[Jonne Haven]

Wow thanks @Kentajalli and @Kevintj604 for the detailed replies. I love my LCD-X and think they’re perfect. I didn’t know the lack of back pressure was what contributed to their warmth. Makes sense and makes sense that the closed LCD-XC would be perceived as brighter.

I don’t mind the weight of the LCD-X. I grew up on my dad’s old Japanese JVC closed backs from the late-70s early 80s. Those were beasts on an 11 yo head. (I’m in my 40s now).

The “extra” energy up top on the LCD-XC would probably be beneficial as I plan to use them in a shared space, and will probably need to keep them on low volume. This may help keep some of the details of the music intact for my aging ears.

Thanks again!

Hey mancpg,

I own both cans and I love them both, moreso than my sometimes much more expensive cans of various sorts. Partly because of what @Kentajalli said about the fact that they both EQ very well with practically no distortion. The X EQs a little better than the XC. That said, if you do EQ you will find that you can make them sound pretty identical,...almost...the XC has inherent bass boom that is due to being closed that the X can't produce quite the same, and the X has some unexplainable (at least to me) kind of magical imaging going on, not necessarily sound stage but the word 3D is the only word, inadequate though it is, to describe it that the XC can't reproduce no matter how you EQ it.

I agree with @Kevintj604 that the un-EQed the XC will present a brighter character, much brighter than the un-EQed X.

After all is said and done, EQ or no EQ, I prefer the X to the XC due to it's more pliable nature in studio engineering applications. It also sounds more like actual speakers, due to its open backed nature. But this of course means that everyone in the room can hear them. Is that an issue for you?

But as far as closed backs are concerned, I doubt you will find the XC's equal...at any price range, and I own a closed back $3000 Focal Stellia which while it has its own strengths just isn't the overall closed back that the XC is. If you enjoy A LOT of bass quantity and we're talking can vibrating bass, the XC can do that for you, like bass I've never experienced or knew possible in headphones, but it is also quick and detailed. I think the only complaint I have against the XC, and it is a minor one, is that it requires more juice if you want the same quantity of bass at the same level as the X. Otherwise, I don't think you can go wrong with that purchase.

So, to sum up, they are much the same, but also much different!...but equally great!

Blessings,
-J

 

[albertmuc]

You need a closed headphone or listen to classical, take the XC, for the rest take the X. With EQ, both are great, complement each other and I don't know which is better. You don't like EQ, don't take either of them, certainly not the XC. So much for my part of the truth.

 

[Kentajalli]

Hey mancpg,

I own both cans and I love them both, moreso than my sometimes much more expensive cans of various sorts. Partly because of what @Kentajalli said about the fact that they both EQ very well with practically no distortion. The X equals a little better than the XC. That said, if you do EQ you will find that you can make them sound pretty identical,...almost...the XC has inherent bass boom that is due to being closed that the X can't produce quite the same, and the X has some unexplainable (at least to me) a kind of magical imaging going on, not necessarily sound stage but the word 3D is the only word, inadequate though it is, to describe it that the XC can't reproduce no matter how you EQ it.

Regarding the XC bass, because it does not have the lower mid/upper bass of X, it can be conceived as having more sub-bass! also closed back, means faster bass.
The 3D imaging you mention is pretty true for most quality open-back headphones, it is an illusion the brain creates! it can hear the Room and the music, so you get a music-in-the-room sensation.
Very true.

I agree with @Kevinj604 that the un-EQed the XC will present a brighter character, much brighter than the un-EQed X.
After all is said and done, EQ or no EQ, I prefer the X to the XC due to it's more pliable nature in studio engineering applications. It also sounds more like actual speakers, due to its open backed nature. But this of course means that everyone in the room can hear them. Is that an issue for you?

It was an issue for me. That was the major reason I went for the XC.

But as far as closed backs are concerned, I doubt you will find the XC's equal...at any price range, and I own a closed back $3000 Focal Stellia which while it has its own strengths just isn't the overall closed back that the XC is.

Best closed back ever, all the way to DCA Stealths, which incidentally, the Stealths sound like the X, if it was a closed back.

If you enjoy A LOT of bass quantity and we're talking can vibrating bass, the XC can do that for you, like bass I've never experienced or knew possible in headphones, but it is also quick and detailed. I think the only complaint I have against the XC, and it is a minor one, it is that it requires more juice if you want the same quantity of bass at the same level as the X. Otherwise, I don't think you can go wrong with that purchase.

My moded XC does not require any bass boost using EQ. This is very important from an EQ point of view!
If all you need to do is tame down the higher frequencies, using EQ, there would be no need for a preamp cut! so you get to use all of your amp's power.
EQ ing the X is even simpler. Just boost the deficiencies above 1.8kHz with EQ, and don't worry about applying equal preamp cut!
You may ask why? How come? Answer is simple!
Music (not test tones, but what we actually feed the headphones) has a natural drop in energy as you go up the frequency. Past the first few hundred Hertz, the levels are naturally down by many many dB's, so you can boost by a good few dB's (as much as 10 or even more), without the risk of clipping your DAC.

So, to sum up, they are much the same, but also much different!...but equally great!

Absolutely. I heard the XC at CanJam last year, and I had to have one.
I bought mine on impulse, and only using my ears subjectively, even though I am mostly a measurement centric guy.
They just sounded so good. Afterwards, I came across the measurements, the low distortion and the rest.

 

[mancpg]

Thanks @Jonne Haven @albertmuc and @Kentajalli (once again)! Ok, that's sealed it for me, I'm getting the LCD-XC to compliment my LCD-X, for when I need minimal sound leakage. I'm open to EQing, and I've used it sparingly with the LCD-X. But I find it sounds equally great without EQ!

the X has some unexplainable (at least to me) kind of magical imaging going on, not necessarily sound stage but the word 3D is the only word

Totally, totally, totally agree about the holographic nature of the LCD-X.

Thank you all again!

 

[Andrew_WOT]

I was looking at LCD-XC myself to compliment LCD-X with something more isolating. But based on my research looks like most people suggest that isolation is not really better, but extra weight and drop in SQ are real.

 

[Dixter]

If you like the LCD-x21 then I think you will like the LCD-XC21 too... they both sound good and you can dial them both in with EQ if you want... the obvious advantage to the LCD-XC21 is when you need the isolation...

 

[DaOchin]

Bought the shorter headband and that is the way to go IMO. The original headband made it feel like they were weighing down on my neck, now it feels more floating. I don't get why the longer headband is standard.

 

[jsk ksj]

I know that this is not the general experience, but I find the lcdx to be the most comfortable headphone I have ever used. All day long, no issue. Forgot it's on.

Heavy, but the weight is so well distributed.

 

[Andrew_WOT]

I don't get why the longer headband is standard.

Mystery to me as well, shrug.

 

[Kentajalli]

Thanks @Jonne Haven @albertmuc and @Kentajalli (once again)! Ok, that's sealed it for me, I'm getting the LCD-XC to compliment my LCD-X, for when I need minimal sound leakage. I'm open to EQing, and I've used it sparingly with the LCD-X. But I find it sounds equally great without EQ!

You know you could cheat!
As far as I know, the XC and the X use the same drivers, cups and cushions.
I would not be surprised that the difference between the two, are just the back cups!
So it should be feasible to buy just a pair of XC 21 back cups, and gently fit them into an X.
While I was modding mine, and just for the heck of it, I listened to my XC 21's without the cups, I can swear they sounded just like an X.

I think, if someone has already tried it, should chip in and tell us.

 

[iFi audio]

Well, Yes and No!
Both headphones, as far as I know, use the same drivers!
Here is LCD-X


Here is LCD-XC


And here is one, superimposed on the other, allowing for treble level:

The faded curve is LCD-X, the solid curve is XC.

It is a matter of point of view!
From the superimposed graph, you can see that:
1- Both headphones have the same FR from about 1.8kHz upwards.
2- The XC, being a closed back, has all outputs below 1.8kHz, muted a bit.
OR
3- The X being an open back has all lower frequencies boosted! This is because there is no back pressure on the diaphragms.
This makes the headphones sound warmer, OR makes the XC sound brighter, depending on your view-point.
I personally did a simple Mod. on my LCD-XC ( https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...eze-lcd-xc-21-effects-of-small-venting.42829/
From my measurements, after allowing small venting to occur on the XC, you get this:



Just look at the curve below 300Hz.
As I reduced the back pressure from XC diaphragms, in small steps, it changed the bass FR curve.
Here is a zoomed version of the affected area.



At the end of the day, either, the X is too warm, or the XC is too bright, take your pick.
But since both headphones have almost no DISTORTION to speak of, EQ to you heart's desire, just make sure you don't run out of gain.
Distortion? what distortion!

Very informative stuff, thanks a lot!

 

[X-Frame]

Bought the shorter headband and that is the way to go IMO. The original headband made it feel like they were weighing down on my neck, now it feels more floating. I don't get why the longer headband is standard.

I haven't checked into this thread in a while -- last I checked with Audeze about 6 months ago they were not selling the shorter headband anymore. Did that recently change I assume?

 

[Jonne Haven]

I haven't checked into this thread in a while -- last I checked with Audeze about 6 months ago they were not selling the shorter headband anymore. Did that recently change I assume?

I don't know if they are selling them again.

Perhaps in the case that they are not, I will put forth this though.

I did get a shortened headband (free of charge) from them a long time ago and didn't find it supported the weight as well as the original though it did solve the problem of touching the metal frame. I ended up shortening the headband myself following this YouTube video's instruction.


It was much easier than I thought it would be and only required a screwdriver and scissors. My LCD-X became perfectly comfortable and has remained that way for perhaps over a year now.

I understand it might scare you to "impair" your headphone band in such a way but I thought I'd let you know that I found it easy and successful, and ultimately better than the shorter band Audeze provided me.

Blessings,
-J

 

[Jonne Haven]

I haven't checked into this thread in a while -- last I checked with Audeze about 6 months ago they were not selling the shorter headband anymore. Did that recently change I assume?

Sorry to double post,

But I should qualify something. Though I said scissors were required, they are not, I did not actually cut my headband as the instructional video said to because I did not wish to "adjust" the headband permanently like that. The extra length is still there and is on the inside of the band so it is not visible from the outside and I can always revert it back to the way it was.

Blessings,
-J

 

[PixelSquish]

Anyone who has loved the LCD-X tried the ZMF Caldera or Meze Elite or Final Audio 8000 Pro? I'm quite strongly leaning to the Caldera but one of those will be my next cans. I will also not sell the LCD-X. I love the LCD-X sound I am just looking for something to be a bit more well-rounded and refined at the same time as that amazing planar sound and bass.