Audeze LCD-X Review (2021 Edition Headphone)

[staticV3]

Are these specs any good ?

Output power is the most important spec as far as your UX goes.
However, the way Sound Devices put it, makes the "300 mW + 300 mW" spec next to useless.
Output power must always be stated alongside the load impedance with which it was measured.

 

[R1c0c0]

Output power is the most important spec as far as your UX goes.
However, the way Sound Devices put it, makes the "300 mW + 300 mW" spec next to useless.
Output power must always be stated alongside the load impedance I’ve mailed them and will get back to you

Output power is the most important spec as far as your UX goes.
However, the way Sound Devices put it, makes the "300 mW + 300 mW" spec next to useless.
Output power must always be stated alongside the load impedance with which it was measured.

I’ve mailed them about it and will post the figures once I get an answer from them. Thanks

 

[Blorg]

@R1c0c0 it's almost certainly fine power wise, these are very easy to drive and can be driven off a dongle. It's true you need the impedance to make sense of power figures but numbers are usually quoted around 16-32Ω, if so 300mW is weak for a desktop amp but more powerful than most dongles. I can't go over 1mW on the Qudelix, it's too loud... so gives you an idea of how little these need. I'm fine out of my dongles even with EQ with a -9.5dB pre-amp.

Even if you have the impedance, you are limited in how you can extrapolate from that as real amps often don't behave like an idealized amp, theoretically you should get double the power into 16Ω vs 32Ω but in reality plenty of stuff the power output is lower at 16Ω than 32Ω. Manufacturer power figures are often exaggerated too, but it gives you an order of magnitude, if they are claiming 300mW even if it only does half that... it's still enough for this, because it's a really easy to drive headphone.

 

[Ken Tajalli]

Output power is the most important spec as far as your UX goes.
However, the way Sound Devices put it, makes the "300 mW + 300 mW" spec next to useless.
Output power must always be stated alongside the load impedance with which it was measured.

Well it does say, with ANY impedance headphone .
But I do get you, is it 300mW @ 300 ohms or 32 ohms? I bet it is 32.
It is safe to assume, the output impedance and current delivery should be all fine.
300mW (I reckon where it clips) is enough for LCD-X as it is a very sensitive headphone.
Happy listening.

 

[Ken Tajalli]

@R1c0c0 it's almost certainly fine power wise, these are very easy to drive and can be driven off a dongle. It's true you need the impedance to make sense of power figures but numbers are usually quoted around 16-32Ω, if so 300mW is weak for a desktop amp but more powerful than most dongles. I can't go over 1mW on the Qudelix, it's too loud... so gives you an idea of how little these need. I'm fine out of my dongles even with EQ with a -9.5dB pre-amp.

Even if you have the impedance, you are limited in how you can extrapolate from that as real amps often don't behave like an idealized amp, theoretically you should get double the power into 16Ω vs 32Ω but in reality plenty of stuff the power output is lower at 16Ω than 32Ω. Manufacturer power figures are often exaggerated too, but it gives you an order of magnitude, if they are claiming 300mW even if it only does half that... it's still enough for this, because it's a really easy to drive headphone.

What are you boosting by 9dB ?!

 

[staticV3]

What are you boosting by 9dB ?!

Bass and 4k I reckon:

 

[Blorg]

What are you boosting by 9dB ?!

As @staticV3 suspected, the bass. It's based on Oratory1990's EQ which is -9.5dB pre-amp but then I don't bring up the upper mids quite as much, I find it too shouty and intense if I do his full Harman profile. I suspect at least some of this is unit variance, Audeze aren't the best at making the same headphone twice and my favourite headphones are Hifiman which have even more at 4kHz, so it's not like I'm not used to upper mids.

 

[Ken Tajalli]

As @staticV3 suspected, the bass. It's based on Oratory1990's EQ which is -9.5dB pre-amp but then I don't bring up the upper mids quite as much, I find it too shouty and intense if I do his full Harman profile. I suspect at least some of this is unit variance, Audeze aren't the best at making the same headphone twice and my favourite headphones are Hifiman which have even more at 4kHz, so it's not like I'm not used to upper mids.
View attachment 306732View attachment 306731

You do what you must. But consider the following:
- you can pretty much boost mid to high frequencies to your heart's desires, and not bother with any preamp cuts!
Why? because music is naturally at much lower levels at these frequencies, so you will not overload anything.
- Equally , There are scarce any recordings with any content below 35 Hz. So you don't need to worry about that range either.
Sure, boost your 35 Hz and above by a few dBs, but 9 dB is overkill.
You are fortunate the X are so sensitive , otherwise you would have risked running out of gain.

 

[R1c0c0]

Output power is the most important spec as far as your UX goes.
However, the way Sound Devices put it, makes the "300 mW + 300 mW" spec next to useless.
Output power must always be stated alongside the load impedance with which it was measured.

Sound devices tech support:

“I don't have access to that data information but the MixPre II Series is designed to work with all impedances and headphones. I see the LCD-X's need a minimum of 100mW to work and I have personally used headphones that require 100mW with the MixPre series.”

 

[staticV3]

Sound devices tech support:

“I don't have access to that data information but the MixPre II Series is designed to work with all impedances and headphones. I see the LCD-X's need a minimum of 100mW to work and I have personally used headphones that require 100mW with the MixPre series.”

As @Ken Tajalli said above, it'll probably be fine as the LCD-X is a very sensitive headphone.

Still, Sound Device's lack of expertise is regrettable. They freakin' build that thing and can barely tell you anything about it? How does that work?

 

[R1c0c0]

As @Ken Tajalli said above, it'll probably be fine as the LCD-X is a very sensitive headphone.

Still, Sound Device's lack of expertise is regrettable. They freakin' build that thing and can barely tell you anything about it? How does that work?

I don’t know what’s that discretion on their end they can’t even disclose what ADC/DAC are using in their mixpre series... This is the only device that would suit my needs as I’ll have to do recording as well as relying on headphones 100% of the time. But I do believe in what you and the others said about the drivability of the LCD-X.

 

[andivax]

I LOVE LCD-X. For me it's even better than MM-500, both with and without EQ. It has very INSPIRING sound when you produce or mix.
Here is my correction EQ curve for FabFilter Pro-Q3 and Audeze profiles for dSoniq Reakpohones (MM-500, LCD-2, LCD-X, LCD-XC).
Well done, Audeze!

 

[goat76]

I LOVE LCD-X. For me it's even better than MM-500, both with and without EQ. It has very INSPIRING sound when you produce or mix.
Here is my correction EQ curve for FabFilter Pro-Q3 and Audeze profiles for dSoniq Reakpohones (MM-500, LCD-2, LCD-X, LCD-XC).
Well done, Audeze!

I just tried your EQ curve made for FabFilter Pro-Q3 and it sounds great. Well done to you!

I compared it to the "out-of-the-box" tuning and the Oratory1990s LCD-X EQ curve, and the sound of your setting comes way closer to how my ATC loudspeakers sound, which is my target preference. The "out-of-the-box" tuning is clearly mid-forward and missing the bass, while the Oratory curve sounds very nasally, unnatural, and strange as if the sound was going through a soda can or something.

It's possible I will fine-tune your EQ curve even further to my liking while comparing the sound to my ATCs, but as I said, it's already really close as it is.

 

[andivax]

I just tried your EQ curve made for FabFilter Pro-Q3 and it sounds great. Well done to you!

I compared it to the "out-of-the-box" tuning and the Oratory1990s LCD-X EQ curve, and the sound of your setting comes way closer to how my ATC loudspeakers sound, which is my target preference. The "out-of-the-box" tuning is clearly mid-forward and missing the bass, while the Oratory curve sounds very nasally, unnatural, and strange as if the sound was going through a soda can or something.

It's possible I will fine-tune your EQ curve even further to my liking while comparing the sound to my ATCs, but as I said, it's already really close as it is.

Thank you!
I have compared the sound of LCD-X with my Adam S3H, so it is logical that you like it ))
Some measurements on Oratory sounds weird. Might be error while measuring (wrong distance, angle or pressure) or even very different copy of device.
And of course you should fine-tune my profile based on your reference and TASTE )

BTW Realphones sounds even better to me than Pro-Q3 curve. Their MM-500 I very dislike. But LCD-X/XC 2021 is just SPOT ON!

 

[R1c0c0]

After days of reading/overthinking (still thinking) I’ve decided to take the desktop amp/dac + interface route (for mic/line pres) instead of AIO audio interface only route. I’m eyeing with the budget Schiit units magni+ or heretic (basically discrete amp vs op amp) and would like to know which amp design would suit the LCD-X best if this matters at all in this price range (quality of components vs just a chip).

 

[splitting_ears]

I don’t know what’s that discretion on their end they can’t even disclose what ADC/DAC are using in their mixpre series... This is the only device that would suit my needs as I’ll have to do recording as well as relying on headphones 100% of the time. But I do believe in what you and the others said about the drivability of the LCD-X.

I can confirm that you'll have no problem driving these headphones with a MixPre. I used one of these interfaces some time ago for mixing work. Apart from the peculiar ergonomics, it worked great and there was plenty enough power.

 

[kleijnforstm]

Will help me choose between audient id14 and motu m4 for my audeze lcd x.
I read that on audient id14 there may be a problem with low headphone impedance

 

[andivax]

Will help me choose between audient id14 and motu m4 for my audeze lcd x.
I read that on audient id14 there may be a problem with low headphone impedance

my friends reported problems with Audient HP outputs when using with planar headphones.
Different Audient models, same problem.
So be careful.

 

[kleijnforstm]

my friends reported problems with Audient HP outputs when using with planar headphones.
Different Audient models, same problem.
So be careful.

Thank you Andrey for your answer, I have subscribed to your channel on YouTube and have been following you for a long time. Maybe you should choose Motu m4? or something different. Spasibo

 

[andivax]

Thank you Andrey for your answer, I have subscribed to your channel on YouTube and have been following you for a long time. Maybe you should choose Motu m4? or something different. Spasibo

View attachment 333746

Thank you very much for your support!
I have tested small Motu Micro and big 8XX series.
Small was ok but I was not in love with big 8XX interface in comparison with RME FireFace 800.
You should try UAD or even RME.

PS On Ukrainian "thank you" is "djakuyu" )))))