Audeze LCD-XC Review and Impressions

Big thanks to everyone involved in the loaner program!

Chain: Pi2AES / Holo Audio Spring 2 KTE / McIntosh MHA150

LCD-XC is surprisingly bright! It’s a bit sharp for me, even when using a NOS DAC. The bass is also a bit weak for my preferences, but it responded very well to EQ. +5 dB at 40 Hz filled things out. I expended more bass from the closed back. The frequency response on this headphone is the most even I’ve heard from an Audeze. No issues with the weight or fazor sharpness. After listening for several days, I felt lukewarm about it. It didn’t get on my nerves but didn’t pull me in either. Based on my Audeze experiences in the last 5 years, I like the directions they’re going.



My 2020 LCD-4 is far more engaging. More detail, visceral bass, and vivid impact. However, the frequency response on this LCD-4 isn’t as linear as the LCD-XC. Most of the time with a little brain burn in it’s not very noticeable, but on some tracks, it’s annoying. Solo piano isn’t great without EQ, but deep house, dub, and drum n bass are amazing!

 

Audeze LCD-XC Loaner Impressions

TLDR

Uncomfortably heavy and the fazors bang against my dumbo ears. From a SQ standpoint, I found these to lack bass extension and overall thin sounding relative to my ZMF’s… maybe a little brighter than I’m used to, but not objectionable. I think these sounded best with chamber & acoustic music, not so great for orchestral, EDM or anything with electronically enhanced bass.

Also, these are my first opportunity to put ears on Audeze, so I really don’t know the much talked about “house sound”.​

Spoiler: Playlist

Anner Bylsma Prélude to Bach’s Suite for solo cello No. 1 in G major
The 5 Browns Malagueña from Andalucia Suite
Pamela Frank/Zurich Tonhalle Orchestra Mozart’s Serenade No. 7 for orchestra in D major
John Williams/John Etheridge Extra Time for 2 Guitars
Duplessy & The Violins of the World Kung Fu
Kaki King Ingots
The Beatles Norwegian Wood
Eagles Hotel California (from Hell Freezes Over)
Carl Anderson Heaven on their Minds
James Brown It’s a New Day, Pts. 1-2
Earth Wind & Fire Shining Star
Los Lonely Boys I Don’t Wanna Lose Your Love (Live at Blue Cat Blues)
Led Zeppelin Moby Dick (from How the West was Won)
Daft Punk Giorgio by Moroder
Cream Badge
Ben Harper & The Blind Boys of Alabama Take My Hand
Horace Silver Quintet Finger Poppin’
Maynard Ferguson Birdland
Phil Woods Rain Dance (Live from the Showboat)
Bill Evans Trio Detour Ahead [Take 2]
Ray Charles/Count Basie Orchestra Oh, What a Beautiful Morning
Macy Gray Redemption Song
Joni Mitchell California

UBridge Sig -> USB -> ECP Walnut x.3 -> A&S Mogwai SEv2 + -> ZMF Eikon (Cherry/Eikon Lamb)/Audeze LCD-XC
(Eikons from the 32ohm taps and LCD-XC from the 8 ohm taps)

Coming from the Eikon I was struck by how thin the LCD-XC sounded when I started listening. So much so, that I swapped in my lushest output tube (RCA greyglass) and they still sounded a little thin. My first thought was “these aren’t going to last long”. But after roughly 30 minutes, I didn’t really notice the thin sound anymore... so it wasn’t the showstopper I initially thought.

The mid/treble frequency response sounded pretty dang good. Horns thru cymbals on Birdland, the saxophone on Raindance (where I think the Eikons can sometimes sound slightly honky) were my standouts. Acoustic guitar, and piano also sounded particularly natural to my ears.

I’m in no way a bass head, but the bass just seemed to fade away on some tracks. The bass lines that run thru James Brown’s It’s A New Day & Horace Silver’s Finger Poppin’, and the deep bass in Giorgio by Moroder were all recessed into the background. But I didn’t notice the missing bass as much on other tracks. For example, the toms in Hotel California were natural (but with less extension), the drums sounded very clean/fast on Moby Dick (from how the West Was Won), where I didn’t miss the bass extension at all.

I thought the headstage and imaging on both were similar, maybe the Eikon was a little deeper, with vocals pulled a little forward on the LCD-XC.​

Pi2AES -> RCA -> Bifrost 2 -> SE -> EC Studio B -> ZMF Auteur (Cocobolo/Eikon Lamb)/Audeze LCD-XC

This rig is new to me, so I’m still wrapping my head around the sound of this chain… overall it is more polite than my Walnut/Mogwai chain… everything seems a little too laid back (maybe it’s the tubes – Cossor 300B, Bendix 2c51, Mullard 5ar4), so take comments on this chain with a grain of salt.

The Audeze bass is faster but doesn’t extend as low as the Auteur. Mids/treble sounded “fine”, but a little sleepy (trending towards boring). The Auteur stage is deeper/wider than the LCD-XC, and the vocals are a little forward on the LCD-XC. Relative to the Auteur, the LCD-XC is approaching the wall of sound realm on this chain (YMMV).

I was not a fan of this pairing…​

Pi2AES -> BNC -> SFD-1 Mkii SE+ -> Bal -> 3F -> ZMF Auteur (Cocobolo/Eikon Lamb)/Clear MG

I thought the 3F woke up the LCD-XC, which surprised me… for whatever reason, I wasn’t expecting much out of this pairing. IMO, the 3F has a better handle on the LCD-XC driver and this is the strongest pairing of my chains. More impact, faster transients, not as sleepy as the Studio B pairing.

Acoustic instruments sounded especially natural and “snappy” to me… guitar, piano, cello, violin, horns of all types… very enjoyable. Relative to the Auteur (also an excellent pairing on the 3F), I thought the LCD-XC was a little brighter and the bass lacked a little extension, but the impact seemed to make up for the lack of extension. Bass heavy songs were still enjoyable, unless you really needed those deepest notes to make your life complete.

Headstage was where the Auteurs pulled ahead for me (YMMV), I found the Auteur wider/deeper with more space. The LCD-XC was flatter, but the imaging was just as tightly focused, just not as much space between the instruments.

This pairing really pulled me away from my work and into the music (this is not a background music combination).​

Ergonomics

1. Heavy… and ZMF’s aren’t exactly light… so I was surprised how much this bothered me.
2. The pads are cushy, but not deep enough for me… the fazors bang up against my dumbo ears and make it hard to wear these for extended listening.
3. I found the clamp to be a little tight, the pressure from the pads on my upper jaw had me constantly repositioning the cans
4. Isolation was better than my Eikons… much better
5. Didn’t use the stock cable… I just plugged my ZMF cables into it.
6. The case… really nice.

Other

AUDEZE you really didn’t need to ruin the very sharp carbon fiber appearance with the huge branding on the cups – understated is classy, these… not so much.​

Conclusion

The ergonomics of these would prevent me from ever owning them… they’re just too uncomfortable on my head. But ergonomics aside, these headphones are really a tale of three chains.

• On the Mogwai chain, I thought the LCD-XC fell flat in orchestral and bass heavy music. They sounded better with acoustic, chamber and most jazz… but I preferred the deeper/richer sounding Eikons.
• On the Studio B chain, I thought the LCD-XC were dull and somewhat lifeless… not a good pairing to my ears at all.
• I thought both the LCD-XC and Auteur were excellent on the 3F. Yes, the LCD-XC was missing a little bass extension. Yes, the Auteur threw a bigger headstage. The LCD-XC counters with faster transients and its very engaging presentation. I prefer the Auteur, but it’s a really close call… I can see someone else preferring the LCD-XC presentation. Different flavors of an excellent meal.

​

Thanks SBAF and all past/present gearmasters for the opportunity to hear different things - the loaner program has really helped refine both my preferences and my personal show stoppers.

 

I tried the new pads with both the loaner (thanks!) and bought a pair for my 4Z. Although it did fix some of the typical Audeze vail, it traded off some of the lower end in dB and quality. I think some folks would prefer the trade off, but I do not mind the Audeze vail.

Noteworthy, with the Lokius loaner I can minimize the vail, and keep the low end. So I prefer the OG pads to the new ones. But without the Lokius, I still prefer the OG pads.

For the XC loaner, I think I would like to hear it with the OG pads, but as it is on this loner tour... comfort level with the sound performance(freq response, dynamics, sound stage ect), I am not a big fan, but would concede that it could be another's cup of tea.

 

Alright, now i am intrigued.. i LOVED your thoughts on the XC! i can say i am a bit disappointed on the cans.. maybe my expectations could've have been a bit high considering the price point?

I wonder, what is your favorite closed back?

 

Yes, the XC was not the right headphone for SBAF. Audeze and I both agree. They are going to loan us an LCD-X and an LCD-5 next.

My favorite closed back headphones are my modded T50rp mk3. But it's a very involved mod that takes a few days to implement and sounds nothing like stock, so its hard to recommend. I don't know any other closed headphones I like though.

The Beyerdynamic DT-250-250ohm is good for an electrodynamic, it's kind of like a closed back HD600. but that's an old headphone, they're may be better since then.

 

Minority opinion here, but I was actually quite happy to try the XC. While the tone is not right for me, I am happy to use EQ and in all other regards I thought it was a great sounding closed headphone.

If voicing a request is okay - would Audeze be able include XLR cables in addition to TRS for LCD-X and LCD-5? If you let me jump on these, I might be using a 3F for example (have one on loan that I might buy), and @dasman66 comments on LCD-XC with 3F suggest that there anyone with similar config might hear something great with LCD-X.

 

I can ask or just include one of my own cables.

 

Equipment: Theta DS Pro Basic II DAC, Schiit Ragnarok ver. 1.5, Shiit Vali 2+, ECP Tornado 1, Gilmore Dynalo clone

First of all, it was a shame these did not come with a balanced cable. I really wanted to hook them up to the Rag balanced instead of just unbalanced. I don't any mini-XLR cables, so unbalanced it was.

Design
These are big and heavy. Slanted cups are big and comfy. Headband is still atrocious, especially for small heads like mine. The steel headband still rests on top of the perforated leather sub-band. Cable is the same unbalanced black twisted cable from all the Audeze line down to at least LCD-2. Carbon fiber looks more 1999 than the wood from the old XC, but I guess Audeze wants something more sustainable.

Sound
Missing lows. For a 108mm driver in a closed planar, this is infuriating. I guess banging lows is not what they had in mind for this headphone. Expect to use a lot of low bass EQ. Even the headphonics review tried to turn this around to a positive,

“One thing to note is the discipline of the driver is excellent for bass tweaking. Pump it up say by 2-3dB or even 5-6dB on a low-shelf PMEQ and it responds beautifully so if you want a better fundamental, (and more warmth), you can get it quite easily from the LCD-XC 2021.” He even closes with “Yes, the stock tuning weight could do with a 2-3dB more sub-100Hz just to give those lower-mids instruments sitting just being the vocals a bit more power.”

“…excellent for bass tweaking…” That is one way to put it, but if you have to boost any frequency 6db to get a good response in any area, this is quite a failure for me. Espcially coming from such bass rich headphones with plenty of bass detail, like ETA Genesis.

The rest of the spectrum is okay. Meaning mids are clear, highs are rich and clean. They still sounded a bit thin and papery on some tracks and reminded me of balanced armature timbre. I am not going to be romantic about it, but it did seem these are more refined than say LCD-2. I did not get any harshness in the mids or high-mids. No real graininess to speak of and seemed very “stat” like. There is good depth, no real dryness or wetness. And of course, not quite dynamic (they are planars)

They are about to hard to drive as most high end planars. They sounded fine out of a Vali 2+, even on low gain, but definitely had more space, depth, and low end when plugged in (unbalanced) in to Ragnarok.

Tale of the old XC
A few years ago, I visited a small high-end audio store in Nashville, and they had a used pair of the older style LCD-XC, and I only heard it briefly from a Simaudio 230HAD DAC/Amp. It was hooked to a DAP of some kind with a digital Coax, and from what I recall was deep rounder bass that was fuller and did not bleed into the rest of the spectrum. It was like there was a sub. It was like the bass was just rolled off or someone turned off the sub. Now I could be wrong and my memory could be off, but I could swear there was more bass in the old XC.

Overall
I mean, they sound like a set of very small bookshelf speakers.

Oh, and pics or it didn't happen:

 

Between this and your complaints about absent bass, can you actually be more specific? Are you totally missing 40 hz, or does it need a 6 dB boost? Because one of those two is likely to be a result of the cups not sealing against your head.

 

@ushanka

50hz amplitude is about 8dB below the amount of energy at 2khz (highest point of midrange response) or 9-10dB below the 8khz peak. Saying the bass isn't particularly strong in quantity relative to the big-picture tonal contour doesn't really seem like a controversial statement. Take a look at HD600 for comparison (edit, changed to marv's FPC measurement below) -



HD600 is known to lack extension in the bottom end. You can see the rate of rolloff in terms of dB/octave below 100hz is steeper than the LCDXC, but the level at 50hz is less than 3-4dB down from the amplitude of the upper midrange and also not far off from the highest point of the treble response. So arguably the HD600 is a bassier headphone than the LCDXC in terms of the big picture. Of course the XC has lower distortion in the lows and doesn't continue to roll as hard below that point... But that broad uptilting response on the XC is likely to be heard as lean and honky for many...

edit -

the response of the XC honestly looks like what you get when you totally seal off the cups and baffle of a closed back dynamic headphone. In that case, driver flex causes a similar uptilting contour. I bet this headphone would measure and sound better in the lows with vents in the cup, but then you'd probably also get a low mid dip somewhere and Audeze would have to use more sophisticated damping than what's probably inside the cups now. AFAIK there aren't any baffle vents on the XC either. I'm surprised people don't have flex and tearing issues if that's the case on these. Pics would confirm.

 

The cups are sealing against my head. I am also not the first person to complain about low bass as that is clearly documented in the headfonics.com review, and he gave it a 9.1/10. I would say most stuff below 100hz is fairly missing by a few db.

What I mean by the bookshelf comment is there seems to be a rolloff, but the rest of the FR is pretty clean. I just miss that liquid bass I remember from the previous XC's I heard.

 

Headphonics? Who cares about them. Every person in this thread including myself has said they are bssslight and the graphs show it too.

 

I'm still writing up my loaner impressions of the XC but I can add my voice to the chorus of comments about the lack of bass. And I had a perfectly good seal - so much so, in fact, that as @E_Schaaf wondered, I did indeed briefly experience what I assume was driver flex. I was adjusting the cups on my head while listening to music and heard a very brief buzzing sound. I was careful not to do this again.

 

Audeze XC Loaner Impressions
I’d like to thank rhythmdevils for arranging this and other loaner tours and Audeze for generously letting us hear these headphones. I very much appreciate this great opportunity.


Gear and Preferences

• Audirvana/2012 MacBook Pro -> USB -> Bifrost 2 -> Mjolnir 1 (balanced) or Magni 3, Massdrop Cavalli Tube Hybrid, or SW51+ (all single ended) -> LCD-XC
• comparisons are with LCD-2 Classic and Focal Clear
• I’m in my mid-40s and have had a bit more hearing loss than one would expect for someone of my age; I can’t hear above ca. 14-15 kHz.
• I tend to prefer more colored, flavorful headphones than these, a couple on the brighter side (HD 800 SDR, HD 600), and a couple darker ones (LCD-2C, Vérité)

Impressions
Tuning and amp pairings
The XC reminded me, initially, of the first time I heard a pair of IEMs designed for musicians to use on stage (they happened to be Jerry Harvey Audio ones). I was a bit flummoxed at the lack of bass and the lack of warmth to the sound. The JH Harvey rep saw my confusion and explained that this particular pair of IEMs didn’t usually appeal to audiophiles. I wonder if the tuning of the XC is designed for a similar purpose - after all, the marketing on Audeze’s website highlights studio producers’ approval of their headphones.

All this is to say that the sound of these headphones is quite neutral. They certainly don’t have the dark or warm Audeze house sound of old. The XC are less colored and more neutral to me than the Clear. The Clear’s bass is weightier and, by extension, there’s also more warmth to its sound, at least in the lower frequencies. I’d also say the Clear has better treble extension, which balances out that bassiness. The XC, by contrast, comes across as leaner. They’re not thin exactly. But they don’t have a lush, rich sound, either.

Part of this neutral, lean sound has something to do with the bass presentation. The XC really are lacking in bass compared to my other headphones. The XC do a great job of reflecting the characteristics of different amplifiers, though, and I was able to dial in the greatest, most satisfying amount of bass with the Magni 3 of the four amps used. The bass still isn’t especially pronounced with the Magni 3, but neither is it conspicuously absent. With the Magni 3, the bass is also a bit looser and boomier when otherwise it's really tight and quite fast. (I suspect the Jot 2 would make for an excellent pairing, too, if a bit more warmth and a more robust bass are appealing). The SW51+ also introduces more bloom still, presumably impedance matching is an issue here, but the overall effect is quite pleasant. I like these two pairings the most but my sense is that they’re making the XC become a different kind of headphones than the ones they’re supposed to be. The bass is the least present with the MJ1 and, to a lesser extent, the MCTH. I wonder what a Phonitor or similar higher-end neutral amp would do with these headphones.

I also wonder if XC’s lean tuning owes something to the lower mids, which aren’t very rich. Male vocals aren't always ideally rich and robust. The mids, in general, don’t really stand out, and I’d say the emphasis of these headphones, so far as they have one, is in the upper mids. Female vocals are much better. These headphones aren’t sitting-back-in-an-old-armchair, smoking-a-pipe kind of headphones. They’re not euphonic. Instead, I could see them being described as a bit dry. I very much liked the SW51+ pairing with them because its slightly wet, rounded sound goes some way to offsetting the lean sound of the XC. In other words, the SW51+ softens the XC’s sharper edges and makes for a more relaxing and natural sound. The SW51+ also adds some nice and much-needed texture to acoustic instruments’ timbre. Strings sound nicely rich and resonant now, with more complexity than I heard through the MJ1, which seems to simplify massed strings somewhat with these headphones.

The danger with some amp pairings for these headphones lies in the upper-mid and treble regions. They can get bright pretty quickly. The XC’s treble isn’t especially well extended—at least as far as I can tell—but there’s some lower treble emphasis (or also upper mid forwardness) that can make them bright and fatiguing. I don’t think the issue is a peak. Rather, it seems to be more a matter of emphasis. The MJ1 gives the XC a very clean, clear, clinical sound, one that can be too bright, which itself has a very slight treble emphasis (which typically comes across as a bit of sweetness with darker or warmer headphones like my LCD-2 Classic). The MCTH is even worse, and I hear that amp as having a bit of glare or hardness in the treble with both the XC and my Clear. The brightness is still there with the SW51+. Only the Magni 3 reins it in, but then this amp introduces a bit of grain that offsets the benefit of a less bright sound. Ultimately, I don’t think I found quite the right amp pairing for these headphones. I suspect the Jot 2 would be better, and perhaps better again might be the Lyr 3, at least for me.

Timbre
What all this means is that while these headphones are quite neutral, their ability to present timbre convincingly depends significantly on the chain behind them. Out of the MJ1, the sound is very clean and clear, and a bit bright, which tends to make the right-side of the piano keyboard sound pretty forward. Stringed instruments don’t have the resonance or richness I’d like, although they have lots of bite. With a warmer, richer sounding setup, such as the Magni 3, the timbre shifts noticeably, with brass instruments retaining some bite but also having more crackle and blare. Strings have a richer, more reverberant sound. Bass instruments, like the double bass, get some much-needed weight to them. Pianos are still decent but not as forward now in their upper registers. Electric guitars have a superb sharp bite. The SW51+ offers a good balance between the MJ1 and Magni 3. Female vocals are wonderful with this combination, especially sopranos’.

Technical Qualities
The XC sound tight and pretty fast. I couldn’t get a good handle on resolution. At times it seems fine. At others, it seems a bit lacking. I’m not sure what’s happening here.

Imaging is decent without being outstanding. Layering and separation are likewise adequate. Much better is the staging, which is very good in terms of openness, air, and space, especially with width but less so with depth, which I find slightly lacking.

Unsurprisingly, given the lean bass, you don’t get much slam. Macrodynamics aren’t especially strong either, but they’re not conspicuously soft.

Overall, there’s nothing here to write home about. But there’s little to complain about, either. And I should add that I don’t have much experience with closed back headphones, having only ever owned the AKG 553 Pro and the Fostex TH-X00 Ebony. I’d say that the XC are much better than the Elegia, from distant memory and fleeting experience.


Comparison with Focal Clear
I realize this is something of an apples-to-oranges comparison, given their closed and open back designs. Then again, the XC sound about as open and spacious as the Clear, and they have a similar price tag. Adding to the limits of this comparison are the issues of amp synergies; the Clear is best with the MCTH while the XC is at its worst with this amp; neither does well with the MJ1, and neither headphone truly shines with the Magni 3. The SW51+ arguably makes for an acceptable compromise, detracting somewhat from the Clear’s aggressive macrodynamics but making the mids more lush and liquid, all the while softening the treble, which can be a bit hard or crystalline. Meanwhile, the SW%1+ plays nicely with the XC but doesn’t make it excel in any one area.

vs. the Clear, the XC...

• are less bassy, overall, but, oddly, have more sub-bass rumble
  • double basses don’t sound as rich or convincing, they lack body
• but the bass, such as it is, is nice and tight
• sound a bit thinner
• can have slightly insubstantial male vocals
• have more treble emphasis but not quite the upper extension
  • have much, much more bite with electric guitars

• are less resolving
• have less precise imaging, which makes the sound hazier, less precise, more vague
• have less clean and discernible separation
• layering and imaging also take steps back from the Clear
• have a larger headstage, with a good deal more width
• the overall sound of the XC comes across as being bigger, more expansive
• but music falls apart slightly in complex passages, becoming slightly fuzzy and blended together, with a loss of the distinctiveness of individual instruments

Conclusion
I think a potential problem with the XC is finding the right amp pairing. This might be a good thing, though, insofar as it offers a chance to tune the headphones according to preferences. These headphones aren’t to my taste but I found them fairly impressive. They didn’t do anything outstandingly well. But neither do they do much wrong, besides the weak bass and some problems with technicalities (imaging, in particular).

 

I own them since a couple of months back and I really like them. I have EQ them from day one (Resolves eq) since I read your feedback (and others) so few of the negative impressions you heard are my experience. I find them perfect for my use wich is in our living room with my wife enjoying her home improvent shows that Im not that interested in

cheers
Ferrum

 

I agree his EQ settings are quite a good baseline to start messing around with. Mine(or ears) don't need the 2db boost at 10k though. I also use Radiohead's Reckoner to test for brightness (forgot who mentioned that) and with that adjustment it passes to my ears. The track should be just below the too bright threshold ime. Stock it's a no go for me.

Overall very happy with these and a Clear winner over the Clear(hue hue) with EQ. Without they are a bit too sharp and bass light. No problem with comfort either i can wear them all day.

 

You were correct. I tried it, measured it, confirmed it.
The venting that Audeze claims is possibly in the form of not fully tightening of the bolts that hold the cups on. The bolts were just finger tight on mine.
They were also ugly!
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...eze-lcd-xc-21-effects-of-small-venting.42829/