[borrego]

So something interesting happened the other day when I was at a friends place to audition a new amp (Ferrum).
Another gentleman who was invited was carrying his LCD-X 2021. The host also had an LCD-X but his was the older model (circa 2019). Not finding the amp captivating enough, I excused myself to the reading room with both the Xs' and started listening on the host's main setup.

I don't know how to put it but frankly both of them sounded quite different. While the newer one is a tad more balanced of the two, I found the older set to be slightly more dynamic and resolving. Specifically the bass (while good on both units) on the older X was gawwwd awesome. It isn't as textured or detailed on the newer version. Likewise the highs on the newer are okay while on the older unit the shimmer and gloss in the HF is pretty distinct. All these findings were without any EQ.
I'm not sure but I did like the older unit better; by quite a bit actually.

Anyone else had a chance to do a similar a/b with the old and new?

Not really a surprise that you found the 2019 model more dynamic, as the 2021 model has fewer magnets. I don't think Audeze gave the newer model thinner/lighter diaphrams, or stronger magnets to compensate. With fewer magnets, the 2021 model should give better imaging as sound wave is less blocked. And with fewer magnets, they are also slightly lighter.

The 2021 model's flatter FR curve is mainly contributed by the thinner pads. But now users are swapping back to the thicker Dekoni or stock pads because their ears are touching the fazors.

I am sticking with my 2018/2019 LCD-XC as it would be the last model with the bubinga cups.

 

[pofofo]

So the drivers on both versions are same? Interesting...

EDIT: Oh they completely redid the driver. No wonder then. They sound really different.

Yes, the pre-21 have 8 rows of magnets, the post-21 have 6. But even still, Audeze also wrote that the main difference in sound comes from the pads.

 

[Giru]

With fewer magnets, the 2021 model should give better imaging as sound wave is less blocked.

Really? Any links or precedant for this? I doubt that reducing magnets improves imaging in any way. Moreover the older unit that I heard had better detail and accuracy so I don't think that I agree with this.

Yes, the pre-21 have 8 rows of magnets, the post-21 have 6. But even still, Audeze also wrote that the main difference in sound comes from the pads.

Hmmmm. I dunno why they would go a step back in terms of performance just to get a (very) slightly better FR.

Anyway, whatever it is, the older unit sounded very different and I think was superior to the current model (the 2021 model) specially in terms of detail, dynamics, resolution and punch. The newer one sounds a bit thin and watered down in comparison. Clearly the older driver was superior or whatever. I guess it's okay tho maybe. It's still not a bad headphone per say (far from it). I almost thought it was a QC issue on the newer unit

 

[pofofo]

I think weight was a motivator to change the drivers as well

 

[Giru]

I think weight was a motivator to change the drivers as well

If that's true it's probably the most amusing thing I've heard in headphone lore. Why touch your bulky metal chassis and headphone parts when you can shave off a few grams by reducing the number of magnets in the drivers?

 

[borrego]

Really? Any links or precedant for this? I doubt that reducing magnets improves imaging in any way. Moreover the older unit that I heard had better detail and accuracy so I don't think that I agree with this.

See posts #148 to #150 of this thread.

 

[Giru]

See posts #148 to #150 of this thread.

Yeah, no mention of imaging improvement or why it will be so.

I think it's a moot point to go digging into the technicalities as the older driver has been discontinued and people are happy with the new LCD-X. However if I owned an older unit I'd hang on to it unless I was upgrading to something much more expensive (or rather: better sounding).

 

[szore]

17 Band EQ Revision


For those of you interested the EQ profile I posted in February it has under gone several silent revisions. The latest can be found below in the 17 band version iteration. The EQ now has just that much more sub bass punch and slam with more controlled highs that match the high mids more evenly. Simply put, it’s subtle but it's better. Try it!




Pre Amp: -14.75 (Be sure to enter this value to avoid clipping)

Band 1: Freq 29.8 Gain 2.91 Q 0.69 Filter Low Shelf
Band 2: Freq 35 Gain 0.93 Q 3.3 Filter Low Shelf
Band 3: Freq 70 Gain 5 Q 1.5 Filter Peak
Band 4: Freq 90 Gain 10.75 Q 0.7 Filter Low Shelf
Band 5: Freq 130 Gain 0.5 Q 0.6 Filter Peak
Band 6: Freq 540 Gain 0.5 Q 2.7 Filter Peak
Band 7: Freq 810 Gain -1.85 Q 2.2 Filter Peak
Band 8: Freq 1235 Gain -1 Q 2.4 Filter High Shelf
Band 9: Freq 1500 Gain 7.9 Q 0.71Filter High Shelf
Band 10: Freq 1910 Gain 1.3 Q 5 Filter Peak
Band 11: Freq 2730 Gain -3.6 Q 2.2 Filter Peak
Band 12: Freq 3700 Gain 4 Q 1.4 Filter Peak
Band 13: Freq 5775 Gain -5.3 Q 4.7 Filter Peak
Band 14: Freq 7350 Gain -2.3 Q 7 Filter Peak
Band 15: Freq 8150 Gain -1 Q 8 Filter Peak
Band 16: Freq 12450 Gain 1.25 Q 1.7 Filter High Shelf
Band 17: Freq 20000 Gain 1 Q 0.6 Filter High Shelf

To increase or decrease sub-bass, adjust gain to Band 4 to taste.
To increase or decrease treble/air, adjust gain to Band 16 to taste.
If the tracks you're playing have a bit too much "bass body" change Band 4's Frequency from 90 to 70-80 and you'll get more of a "planar typical" bass sound that extends just as deep.


Here’s an original track of mine that I mastered with the LCD-X 2021 to try out this profile with that really pushes these cans to do things previously not thought possible by me:

Jonne Haven - “Big Bad World”





Once again, the LCD-X 2021 proves itself to be equal to the task of representing even the smallest of EQ changes and tweaks. It’s an integral and indispensable tool in the studio!

If you'd like a version with less bands just ask!

Blessings,
-J

I'm sorry, I tried this and it was a mess.

 

[shwnwllms]

I'm sorry, I tried this and it was a mess.

Have you tried AutoEQ? Linked are the Oratory1990 EQs for the 2021 revision and pre 2021 LCD-X

LCD-X 2021
https://github.com/jaakkopasanen/Au...ry1990/harman_over-ear_2018/Audeze LCD-X 2021

LCD-X pre-2021
https://github.com/jaakkopasanen/Au...90/harman_over-ear_2018/Audeze LCD-X pre-2021

 

[szore]

Have you tried AutoEQ? Linked are the Oratory1990 EQs for the 2021 revision and pre 2021 LCD-X

LCD-X 2021
https://github.com/jaakkopasanen/AutoEq/tree/master/results/oratory1990/harman_over-ear_2018/Audeze LCD-X 2021

LCD-X pre-2021
https://github.com/jaakkopasanen/AutoEq/tree/master/results/oratory1990/harman_over-ear_2018/Audeze LCD-X pre-2021

Yeah, my deal is I do not like EQ at all...I got into some very deep and vitriolic discussions about this...but to me EQ always destroys sound fidelity. Everything to me just sounds better without it...I keep experimenting, but I always come back to the same conclusion; no EQ!. I was using the DSP profile from the AudioScienceReview article...lived with it for a few days, and I just turned it off, and the fidelity is just better without it...at least to my ears, anyway.

 

[Giru]

Yeah, my deal is I do not like EQ at all...I got into some very deep and vitriolic discussions about this...but to me EQ always destroys sound fidelity. Everything to me just sounds better without it...I keep experimenting, but I always come back to the same conclusion; no EQ!. I was using the DSP profile from the AudioScienceReview article...lived with it for a few days, and I just turned it off, and the fidelity is just better without it...at least to my ears, anyway.

+1^n

I don't EQ either. EQ Destroys a lot of detail (esp transients, reverb effects, subtle nuances and temporal intricacies) that are present in a recording. Digital EQ is a strict no no for me (regardless whether it's lossless).

Besides after hearing both the older and newer X, I can safely say that they're pretty enjoyable without EQ (the newer version more so).

 

[shwnwllms]

Yeah, my deal is I do not like EQ at all...I got into some very deep and vitriolic discussions about this...but to me EQ always destroys sound fidelity. Everything to me just sounds better without it...I keep experimenting, but I always come back to the same conclusion; no EQ!. I was using the DSP profile from the AudioScienceReview article...lived with it for a few days, and I just turned it off, and the fidelity is just better without it...at least to my ears, anyway.

I fought it for awhile myself, but ultimately gave in as the LCD-X 2021 are a reference headphone that not only benefit from EQ they are designed to be EQ’d IMO. They are ok without but their strength really lies in the ability to tailor the sound without loss of fidelity. If you don’t plan on EQing them then it may not be the ideal match for you.

As far as fidelity loss goes, I pass the signal from Roon bitperfect (no DSP whatsoever) and load the PEQ into the HQPlayer pipeline matrix to handle. There is no loss of fidelity whatsoever. As always YMMV

 

[szore]

I fought it for awhile myself, but ultimately gave in as the LCD-X 2021 are a reference headphone that not only benefit from EQ they are designed to be EQ’d IMO. They are ok without but their strength really lies in the ability to tailor the sound without loss of fidelity. If you don’t plan on EQing them then it may not be the ideal match for you.

As far as fidelity loss goes, I pass the signal from Roon bitperfect (no DSP whatsoever) and load the PEQ into the HQPlayer pipeline matrix to handle. There is no loss of fidelity whatsoever. As always YMMV

You mean the Roon HQPlayer that they sell as an add-on? I was curious about that.

 

[shwnwllms]

You mean the Roon HQPlayer that they sell as an add-on? I was curious about that.

No. HQPlayer is software. Roon allows you to set up HQPlayer as a zone. Roon handles the front end (manages library, playlists, UI etc) while HQPlayer does oversampling, Parametric EQ, room correction etc on the backend. In this type of setup you need to be careful not to have any DSP in Roon first (such as an Audeze Reveal preset) before oversampling is applied in HQPlayer as there will be loss of fidelity. HQPlayer’s oversampling and matrix pipeline (PEQ) is superior to Roon and built with the highest fidelity in mind so passing a bit perfect signal from Roon to HQPlayer is preferred.

 

[Giru]

I fought it for awhile myself, but ultimately gave in as the LCD-X 2021 are a reference headphone that not only benefit from EQ they are designed to be EQ’d IMO. They are ok without but their strength really lies in the ability to tailor the sound without loss of fidelity. If you don’t plan on EQing them then it may not be the ideal match for you.

As far as fidelity loss goes, I pass the signal from Roon bitperfect (no DSP whatsoever) and load the PEQ into the HQPlayer pipeline matrix to handle. There is no loss of fidelity whatsoever. As always YMMV

I've tried everything from pro-audio EQs to software based PEQ using HQP, etc and always return back to my non-Eqd rig. Maybe that's a personal thing but still, I've found that digital EQ (regardless how you're doing it) ends up making things sound artificial and takes away a lot of key nuances from the recordings.

I'm sure this is not a popular opinion these days especially after certain forums and reviewers hyping it up so much but it is what I've personally experienced and stand by. However I do not frown upon those who do EQ coz everyone likes their gravy their own way. Whatever floats your boat. I just find the concept that a headphone is meant to be EQd to be enjoyed or brought to it's potential a bit comical and misleading; especially given that the X sounds just fine without any equlization.