[x RELIC x]

I want to show off how beautiful these headphones are.


With a polarizing filter on the lens to see the beauty of the carbon fibre.


This is what they look like in real life, lens filter removed. Shiny!!!


Just stunning. :blink:

 

[x RELIC x]

I just had a listen at the Ether C's from a local shop and compared them to the audeze XC's. I also listened to the lcd3 and compared them to the he1000, I ended up buying the lcd3 today. best value I think

Comfort: Ether C much lighter and are easier to forget while wearing than the audeze XC. sound isolation seems to be a tad better than the XC, they sit much better on the head than the alpha dogs and the construction is excellent.

Sound: They're completely different from the XC's, the Ether C is much brighter.
I wouldn't say neutral or balanced at all, if I would describe the audeze XC's as a little dark let's say medium [minus], on the same scale I'd rate the ether C's as medium [plus] [plus]. the bass was really lacking. and not in a subtle way. the XC's sounded more musical and intimate. Although the Ether C did have a better soundstage maybe due to the apparent diluted sound. 

Anyway they're a definite upgrade from the alpha dogs 

Funny, this is the exact opposite of my impressions. LCD-XC has an elevated upper mids/treble and perceptively low bass, especially compared to the LCD-3. The ETHER C in comparison has more bass, and better mids than the XC, it's more musical to these ears. Wonder if Audeze variance is at play here as most XC graphs I've seen are quite different.

I agree about the comfort. The ETHER C is unbelievably comfortable.

 

[micropixel]

I just had a listen at the Ether C's from a local shop and compared them to the audeze XC's. I also listened to the lcd3 and compared them to the he1000, I ended up buying the lcd3 today. best value I think

Comfort: Ether C much lighter and are easier to forget while wearing than the audeze XC. sound isolation seems to be a tad better than the XC, they sit much better on the head than the alpha dogs and the construction is excellent.

Sound: They're completely different from the XC's, the Ether C is much brighter.
I wouldn't say neutral or balanced at all, if I would describe the audeze XC's as a little dark let's say medium [minus], on the same scale I'd rate the ether C's as medium [plus] [plus]. the bass was really lacking. and not in a subtle way. the XC's sounded more musical and intimate. Although the Ether C did have a better soundstage maybe due to the apparent diluted sound. 

Anyway they're a definite upgrade from the alpha dogs 

I have similar experience with Ether C when I auditioned it recently. It sounded thin and the bass was light. In comparison Ether has fuller body and deeper bass. Considering they both use the same driver, the result caught me by surprise. I am now wondering if this is caused by poor cup seal. I will definitely go audition it again soon as I'm keen in looking for a good pair of closed planar which is not too heavy.

 

[Allanmarcus]

 

I just had a listen at the Ether C's from a local shop and compared them to the audeze XC's. I also listened to the lcd3 and compared them to the he1000, I ended up buying the lcd3 today. best value I think

Comfort: Ether C much lighter and are easier to forget while wearing than the audeze XC. sound isolation seems to be a tad better than the XC, they sit much better on the head than the alpha dogs and the construction is excellent.

Sound: They're completely different from the XC's, the Ether C is much brighter.
I wouldn't say neutral or balanced at all, if I would describe the audeze XC's as a little dark let's say medium [minus], on the same scale I'd rate the ether C's as medium [plus] [plus]. the bass was really lacking. and not in a subtle way. the XC's sounded more musical and intimate. Although the Ether C did have a better soundstage maybe due to the apparent diluted sound. 

Anyway they're a definite upgrade from the alpha dogs 

I have similar experience with Ether C when I auditioned it recently. It sounded thin and the bass was light. In comparison Ether has fuller body and deeper bass. Considering they both use the same driver, the result caught me by surprise. I am now wondering if this is caused by poor cup seal. I will definitely go audition it again soon as I'm keen in looking for a good pair of closed planar which is not too heavy.

 
 

  I just had a listen at the Ether C's from a local shop and compared them to the audeze XC's. I also listened to the lcd3 and compared them to the he1000, I ended up buying the lcd3 today. best value I think
 
Comfort: Ether C much lighter and are easier to forget while wearing than the audeze XC. sound isolation seems to be a tad better than the XC, they sit much better on the head than the alpha dogs and the construction is excellent.
 
Sound: They're completely different from the XC's, the Ether C is much brighter.
I wouldn't say neutral or balanced at all, if I would describe the audeze XC's as a little dark let's say medium [minus], on the same scale I'd rate the ether C's as medium [plus] [plus]. the bass was really lacking. and not in a subtle way. the XC's sounded more musical and intimate. Although the Ether C did have a better soundstage maybe due to the apparent diluted sound. 
 
Anyway they're a definite upgrade from the alpha dogs 

 
I used not believe in breakin, but I do now. I got my ether-c, listened to my audition list, then put the ether-c in my son's old room and let it play on an iPod with bass boost for about 120 hours. I listed to the same list again, and the bass was much better. That said, everyone has different ears and different tastes.  

 

[gelocks]

  I just had a listen at the Ether C's from a local shop and compared them to the audeze XC's. I also listened to the lcd3 and compared them to the he1000, I ended up buying the lcd3 today. best value I think
 
Comfort: Ether C much lighter and are easier to forget while wearing than the audeze XC. sound isolation seems to be a tad better than the XC, they sit much better on the head than the alpha dogs and the construction is excellent.
 
Sound: They're completely different from the XC's, the Ether C is much brighter.
I wouldn't say neutral or balanced at all, if I would describe the audeze XC's as a little dark let's say medium [minus], on the same scale I'd rate the ether C's as medium [plus] [plus]. the bass was really lacking. and not in a subtle way. the XC's sounded more musical and intimate. Although the Ether C did have a better soundstage maybe due to the apparent diluted sound. 
 
Anyway they're a definite upgrade from the alpha dogs 

 

Funny, this is the exact opposite of my impressions. LCD-XC has an elevated upper mids/treble and perceptively low bass, especially compared to the LCD-3. The ETHER C in comparison has more bass, and better mids than the XC, it's more musical to these ears. Wonder if Audeze variance is at play here as most XC graphs I've seen are quite different.

I agree about the comfort. The ETHER C is unbelievably comfortable.

 

I have similar experience with Ether C when I auditioned it recently. It sounded thin and the bass was light. In comparison Ether has fuller body and deeper bass. Considering they both use the same driver, the result caught me by surprise. I am now wondering if this is caused by poor cup seal. I will definitely go audition it again soon as I'm keen in looking for a good pair of closed planar which is not too heavy.

 
And this is what really "scares" me and has driven me away from ordering... I keep reading impressions and they vary from end to end! Either they are thin, bright, low bass impact, not at all neutral, etc. Or they are "full-bodied", more "musical", etc.
 
Is it due to the way different people interpret sound?
Is it gear?
Or is it product variation Beyer/AKG style!?
 
Spending $1600-$1700 on a product that can not even best the XCs (to my ears, the Alpha Dogs do VERY well against the XCs and I preferred them over the Audeze's) I don't think it's a good deal... More impressions?! Any other comparisons with other "light-on-bass" dynamic headphones such as the T1s, T5p's, or even "low-end" fare such as Grados and/or Shure SRH940s, etc.? Heck, even against Dan's own Alpha Dogs and/or Mad Dog Pros?
 
 
Thanks.

 

[Jodet]

I'm still going back and forth on the 'open' 'closed' thing.   Haven't given up on the original Ether. 
 
Would welcome any more comparisons people could make between the two.  

 

[bflat]

   
 
 
And this is what really "scares" me and has driven me away from ordering... I keep reading impressions and they vary from end to end! Either they are thin, bright, low bass impact, not at all neutral, etc. Or they are "full-bodied", more "musical", etc.
 
Is it due to the way different people interpret sound?
Is it gear?
Or is it product variation Beyer/AKG style!?
 
Spending $1600-$1700 on a product that can not even best the XCs (to my ears, the Alpha Dogs do VERY well against the XCs and I preferred them over the Audeze's) I don't think it's a good deal... More impressions?! Any other comparisons with other "light-on-bass" dynamic headphones such as the T1s, T5p's, or even "low-end" fare such as Grados and/or Shure SRH940s, etc.? Heck, even against Dan's own Alpha Dogs and/or Mad Dog Pros?
 
 
Thanks.

In my experience most folks who are listening to planars for the first time coming from dynamic drivers tend to listen at fairly low volume levels and mistake that for "thin" and "bass light". I certainly made the same mistake the first time I listened to the XC's. Maybe people are afraid of blowing up $2000 headphones?
 
In my subjective comparison of Ether C and T5P, I find Ether C having more bass presence by about 1-1.5 dB over the T5P. Bass extension is also better on the C.

 

[uncopy87]

Thanks for the review!! It looks gorgeous! Makes me rethink where I should spend my money on.

 

[NZtechfreak]

And this is what really "scares" me and has driven me away from ordering... I keep reading impressions and they vary from end to end! Either they are thin, bright, low bass impact, not at all neutral, etc. Or they are "full-bodied", more "musical", etc.

Is it due to the way different people interpret sound?
Is it gear?
Or is it product variation Beyer/AKG style!?

Spending $1600-$1700 on a product that can not even best the XCs (to my ears, the Alpha Dogs do VERY well against the XCs and I preferred them over the Audeze's) I don't think it's a good deal... More impressions?! Any other comparisons with other "light-on-bass" dynamic headphones such as the T1s, T5p's, or even "low-end" fare such as Grados and/or Shure SRH940s, etc.? Heck, even against Dan's own Alpha Dogs and/or Mad Dog Pros?


Thanks.

They best the XC for me, I've heard the XC several times and can't get along with it. Wonky sound and terrible comfort.

I'm going to do a proper volume-matched comparison with my T5p, hopefully tonight if the twins allow it.

Mine need more hours on them, so take this FWIW, but I think these are a bit on the leaner side. So far I'm enjoying them, but I haven't fallen for them as yet.

 

[anorphirith]

   
 
 
And this is what really "scares" me and has driven me away from ordering... I keep reading impressions and they vary from end to end! Either they are thin, bright, low bass impact, not at all neutral, etc. Or they are "full-bodied", more "musical", etc.
 
Is it due to the way different people interpret sound?
Is it gear?
Or is it product variation Beyer/AKG style!?
 
Spending $1600-$1700 on a product that can not even best the XCs (to my ears, the Alpha Dogs do VERY well against the XCs and I preferred them over the Audeze's) I don't think it's a good deal... More impressions?! Any other comparisons with other "light-on-bass" dynamic headphones such as the T1s, T5p's, or even "low-end" fare such as Grados and/or Shure SRH940s, etc.? Heck, even against Dan's own Alpha Dogs and/or Mad Dog Pros?
 
 
Thanks.

Year It would be kind of costly to order the ether C to try them since they charge 150$ if you decide you like the Alpha Dogs better, for that price you could probably fly to the nearest audio store that has them in demo haha ! 

 

[x RELIC x]

And this is what really "scares" me and has driven me away from ordering... I keep reading impressions and they vary from end to end! Either they are thin, bright, low bass impact, not at all neutral, etc. Or they are "full-bodied", more "musical", etc.

Is it due to the way different people interpret sound?
Is it gear?
Or is it product variation Beyer/AKG style!?

Spending $1600-$1700 on a product that can not even best the XCs (to my ears, the Alpha Dogs do VERY well against the XCs and I preferred them over the Audeze's) I don't think it's a good deal... More impressions?! Any other comparisons with other "light-on-bass" dynamic headphones such as the T1s, T5p's, or even "low-end" fare such as Grados and/or Shure SRH940s, etc.? Heck, even against Dan's own Alpha Dogs and/or Mad Dog Pros?


Thanks.

Thing is the LCD-XC and ETHER C have different efficiency ratings and if not volume matched its easy to misinterpret the differences in sound. Especially from a quick audition in a store. I'm in Jude's camp with these headphones and would have to agree with his impressions in the first post of the thread. They aren't bass light IMO.

 

[Stereolab42]

They are definitely not bass light. Anyways all these top planar headphones can be EQ'd up if necessary without distortion so a few DB in either direction makes little difference.
 
The ETHER-C is very fun to listen to. It has an amazing ability to stitch together all of the elements of a recording and present them as a tight, cohesive whole. It's fast and nothing is over-emphasized. Definitely a true all-rounder.

 

[gelocks]

In my experience most folks who are listening to planars for the first time coming from dynamic drivers tend to listen at fairly low volume levels and mistake that for "thin" and "bass light". I certainly made the same mistake the first time I listened to the XC's. Maybe people are afraid of blowing up $2000 headphones?

Oh, I don't mind turning up the volume at all!! Specially with planars which are usually more power hungry.

Year It would be kind of costly to order the ether C to try them since they charge 150$ if you decide you like the Alpha Dogs better, for that price you could probably fly to the nearest audio store that has them in demo haha ! 

I'm from Puerto Rico, so no, it would not be cheaper...

 

[money4me247]

 
And this is what really "scares" me and has driven me away from ordering... I keep reading impressions and they vary from end to end! Either they are thin, bright, low bass impact, not at all neutral, etc. Or they are "full-bodied", more "musical", etc.
 
Is it due to the way different people interpret sound?
Is it gear?
Or is it product variation Beyer/AKG style!?
 
Spending $1600-$1700 on a product that can not even best the XCs (to my ears, the Alpha Dogs do VERY well against the XCs and I preferred them over the Audeze's) I don't think it's a good deal... More impressions?! Any other comparisons with other "light-on-bass" dynamic headphones such as the T1s, T5p's, or even "low-end" fare such as Grados and/or Shure SRH940s, etc.? Heck, even against Dan's own Alpha Dogs and/or Mad Dog Pros?
 
Thanks.

ether c is definitely nicer than the alpha primes imo. I found the alpha primes a bit bland though I do also prefer the prime over the XCs. XC has some interesting coloration from my perspective so I think the XC really depends on personal preference. I think its worthwhile to consider the ether closed if looking for a closed home usage generally neutral orientated sound signature. should be well-tuned for most audiophile-type tastes. personally preferred the ether closed over the ether open. I think its a worthwhile upgrade over the prime & I would recommend skipping over the prime to the Ether closed.
 
The closed headphones that I think are competitive at their price points are the k553, hp50, pm-3, prime (sale price), and ether closed to give you a sense of my preferences. cheers

 

[m0nster]

Hey everyone
 
I've been reading this thread for the last week, even that was an emotional roller coaster. You guys seem to have a pretty family-like thing going on here! I must say I am always impressed at head-fi that there is no unqualified beef in such a long thread. You guys are great!!
 
I hope there are a lot more impressions and comparisons coming. And if anyone decides they don't want their Ether C anymore I'd gladly buy it

 
Enjoy the weekend, guys!