• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

Audeze LCD-X Over Ear Open Back Headphone Review

solderdude

Grand Contributor
Joined
Jul 21, 2018
Messages
15,891
Likes
35,912
Location
The Neitherlands
The optimal setting (when boosting frequencies which is needed) is to lower the gain and set peak limiter off.
When you hear peaks 'distort' simply dial the gain back a little more.
 

Draculr

Member
Joined
Dec 9, 2018
Messages
31
Likes
46
How come the LCDX is listed as "not recommended" with EQ on the headphone reviews listing? I understand totally it being not recommended without an EQ but with a EQ it's one of the best headphones available in terms of not only having great frequency response but also incredible dynamic range. Am I missing something?
 

MRC01

Major Contributor
Joined
Feb 5, 2019
Messages
3,422
Likes
4,029
Location
Pacific Northwest
How come the LCDX is listed as "not recommended" with EQ on the headphone reviews listing? I understand totally it being not recommended without an EQ but with a EQ it's one of the best headphones available in terms of not only having great frequency response but also incredible dynamic range. Am I missing something?
And, IIRC, the lowest distortion Amir has measured in any headphone.

Amir hinted why in the review, something about in this price range he has higher expectations.
 

Draculr

Member
Joined
Dec 9, 2018
Messages
31
Likes
46
And, IIRC, the lowest distortion Amir has measured in any headphone.

Amir hinted why in the review, something about in this price range he has higher expectations.

Yep, very low distortion which is why it can respond so well to EQ.

I think unless there is a good reason that I'm not seeing it should be recommended with EQ. The performance without EQ should have no relation.
 

MRC01

Major Contributor
Joined
Feb 5, 2019
Messages
3,422
Likes
4,029
Location
Pacific Northwest
"At this price, they should be able to do the engineering necessary to have frequency response that closely follows the Harman curve. I shouldn't need EQ."
Or something to that effect. Just to play Devil's advocate, the frequency response was pretty far off. However, I tend to agree with you. As a listener, you can't fix high distortion, but you can fix frequency response. So it looks like Audeze put the engineering into the right places.
 

Draculr

Member
Joined
Dec 9, 2018
Messages
31
Likes
46
"At this price, they should be able to do the engineering necessary to have frequency response that closely follows the Harman curve. I shouldn't need EQ."
Or something to that effect. Just to play Devil's advocate, the frequency response was pretty far off. However, I tend to agree with you. As a listener, you can't fix high distortion, but you can fix frequency response. So it looks like Audeze put the engineering into the right places.

Yep. I can't explain why Audeze FR is all over the place but they do take to EQ very, very well. Whether you should or shouldn't have to use an EQ is irelevant when you're giving a recommendation "with EQ". This should be something that's very straight forward and without commentary. Is it a good headphone with EQ? If so, it should get a recommendation.

I'd argue it's one of the best headphones available with EQ but that's beyond the point.
 

MRC01

Major Contributor
Joined
Feb 5, 2019
Messages
3,422
Likes
4,029
Location
Pacific Northwest
Along those lines, if you don't need the high voltage sensitivity of the LCD-X, the LCD-2 fazor has more neutral frequency response, with equally low distortion.
 

Draculr

Member
Joined
Dec 9, 2018
Messages
31
Likes
46
Along those lines, if you don't need the high voltage sensitivity of the LCD-X, the LCD-2 fazor has more neutral frequency response, with equally low distortion.

I personally went even cheaper with the LCD2C :)

Again it sounds totally whack without EQ (although it can be argued that it's also an enjoyable way to listen) but with the oratory1990 EQ sounds very accurate while delivering a low end that most other headphones can only dream of.
 

Helicopter

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Aug 13, 2020
Messages
2,693
Likes
3,941
Location
Michigan
Mine sound very good with EQ, especially the bass. I usually use my Focal Clear for the better spatial effects, but If I'm gonna listen to something with tons of bass like Infected Mushroom of Billie Eilish the I might prefer these. If I were going to do it again, I'd probably get the LCD-GX with the magnesium housing, microphone, and lower price.
 

MRC01

Major Contributor
Joined
Feb 5, 2019
Messages
3,422
Likes
4,029
Location
Pacific Northwest
To me personally, with my LCD-2 Fazors, the oratory1990 EQ is too much, makes it sound worse. Rather than chase every wiggle in the FR, I prefer simpler correction that only fixes the biggest deviations. For the LCD-2 fazor, I use a bell +4 @ 3850 Q=0.9, and a low shelf +2 dB with a gentle slope and corner frequency of 80 Hz.

But then to me, most headphones sound too bright, as does the Harman curve which is also too much bass for my taste. So I don't want to correct the headphone to the Harman curve!
 

Helicopter

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Aug 13, 2020
Messages
2,693
Likes
3,941
Location
Michigan
I am using Amir's LCD-X EQ. It sounds good. Other than play with the bass a little, I haven't tried anything else.
 

arancano

Member
Joined
Feb 10, 2020
Messages
78
Likes
120
I think Amir is right in not recommending the LCD-X. While it may be true that Audeze is sacrificing FR for other important parameters, people judge audio gear out-of-the-box with some time allowed for break-in as necessary. They don't expect to have to learn EQ, even if it is made easy, to make their purchase shine.

The problem is that a lot of retailers I spoke with when doing my purchase research either don't know, or feign they don't, that the cans need EQ correction, most likely to avoid discouraging sales. Customers buy the X's expecting great sound and are inevitably disappointed, if not feel downright misled.

Some reviewers discuss it but others don't, leading to confusion. It's hard enough to differentiate among the various Audeze models. Audeze is lucky to have an exceptional product and enough people willing to EQ to make it a business.

I love my X's. I've never had better headphones and have stayed up nights because I can't put them down they sound so real and musical. But then I understand EQ and love doing it, particularly because to get the most out of often less than stellar recordings you have to EQ.

I would venture that a majority of consumers just want to enjoy the music without having to tinker with EQ. If Amir were to recommend the X's without a caveat he'd lose credibility. If he were to recommend them conditionally he would be criticized for endorsing a product that needs consumer intervention to work as advertised.

There's too much misleading and shading of truth in the audio industry. There's no point contributing to it.
 

BillG

Major Contributor
Joined
Sep 12, 2018
Messages
1,699
Likes
2,266
Location
Auckland, New Zealand
"I would venture that a majority of consumers just want to enjoy the music without having to tinker with EQ..."

I'd like to think that if one is going to pay >= $1,000USD for HEADPHONES, that they would be an educated consumer. Prices like would discourage impulse buying and I'd want to read every technical review/performance analysis of them that I could find. However, I do realize that the type of person who's frequent ASR isn't representive of the average consumer/audiophile.
 

Draculr

Member
Joined
Dec 9, 2018
Messages
31
Likes
46
Again, I'm not asking for a recommendation. But it doesn't make sense a headphone like the HEDD to be recommended with EQ even though it has incredible THD but not the superior and cheaper LCDX (see image below). This shouldn't be a matter of opinion.

Screenshot 2021-02-26 180237.jpg
 

MRC01

Major Contributor
Joined
Feb 5, 2019
Messages
3,422
Likes
4,029
Location
Pacific Northwest
Again, I'm not asking for a recommendation. But it doesn't make sense a headphone like the HEDD to be recommended with EQ even though it has incredible THD but not the superior and cheaper LCDX (see image below). This shouldn't be a matter of opinion. ...
Same with the HD800. It requires EQ to lift the attenuated bass and tame its 6 kHz resonance spike. And has higher distortion than the LCD-X, and costs about the same. Yet is recommended. So it seems the recommendations portion of the reviews lack consistency.

However, the reviews themselves are still among the best available anywhere. Because they include detailed and consistent objective measurements, people reading can form their own opinions.
 

roskodan

Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2021
Messages
78
Likes
114
Location
EU
The LCD-X and LCD2C are really an acquired taste (read awful) at best without EQ. Audeze doesn't care about consistency either. It's for a reason the enthusiasts' community has coined the term "Audeze lottery". LCD2 and LCD3 can be decent without EQ, if one gets lucky. Haven't heard the LCD4, but from what I read, same old same old.
 

Nitrium

Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2021
Messages
18
Likes
14
Location
Toronto, ON
The LCD-X and LCD2C are really an acquired taste (read awful) at best without EQ. Audeze doesn't care about consistency either. It's for a reason the enthusiasts' community has coined the term "Audeze lottery". LCD2 and LCD3 can be decent without EQ, if one gets lucky. Haven't heard the LCD4, but from what I read, same old same old.

I got my LCD-X today and yeah, you are not kidding. Without EQ, they sound like cheap tincans. I never seen a headphone respond to EQ this way.
 

roskodan

Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2021
Messages
78
Likes
114
Location
EU
Indeed they respond great to EQ. Loving my LCD2C with the AutoEQ orataory1990 PEQ preset. But that's because without EQ these are just a pair of broken headphones. It's really beyond me how a company can have such a lousy attitude.
 
Top Bottom