[tovarich007]

Well you know, I already listened to various high priced headphones at times aver the years ( to remember a few : Final audio D8000, Audeze LCD 3, Sennheiser HD800 and 800S, Focal Stella, a few Staxs- i don't remember the exact references). Of course, I found them good, especially the Final -IMHO the best of all these, but they were less balanced than the good budget headphones I use especially the Senn HD560 S (the only "neutral" among them were the Final and the Staxs).

The extra definition of these high priced phones at the expense of neutrailty is not such an advantge to my ears and tastes -classical and jazz oriented- and IMO nothing can justify such higher price tags.

So I won't go for them, and I've no regret at all.
But, I could go for a 400 to 700 $ Hphones with the same neutrality as my day to day Hphones with some extra definition and a better overall built quality and fit (not need for luxury looks anyway). Of course, it's always possible to use HQ to improve tonal balance, but as for me, a good Hphone as to be rather well balanced straight out of the box.
I'm waiting to know if the MM-100 can fullfill my requirements.

 

[pk4425]

Guys do you think the mm100 could compete with the LCD X?

No. Why would Audeze cannibalize the sales of its most popular headphone by kneecapping itself with a headphone that's $800 less?

But I guess it depends on your definition of "compete." Will the MM-100 get within 90 percent of the LCD-X? Unlikely. Too close for that price differentiation. But 75 or 80 percent? Possibly.

The MM-100 could be enticing to LCD-X 2021 owners like me if it has better tuning out of the box (which the LCD-X 2021 does not -- it pretty much demands EQ) and because it will weigh at least 200 grams less.

Those two factors alone interest me in the MM-100 and could cause me to sell my LCD-X 2021 at a profit and cancel my Roon subscription, which will save even more money as the American economy continues to swirl downward. The only reason I use Roon these days is for the LCD-X 2021 Audeze preset, which I think is the same as the Audeze Reveal plug-in and makes those cans sound marvelous.

 

[LowBeat91]

No. Why would Audeze cannibalize the sales of its most popular headphone by kneecapping itself with a headphone that's $800 less?

But I guess it depends on your definition of "compete." Will the MM-100 get within 90 percent of the LCD-X? Unlikely. Too close for that price differentiation. But 75 or 80 percent? Possibly.

The MM-100 could be enticing to LCD-X 2021 owners like me if it has better tuning out of the box (which the LCD-X 2021 does not -- it pretty much demands EQ) and because it will weigh at least 200 grams less.

Those two factors alone interest me in the MM-100 and could cause me to sell my LCD-X 2021 at a profit and cancel my Roon subscription, which will save even more money as the American economy continues to swirl downward. The only reason I use Roon these days is for the LCD-X 2021 Audeze preset, which I think is the same as the Audeze Reveal plug-in and makes those cans sound marvelous.

Just because a price is artificially inflated despite adapted production processes, reduced manufacturing costs and falling demand and you are talking about a 2021 model (good marketing), but it is ultimately a 10-year-old headphone, then I see arguments who speak for it. The LCD X is a timeless but also outdated headphone. It's incredibly heavy, poorly tuned and even unsuitable for the field it was designed for - mastering. The more sales you can make in the mid-range, see Apple, the more sales you generate. And it makes perfect sense to release excellent headphones at a budget price in order to achieve more market profit and dominance. Exactly the area in which I think Hifiman is currently playing at the forefront

 

[pk4425]

Just because a price is artificially inflated despite adapted production processes, reduced manufacturing costs and falling demand and you are talking about a 2021 model (good marketing), but it is ultimately a 10-year-old headphone, then I see arguments who speak for it. The LCD X is a timeless but also outdated headphone. It's incredibly heavy, poorly tuned and even unsuitable for the field it was designed for - mastering. The more sales you can make in the mid-range, see Apple, the more sales you generate. And it makes perfect sense to release excellent headphones at a budget price in order to achieve more market profit and dominance. Exactly the area in which I think Hifiman is currently playing at the forefront

Agree with you in theory and with all your specifics. But we're not talking the Edition XS playing in the same arena as the Ananda or the HD 560s playing on the same jungle gym as the HD 600 here. There's still an $800 difference in price, and all the efficiencies you mention can only go so far.

Percentages are esoteric in this case, but I'll be stoked if the MM-100 can get within 80 percent of the LCD-X 2021, especially if it's tuned better and because it's definitely lighter.

Could not agree with you more about LCD-X 2021 as a mastering headphone. I LOVE mine, especially with the Roon EQ preset or Jaakko's convolution filter, but I have thought while using them without EQ: "People actually mix and master with these? C'mon."

 

[Netforce]

Last year when I went to NAMM with my buddy Miceblue who brought his LCD-X 2021 model, we both ourselves preferred the MM-500 over the LCD-X in most ways. Probably the biggest thing the LCD-X still was better at was bass. I thought at the time the MM-500 would have been the more popular sound signature. In the nearly year since, few more friends had also tried both and they told me they actually preferred the LCD-X over the MM-500. So it was a reflection point for me that it really does seem like preferences can sway either way.

On the MM-100 I thought it was quite good and had a lot of the characteristics of the MM-500 that I liked though was just not as good in the techs department. LCD-X if folks still like its tuning/sound, that is completely fair. I think you can't go wrong with the MM-100 or sticking to the LCD-X.

 

[LowBeat91]

Last year when I went to NAMM with my buddy Miceblue who brought his LCD-X 2021 model, we both ourselves preferred the MM-500 over the LCD-X in most ways. Probably the biggest thing the LCD-X still was better at was bass. I thought at the time the MM-500 would have been the more popular sound signature. In the nearly year since, few more friends had also tried both and they told me they actually preferred the LCD-X over the MM-500. So it was a reflection point for me that it really does seem like preferences can sway either way.

On the MM-100 I thought it was quite good and had a lot of the characteristics of the MM-500 that I liked though was just not as good in the techs department. LCD-X if folks still like its tuning/sound, that is completely fair. I think you can't go wrong with the MM-100 or sticking to the LCD-X.

I understand the MM's bass is more linear and accentuated than deep and overpowering. Thus the MM100 is "clean" and clear in presentation rather than engaging and edgy. I think there are too many headphones on the market to put a mid-range all-rounder above everything else. I think we need an LCD 4 at the price level of an LCD X instead of an MM100 at the level of a allready neutral sounding Hifiman Ananda

 

[phthora]

I think we need an LCD 4 at the price level of an LCD X

If you want the same flavor, that's basically the LCD-2C. The measured sound signature is remarkably similar between the two.

 

[JAnonymous5150]

If you want the same flavor, that's basically the LCD-2C. The measured sound signature is remarkably similar between the two.

*Any use of the term endgame should not be construed in any way to imply or establish any binding declaration, personal or legal, to forgo purchasing new gear. Rather, the term simply suggests the personal opinion that the gear so described is very fancy and greatly enjoyed.*

This "clause" from your sig definitely made me chuckle. Well done, sir!

 

[phthora]

*Any use of the term endgame should not be construed in any way to imply or establish any binding declaration, personal or legal, to forgo purchasing new gear. Rather, the term simply suggests the personal opinion that the gear so described is very fancy and greatly enjoyed.*

This "clause" from your sig definitely made me chuckle. Well done, sir!

Glad you liked it! It's an especially useful disclaimer to have around when married.

 

[JAnonymous5150]

Glad you liked it! It's an especially useful disclaimer to have around when married.

I'm engaged so consider this me taking notes.

 

[LowBeat91]

If you want the same flavor, that's basically the LCD-2C. The measured sound signature is remarkably similar between the two.

But it doesn't go nearly as low with eq as the LCD4 and can't handle eq as well

 

[chargedcapacitor]

But it doesn't go nearly as low with eq as the LCD4 and can't handle eq as well

That's not what the measurements show

 

[phthora]

But it doesn't go nearly as low with eq as the LCD4 and can't handle eq as well

True. Nor does it resolve as well. But, that may be why the 4 was priced at more than $3k more than the 2C. There will always be tradeoffs for a lower price.

On the other hand, the 2C is lighter, more comfortable, easier to drive, and far easier to actually buy.

Ultimately, within Audeze's line-up, a neutral 400 dollar headphone to complement the MM-500/5 fills a bigger gap than a 400 dollar 4/2C type headphone.

 

[LowBeat91]

True. Nor does it resolve as well. But, that may be why the 4 was priced at more than $3k more than the 2C. There will always be tradeoffs for a lower price.

On the other hand, the 2C is lighter, more comfortable, easier to drive, and far easier to actually buy.

Ultimately, within Audeze's line-up, a neutral 400 dollar headphone to complement the MM-500/5 fills a bigger gap than a 400 dollar 4/2C type headphone.

But then the comparison doesn't fit. For me, the LCD 2 is not a comparable headphone to the LCD4 just because they measure similarly. I just wonder what the MM100 wants to be. A very accurate headphone for production similar to the LCD1 which was niche even in the normal Audeze lineup or a headphone that also has show value for the masses. I came to the LCD 4 primarily because it has excellent bass performance. And there is no mid-range headphone with such a performance. That was just my point. I don't think money is the decisive factor, the net profit with such high-end headphones is beyond any doubt anyway

 

[phthora]

But then the comparison doesn't fit. For me, the LCD 2 is not a comparable headphone to the LCD4 just because they measure similarly. I just wonder what the MM100 wants to be. A very accurate headphone for production similar to the LCD1 which was niche even in the normal Audeze lineup or a headphone that also has show value for the masses. I came to the LCD 4 primarily because it has excellent bass performance. And there is no mid-range headphone with such a performance. That was just my point. I don't think money is the decisive factor, the net profit with such high-end headphones is beyond any doubt anyway

If you are after a headphone with all the merits of an LCD-4, but priced lower than than the 2C, good luck. I would imagine there is some room for the price to come down as R&D has been recovered and manufacturing processes have been streamlined, but that's a huge drop in price. Even if they could manage it, I can't see them cannibalizing their whole line-up to offer such a thing.

If all you want is a reasonable approximation of the bass of the LCD-4, that is, as I've mentioned, the 2C. You can find a new b-stock for 500 dollars sometimes. So, that hypothetical headphone pretty much exists already. If you want exactly the same bass, it's just not going to happen at that price.