[Shawn39]

I was going to buy some Audeze EL-8's soon online. How do I tell if they are selling me the newer EL-8's? What serial # should I be looking for (closed back models)?

Also, does everyone agree that the newer EL-8's are enough better to stay away from the old models given a choice between the two at the same price?

 

[maheeinfy]

I was going to buy some Audeze EL-8's soon online. How do I tell if they are selling me the newer EL-8's? What serial # should I be looking for (closed back models)?

Also, does everyone agree that the newer EL-8's are enough better to stay away from the old models given a choice between the two at the same price?

Based on what i got from Audeze, if the drivers are made after Jan 1, 2016, it means you have latest and greatest. With your headphones you will get a inspection card and there will be a hand written date on it. If its anything recent then you are golden

 

[Shawn39]

Based on what i got from Audeze, if the drivers are made after Jan 1, 2016, it means you have latest and greatest. With your headphones you will get a inspection card and there will be a hand written date on it. If its anything recent then you are golden

Awesome, thank you. I'm going to email the seller and ask.

 

[Sound Eq]

i am really interested in this thread

and so far I can not find a detailed impression about how the new lcd x compares to the old ones

and then there was a post where somebody mentioned he liked the new lcd 2 2017 over the new lcd x , such statements would be more helpful if they elaborate on such big statements

 

[JeoO]

That was me.
Overall it is just my personal opinion. What I personally like might not be the universal answer to the question which headphone is better.

I tried both lcd2 and x in their pre and postrevamp versions. Pre revamp i liked the LCD X more, they sounded more open, detailed and had a harder slam than the lcd2. This was at a local shop A/B´ing both.
Fast forward I am owning the LCDX (2016 driver) and LCD2 (was built 2017). Regarding those two cans, the LCD2 has a wider soundstage, VERY fast clean bass (almost unrealisticly so), sounds more transparent and the overall timbre is more natural. In general it tends to sound a bit brighter than the new X.
The X sounds a bit darker, less transparent, more congested, less lifelike in timbre. The only things the X does better: Bass is still a bit stronger and more bloomy and the imaging more precise. But this is just comparing the 2016revisions of those headphones.
Overall the old LCDX was the best headphone out of the 4. They combined the clarity of the new lcd2 with a wide soundstage, full sound and a bass that was absolutely lovely. The 2016model seems bass light in comparison (even tho stronger than the LCD2 as i mentioned).
Just my 50Cent

But i suggest to audition them yourself and report back here after doing so.

greetings

 

[exsomnis]

That was me.
Overall it is just my personal opinion. What I personally like might not be the universal answer to the question which headphone is better.

I tried both lcd2 and x in their pre and postrevamp versions. Pre revamp i liked the LCD X more, they sounded more open, detailed and had a harder slam than the lcd2. This was at a local shop A/B´ing both.
Fast forward I am owning the LCDX (2016 driver) and LCD2 (was built 2017). Regarding those two cans, the LCD2 has a wider soundstage, VERY fast clean bass (almost unrealisticly so), sounds more transparent and the overall timbre is more natural. In general it tends to sound a bit brighter than the new X.
The X sounds a bit darker, less transparent, more congested, less lifelike in timbre. The only things the X does better: Bass is still a bit stronger and more bloomy and the imaging more precise. But this is just comparing the 2016revisions of those headphones.
Overall the old LCDX was the best headphone out of the 4. They combined the clarity of the new lcd2 with a wide soundstage, full sound and a bass that was absolutely lovely. The 2016model seems bass light in comparison (even tho stronger than the LCD2 as i mentioned).
Just my 50Cent

But i suggest to audition them yourself and report back here after doing so.

greetings

That is strange.
OTOH, I find that the 2016 LCD3 is substantially ahead of the 2016 LCD2 in transparency, resolution and clarity, with the 2016 LCD2 clearly sounding less refined. And to my ears, the 2016 LCD4 are yet further ahead of the 2016 LCD3 in terms of transparency, resolution and clarity. Audeze are distinctly progressive with the model line-up, so it would make sense for the LCDX to be ahead of the LCD2, not the other way around.

I haven't heard the LCDX recently though. But your experience seems to suggest the possibility of unannounced improvements to the LCDs in 2017. I think we need someone to compare 2016 and 2017 LCDs.

 

[Sound Eq]

i bought an lcd x 2017 which is due to arrive in 10 days, i hope it will sound better than my lcd2 2014 fazor

 

[exsomnis]

I think it’s safe to say that it will definitely be better than the 2014 LCD 2F. Don’t forget to let us know how it’s like.

 

[BearMonster]

I've just heard the LCD 2 2016 and it really does sound so different. From my own memory against the 2014 it does not have those warm mids it also does not have that funky treble i heard from the 2014 which is good. The LCD 2 2016 was driven out from the Deckard,

The LCD 3 being played out a hugo 2 did not have those midrange i once heard back from the 2014 one i once heard, though the bass still has the bloom.

 

[Sound Eq]

I received my lcd x 2017 model, and what a great heapdhone it is. I heard the lcd3 2014, and I have the lcd2 2014 both fazors as well. By far I love the lcd x the most. The sound is so balanced and transparent and in my opinion it handles all genres so well. It has amazing punchy bass that is controlled, and the mids are simply spot on, and to my ears the sound stage is wider than lcd2 or lcd3.

And literally this is the only audeze that my cowon plenue s drives it with big authority. which is simply amazing. And on my burson v2+ the lcd x is on another level and what a nice pairing with burson

 

[kr11048]

Unfortunately for me, I'm late discovering this thread. I needed a set of closed back headphones so I began checking reviews. All the reviewers I read gushed over the El-8. None of them ever said anything about this old-and-new version thing. New ones were no longer available, so I ordered an open-box set on ebay (admittedly a pretty risky move on my part) and now find that I have been suckered into buying the crappy 2015 version. I don't completely fault Audeze. It would have been nice to see a new version number, but I can understand their hesitation as that would have been a big expense requiring new packaging, promotion etc. I do partially begrudge them though because if the 2015 version is as bad as everyone who's heard them keeps saying (haven't heard them yet), then it seems like this was less of a "let's see if we can make them even better" type move and more of a "let's see if we can patch up our rushed-to-market screw-up, but we'll cover it all by not changing the model number" type move.
I place the brunt of the blame on those reviewers, though. They were the ones who were supposed to do their homework. They had an obligation to inform their readers and listeners that there were two vastly different but superficially identical versions out there. I shouldn't have had to read it in a thread somewhere. It's the reviewers who've lost my trust.

 

[phase0]

and now find that I have been suckered into buying the crappy 2015 version.

Can't you return it? I know sometimes people's auctions say all sales final and no returns accepted but generally if you're not happy with what you got they're on the buyer's side. You can say you didn't get what you expected and the seller didn't represent the sale accurately (that it was a 2015 version and you wanted a late 2016 or 2017 edition (or whatever)). Maybe just IMO but people selling should stand behind what they are selling. As long as you aren't counter scamming the seller etc should be okay IMO.

 

[exsomnis]

I place the brunt of the blame on those reviewers, though. They were the ones who were supposed to do their homework. They had an obligation to inform their readers and listeners that there were two vastly different but superficially identical versions out there. I shouldn't have had to read it in a thread somewhere. It's the reviewers who've lost my trust.

In fairness to reviewers, Audeze does shoulder some of the blame for this. Reputable high-end manufacturers generally don't have a need to come in and revise their products while they're in production and change things mid-stream, ending up with different versions of the same product that might well sit on the same shelves in stores. See, if Audeze had invested more money into fully developing their headphones, ironing out production issues before releasing their products and running comprehensive testing to uncover latent defects in design - this thread would not exist, we wouldn't have been complaining about failed drivers and you wouldn't have bid on a lemon.

Don't get me wrong, I love my Sine, LCD2 & LCD3, but to be perfectly honest, Audeze has always seemed amateurish in the way that they're run - although it has to be said that things seem to have improved in recent times. Yes, they make premium priced headphones but they are still a small and relatively new company in the midst of well established headphone giants like Sennheiser, AKG and the rest of them.

On the other hand, you might think that reviewers are all knowing omnipotent beings but in reality they are just regular joes like you and me. Some are less detail oriented than others, some procrastinate on writing out their reviews thus jamming everything in the last minute regardless of quality and some are just trying to earn a living. There are going to be impassioned reviewers like Tyll Hertsens (who is a big loss to this community), who usually leave no stone unturned in their investigative reports and there are going to be reviewers who behind it all really couldn't be bothered, particularly when they have a bias against what they're reviewing.

 

[moriez]

In fairness to reviewers, Audeze does shoulder some of the blame for this

Strongly agree.

To begin with nobody can be held responsible for someone else's actions but if we're going to do some fingerpointing mine is in Audeze's direction because from a consumer standpoint it's quite a mess. I never understood why this thread wasn't birthed by an Audeze rep. Would have been the right thing to do. The other side of the coin is their outstanding service I've gotten every single time and heard about from others.

@kr11048 you should get in touch with Audeze and explain the situation.

 

[take8]

Nobody ever likes rolling product updates. They always feel like the previous purchasers have lost value in their purchases, and it makes the used market more difficult. But from a manufacturer's perspective, they have no incentive to encourage a good experience on the used market, and it makes no financial sense to offer something akin to free upgrades to previous owners (although it would certainly be nice). Unfortunately, rolling product updates and silent revisions have always been a thing, for countless decades and across many industries, and that isn't likely to stop anytime soon.