[conquerator2]

  Has anybody tried these straight from an iPhone? I will probably buy a cheap amp, but just curious.

Ridiculous but interesting to know
I'd be interested to but rather in a Clip+
Though I admit buying a 2K headphone without an amp/DAC is stupid

 

[David1961]

Has anybody tried these straight from an iPhone? I will probably buy a cheap amp, but just curious.

I don't have an iPhone, but I do have a Pico Slim / Classic iPod and normally I use my UM Miracles with that combo. I also have the LCD-XC that I've only used with my GS-Xmk2, however after seeing this post of yours tremolo, I decided to try my LCD's with my Pico Slim / iPod and I have to say I was quite surprised at what I heard. The SQ was there with authority, in fact I could only have the Pico Slims volume knob between 12 and 1 o'clock, any higher and the volume was too loud.
The only problem I have with the LCD-XC is the comfort, not the weight but the clamping. As I've said though, I'm sorting that out.

 

[tremolo]

Thanks David. I might look at buying a used pico.

 

[David1961]

Thanks David. I might look at buying a used pico.

The reason why I was surprised tremolo, is because the Pico Slim is supposed to be for IEM's, however I tried my LCD-XC's with just my iPod and I was quite impressed. IMO the SQ wasn't as good as when using the Pico Slim with the iPod, same as IMO the Pico Slim isn't as good as when using the GS-Xmk2 with those headphones, but to me the SQ from just using the LCD-XC / iPod was acceptable.

 

[skfktkwjs]

.

 

[skfktkwjs]

  Has anybody tried these straight from an iPhone? I will probably buy a cheap amp, but just curious.

They work fantastically with iphone but they will obviously  sound better with great amp.
I recommend tube amp with LCD XC

 

[Mediahound]

For anyone wanting to know the difference between the LCD-3s and XC-
 
Quote:

The LCD-3 is the next step up, and top of the line, Audeze headphone. Ireviewed the LCD-3 and said, “I’m pretty hard to impress, especially when it comes to headphones, and these impressed me. They’re that good.”

Comparing the two back to back (or I guess technically, open-back to closed-back), I found the XC to be a little less open sounding. Obviously, right? Except, it was not nearly as different as I expected. Sure the LCD-3s are moreopen sounding, but the XCs are so open sounding that the two headphones are lot closer than you’d expect.

I also like that there’s a little more bass with the LCD-3s, the sound is a little warmer. This is more my preference in headphones, just so you know. There also seems to be a little more mid-treble with the LCD-XC, which might make it seem like it has a little less bass (in comparison to the treble).

There’s slightly more… effortlessness… to the LCD-3’s sound. It’s not a huge difference, but with the three Audeze headphones laid out in front of me (including the X’s), the 3’s are the ones I kept wanting to reach for.

So personally, I’d get the LCD-3s over the XCs, for that extra warmth and openness, but if you’re not interested in an open-back headphone then… don’t worry about the LCD-3.

 

from - http://www.forbes.com/sites/geoffreymorrison/2013/11/03/audeze-lcd-xc-review/2/

 

[conquerator2]

Well 650g weight... I thought 500 g was bordering wearability [HE-500/6, LCD2/3]...
Nope, I guess... I can't imagine getting an extra 150g [an extra 1/3 of the weight...] on top of that :/

 

[Currawong]

Ok, the following isn't a good example, as Headroom doesn't have measurements of all the Audio Technica line and AT don't make planar headphones, but bear with me none-the-less.
 
I felt that the XCs reminded me a bit of how ATs (and sometimes Grados) can be very good with bringing forward instruments. We know they are more forward in the mid-range than the other Audeze cans. Stretching it a bit, I might say that the XCs sound like a very dark AT in some respects. 
 

What I want you all to look at here is the somewhat similar mid-range (note that I've adjusted the scale on the graphs). I was listening to some music with the LCD-Xs where some instruments were still sounding a bit muffled (something that goes back to the original LCD-2s and has to do with the mid-range FR). That music sounded better with the XCs.
 
Compare the XCs now to the Xs:

2-4 kHz is where a lot of acoustic instruments have their ranges. I'm not sure my loaner LCD-Xs have such a steep drop though.

 

[Tonyflo]

I'm curious about the synergy between these and the Cypherlabs Theorem 720 -- anyone tried? 

 

[figaro69]

Okay, so I loved the LCD-Xs so much (i.e., the best headphones I've ever heard, and I own a boatload, including most of the flagships) that I decided (yes, I know I am sick) to get the LCD-XCs for listening either in the bedroom or when there are people around (particularly wife shrieking and kids raising hell).  So, placed the order with Headroom.  Why so hasty only after a week of owning the LCD-Xs?  I was afraid that they would run out of the black rim LCD-x, which are supposedly only available for a limited time (i.e., I find that the grey rim clashes with the black and wood finishes...don't like it one bit).  I had the money right now, so I said, "what the heck".  UPS says they should be in my office by Wednesday!

 

[TMRaven]

Will be waiting eagerly for impression.

 

[skfktkwjs]

  Ok, the following isn't a good example, as Headroom doesn't have measurements of all the Audio Technica line and AT don't make planar headphones, but bear with me none-the-less.
 
I felt that the XCs reminded me a bit of how ATs (and sometimes Grados) can be very good with bringing forward instruments. We know they are more forward in the mid-range than the other Audeze cans. Stretching it a bit, I might say that the XCs sound like a very dark AT in some respects. 
 

What I want you all to look at here is the somewhat similar mid-range (note that I've adjusted the scale on the graphs). I was listening to some music with the LCD-Xs where some instruments were still sounding a bit muffled (something that goes back to the original LCD-2s and has to do with the mid-range FR). That music sounded better with the XCs.
 
Compare the XCs now to the Xs:

2-4 kHz is where a lot of acoustic instruments have their ranges. I'm not sure my loaner LCD-Xs have such a steep drop though.

2-4 kHz is where a lot of acoustic instruments have their ranges. I'm not sure my loaner LCD-Xs have such a steep drop though. -> that's topical characteristic of planner magnetic.
although 2~4 k is some what missing, they actually sound natural. If that deep was in in ear monitor, they will lose it's detail and bring muddiness on mid.
however in headphone, missing information around 5khz should be fine because ur ear conch amplify that area. 

 

[Currawong]

I forgot to add to my comments that HeadRoom aligns the graphs at 1kHz. If we bump the LCD-X graph up to align with the bass, the effect is what I've experienced with some music, that the LCD-XCs sound thinner from the drop in the upper bass. The effect with acoustic music is roughly the same, however, highlighting the instruments better.

 

[TMRaven]

I noticed a recurring trend amongst closed headphones, and a lot of them seem to have a dip in the lower mids around 5-700hz that would otherwise provide extra warmth.