Audeze LCD-2C (LCD-2 Classic) - Open-Back Planar-Magnetic Headphones - Official Thread

Audeze’s “resurrection” of the “classic” (pre-Fazor) LCD-2 has generated quite a bit of nostalgia and interest since its announcement, especially among those that enjoyed the original pre-Fazor LCD2.1 and 2.2 iterations.

This is the spot to discuss the LCD-2C.


@Ishcabible has written an excellent comprehensive review of the Audeze LCD-2C which is featured on

It’s well worth checking out!


@Ishcabible I’d love to try playing with EQ relative to your measurements. Can I please get a text dump of the averaged frequency response from you? That’ll make it easy for me to import your results into REW for tweaking.

1 Like

I’ve been listening to these so little that I tried selling mine. I didn’t get any takerd at the asking price and decided I wouldn’t part with them for less. So instead I ordered some Dekoni velour pads to see what those will do for the sound :rofl:


Ah yes. Did you see the Steve Guttenberg review comparing them to a muscle car:

I’m on the same page as him – these are great ROCK headphones. I reserve mine for genres that are already heavily processed in the studio and that have no ground truth (e.g., Rock, Electronic/EDM, and the little Hip-Hop I listen to), or for productions that could use more vibrato and bass (e.g., flat/dead/thin vocals). I personally hate them for ‘natural’ productions that explicitly avoided studio manipulation.

These are the only headphones where I bought a balanced cable and then took it off. First, it did nothing for the tone and details. Second, it came with a bulky XLR-4 connector and was awkward to use. Third, it took away the sensory experience of the braided factory cable. Muscle cars, 4x4s, Marshall Amps, and Rock & Roll. Take them as they are and for what they are.

Regarding price, I grabbed the factory Black Friday B-Stock offer of $550 and think that’s reasonable in the current market. [With a close initial inspection I saw no flaws at all to justify the B-Stock label.]


It’s possible that putting velours on the LCD2C will prove akin to putting coilovers on a muscle car. Guess we’ll see :wink:

1 Like

Well, the velours are here. Very quick initial impressions:

  • Very comfy due to being breathable. They also don’t seal like the stock pads, which I appreciate.
  • They’re thicker than the already thick stock pads?!
  • Contrary to my hopes, they have even less presence than the stock pads (both heard and measured)
  • Less sub-bass than the stock pads
  • On the plus side, timbre does sound more natural than stock.

I’ll be keeping these on for a while (not least because Audeze pads glue on and they’re a pain to swap). I’ll post more detailed impressions once I’ve had a chance to get used to them.


Yeah, the missing presence is killing me. If the stock LCD2C sound like someone stole my upper mids, the velours sound like someone else came along, realized that there were still a few left over and took those too. On the plus side, they’ve smoothed out the rest of the treble.

EDIT - Measurements

Measurements on MiniDSP E.A.R.S. comparing pleather and velour, to MiniDSP HEQ compensation (harman-like).

Things that stand out to me:

  1. Velours lose some sub-bass, but not a ton
  2. Velours have a tiny amount more warmth in the mid-bass (barely worth mentioning)
  3. Velours have a lot less clarity (1-2 KHz). Some would call the stock response “shouty” but I found it about right.
  4. Velours have even less presence than stock (2-5 KHz)
  5. Velours exaggerate the spike at 4.5 KHz
  6. Mid and upper treble seems less peaky and generally somewhat elevated on velours

My measurements are a bit different than cskippy’s results over on SBAF. We agree on the sub-bass rolloff and increased warmth, as well as the reduction in the 1-3 KHz region, but I don’t see (nor hear) the increased presence that he did and I see the velours having a bunch more treble than he did. He also doesn’t see the weird spike at 4.5 KHz (which I see on both channels of mine, so I don’t think it’s a driver variation thing). IIRC he uses a flat plate coupler, so that could account for some of the differences.


You know, this sounds a lot like my reaction to the AQ NightHawk Carbons. They are reeeeeeeallllly dead in the upper half, have a cotton-like haze over everything, and no nuance to the dynamics. [Keeping them around for their extreme comfort.]


For fun, here’s a CSD.

Ignore the resonance at around 4.5 KHz, as that’s more a feature of my MiniDSP E.A.R.S. The resonance at around 7 KHz is real though, and probably a major contributor to the “sharpness” of the treble.


Okay, I put the balanced cable back on the LCD-2Cs for critical listening with songs that I know very well. I do hear what you show: a dead range and sharpness. The impact varies by song, making some passages lifeless, others almost painfully loud, and others unaffected. They also have more mid range detail confusion (haze) than the HE-560s and Elex.

I’ll continue to reserve mine for specific genres and recordings.

1 Like

I purchased a set of these and arriving next week. This my first set of planar cans. I am not a audiophile to any extent just a casual gamer that loves building powerfull pc’s. i have a couple of other cans, 1 beyerdynamic mmx300’s and another BD gaming headset. i also got the schiit jotunheim with multibit dac and a audeze 4 pin balanced cable. im hoping they will sound better than the two i own now. I am surprised that there are not more posts about these. im glad to be aboard.


Hi @FiddyT and welcome. I am sure you’ll hear a nice step up in quality when you get your new headphones. I hope everything goes well and happy listening.