[headchiq]

Dynamic drivers might sound punchier, but they can't provide the bass extension and sub-bass presence of (good) planar transducers. When it comes to bass, for me planar is the answer. Dynamic drivers fall short of extension, presence, body, balance. For a bass connoisseur planar is the final answer. Dynamic driver bass is only the McDonald's of bass lovers. A good planar transducer offers the full plate of refined bass like no other dynamic drivers ever can.

I can get the LCD-X to be as beefy as the mdr-v600, or even more if i use the EQ to really boost the low end. unfortunately my trial of soundsource EQ for mac ran out

 

[mikecheck95]

I can get the LCD-X to be as beefy as the mdr-v600, or even more if i use the EQ to really boost the low end. unfortunately my trial of soundsource EQ for mac ran out

It’s less than 100 bucks isn’t it?... why will an audiophile spend 1000 dollars on an amp but not 100 dollars on a program that allows them to easily change the EQ. I mean for me... rather than having multiple headphones I’d rather just have a good Open-back, a decent closed-back and then have EQ profiles for different tracks/genres but I understand this is not for everyone.

 

[headchiq]

It’s less than 100 bucks isn’t it?... why will an audiophile spend 1000 dollars on an amp but not 100 dollars on a program that allows them to easily change the EQ. I mean for me... rather than having multiple headphones I’d rather just have a good Open-back, a decent closed-back and then have EQ profiles for different tracks/genres but I understand this is not for everyone.

i'm a music professional, its not really for listening pleasure. my use case for the headphones is producing, listening to individual sounds by themselves, like a single kick sample etc. so it's not a deal breaker. As long as my ear can adjust to the new sound of the kick in reference to my studio monitors.

but yeah, if it was for listening pleasure i guess id just buy the EQ software

 

[mikecheck95]

i'm a music professional, its not really for listening pleasure. my use case for the headphones is producing, listening to individual sounds by themselves, like a single kick sample etc. so it's not a deal breaker. As long as my ear can adjust to the new sound of the kick in reference to my studio monitors.

but yeah, if it was for listening pleasure i guess id just buy the EQ software

This makes sense!

 

[headchiq]

This makes sense!

There is the problem though however, of trying to decipher between a really meaty deep kick and a kick that's not as meaty. On the lcd-x, this could be a little hard, since with that dip in the base frequency they both kind of sound the same

 

[FYFL]

Dynamic and planar drivers hit bass notes quite different to my ears. Perhaps that’s what you hear? Do you have other planars for comparison?

 

[Sayed2020]

Dynamic drivers might sound punchier, but they can't provide the bass extension and sub-bass presence of (good) planar transducers. When it comes to bass, for me planar is the answer. Dynamic drivers fall short of extension, presence, body, balance. For a bass connoisseur planar is the final answer. Dynamic driver bass is only the McDonald's of bass lovers. A good planar transducer offers the full plate of refined bass like no other dynamic drivers ever can.

Have you heard biocellulose dynamic driver headphones like the Fostex TH-900 mk2 or the Denon AH-D9200? Check them out if you can, they may change your views.

 

[betula]

Have you heard biocellulose dynamic driver headphones like the Fostex TH-900 mk2 or the Denon AH-D9200? Check them out if you can, they may change your views.

I owned the TH-X00 Mahogany and Nighthawk. They both have biocellulose drivers. Lots of fun but not much precision. I prefer bass precision and a flat extension. That said, I would give a go to the TH900MK2 or D9200 but I don't think they would change my mind on my preferred bass presentation. Opened back planars are the way to go when someone is looking for bass quality.

 

[Malevolent]

Dynamic drivers might sound punchier, but they can't provide the bass extension and sub-bass presence of (good) planar transducers. When it comes to bass, for me planar is the answer. Dynamic drivers fall short of extension, presence, body, balance. For a bass connoisseur planar is the final answer. Dynamic driver bass is only the McDonald's of bass lovers. A good planar transducer offers the full plate of refined bass like no other dynamic drivers ever can.

I'd respectfully disagree. I enjoy bass a lot, too (I am a huge basshead). For EDM (my primary genre of music), dynamic headphones produce the best lows, IMO. I've tried most of the top-end headphones on the contemporary market, and I always return to a good dynamic. Planar bass is (generally) detailed with excellent punch and extension. However, they lack the texture, body and rumble of a dynamic driver.

There is no single way to enjoy bass, though - some like it lean and clean, others prefer it weighty and thick.

 

[the8o88y]

Sorry if this has already been asked. Does anyone know if the Reveal plugin presets have been adjusted to coincide with these updates? If not then, would it be a better idea to listen to new LCD-X without Reveal and add EQ? With Reveal and add EQ? Without either? Thoughts?

 

[betula]

I'd respectfully disagree. I enjoy bass a lot, too (I am a huge basshead). For EDM (my primary genre of music), dynamic headphones produce the best lows, IMO. I've tried most of the top-end headphones on the contemporary market, and I always return to a good dynamic. Planar bass is (generally) detailed with excellent punch and extension. However, they lack the texture, body and rumble of a dynamic driver.

There is no single way to enjoy bass, though - some like it lean and clean, others prefer it weighty and thick.

Dynamic drivers always lack that last bit of sub-bass extension and this simply breaks the deal for me. Also planar bass is usually more layered with better separation. Planar bass is also more balanced, more equal. Dynamic driver bass often emphasises upper bass. A matter of personal preference I guess.

 

[FYFL]

I do agree with above

Sorry if this has already been asked. Does anyone know if the Reveal plugin presets have been adjusted to coincide with these updates? If not then, would it be a better idea to listen to new LCD-X without Reveal and add EQ? With Reveal and add EQ? Without either? Thoughts?

No. But soon.

 

[FYFL]

I would also like to chime in on your little planar vs dynamic conversation. But I’ll keep it short (this time). Like already mentioned by @Malevolent. Texture, body, decay/reverb, color, authenticity is what I like with dynamic drivers. Speed, extension, slam/punch/impact, that’s planars’ forte.

Just finished this comparison between ADX5000 and Audeze LCDX with new leather and non leather pads. Used “Drums around the corner” by Art Blakey and “Mombasa” from Interception movie soundtrack.

Also...... for whatever reason, I like non-leather sound and feel better on LCDX. Don’t want to get into it as you guys should get to your own conclusions. Let’s just say that they are more balanced and less distracting, to me.

 

[chris.d.m.]

As an audio engineer using the LCD X for mixing, something I've noticed is that compared to the Sundara, which has been my reference headphone, the LCD X makes things easier to EQ. Makes decisions easier. Not hugely so, but it's noticeable to me. I think it's the way the X handles transients, maybe combined with the greater detail?? A common EQ trick to find problematic regions that need reduction is to create a filter and actually amplify those frequencies, sliding the filter left to right (up and down the frequency range). This makes problems more obvious, and then you reduce the offending frequency. Doing this on the Sundara was effective, but things didn't "pop" the same way they do on the LCD X. When I do the same technique with the LCD X, I'm just able to hear the effect much more clearly. I could boost things by 5db on the Sundara and would still be second guessing myself if I'm adjusting the correct frequency. On the LCD X, the effect of amplifying a frequency range is much more obvious to my ears, and then I can confidently decide which areas need to be reduced. There's more contrast, and my guess is that the LCD X is more resolving of detail in a way that makes transients come through very clearly. The Sundara is great, but things sound a bit more smeared.

Sounds promising an the Sundara's are also my other pair here, as well as Oppo's. I should get the X's in a few weeks. All things considered with loving the previous X's engaging bass, hoping there's not too much of a compromise made in the new ones to achieve the improved balance / voicing.

I'm wondering how the Engineer folks most efficiantly EQ theirs. Meaning, I have some quality good EQ plugs and realize at the end of ones master buss chain is probably best but, I've made some dumb mistakes in the past by forgetting to bypass the EQ before rendering the mix file. But mostly, it's a hassle to use the headphones to check your mix outside the studio on an iPad, or phone etc. without having the same preferred eq plug option there.

 

[tudedude]

Anyone have experience with Audeze customer support? I've been getting some generic responses with no updates to my order. I'm trying to cancel and again get the same generic responses and no signs of cancelation. If their CS is this bad they should just not sell directly from their site. Leave it to the retailers.