How do you like the 2F with the new style pads?
1 Like
My lcd3 pre fazor is modded. I removed the dampening in front of the driver, and added a few different types of dampening to the rear. I truly think it resolves as much as other $2k plus headphones. I have heard the lcd5 and think it would be a waste of money personally. As long as these old drivers do not give up. I am not buying another headphone in that price range unless it performs at a way higher level. I think Audeze is catching on and sealing the rear of lcd5, so tinkerers can’t change the rear dampening… If you find one I recommend modding it. The timbre does not disappoint either and I love Sennheiser.
1 Like
So after testing the main line
LCD 2 classic
LCD 2
LCD x
Lcd3
Lcd4
Lcd5
My taste is for 2 and 3. Are those I didn’t list inline with 2 and 3?
I tried, and failed, to review the LCD-2 closed back. Headphones.com was kind enough to send me a pair. I tried and tried, but disliked them very much, finally making an awful hash of review, and getting banned from any future review tours in the process. I found that the only music that sounded good on them was Mike Oldfield’s Tubular Bells.
2 Likes
Hi. I just received my new pair of LCD-5s and like the sound very much. There is an issue with this particular pair of headphones that maybe someone can assist me with:
The up and down detent mechanism on the right ear cup is very loose and does not hold the setting. I can pick up the headphones by the headband and the right earcup falls to it’s lowest position via gravity alone. Is there anything I can do to correct this or do the phones have to go back?
Thanks!
There is a small hole in the part that holds the headband and rod. Use a small Allen key and turn clockwise a couple turns.
This will tension up that whole mechanism.
4 Likes
Thank goodness for people like you! I appreciate it very much! Inside the hole I found a 2mm equivalent hex head screw that when turned about a half a turn CW did the trick.
1 Like
If you were offered the
LCD-2 (current 2020 regular fazor one)
or the
LCD-X (current 2021 one)
and you could eq them to your heart’s desire
(or they’re eq’d to have the same frequency response)
which would you take?
what are their differences?
(other than tonality due to frequency response)
are the differences big?
I’d take the 2021 X. Better clarity/detail retrieval and better separation of instruments. Imaging is a little more precise to my ears as well. I felt the soundstage width was a wash.
I know you said forget about tonality, but with the 2021 X having better tonality, you won’t have to boost as much using EQ, therefore there should be more headroom for the amplifier.
7 Likes
Totally the X. The differences are pretty apparent, especially in imaging and detail, and this is all after EQ correction.
4 Likes
Our latest YT video and first look of the Audeze Euclid In-Ear is live!
We also announced with the support of Audeze we will be giving away one Euclid to one lucky winner! The Contest link is in the video description. Good luck!
4 Likes
So, I have been working on a small meet here in Pittsburgh and Audeze are helping out. We are going to have the LCD-2 Classic, LCD-X, LCD-3, as well as the new MM-500 and Audeze just confirmed that they are sending the CRBN electrostatic!
Details can be found here:
6 Likes
Crinacle’s recent Audeze factor tour allowed him access to and measure the LCD-R:
7 Likes
Hi guys,
Today we are taking a look at a product which is a bit of a change of pace, an interesting pair of IEMs from Audeze called the Euclid. In traditional Audeze fashion, these feature a planar magnetic driver, similar to their open back LCDi4, iSINE, and LCD-i3 siblings. Now, in the past I have owned Audezes LCD-i4 open backed IEMs, which were more of a miniature headphone, than a true IEM. Having had a good experience with their sound quality, I was curious if Audeze had managed to capture some of their sound in a closed back model. For all the LCDi4 sounded great, its open back nature did limit its use case compared to a traditional closed IEM, and the fit was also something I struggled with. If the Euclid could improve upon those areas, but continue to be a very capable driver, then I felt it had a ton of potential.
Thankfully, the Euclid are much more traditional in their form and fit. The driver itself has shrunk compared to the LCDi4, which has a 30mm driver, whilst the Euclid has an 18mm driver. In comparison to the group of planar magnetic driver options from Chi-Fi land that have been released in the last couple years, this is slightly bigger, with most of those options featuring a 14mm or 14.5mm driver.
The Euclids use an MMCX terminated cable, weigh 15g per side without the cable, and come in a nicely presented box with a handy small pelican case for storage. Included are Audeze silicon tips, SpinFit silicon tips, and Comply foam tips. I ended up preferring the Audeze silicon tips, though the Spinfit are certainly worth trying to find your ideal fit. I usually don’t enjoy foam tips, so I only tested the comply tips in terms of sound, and not as my preferred overall fit. As far as I understand the Euclid come with a 3.5mm cable, a 4.4mm Pentaconn Cable, and a bluetooth cable is available separately. At 12 ohms impedance and 105db/mw in terms of sensitivity, the Euclid are not the most sensitive IEMs on the market, but entirely serviceable and can be driver well from most DAPs, laptops, dongles, etc…You certainly do not need a large desktop amp to get the best out of the Euclid. They seems to play well over a wide variety of sources, and I will mention some pairings I enjoyed later on in the review.
In terms of general overall tonal balance, the Euclid seemed a bit more even keeled than the LCDi4 which I used to owned. Still, with that being said, in its stock tuning the Euclid is not my favourite. I think that for many listeners it may actually work very well, but I did end up preferring it after doing a bit tweaking via EQ. Audeze themselves seem to be a big supporter of the idea of EQ, going as far as releasing their “Reveal” (a software program they created) presets for their headphones and IEMs. Now, I prefer just figuring out what I prefer and doing it myself, but the reveal presets are always there, should you be interested in trying them out, and not interested in trying out EQ on your own. The drivers of the Euclid really do seem to be a level above the cheaper Chi-Fi planar magnetic options in term of technical performance, and take to EQ very well.
In terms of the bass response of the Euclid, it did seem to be slightly elevated, and I actually really enjoyed it in its stock tuning. I didn’t feel an overall need to ad any bass or that I was lacking low end. There is more of a sub bass focus than a mid bass focus, and it seems to be a somewhat easy going low end response. I mean that in the sense that some IEMs really just go for it in terms of bass, and also have tons of slam and punch in terms of dynamic drivers. Some of the Campfire Audio’s like the Atlas are like that. The Audeze seems more polite and technically capable than those IEMs however. Perhaps this is due to the Planar Magnetic driver in use here, but there is a real sense of speed and delicacy that a lot of IEMs don’t have on show, not just in the low end but in terms of the overall performance.
The mids of the Euclid did seem a little bit nasal and forward in the upper mids to me at times. I ended up preferring to reduce the 2khz area a little bit, which seemed to help with that nasal quality. I also found that snare drums and clap (or similar) type noises could be a bit too much, being piercing and grating. The Euclid’s lower mids seemed mostly neutral, not really being forward and warm and mushy, or pulled back, being cold and clinical. They struck a fairly good balance between the two extremes, and I never bothered with tweaking them via EQ in the lower mids.
The treble response of the Euclid was where I had the most problems. The lower treble was actually entirely ok, I just felt that for my personal preferences, the upper treble (lets say 8.5Khz and above) was way too dark. There just wasn’t enough energy, air, and sparkle. I also feel that through this recessed upper treble, it seemed to be masking how truly capable the drivers themselves were in terms of presenting detail and technical performance. Now, a darker treble obviously doesn’t mean that the detail isn’t there, and an overly hot treble can also make you think there is detail that isn’t really there, but I did end up feeling that with a boost in the highs, the Euclid really came into their own, and showed what they were truly capable of.
Which brings me to my next point. Although the Euclid did not seem to be as large sounding and technically impressive as their LCDi4 siblings, they were incredibly capable IEMs. Lots of detail, lots of dynamic capability, with decent soundstage width and height for a closed back IEM. The tonal balance in its stock form may not be my favourite and treble in particular may not show off what the Euclid are capable, but after I got them dialled in, they really did impress me. The LCDi4 does have a much “bigger” sound, and a wider soundstage, and I think that is due to its larger driver and open back nature. That whilst Audeze has done a great job with the rear chamber and optimization of the Euclid to get a good sounding closed planar IEM, they just can’t out physics, physics, to beat the LCDi4s performance. To be fair though, the Euclid is vastly more affordable than the LCDi4, and I think it is the most technically capable IEM I have heard for the price (which I will mention more about after I speak about the build quality)
Now, the Euclid are made of a metal shell, feel fairly substantial at 15g. Thankfully, they don’t need ear hooks like the open back IEMs from Audeze, and do have a much better overall fit. Once I did some experimenting with the Eartips they came with, settling on the stock Audeze silicon tips, they were entirely comfortable for long listening sessions. There are more comfortable smaller IEMs on the market, but in terms of accommodating the driver size of the Euclid, their comfort is absolutely ok, for me and my ears. If you have very small ears you may have some issues with the fit, so I would recommend trying to get your ears on a demo pair, if at all possible. The build of the stock cables was also absolutely acceptable, and I haven’t had any problems with the MMCX termination thus far. The Euclid’s feel like a well built product overall, being substantial, but not too heavy to cause comfort issues.
The bluetooth cable that Audeze makes for the Euclid, which I believe originally came with them stock, but is now an additional add on, works very well. Pairing the cable with your bluetooth source is very easy to do, and the whole process seemed smooth and worked well. The cable itself actually doesn’t have a ton of power or gain so if you want to really rock out, you would be better off with a DAP or dongle with a bit more power. However, if you want to be free to move around, with no attached cables or things to worry about, the bluetooth cable is worth considering. It sounds totally fine for a bluetooth option, but of course, for ultimate sound quality, I found that other sources did improve upon its performance. EDIT: I have found out that the bluetooth cable is no longer available.
In terms of pairings, you don’t need a desktop amp to enjoy the Euclid. I’ve tried them with lots of portable sources, and the iFi GoBar was a great option. I also enjoyed my Fiio Q3. Basically, whichever portable DAP or amp you prefer the sound of, as long as its moderately powerful, will sound good with the Euclid. They are not very picky about what they are paired up with.
My main comparison with the Euclid was the 7Hertz Timeless, another planar magnetic IEM. The Euclid is better in terms of technical performance, build quality, and comfort but the stock tuning of the 7hertz is better for my personal preferences. As I am not opposed to EQ use, the Audeze are the clearly superior choice especially given the pricing problems I will mention in the next section. The 7Hertz were a great option when they came out, but things have changed in a very quick way since their release, so I would hesitate to recommend them at this point.
Now, I need to talk about the price of the Euclid as it’s a complicated issue and has caused some problems in terms of what to recommend. The Euclid released at an MSRP of $1299USD. Compared to the $2500USD MSRP of the LCDi4, whilst also being closed back, was an interesting addition to Audezes line up. There were a few sales here and there with the Euclid going for around $1000USD. Then, Audeze had B-stock models at around about $650USD two years in a row during their B-Stock sale. Most recently, Adorama.com, a US based online retailer, has had them on sale, B-Stock new models, for $299USD. They are also showing as being sold out on Audezes website. I’m not sure if that means they are going to be discontinued, or what is going on. With that being said, if you can get a pair of these for $299USD, and either like their stock tuning or don’t mind playing with EQ, then this is the EQ to get for the money in my opinion. Its technical performance for $299USD blows anything else out of the water at that price point, and many above that price point. At its MSRP, it’s still a great sounding IEM, which is comfortable and well built, but has a much larger number of competitors to go up against. I would have even recommended the Euclid at its MSRP with caveats, but if you can get a pair from Adorama or used at $299, it’s a no brainer in my opinion for those looking for an IEM.
Overall, the Euclid is a very technically capable IEM, albeit with a stock tuning that is not my favourite. The accessories that come with the Euclid are great, equally well built, and make it an overall well done package. If you are willing to EQ the Euclid’s frequency response to be more in line with your personal preferences, their technical performance is very good, with good comfort and build quality as well. If you were paying MSRP, and don’t like to EQ, I would recommend trying them prior to purchase if at all possible to make sure you like the stock tuning. However, if you were able to get a pair from Adorama or similar at $299USD for a new A stock pair, and that is within your budget, I would recommend giving them a try regardless of your sonic preferences as you may end up really enjoying them, and the financial risk is much lower.
I’m curious if Audeze will ever be able to come up with a higher performing closed back IEM, similar in sound and performance to the LCDi4. Would it be possible to do a bigger driver in a closed back model? With even more technical performance? I’m really not sure, but if Audeze does indeed ever release a “V2” or a model above the Euclid, I’d certainly be very interested to hear them and see what they are like. Overall, I’d recommend the Euclid, especially if you can get it at the bargain basement pricing they have been going for lately.
6 Likes
Just checked Adorama, and the b stock is not showing. I love my b stock LCDi4s.
2 Likes
They must have sold out. I’d keep an eye on it though, maybe there will be more.
As I did not find a specific thread for the Sine headphones, I’ll drop my comment here.
First off: I really really love the sound of the Sine DX; the only annoying thing for me is their on-ear design, what makes them uncomfortably for me after a while.
Recently the pads on these started to dissolve completely. So the hunt for replacement was on. Wasn’t an easy task, as Audeze had nothing anymore; so I bought two different sets off the big River that claim to fit the Sine (DX). When they arrived I thought “Oh sh…- these will never ever fit.” But they did, and turned the on-ear into an over-ear design. 
And boy, does that sound improve. This really brings new life into the Sine DX and I haven’t used any other set for the last week 
1 Like