Audeze LCD-X Review (2021 Edition Headphone)

[staticV3]

Would anyone be able to show me eq settings that would properly correspond with my attached graph?

That graph alone cannot be used for EQ purposes, as it was created using a Neumann KU100 which is good for QC but unfit for frequency response correction.

Here's how one could use it: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/harman-eq-for-audeze-lcd-3-fazor.27918/

 

[Nkam]

These headphones are really difficult to EQ well without sweeps as for whoever has done it, there are a lot of peaks and dips from 2khz upwards. Lots of chop.

I don’t know if that is the reason I can’t seem to hear the timbre as sounding natural in these headphones. I do need to do more sweeps as the more I do them and EQ they do sound better.

But for the love of god they are super uncomfortable headphones.

 

[Angelusmcr]

So do I just copy your EQ corrections into Fabfilter ProQ and put that on my master bus in logic? Or does Realphones do this for me? Does anyone have a preset for ProQ for these headphones that I can download and use to get the correction? Thanks sorry this is new to me

 

[andivax]

So do I just copy your EQ corrections into Fabfilter ProQ and put that on my master bus in logic? Or does Realphones do this for me? Does anyone have a preset for ProQ for these headphones that I can download and use to get the correction? Thanks sorry this is new to me

Realphones has LCD-X correction curve. Plus yuu can EQ it a little bit using internal Realphones knobs and disable HRTF which I personaly didn't like. And of course "room simulation" if you using LCD-X for mixing.

 

[Angelusmcr]

Realphones has LCD-X correction curve. Plus yuu can EQ it a little bit using internal Realphones knobs and disable HRTF which I personaly didn't like. And of course "room simulation" if you using LCD-X for mixing.

Thanks what is HRTF?

 

[staticV3]

Thanks what is HRTF?

Head-related transfer function - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

 

[APERTURE]

Preamp: -9.0 dB
Filter 1: ON PK Fc 26 Hz Gain 3.5 dB Q 0.710
Filter 2: ON LSC Fc 105 Hz Gain 5.5 dB Q 0.710
Filter 3: ON PK Fc 240 Hz Gain -0.6 dB Q 1.400
Filter 4: ON PK Fc 540 Hz Gain 0.8 dB Q 1.400
Filter 5: ON PK Fc 760 Hz Gain -1.1 dB Q 2.500
Filter 6: ON HSC Fc 1800 Hz Gain 3.0 dB Q 0.710
Filter 7: ON PK Fc 2670 Hz Gain -2.9 dB Q 2.700
Filter 8: ON PK Fc 3850 Hz Gain 2.0 dB Q 1.400
Filter 9: ON PK Fc 5650 Hz Gain -5.2 dB Q 3.500
Filter 10: ON HSC Fc 9000 Hz Gain -2.0 dB Q 0.710

This is my new personnal eq tweaked from oratory to my ears. Used pink noise and many reference (multiple genres, commercial tracks and older classics)
Adjust the gain of band 2, 6, 8, 10 to your preference.

 

[FIOIOIO]

What headphone is strictly better than lcd-x?

 

[Robbo99999]

What headphone is strictly better than lcd-x?

Terrible frequency response at stock so if talking about using a headphone without EQ then almost any headphone is better! It looks like it can be quite successfully EQ'd by an Oratory EQ for instance and it's low distortion so that's in it favour when used with EQ. Still I'd imagine there's a lot of headphones that sound just as good when EQ'd and they don't have to cost $1200 or whatever they cost now! It is low in distortion though which is it's main plus point from the measurements.

 

[FIOIOIO]

Terrible frequency response at stock so if talking about using a headphone without EQ then almost any headphone is better! It looks like it can be quite successfully EQ'd by an Oratory EQ for instance and it's low distortion so that's in it favour when used with EQ. Still I'd imagine there's a lot of headphones that sound just as good when EQ'd and they don't have to cost $1200 or whatever they cost now! It is low in distortion though which is it's main plus point from the measurements.

My lcd-x died and I am look for a upgrade

 

[Martin]

My lcd-x died and I am look for a upgrade

I love my pair of LCD-3 but I'd buy Dan Clark Expanse in a heartbeat at the right price.

Martin

 

[Robbo99999]

My lcd-x died and I am look for a upgrade

Do you like headphones that have been EQ'd to the Harman Curve, do you like the Harman Curve. If you do, and you want to spend quite a bit of money then get one of those Dan Clark headphones that hug the Harman Curve like the Noire X or the E3. Maybe you can even get the same experience with an EQ'd Sennheiser HD560s or EQ'd Hifiman HE400SE which both cost vastly less money. It's a bit of a minefield to know for sure, you just have try it and the EQ's - it kind of makes sense to start off fairly cheap with headphones and EQ them and if that's good enough then that's good enough. It can be a minefield though where you keep buying maybe some more expensive headphones to see if they're really better or not, and then sometimes you think they're better & sometimes you think they're not, because it's hard to compare headphones if you're EQ'ing them to the same curve, but eventually you'll land on a pair and an EQ that you keep coming back to, albeit you might change it out once in a while and come back to it again. I think we're pretty fluid with headphones, you can probably be fine by EQ'ing a pretty cheap of headphones (that measures OK) as long as you get to a point where it sounds good. At some point there's not much to be gained.

 

[Postlan]

Terrible frequency response at stock so if talking about using a headphone without EQ then almost any headphone is better!

This isn't about the LCD-X but the MM-500, and while I also agree that the frequency response without EQ does leave something to be desired, I have to say your comment is going too far.

People who buy headphones at this price level tend to be very picky to begin with, so even small issues stand out to them—hence many reviews pointing out frequency imbalance. But compared to more common headphones like the HD600/650, the MM-500 has much lower acoustic noise and distortion, and significantly higher resolution. Also, I feel like people who are used to the relatively soft sound of high-end audio speakers might not find this frequency response problematic at all.

 

[Robbo99999]

This isn't about the LCD-X but the MM-500, and while I also agree that the frequency response without EQ does leave something to be desired, I have to say your comment is going too far.

People who buy headphones at this price level tend to be very picky to begin with, so even small issues stand out to them—hence many reviews pointing out frequency imbalance. But compared to more common headphones like the HD600/650, the MM-500 has much lower acoustic noise and distortion, and significantly higher resolution. Also, I feel like people who are used to the relatively soft sound of high-end audio speakers might not find this frequency response problematic at all.

I think you're confused, this is an LCD-X thread and I was talking to the other guy about the LCD-x, there's not a mention of MM-500 - if I had to guess you probably have multiple browser tabs open and you're accidentally replying to the wrong thread.

 

[APERTURE]

If you're mixing/mastering, this is currently my best eq to date imo.
Works well if you want to keep the original tuning while having a more neutral balance.

Preamp: -4.0 dB
Filter 1: ON PK Fc 45 Hz Gain -2.0 dB Q 1.500
Filter 2: ON PK Fc 5300 Hz Gain 2.0 dB Q 2.000
Filter 3: ON PK Fc 3800 Hz Gain 3.0 dB Q 3.000
Filter 4: OFF PK Fc 50 Hz Gain -1.5 dB Q 1.100
Filter 5: ON LSC Fc 120 Hz Gain 4.3 dB Q 0.700
Filter 6: ON PK Fc 50 Hz Gain -0.8 dB Q 3.600

 

[staticV3]

if anyone's curious what this EQ graphs like:

 

[Sokel]

All the EQ I do to them is knocking off that bump around 5kHz couple of dB.
It may be counter- intuitive but to me this gives a little air higher

(maybe because I avoid the round-5kHz-headache)

 

[goat76]

If you're mixing/mastering, this is currently my best eq to date imo.
Works well if you want to keep the original tuning while having a more neutral balance.

Preamp: -4.0 dB
Filter 1: ON PK Fc 45 Hz Gain -2.0 dB Q 1.500
Filter 2: ON PK Fc 5300 Hz Gain 2.0 dB Q 2.000
Filter 3: ON PK Fc 3800 Hz Gain 3.0 dB Q 3.000
Filter 4: OFF PK Fc 50 Hz Gain -1.5 dB Q 1.100
Filter 5: ON LSC Fc 120 Hz Gain 4.3 dB Q 0.700
Filter 6: ON PK Fc 50 Hz Gain -0.8 dB Q 3.600

I like your EQ after I did a few modifications to it to suit my taste a bit more. I think I like it better than the EQ settings I have done earlier, which were based on the Harman EQ curve.

This is what I ended up with based on your EQ settings:

Filter 1: OFF PK Fc 45 Hz Gain -2.0 dB Q 1.500
Filter 2: ON PK Fc 5300 Hz Gain 2.6 dB Q 2.000
Filter 3: ON PK Fc 3800 Hz Gain 3.6 dB Q 3.000
Filter 4: OFF PK Fc 50 Hz Gain -1.5 dB Q 1.100
Filter 5: ON LSC Fc 120 Hz Gain 4.3 dB Q 0.700
Filter 6: OFF PK Fc 50 Hz Gain -0.8 dB Q 3.600

 

[APERTURE]

Thank you, I've tried eqing to Harman 2018, oratory (tweaked and his original curve), some from here, reddit, gearspace and head-fi. And I feel this my most effective one for my ears.
As for the band in the low end, most likely only the 120Hz is needed and maybe the 45Hz tweaked. Doing narrow cut in that area is not a good move I think.
Glad it works for you.

 

[goat76]

Thank you, I've tried eqing to Harman 2018, oratory (tweaked and his original curve), some from here, reddit, gearspace and head-fi. And I feel this my most effective one for my ears.
As for the band in the low end, most likely only the 120Hz is needed and maybe the 45Hz tweaked. Doing narrow cut in that area is not a good move I think.
Glad it works for you.

I don’t know about others, but for my hearing/ear canals, the Harman curve for headphones definitely sound too bright. I have used Oratory’s EQ curve but had to tweak down the filters in the treble frequencies, which made it more natural sounding. I have heard may people saying they find the Harman curve to be on the bright side and not perceived as neutral in the tonality, this makes it very hard to EQ headphones as different people’s hearing seem to deviate much from each other when it comes to headphone listening. That or many people are very prone to confirmation bias thinking their hearing just need to adjust itself to the supposed correct sound. Either that or it may be some deviations from headphone to headphone, I don’t know.

As already said, I find your EQ settings to come closer to what I find neutral. It just needed a small lift of 0.6 dB for the high-frequency filters, but I definitely wanted more bass than you which make me think you maybe compared the sound to a pair of loudspeakers that doesn’t have a full-range bass extension, maybe? Anyways, by turning off the filters at 45 Hz and 50 Hz, I find the bass to be quite similar to how it sounds with my main speakers sounds including two subwoofers.