Audeze LCD-X Review (2021 Edition Headphone)

[Varail]

Would you please be kind to tell me what version is he LCD X 7456853 ?

Thank you

 

[goat76]

Would you please be kind to tell me what version is he LCD X 7456853 ?

Thank you

I’m sure you can send Audeze an email and ask. They can also provide you with their measurement of your specific headphones at the same time.

 

[Varail]

I just did. If anyone has a clue please feel free to share the info to kill the suspense of waiting till Monday
Thank you.

 

[goat76]

Information found at: https://www.head-fi.org/threads/lcd-x-and-xc-update.956949/

For those who may be curious, here are the start dates and serials for the new configuration:

11/23/20 LCD-X Leather-Free 7527615

11/9/20 LCD-XC Leather 8523700

11/23/20 LCD-X Leather 7527600

11/23/20 LCD-XC Leather-Free 8523710

If you have specific questions, please email [email protected]

 

[Varail]

Yes.. I found this myself but I am still clueless ..it just looks is pre 2020.

 

[pk500]

Yes.. I found this myself but I am still clueless ..it just looks is pre 2020.

Your model is not the 2021 revise. It's the previous version. All the serial numbers equal to or HIGHER than those posted above are from the 2021 revised model, which came out in November 2020, as also listed above.

 

[solderdude]

AFAIK the only difference is the pads.
So just buy a new set of pads and you have the new version.

 

[pk500]

AFAIK the only difference is the pads.
So just buy a new set of pads and you have the new version.

Not true.

Audeze changed the magnet configuration and circuitry with the 2021 version. Not a huge change, but the revision was more than just pads.

 

[solderdude]

Didn't know that.
The biggest sound change, however, seems to come from the pads (more upper midrange) from what I have seen in measurements where only the pads were changed.

 

[Varail]

The serial I asked for is for the 2015 version ( official reply ) if this will be of any help for anyone in the future.
Thank you

 

[Nils030]

Demoed these a week a go.

First of all i have to say I really like asr for the technical side of things tho I have to say these graphs lag a lot of what things sound in real life. For example what graph shows how good they are in representing the depth of a recording?

Also it seems to me that it’s the common knowledge here that everything that’s off the harman curve is bad.. and people start blindly tweaking eq till they get close.
Totally leaving out what artifacts eqs implement like delaying a part of the frequency response.

The Lcd-X are headphones made for mixing/ mastering music and not for people who want to listen to music. This is important to mention and the reason why a Harman curve is not really suited here. The high mid dip around 4K is on purpose and not a flaw.
It represents the Fletcher Munson Curve wich aims to how loud a sound at one frequency must be in order to be perceived as equally loud as a sound at another frequency. So basically the lcd x are really great for its purpose as mixing on them will translate great on other systems. Everything else is just trying to make them fit to something what they weren’t intended for..

So for everyone who wants to mix/ master, I would really recommend to try them and for everyone else it’s probably better to look somewhere else.. if you like the harman curve and don’t mind the costs Dan Clark will make you happy.

My point is don’t get to serious about the measurements and graphs on this page and just try stuff with your own ears.

Cheers

 

[IAtaman]

First of all i have to say I really like asr for the technical side of things tho I have to say these graphs lag a lot of what things sound in real life. For example what graph shows how good they are in representing the depth of a recording?

Welcome to ASR forums.

No one said FR graphs are everything, so you are effectively arguing with yourself here. Give us a hint when you need us to participate in the conversation please by disagreeing with an actual point made please.

The Lcd-X are headphones made for mixing/ mastering music and not for people who want to listen to music.
This is important to mention and the reason why a Harman curve is not really suited here. The high mid dip around 4K is on purpose and not a flaw.
It represents the Fletcher Munson Curve wich aims to how loud a sound at one frequency must be in order to be perceived as equally loud as a sound at another frequency. So basically the lcd x are really great for its purpose as mixing on them will translate great on other systems. Everything else is just trying to make them fit to something what they weren’t intended for..

So you are saying Audeze is making a mistake with Reveal+?

 

[Nils030]

Welcome to ASR forums.

No one said FR graphs are everything, so you are effectively arguing with yourself here. Give us a hint when you need us to participate in the conversation please by disagreeing with an actual point made please.


So you are saying Audeze is making a mistake with Reveal+?

Thanks.

No but most of the replies here where about changing the frequency response with eq so to me the discussion was based about changing what the intend design was for (as Amir mentioned it’s a pass for him without eq). That’s why to me this discussion was off and another „apply harman curve and eq to it approach“.
Also not a single word about the depth of the sound field was mentioned in the review wich, to me, these headphones are really great
at. This something pretty important when you want to place instruments in the mix correctly and something I only heard in high priced headphones yet.


And no, reveal+ is not a mistake to me, since it’s seems there are a lot of people who like to change their frequency response by implementing delays..

Our hearing, taste and purpose is really personal so everyone should do it how she/ he likes it. I was just missing the note that those headphones are not intended for casual listening they are made for mixing and the goal wasn’t to have a Harman curve FR. To me they stand out for what they are made for. YMMV.

Cheers

 

[IAtaman]

No but most of the replies here where about changing the frequency response with eq so to me the discussion was based about changing what the intend design was for (as Amir mentioned it’s a pass for him without eq). That’s why to me this discussion was off and another „apply harman curve and eq to it approach“.
Also not a single word about the depth of the sound field was mentioned in the review wich, to me, these headphones are really great

I use it with EQ and don't notice any degradation with depth perception. Do you?

 

[IAtaman]

Our hearing, taste and purpose is really personal so everyone should do it how she/ he likes it. I was just missing the note that those headphones are not intended for casual listening they are made for mixing and the goal wasn’t to have a Harman curve FR. To me they stand out for what they are made for. YMMV.

One more question if I may, in my understanding Harman target with its pinna gain and bass boost etc is supposed to represent the FR a headphone should have on a human head, in order for its FR to be perceived as neutral at the ear drum. If that is the case, then you WOULD want to tune it to Harman target, maybe not with 25 filters as you rightfully criticized, but with broad strokes as its said around here, and adjust to your own taste for it to be a good mixing headphone. What does Harman target represent in your understanding?

I believe that's what Revel+ does as well, that is, tune the headphone to your estimated HRTF, and claiming it improves clarity and separation. So If I am understanding it correctly, they are proposing the exact opposite of what you are proposing. Am I getting you wrong?

Reveal+ uses AI algorithms to create your unique personalized HRTF in 30 seconds or less. When you combine Audeze headphones with Reveal+, you’ll hear every single sound with impeccable clarity and separation

 

[staticV3]

in my understanding Harman target with its pinna gain and bass boost etc is supposed to represent the FR a headphone should have on a human head, in order for its FR to be perceived as neutral at the ear drum.

The Harman target is a Preference target. Not a Neutrality target. Important difference.

It also doesn't represent the FR a headphone should have on a human head, but on a head and torso simulator with IEC60318-4 compliant inner ear simulators and Welti's custom pinna.

 

[IAtaman]

The Harman target is a Preference target. Not a Neutrality target. Important difference.

It also doesn't represent the FR a headphone should have on a human head, but on a head and torso simulator with IEC60318-4 compliant inner ear simulators and Welti's custom pinna.

Yes, I understand that it is rig specific target, have been thoroughly "trained" in the recent Resolve's 5128 target discussion. I was under the impression though that preference is linked to neutrality.

Edit: here you go. Am I getting it wrong that in this context preference represent neutral?

I think it is well established that flat bass in a headphone or in-room response of a loudspeaker is NOT neutral. We’ve had trained listeners draw the perceived spectral balance of these targets and they are perceived as not flat.
Toole spent 10 years having listeners rate loudspeaker based on perceived fidelity/neutrality. When we switched to preference, the loudspeakers ratings didn’t suddenly change. There is a high correlation between fidelity/neutrality/ preference.

Our headphone targets do not deviate significantly above 200 Hz from a anechoically flat speaker measured in our reference room at the DRP. For the AE/OE target it’s within 2 dB of the bass of the in-room speaker target. For the IE target it’s higher, but there are data to support it needs to be higher to be perceived as equivalent

 

[staticV3]

I was under the impression though that preference is linked to neutrality.

The Harman target is what sounds subjectively best to most people. It is not the FR that's objectively the most neutral.

 

[Ken Tajalli]

The Harman target is what sounds subjectively best to most people. It is not the FR that's objectively the most neutral.

What IS objectively neutral?

 

[staticV3]

What IS objectively neutral?

Good question