Alessandro1
Head-Fier
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2013
- Posts
- 85
- Likes
- 100
Audeze LCDX Vs Hifiman HE6
Some month ago I wrote this comparison in italian language and posted in italian forums, I've found some spare time now to translate .
Sorry for my poor English, please tell me if it's comprehensible or not.
Gear:
Foobar / Deadbeef
M2tech DSD dac, Burson 160D + Hiface one
Hifiman EF6
M2tech DSD dac, Burson 160D + Hiface one
Hifiman EF6
Other amps to test the LCDX: Wooaudio WA6se, Burson 160, Fiio X5
Sonic signature:
Audeze LCDX
Any disc or genre is put on a LCDX is played making a grand, majestic and euphonic sound. Sometimes sumptuous!
We are on the limit of coloured, but not a cheap color made of an exaggerated midbass to compensate a poor low-bass. The low range, while having a significant presence, do not not overshadows the mellow and full-bodied mid-range. The X shows a good linearity from the bass to mids area are of the spectrum.
As sound-signature, the impression that I have is similar to use the effect of "sepia" in a photo editing program.
The LCDX offers rich sound and full-bodied, It is heavier and meatier than HiFiMan. If you get used to this sound signature is difficult not to be caught by addiction to this way of presenting the music.
Audeze LCDX
Any disc or genre is put on a LCDX is played making a grand, majestic and euphonic sound. Sometimes sumptuous!
We are on the limit of coloured, but not a cheap color made of an exaggerated midbass to compensate a poor low-bass. The low range, while having a significant presence, do not not overshadows the mellow and full-bodied mid-range. The X shows a good linearity from the bass to mids area are of the spectrum.
As sound-signature, the impression that I have is similar to use the effect of "sepia" in a photo editing program.
The LCDX offers rich sound and full-bodied, It is heavier and meatier than HiFiMan. If you get used to this sound signature is difficult not to be caught by addiction to this way of presenting the music.
It is a headphone that tends to enhance the good thongs and hide the shortcomings of what we put into it. It has the ability to make nice (almost) anything, and the louder you listen to them the more euphoria you get.
If I think about LCDX I think "impact".
Generally I found it very “comfortable” with Rock and Jazz
Hifiman HE6
Each piece that I listen with HE6 is now revealed to me. Music has an excellent definition with the feeling that nothing is missing and that nothing is reproduced with emphasis.
Has a sound signature much clearer and less closed the Audeze, but without resulting in listening fatigue or aggressiveness. The sound is clear, crisp.
One of the quite abused audiophiles terms: "polished"; with this can has finally a denotation.
Its sound-signature is quite not to have a sound-signature. The headphone tries to disappear as much as possible, with itssonic signature. It seems to bring out the sound for what it is. It seems to bring, not reproduce.
It seems to me that the HE6 is more transparent than the X and make it easier a more direct relationship with the music, or recording if you prefer.
If the LCDX what catches attention with a round and impactful bass; the HE6 has not impressed me with anything in particular, no parameter is immediately protagonist
If I think about LCDX I think "impact".
Generally I found it very “comfortable” with Rock and Jazz
Hifiman HE6
Each piece that I listen with HE6 is now revealed to me. Music has an excellent definition with the feeling that nothing is missing and that nothing is reproduced with emphasis.
Has a sound signature much clearer and less closed the Audeze, but without resulting in listening fatigue or aggressiveness. The sound is clear, crisp.
One of the quite abused audiophiles terms: "polished"; with this can has finally a denotation.
Its sound-signature is quite not to have a sound-signature. The headphone tries to disappear as much as possible, with itssonic signature. It seems to bring out the sound for what it is. It seems to bring, not reproduce.
It seems to me that the HE6 is more transparent than the X and make it easier a more direct relationship with the music, or recording if you prefer.
If the LCDX what catches attention with a round and impactful bass; the HE6 has not impressed me with anything in particular, no parameter is immediately protagonist
It has everything without excesses; It has not have the headstage of the HD800, or transparency of SR009 and even punch the LCDX ... it “gets placed" in everything and this makes it more universal than the LCDX.
Looking for a parameter that distinguishes it:
Sep 7, 2015 at 3:21 PM
Post #2 of 7
Sep 8, 2015 at 10:24 AM
Post #3 of 7
Sep 11, 2015 at 11:55 AM
Post #4 of 7
Sep 11, 2015 at 4:26 PM
Post #5 of 7
Sep 14, 2015 at 2:16 AM
Post #6 of 7
Dec 12, 2023 at 5:30 PM
Post #7 of 7
Looking for a parameter that distinguishes it:
When I think about HE6 I think “control”.
I love with all kinds of music, it is devastating with piano soloist pieces.
Some details:
Headstage and image
The headstage of X is not very wide, but quite deep. It also has a decent layering. The image is slightly less focused than the HE6 and yields as compared to HiFiMan “feeling of ambience”.
I love with all kinds of music, it is devastating with piano soloist pieces.
Some details:
Headstage and image
The headstage of X is not very wide, but quite deep. It also has a decent layering. The image is slightly less focused than the HE6 and yields as compared to HiFiMan “feeling of ambience”.
The headstge of HE6, although not record-breaking size one if you are used to headphones as the HD800, ensures a very precise pin-point image. Good in size. The LCDX is developed in height, with HE6 I find it more front of you. Personally I prefer the latter type of presentation, it helps to imagine a stage more.
Dynamic
The dynamic impact of LCDX is difficult to reach. You're blown away: "Slam", "Punch". "Bam" Bwok "... are true beats. When it's time to hit the LCDX hits hard without straining. (It's a 4th at bat) With great aprt of rock I prefer it because this headphone assures emotional involvement. The most valuable thing is that a good dynamic range and punch is obtained even with modest amplifications.
The HE6 is a bit more shy than LCDX about impact, but it has an excellent performance with large orchestras. When there are true dynamic excursions I have the impression that everything happens with ease and fluency with the 6. With the orchestras I never noticed congestion or compressions. Between the two the Audeze transmits more energy, but it does HE6 with a better resolution capabilities and I think with more control and articulation even at low volumes. May be what audiophiles call micro-dynamics.
Bass:
Here HE6, while having an absolute low, deep, full-bodied and controlled bass yields to Audeze. The X hits down and deep, its bass is rounder but equally effective and more meaty. HE6 seems leaner. In bass region we pass from the excellent of HiFiMan to the spectacular of Audeze.
Mids:
It's a hard fight in the mids, very good for both. You can think to all the positive adjectives that you have read in all the reviews about the midrange; yes they will fit their eccellent mids. I've found no defect there. A little more dandy and glowing in the HE6, more body and vigorous in the LCDX.
Highs:
Here is a rematch of HE6. The 6 wins quite clear. More in evidence than the Audeze, is extended since my system and my hearing capability allow. Just pleasure. The 6's harmonic richness makes the LCDX's one seem blunt and softened. Much of the sought-after "detail" is in this range, and HE6 returns without emphasis or aggression, without hissing or ringing. It is obvious that between the two the "analytical" is the HE6, but at the same time it has great musicality and kindness. It is very gentle on the top if we compare to top dynamics as T1 and HD800, but it's on par in fact of resolution and detail retrieval. With its linearity, timbre and detail retrival, the HE6 is a 3rd at bat...
LCDX in the high range is a bit subdued. Very blunt, perhaps too much. At high volume (not recommended for more than few minutes) it can be useful not to have the cymbals hurt the eardrums, but in direct comparison with the HE6 I always feel that in the LCD something is missing, something is hidden and something is not completely reproduced. Ok, it's a part of the sound-signature of Audeze that can be addictive, but this deficiency does not convince me at all.
Other audiophile's matters:
Excellent transient response for both, crisp attacks and lightning notes. Transparency? Quite close, although as I understand what transparency is, HE6 is better; LCDX is a bit “smoked”. Naturalness and realism words ... slippery words! Well, not bring up arguments untenable, I can say that between these two headphones and mid-price headphone there is a big difference. Black background? If it exist, It's noticeable and it is what I think it is; you cam find it in HiFiMan HE6. Very fine grain for both the one and for the other.
Test Golden Ears:
Both are fine, the test is quite easier with both in relation to other HP, and the gap with headphones as mid-price Sennheiser HD650, Fidelio X1 ... is noticeable as ease of recognition in almost all tests. But I must say that with the HE6 something is easier. Reverb and bass in the first place, but also the recognition of the various resampling mp3 it seemed easier with HiFiMan.
My conclusions:
When I wore the LCDX for the first time, being used to the sound of HE6 and T1, I found them a bit “oppressive” and closed, but the other features they immediately shocked me. If you listen some rock and jazz is hard to be disappointed. The good thing about this headset is that it sounds good with any amplifier. Even a Fiio X5 makes it sing well. In the the operator's manual they should write: "Danger:This Headphone can be addictive”. Although not perfect has a very high seductive power.
I even thought about the possibility of selling some pieces to finance the purchase for use with the DAP, but the music I listen more (Baroque) is not the one that makes the LCDX shines the best. For just some rock the HE6 ca do the job. The HE6 seems more universal and has less deficiences, if properly amplified, to my ears, and with my music is perfect.*
* it was perfect...
Thx
The dynamic impact of LCDX is difficult to reach. You're blown away: "Slam", "Punch". "Bam" Bwok "... are true beats. When it's time to hit the LCDX hits hard without straining. (It's a 4th at bat) With great aprt of rock I prefer it because this headphone assures emotional involvement. The most valuable thing is that a good dynamic range and punch is obtained even with modest amplifications.
The HE6 is a bit more shy than LCDX about impact, but it has an excellent performance with large orchestras. When there are true dynamic excursions I have the impression that everything happens with ease and fluency with the 6. With the orchestras I never noticed congestion or compressions. Between the two the Audeze transmits more energy, but it does HE6 with a better resolution capabilities and I think with more control and articulation even at low volumes. May be what audiophiles call micro-dynamics.
Bass:
Here HE6, while having an absolute low, deep, full-bodied and controlled bass yields to Audeze. The X hits down and deep, its bass is rounder but equally effective and more meaty. HE6 seems leaner. In bass region we pass from the excellent of HiFiMan to the spectacular of Audeze.
Mids:
It's a hard fight in the mids, very good for both. You can think to all the positive adjectives that you have read in all the reviews about the midrange; yes they will fit their eccellent mids. I've found no defect there. A little more dandy and glowing in the HE6, more body and vigorous in the LCDX.
Highs:
Here is a rematch of HE6. The 6 wins quite clear. More in evidence than the Audeze, is extended since my system and my hearing capability allow. Just pleasure. The 6's harmonic richness makes the LCDX's one seem blunt and softened. Much of the sought-after "detail" is in this range, and HE6 returns without emphasis or aggression, without hissing or ringing. It is obvious that between the two the "analytical" is the HE6, but at the same time it has great musicality and kindness. It is very gentle on the top if we compare to top dynamics as T1 and HD800, but it's on par in fact of resolution and detail retrieval. With its linearity, timbre and detail retrival, the HE6 is a 3rd at bat...
LCDX in the high range is a bit subdued. Very blunt, perhaps too much. At high volume (not recommended for more than few minutes) it can be useful not to have the cymbals hurt the eardrums, but in direct comparison with the HE6 I always feel that in the LCD something is missing, something is hidden and something is not completely reproduced. Ok, it's a part of the sound-signature of Audeze that can be addictive, but this deficiency does not convince me at all.
Other audiophile's matters:
Excellent transient response for both, crisp attacks and lightning notes. Transparency? Quite close, although as I understand what transparency is, HE6 is better; LCDX is a bit “smoked”. Naturalness and realism words ... slippery words! Well, not bring up arguments untenable, I can say that between these two headphones and mid-price headphone there is a big difference. Black background? If it exist, It's noticeable and it is what I think it is; you cam find it in HiFiMan HE6. Very fine grain for both the one and for the other.
Test Golden Ears:
Both are fine, the test is quite easier with both in relation to other HP, and the gap with headphones as mid-price Sennheiser HD650, Fidelio X1 ... is noticeable as ease of recognition in almost all tests. But I must say that with the HE6 something is easier. Reverb and bass in the first place, but also the recognition of the various resampling mp3 it seemed easier with HiFiMan.
My conclusions:
When I wore the LCDX for the first time, being used to the sound of HE6 and T1, I found them a bit “oppressive” and closed, but the other features they immediately shocked me. If you listen some rock and jazz is hard to be disappointed. The good thing about this headset is that it sounds good with any amplifier. Even a Fiio X5 makes it sing well. In the the operator's manual they should write: "Danger:This Headphone can be addictive”. Although not perfect has a very high seductive power.
I even thought about the possibility of selling some pieces to finance the purchase for use with the DAP, but the music I listen more (Baroque) is not the one that makes the LCDX shines the best. For just some rock the HE6 ca do the job. The HE6 seems more universal and has less deficiences, if properly amplified, to my ears, and with my music is perfect.*
* it was perfect...
Thx
Arniesb
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- Dec 12, 2013
- Posts
- 1,725
- Likes
- 649
Very nice review mate! I enjoyed reading it. From your review it sounds like those 2 are like high end hd600/650 only that he6 have beter soundstage x compared to 650>600 soundstage.
Alessandro1
Head-Fier
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2013
- Posts
- 85
- Likes
- 100
THX Arniesb!
Stealthyduc
New Head-Fier
- Joined
- Jul 24, 2015
- Posts
- 28
- Likes
- 15
Reading this only made me want to hear the HE-6s even more. I tried the Lcd-x and absolutely loved them. Great review.
Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk
FredrikT92
500+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Jun 1, 2013
- Posts
- 518
- Likes
- 43
Thanks for the review!
Ive had the LCD-X, but unfortunaly I cant remember very much. I do remember it having a little harder hitting bass compared to the LCD-3F.
I now have the HE-6 and LCD-3F. HE-6 doesnt have as much bass unless its called for, and the bass is much tighter, even with my not so good paired amp.
I expect it to hit harder then the LCD-3F atleast, when amped proporly.
Do you find the LCD-X sound a little loose and boomy compared to the HE-6?
Ive had the LCD-X, but unfortunaly I cant remember very much. I do remember it having a little harder hitting bass compared to the LCD-3F.
I now have the HE-6 and LCD-3F. HE-6 doesnt have as much bass unless its called for, and the bass is much tighter, even with my not so good paired amp.
I expect it to hit harder then the LCD-3F atleast, when amped proporly.
Do you find the LCD-X sound a little loose and boomy compared to the HE-6?
Alessandro1
Head-Fier
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2013
- Posts
- 85
- Likes
- 100
may be "loose" and "boomy" are too negative adjectives, LCDX in a really nice headphone, and I think it'is not "boomy", but I find HE6 more controlled and tight in the bass region.
cactus_farmer
1000+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2008
- Posts
- 1,111
- Likes
- 102
Just digging up this thread because it reminds me of back in the day when everyone used to say that the LCDx had more 'slam' or 'punch' than the Hifiman HE6, but then Resolve from The Headphone Show started saying that no actually the HE6 has more slam than pretty much any headphone including the LCDx - and since then everyone has sort of assigned this mythical status to the 'slam' of the HE6.
I still don't know which version of events is correct.
I still don't know which version of events is correct.
Users who are viewing this thread