentation on the other hand is "intimate-bloomy". Bass presentation on the Burson has a little bit of bloom, it is really engaging, mids even if its a little bit closed in, it is full bodied and the treble sounded like less refined compared to treble of Auralic.

Thank you for reading.
Whill

 

[gazzington]

Hi
I like metal and electronic music. Would these be a good set for that? Also, would a Hugo 2 be good enough for them?
I’ve never owned an audeze before and am considering these, lcd 2c, lcd3 and focal clears
Many thanks

 

[whill]

Hi
I like metal and electronic music. Would these be a good set for that? Also, would a Hugo 2 be good enough for them?
I’ve never owned an audeze before and am considering these, lcd 2c, lcd3 and focal clears
Many thanks

Hi,

I can only attest in my experiences since I have 2 (i think) neutral-bright headphones which are T1 2nd Gen and recently acquired LCD X.

I also listen to some electronic/edm genres and at times, it can sound bright/sharp but not as piercing as T1 2nd gen. In terms of bass it has a lot of weight to it and can sound really tight and fast (if you are coming from bass-heavy headphones, you might find the X a little bit bass shy). Mids however have different takes about it. some say that is sucked in (specially upper mids) that is why it sounds muffled but in my case i didnt hear any of that atleast in my unit.

I hope this helps a little bit.

Thank you.