[fortitude]

I should've just modded a hard hat and bolted the LCD ear cups to the plastic brim, I could wear them all day lol

 

[roskodan]

or if it's your only headphone you could just take off the cups and glue them to your ears, the cable is detachable so no problem there !

 

[dan.gheorghe]

Ok, after more listening I had to change some stuff I wrote about LCD-X in the review, important stuff. I think the LCD-X opened up or I understood their sound better.

 

[preproman]

  Ok, after more listening I had to change some stuff I wrote about LCD-X in the review, important stuff. I think the LCD-X opened up or I understood their sound better.

 
In the review could you give us a mark of what was changed.  Like blue words = edit or something?

 

[dan.gheorghe]

   
In the review could you give us a mark of what was changed.  Like blue words = edit or something?

 
It is mostly about instrument separation, imaging, soundstage and final thoughts. I was mislead because of the more laid back sound of LCD-3 with more recessed higher mids and treble and the better instrument extension.
I will add here some of the stuff I changed/added.
 
The Fazor part prevents the delays from the sound that is produced by the membrane because of the magnets (they are in  between the membrane and the ear)  creating an uniform sound-wave leading to better instrument separation and imaging because of fewer distortions.
 
 
Infected Mushrooms –  Becoming Insane
I liked the bass on LCD-3 more on this song as it had more body and the guitars from the beginning had more texture and extension, but LCD-X did a very good job as well as it had a faster in your face sound and better PRAT with better instrument separation and imaging. The bass didn’t had so much body but it was faster and had  more punch.
 
Leonard Cohen – Banjo
I just love the voices with LCD-X. They have a whole new presence than with LCD-3. All the upper mids and treble are more forward , not recessed as with the 3,  making you rediscover your music. The voice integrates a lot better throughout the instruments and the song with LCD-X.  The guitars had better extension with LCD-3 but the instrument separation was better with LCD-X.
 
Westminster Choir – Festival Te Deum
I think this song slapped me back to reality. I thought that LCD-3 had a wider soundstage at first, due to a more laid back sound, but  knowing the size of the cathedral I can now say that LCD-X has better soundstage than the elder brother. The height of the soundstage and the voice separation are amazing with it. The chorus is a pleasure to listen to and it fills the scene with an incredible presence and transparency.
 
Mids
Even though LCD-X doesn’t have all the magic LCD-3 has in the mids, they have better clarity and the upper mids are more present and more enjoyable with LCD-X. When I said magic I was referring to the instrument extension for example which is better with LCD-3. For example the guitar chords have a fuller life.
 
Openness
I have chosen this word very carefully.  Initially I was fooled by the more laid back sound of LCD-3 and considered it to have bigger soundstage than LCD-X.  However LCD-X is more opened than LCD-3 with more air on top and better positioning. The height of the soundstage is amazing and in some ways the sound opens up  even after HD800, the X having a taller soundstage.
 
Imaging & Instrument separation
Having faster transients, the instrument separation is very good. At first I thought LCD-3 has better instrument separation because of the more laid back sound and better instrument extension. However LCD-X betters the 3 here because the instruments are better contoured and their position are easier to pick because of this. The more I listened, the more I was astonished by the performance of LCD-X in this department.
 
Compared to LCD-3
Is this the new Audeze flagship? This is hard to decide, as both have very strong points, and I am sure there will be people preferring one before the other. However, the more I listen to LCD-X, the more I like it and it makes it very hard for me to decide between the two. I may find myself leaning in favor of LCD-X after a few more days or worse…I may love both, and that is not good for the wallet.
 
I have said several times that LCD-X has more air on top. The height of the soundstage  is incredible and makes the sound open even after HD800 in some regards.  Sometimes I felt that LCD-3 had a little more depth in the soundstage but I think that was because of the more recessed mids and treble, because of the longer decays and better instrument extension on LCD-3. And I do think that sometimes, on some songs LCD-3 can sound a little more spacious because of those aspects.
 
The instrument separation and imaging are amazing with LCD-X and are a step up over it’s older brother.
 
Also I find that the X has better transparency and clarity making the headphone a clean window to the music.
With lcd-3 the instruments seem to have better extension living a fuller life.
 
The attack is more powerful on the X and the decays faster, leading to better transients and more energetic sound.
LCD-3 has a warmer, fuller, more organic and refined sound with better instrument extension which gives the magic to the sound.
 
Conclusions
 
I found it sometimes hard to decide which of the two models I like more, but the more I listen to LCD-X the more I love it and I feel that it is technically superior to LCD-3.
 
LCD-X is proof that Audeze listens to it’s customers and respects their opinions. I feel like X marks the spot, in the essential places the fans said that LCD-3 could be improved.
I am torn apart between LCD-3 and LCD-X but I know something for sure. I could live happily with either of them but I am inclined more and more to the X … My wallet ran away from home again…
 
Pros:

1. Fast bass with good punch
2. Very good details
3. Excellent transients
4. Excellent instrument separation & Imaging
5. Very opened sound and very good soundstage with amazing height
6. Very good and clean treble, present with good texture without being bright
7. Excellent voices
8. Very engaging PRAT
9. Love the mids and the presence on the upper mids
10. Excellent transparency
11. Very good dynamics
12. Easy to drive
13. Good build quality and looks

Cons:

1. I tried to find some cons but I couldn’t

 

[Focker]

   
It is mostly about instrument separation, imaging, soundstage and final thoughts. I was mislead because of the more laid back sound of LCD-3 with more recessed higher mids and treble and the better instrument extension.

 
So is it good news or bad news? 

 

[chirawatf]

@ dan.gheorghe

In your excellent review what cable did you use, stock or after market cable?

thanks

 

[dan.gheorghe]

@ dan.gheorghe

In your excellent review what cable did you use, stock or after market cable?

thanks

 
I used stock cables with both LCD-3 and LCD-X for a fair comparison. 

   
So is it good news or bad news? 

It depends how you see things. I think for my wallet it is bad news. )

 

[Focker]

   
 
It depends how you see things. I think for my wallet it is bad news. )

 
LOL!
 
Don't worry, it's only when you see smoke coming off your wallet that you have to REALLY be concerned

 

[Kiont]

LOL!

Don't worry, it's only when you see smoke coming off your wallet that you have to REALLY be concerned

Haha so true.

 

[M-13]

So does the X have faster transient response than the LCD-3 or not? This is a simple question yet answers seem to be all over the map. I normally equate resolution = transient speed = more sonic information per second hitting my ears. So I guess the Fazor tech is all about phase correction? Like JH Audio's freqphase?

 

[dleblanc343]

  So does the X have faster transient response than the LCD-3 or not? This is a simple question yet answers seem to be all over the map. I normally equate resolution = transient speed = more sonic information per second hitting my ears.

+1

 

[MacedonianHero]

  Plus the Fazors which are 4 more chunks of aluminum.

The other parts are there in the LCD-3s too, just that Audeze made some changes to them for the Fazor. That said, there is only a 50g difference between the LCD-3s and LCD-X. And on my head, I can't tell which pair I have on.
 

  So does the X have faster transient response than the LCD-3 or not? This is a simple question yet answers seem to be all over the map. I normally equate resolution = transient speed = more sonic information per second hitting my ears. So I guess the Fazor tech is all about phase correction? Like JH Audio's freqphase?

I would say that the instrumental separation is better on the LCD-X and the imaging is clearer. The LCD-3s are still outstanding and offer some of the best mids I've ever heard, but I do hear slightly more sonic information with the LCD-Xs as the separation and positioning in the soundstaging are both better.

 

[Greed]

  The other parts are there in the LCD-3s too, just that Audeze made some changes to them for the Fazor. That said, there is only a 50g difference between the LCD-3s and LCD-X. And on my head, I can't tell which pair I have on.
 
I would say that the instrumental separation is better on the LCD-X and the imaging is clearer. The LCD-3s are still outstanding and offer some of the best mids I've ever heard, but I do hear slightly more sonic information with the LCD-Xs as the separation and positioning in the soundstaging are both better.

 
Peter, can you tell me what you think the LCD-3 does better? It seems the LCD-X is better after a few full reviews...

 

[MacedonianHero]

   
Peter, can you tell me what you think the LCD-3 does better? It seems the LCD-X is better after a few full reviews...

A bit to early to say, but the mids are the LCD-3s are very special to my ears.