[punit]

You are comparing this implementation
 


 to this
 

 
The implementation matters more than the DAC chip IMHO.

. Apologies for OT.

 

[kothganesh]

  You are comparing this implementation
 


 to this
 

 
The implementation matters more than the DAC chip IMHO.

. Apologies for OT.

I realize that. And it is indeed a misleading conclusion on my part. The thing is, I felt the sound was on the thinner side so I told myself I'd stay away from the Sabre. I've since been reading about how the implementation matters so I could be wrong. But if you read the information on the Audio GD site, there is always this statement that if one prefers a slightly warmer sound, one should opt for the WM chips. 

 

[Madsumm]

I had a go with iBasso DX90 DoP -> HUGO -> LCD-XC. (since I have HUGO)
Yes, its audio heaven.
 
After which I tried other (Grado GS, HD800..etc), i threw them back, thinking I need to reset my brains (and ears) a bit before listening to others. It is just not as "forward" in your face, and dynamic as the LCD-XC.
 
Than I tried LCD-X.....
XC has much better bass response on HUGO than X.
However, X has a very beautiful tingle and sweetness to the highs. It is very hypnotising. For bass, X has some missing parts, but not so much as to make a huge diff from XC.

 

[Madsumm]

I concur on the sounds of difference DACs. Sabre is more precise, thus giving it a more "harsh feel" especially the highs. (faster as well)
For WM, its warmth and slower thus more "musical". This depends on tastes.
 
My experience with DX90 (dual Sabre) and my Audio-gd WM version is quite different. I would say, depends on genre, I could than decide on the DAC I would like to use.

 

[Madsumm]

For HUGO, you should go Coax if possible. (or USB). Optical max out at 192.
Coax and USB max at 384.

 

[mulder01]

So I've heard from someone that the LCD-XC is a 90%-as-good version of an LCD-X.  They explained that it's basically an LCD-X, with a back on it, which is why it is just slightly dearer than an LCD-X (to cover the cost of the bubingas), but by closing it in, you lose a bit of quality/detail/whatever in the process, and that they are just trying to cater for the closed headphone market.  That's why it's called an LCD-XC, not an LCD-C - indicating that it's a closed LCD-X, not an entirely different product.
 
Would like to hear people's opinion on this matter - weather they agree or weather they think it should have maybe been called the LCD-C because it's just as different from the other Audeze 'phones as the LCD 2, 3 and X.  Is people's main reason for buying the XC the fact that they're closed, or are they your genuine favourite from the Audeze lineup.

 

[kothganesh]

  So I've heard from someone that the LCD-XC is a 90%-as-good version of an LCD-X.  They explained that it's basically an LCD-X, with a back on it, which is why it is just slightly dearer than an LCD-X (to cover the cost of the bubingas), but by closing it in, you lose a bit of quality/detail/whatever in the process, and that they are just trying to cater for the closed headphone market.  That's why it's called an LCD-XC, not an LCD-C - indicating that it's a closed LCD-X, not an entirely different product.
 
Would like to hear people's opinion on this matter - weather they agree or weather they think it should have maybe been called the LCD-C because it's just as different from the other Audeze 'phones as the LCD 2, 3 and X.  Is people's main reason for buying the XC the fact that they're closed, or are they your genuine favourite from the Audeze lineup.

I had the 2.2, and now have the 3 and the XC. To me each offered something slightly different. The 2.2 was more about slam, the 3 to me is the most neutral of the, well, 3 cans, and the XC offers the right combination of bass, that good-to-die for midrange and smooth top end. Isolation is not an issue for me as I don't use the XC outside of the house. 

 

[mulder01]

But in comparison to the LCD-X?

 

[kothganesh]

m

But in comparison to the LCD-X?

Have not heard the X. Where I live, demoing is non-existent.

 

[midnightwalker]

  But in comparison to the LCD-X?

 
Better bass impact. More in quantity. A lil smaller in sound stage. Better isolation.

 

[x RELIC x]

Curious to know what the frequency graphs of other XC's look like.

Here's mine.



Bass feels light in general, but I love the detail.

 

[kothganesh]

MY XC graph.

 

[greenkiwi]

Does one just email Audeze with your serial number to get that?

 

[kothganesh]

Yes. Previously Audez'e would ship the graph along with the HP (if you bought it directly from the company). Nowadays, you write to them with the serial number.

 

[x RELIC x]

Does one just email Audeze with your serial number to get that?

Yup, now get it and post it!