You’ll have to ask Audeze on that. I only have the current one here.
They’ve been answering questions here and there about the revision over here, plus the OP is the official announcement with all revision data: LCD-X and XC Update | Headphone Reviews and Discussion - Head-Fi.org
3 Likes
Is this the measurements without EQ?
It looks really good.
I’ll just pull the relevant quote here:
Ever since the LCD-X and XC were introduced, we’ve continually refined them over the years, striving to develop the best headphones for both the studio professional and the audiophile. Some recent examples of these refinements are the headbands and ear cups. Even more importantly, the critical thin film we use for our diaphragms has been revised and improved. From the original thicker film we started with, to the much thinner film we started using a few years ago - even the chemical composition has morphed over time.
Far ahead of the entire planar magnetic industry, Audeze moved very early on from chemical etching to laser etching – we even hold several patents for this process. The latest versions of the Editor’s Choice - and record producer’s reference – LCD-X and XC have improvements for more consistent performance, with newly optimized magnetic circuits that offer the sonic excellence our users have known for many years.
We also modified the LCD earpad material to get a better seal around the ears on
differently shaped heads for a more consistent sonic experience. All of this is with an eye towards continually improving our products so that you have the best possible listening experience. All LCD-Xs produced from November 23, 2020 and all LCD-XCs produced since November 9, 2020 have these improvements.
Additionally, we’re including our new economy carry case at no additional charge in the LCD-X and LCD-XC Creator packages. And for the Premium LCD-X/XC packages, we now include the 4 pin balanced XLR cable and a 6.3mm to 3.5mm adapter cable (in addition to the standard 6.3mm cable)."
And I believe Grover was answering questions in the head-fi thread linked by @metal571 if anyone is curious.
4 Likes
Yes, without EQ. I’ll post my EQ profile soon, along with a deep dive on the measurements and on-head response to see if there are any unique coupling interactions.
5 Likes
This is indeed a major improvement from the looks of that FR. I’m really interested to see how this affects their Flagship LCD models. 
1 Like
My take away from all of that is that there has been more silent revisions than you can shake a stick at.
I don’t want to be a beta tester on a retail product. I also want to know what I’m getting when I buy a pre-owned item. This is why I don’t like Audeze. R&D your products before you sell them please. Thanks.
Just saying.
5 Likes
Thanks @Resolve ! I’m so happy to finally see an FR graph of the new revision. Worth it’s weight in gold to me. The LCD-X setting in reveal is definitely now irrelevant and I was a bit stuck in limbo for someone who wanted to start using them as a reference for EQing in my DAW. I was about to email Audeze about it, but their mystery compensation curve that they apply to graphs wouldn’t have provided much usefulness if any.
1 Like
In the spirit of constant improvement, this is why I kind of feel like a ‘model years’ approach is… at least an interesting idea that I think would make sense for Audeze products. But of course, that also requires common understanding of what’s actually been changed. We see it in other industries, so in some ways I could see it work well here too.
2 Likes
Thanks! After reading the entire thread thus far, it seems they won’t be making the changes to the LCD-2 line, which is not only a shame but also a real mistake in my opinion. Hopefully they at least improve their flagship, as it measures and sounds very strange. Can you imagine if the LCD-4 measured like the new LCD-X!?
1 Like
On a different note, I recently purchased an LCD-X from Audeze’s website, I have noticed that the new pad is soft to a point where my ear tips are touching the fazors. What seems sad to me, is that their reply was, different people had different physiques and that they did not have a fix for that issue but you can try and do a DIY spacer to increase the distance between the fazors and the ear tip. now the mission is to find a solution for that…
1 Like
Dear community,
1st post here after reading some lines … I did a comparison with some headphones in the last few days (Focal Elear and Clear, HD 660S and HD560S, LCD-X). I mainly listen to jazz and classical and the clear (hihi) winner is the LCD-X. It can handle complex orchestral and big band passages with ease. With these requirements, the Elear showed a real mess and the Sennheisers have a lack of bass performance. The Focal Clear at least plays all the notes, but the separation between instruments or different voices is not so good. But for me, the dealbreaker with the Clear is that I don’t get emotional access to the music. Tone colours of the instruments and timbre in general do not match my perception as I know it from my active time as an orchestra musician. In my opinion, the Clear sounds thin and cold compared to the LCD-X. I wanted to like the Clear, but whenever I put on the LCD-X it was like coming home on a cold winter night (all headphones are B-stock so already tuned in). I found that I can wear the LCD-X well for 1-1.5 h without discomfort (neck).
Furthermore, I can confirm that the new Poslter are very soft and on one side my ear touches the inside very lightly. I think I can live with that.
Here is the frequency response I received from Audeze. For your statistics for EQ-ing. Looking forward to it @Resolve (btw, thanks for your great reviews, it helped me a lot to come to a decision=
I will most likely keep the LCD-X, but am unsure if the LCD-XC is just as good/better. What is your experience on this with the current models?
Many greetings, Stefan
6 Likes
It’s supposed to. Flux’s is like that, and that’s why it made me cry
1 Like
LCD XC has more sub bass rumble. Slightly thicker sounding and not as open because of the amount of air that moves or flows through the drivers. Closed backs tend to carry a thicker sound in the bass regions. I give the LCD XC full marks on a lot. No headphone is perfect, but I think for the XC’s price point it is. 
1 Like
I definitely didn’t hear one like Flux’s then. I want to cry too! 
So it seems like there is still unit variation even in these new units, that’s disappointing… Here’s another “newest model” FR graph from someone on head-fi which has a more prominent 3.5k dip compared to yours. This is similar to the early 2020 model I have, but not as pronounced and has an additional 1.5k bump:
For reference, here’s my early 2020 unit’s frequency response:
4 Likes
I did some testing to try to glean how much of the tuning change was pad-based vs. driver based (for those of us who bought the version with memory foam pads).
The (exciting) results, are posted here.
TL;DR The tuning change seems to be very much pad based, to the point where changing pads on my Oct. 2020 LCD-X made it sound nearly identical to the 2021 pair Resolve measured (on the basis of sine sweeps, anyway).
4 Likes
I would take any KU100 graph with a giant and massive grain of salt. That is a microphone for QC, and it isn’t particularly good at taking real FR measurements. We can start nitpicking the FRs more when @Resolve has more graphs produced on real 711/60318-4 compliant equipment i.e. GRAS.
2 Likes
Is the KU 100 more, or less accurate than a Mini DSP EARs?