Audeze LCD-XC Review (Closed-back Headphone)

[Peterinvan]

Hey guys, I am considering a TOTL closed-back, and am zeroing in on LCD-XC, but have a couple of questions:

1. I have HD800s which I like, would LCD XC or D9200 be a better pair for it?
2. I always EQ my headphones. Is it safe to say, that with EQ LCD-XC would be on par with DCA Stealth?

My LCD-XC (2019 Burbinga) are my reference headphones. I run them balanced, without EQ. I like acoustic bass and jazz trios, as well as some pop (Billie Eilish .
I am sensitive to harsh treble so no horns or whailing saxophones for me.

I deal with the weight by leaning back in my recliner chair.

Note, I am in my 70’s, but have decent hearing for my age. I produce earwax, so I have my ears cleaned out about every three months (and especially before I audition any new equipment).

Because everyone’s ears are different, it is useful to look at the measurements to see if they match the weaknesses we may have in our hearing. Anyone voicing an opinion on these threads, it would be useful if you let us know how old you are, and what hearing deficiencies you may have.

 

[Ken Tajalli]

Something peculiar happened today, I did not expect.
I was at Canjam London today, at Audeze's desk.
I have an LCD-XC myself, that I have modified slightly. I wanted to compare mine to a factory version. They sounded more different than I thought! So they had another XC at hand, and I tried that one, just to see. That one was different too!
OK, mine was modified, but the other two were factory, sounding different. One distinctly, had more lower-midrange, sounding fuller than the other. Mine had more lower-bass (expected), but had less of that lower-midrange compared to one of them, but I would say on a par with the other one, though slightly different.
I understand that headphones can be different from batch-to-batch, some even change slightly with usage (burning-in ?), but I did not expect that to this degree.
Mind you, all three samples sounded great.
Think about those poor souls, that find a review curve and EQ their headphones blindly using it.

 

[Jimbob54]

Something peculiar happened today, I did not expect.
I was at Canjam London today, at Audeze's desk.
I have an LCD-XC myself, that I have modified slightly. I wanted to compare mine to a factory version. They sounded more different than I thought! So they had another XC at hand, and I tried that one, just to see. That one was different too!
OK, mine was modified, but the other two were factory, sounding different. One distinctly, had more lower-midrange, sounding fuller than the other. Mine had more lower-bass (expected), but had less of that lower-midrange compared to one of them, but I would say on a par with the other one, though slightly different.
I understand that headphones can be different from batch-to-batch, some even change slightly with usage (burning-in ?), but I did not expect that to this degree.
Mind you, all three samples sounded great.
Think about those poor souls, that find a review curve and EQ their headphones blindly using it.

I believe the Audeze Lottery is a long running quip.

 

[Robbo99999]

Something peculiar happened today, I did not expect.
I was at Canjam London today, at Audeze's desk.
I have an LCD-XC myself, that I have modified slightly. I wanted to compare mine to a factory version. They sounded more different than I thought! So they had another XC at hand, and I tried that one, just to see. That one was different too!
OK, mine was modified, but the other two were factory, sounding different. One distinctly, had more lower-midrange, sounding fuller than the other. Mine had more lower-bass (expected), but had less of that lower-midrange compared to one of them, but I would say on a par with the other one, though slightly different.
I understand that headphones can be different from batch-to-batch, some even change slightly with usage (burning-in ?), but I did not expect that to this degree.
Mind you, all three samples sounded great.
Think about those poor souls, that find a review curve and EQ their headphones blindly using it.

If they really were that different in terms of unit to unit variation, it's probably hard to be totally sure from listening how poor, then the poor souls are the people that buy this headphone and have to put up with large unit to unit variation. I'm not saying this headphone has large unit to unit variation, as we don't really know, but if it does then purchasers are the poor souls, especially when it's a $1300 headphone!

 

[Ken Tajalli]

If they really were that different in terms of unit to unit variation, it's probably hard to be totally sure from listening how poor, then the poor souls are the people that buy this headphone and have to put up with large unit to unit variation. I'm not saying this headphone has large unit to unit variation, as we don't really know, but if it does then purchasers are the poor souls, especially when it's a $1300 headphone!

You mean me!
The differences were in lower midrange. Noticeable for sure. Not just to my ears, two sets of ears, as I had my enthusiast buddy with me too.
The other unit from Audeze stand, had pretty much the same tone as mine (still a little different).
I must re-emphasize that all three sounded great! OK a bit different tonality, but great never the same.
The resolution and lack of distortion is very catchy.
To my surprise, and to my ears, the LCD-4Z sounded pretty much the same as XC. One is open back, the other closed back.
We didn't get to hear the LCD5, there was a line for that one!
My friend has fallen in love with the LCD-X , and he is trying to find one at special offers.
For £1300 (I paid much less for a new one) , I would still buy the same, today.
BTW, the HEDDphone and the new version, didn't sound good to me at all, while the new Hifiman Arya did.

 

[Robbo99999]

You mean me!
The differences were in lower midrange. Noticeable for sure. Not just to my ears, two sets of ears, as I had my enthusiast buddy with me too.
The other unit from Audeze stand, had pretty much the same tone as mine (still a little different).
I must re-emphasize that all three sounded great! OK a bit different tonality, but great never the same.
The resolution and lack of distortion is very catchy.
To my surprise, and to my ears, the LCD-4Z sounded pretty much the same as XC. One is open back, the other closed back.
We didn't get to hear the LCD5, there was a line for that one!
My friend has fallen in love with the LCD-X , and he is trying to find one at special offers.
For £1300 (I paid much less for a new one) , I would still buy the same, today.
BTW, the HEDDphone and the new version, didn't sound good to me at all, while the new Hifiman Arya did.

I just place value on a headphone being low unit to unit variation, I think it's an important aspect, and it does mean that it makes EQ'ing to a curve a lot more reliable (eg Oratory EQ's for instance). I wanted to respond, because I think EQ'ing to a curve is a good thing to do, especially if you know you're getting a low unit to unit variation headphone, so there is value in that. I didn't agree with your stance calling people who EQ to a curve "poor souls". There's still scope to vary things when EQ'ing to a curve, and sometimes you don't need to finetune it. I just wanted to put it into perspective.

 

[Ken Tajalli]

I just place value on a headphone being low unit to unit variation, I think it's an important aspect, and it does mean that it makes EQ'ing to a curve a lot more reliable (eg Oratory EQ's for instance). I wanted to respond, because I think EQ'ing to a curve is a good thing to do, especially if you know you're getting a low unit to unit variation headphone, so there is value in that. I didn't agree with your stance calling people who EQ to a curve "poor souls". There's still scope to vary things when EQ'ing to a curve, and sometimes you don't need to finetune it. I just wanted to put it into perspective.

Well, unit to unit differences is a fact of life. But I did not expect Audeze to have this much.
I had noticed the same with Hifiman for years, but they are famous for it!
Last year, at the same venue, two HE1000's sounded so different, when I pointed it out to one of their representatives, he had a listen, and then removed one of them from the desk.
Here is where you guys (since there is more of you) and me have our differences, EQing to curve!
Our measurements rigs and techniques for transducers is nowhere accurate. While you can measure a piece of electronic device pretty accurately, same can not be said for headphones, IEMs or speakers.
One of the reasons, is unit to unit changes. Another is the environment where they are being used. Our ear shapes, the room, the seal etc.
Oratory may get a sample that is not indicative of the average production range (by chance). He may do his best to come up with an as-accurate-a-curve as he can, but that may not fit my sample.
The other reason is that, EQing is a bit personal! my ears, are different to yours. I maybe sensitive to certain frequencies that you are not, I have my own preferences. There is no gospel to base EQ curves on.
Throw in the unit to unit discrepancies of this magnitude, and EQing to a published curve becomes a mistake.
Use the curves (plural, from different sources, as many as possible) as a guide only.

 

[sharock]

Well, I'm happy enough with my LCD-XC with EQ provided by Maiky. Perhaps mine is different to the one Amir measured. I guess I'll never know!

On a different note, what high-end open-back would be a nice complement to the XC?

I feel like the HD800s might offer something different enough. I would definitely be EQing it!

 

[Robbo99999]

Well, unit to unit differences is a fact of life. But I did not expect Audeze to have this much.
I had noticed the same with Hifiman for years, but they are famous for it!
Last year, at the same venue, two HE1000's sounded so different, when I pointed it out to one of their representatives, he had a listen, and then removed one of them from the desk.
Here is where you guys (since there is more of you) and me have our differences, EQing to curve!
Our measurements rigs and techniques for transducers is nowhere accurate. While you can measure a piece of electronic device pretty accurately, same can not be said for headphones, IEMs or speakers.
One of the reasons, is unit to unit changes. Another is the environment where they are being used. Our ear shapes, the room, the seal etc.
Oratory may get a sample that is not indicative of the average production range (by chance). He may do his best to come up with an as-accurate-a-curve as he can, but that may not fit my sample.
The other reason is that, EQing is a bit personal! my ears, are different to yours. I maybe sensitive to certain frequencies that you are not, I have my own preferences. There is no gospel to base EQ curves on.
Throw in the unit to unit discrepancies of this magnitude, and EQing to a published curve becomes a mistake.
Use the curves (plural, from different sources, as many as possible) as a guide only.

There is gonna be differences when you EQ a headphone to a curve, which is why you can finetune it after doing so (bass & some other areas), I'm just putting it in perspective. Sometimes you don't need to change anything after EQ'ing to a curve - Oratory EQ for Hifiman HE4XX is one where I don't need to change it, but I do change it a bit for my others. EQ'ing solely by ear without using a measurement as a starting basis is a bit foolish though in my eyes.

 

[Ken Tajalli]

There is gonna be differences when you EQ a headphone to a curve, which is why you can finetune it after doing so (bass & some other areas), I'm just putting it in perspective. Sometimes you don't need to change anything after EQ'ing to a curve - Oratory EQ for Hifiman HE4XX is one where I don't need to change it, but I do change it a bit for my others. EQ'ing solely by ear without using a measurement as a starting basis is a bit foolish though in my eyes.

And that is why I said:

Use the curves (plural, from different sources, as many as possible) as a guide only.

We both know, there are folks out there who do not trust (or use) their ears at all! And blindly go by published curves as gospel.
Good to know, you are not one of them.

 

[Ken Tajalli]

Well, I'm happy enough with my LCD-XC with EQ provided by Maiky. Perhaps mine is different to the one Amir measured. I guess I'll never know!

On a different note, what high-end open-back would be a nice complement to the XC?

I feel like the HD800s might offer something different enough. I would definitely be EQing it!

The X !

 

[kemmler3D]

I have a mini DSP EARS unit - anyone know whether using that to EQ my LCD-XC would be beneficial (with the benefit of others' curves and my own ears) or more likely to lead down a blind alley?

I've found that it's pretty accurate for relative measurements - if you add some gain here or there, it shows up in the next measurement as you'd expect. Fine. But of course for absolute measurements, even 5-figure setups are hard to trust completely, so I'm unsure if I should even bother. I don't need to verify that APOEQ is working.

 

[sharock]

The X !

Could you elaborate why?
What would it do differently?

 

[Jimbob54]

I have a mini DSP EARS unit - anyone know whether using that to EQ my LCD-XC would be beneficial (with the benefit of others' curves and my own ears) or more likely to lead down a blind alley?

I've found that it's pretty accurate for relative measurements - if you add some gain here or there, it shows up in the next measurement as you'd expect. Fine. But of course for absolute measurements, even 5-figure setups are hard to trust completely, so I'm unsure if I should even bother. I don't need to verify that APOEQ is working.

From what I can gather, blind alley.

Checking for channel imbalance on units, yes. Impact of mods /eq yes. Eq to a target based on a completely different rig, no

 

[Robbo99999]

And that is why I said:

We both know, there are folks out there who do not trust (or use) their ears at all! And blindly go by published curves as gospel.
Good to know, you are not one of them.

Well, ok, you had quite a lot of negativity towards people using measurements to EQ to a curve, so I wanted to pick up on that, but we've discussed it out now.

 

[Robbo99999]

I have a mini DSP EARS unit - anyone know whether using that to EQ my LCD-XC would be beneficial (with the benefit of others' curves and my own ears) or more likely to lead down a blind alley?

I've found that it's pretty accurate for relative measurements - if you add some gain here or there, it shows up in the next measurement as you'd expect. Fine. But of course for absolute measurements, even 5-figure setups are hard to trust completely, so I'm unsure if I should even bother. I don't need to verify that APOEQ is working.

Definitely use it to balance your channels. If you can find someone that's measured a specific unit of LCD-XC on both GRAS and miniDSP EARS, then you can create a conversion curve for that specific model of headphone, but I think it's very rare that someone has measured the exact same unit on both.

 

[Ken Tajalli]

Could you elaborate why?
What would it do differently?

It has more lower mid. Otherwise, it is as refined and low distortion as the XC.
If you want something different, I would suggest Hifiman. They are pretty good on value for money.
But the X is really good.
I heard the 4Z a few days ago at London Canjam. They sounded very good to my ears. Basically an XC in open back.

 

[Ken Tajalli]

I have a mini DSP EARS unit - anyone know whether using that to EQ my LCD-XC would be beneficial (with the benefit of others' curves and my own ears) or more likely to lead down a blind alley?

I've found that it's pretty accurate for relative measurements - if you add some gain here or there, it shows up in the next measurement as you'd expect. Fine. But of course for absolute measurements, even 5-figure setups are hard to trust completely, so I'm unsure if I should even bother. I don't need to verify that APOEQ is working.

You already know your own answers!
I have one too, and you are correct.

 

[Spocko]

Thank you for your suggestions.

Actually I bought my LCD-XC quite some years ago, with the original, heavy headband, before the carbon headband.

With the original headband, the top of my head was really aching quickly.
So I bought the expensive and lighter carbon headband. The carbon headband solved the initial problem (pain at top of the head), allowing the headband to stay by putting instead a lot of pressure around the ears, but that pressure also becomes painful after some time. In the end, for me, they moved the pain to another place of the head.
I have given up solving this, and accepted to wear my LCD-XC only for short sessions. ( I like its soothing sound when I have a headache).

THIS is exactly why I haven't moved to any of the Audeze models as they are just too heavy and have been stuck on my Beyerdynamic DT 1770Pro (413 g) as its weight and clamping force perfectly matches my head shape for hours of use (I typically get into a zone and will spend at least 4 hours straight editing) but I am tempted to switch over to DCA Aeon2 Noire also well rate by @amirm and its only 328 g.

 

[kemmler3D]

Good call, I guess channel balance is something that is rig-independent and could help.

BTW, I have found that once I started doing true stereo (4-channel) impulse-based crossfeed, the impression of space in the headphones improved a lot. It delivers more of a continuous stereo image vs. the typical separated L | C | R impression headphones usually give.

I use this VST in EQAPO: https://impulserecord.com/project/convology-xt-plugin/ with these impulses: https://github.com/ShanonPearce/ASH-Listening-Set . I couldn't figure out how to use the 4-channel impulses in EQAPO properly, the VST makes it quite easy. I find about a 30% mix percentage gives a sense of realism without affecting the tonality to an offensive degree. You probably will need to adjust the bass down depending on which impulse you use.