Hi, @glarue. I have had the luxury of comparing the headphones you mentioned for some time, not including the LCD-XC. I would concur with @lost33 on his description. A true comparison would be a massive post, so I’ll try to be as brief as I can. I should note that my use case is for mixing and mastering, which influences my perspective.
To begin with, I would describe the Clears as having that familiar dynamic driver sound we’ve all grown up with, plus that added clarity and shine on the top end of the spectrum. I found the lows to be admirable, although perhaps not as strong in its extension. The width, I’d say, is just shy of what a 90° speaker array would present.
The planars you mentioned, as I’m sure you had found, are quite a different flavor.
The LCD-Xs have that giant bouncy ball thump to them with great extension. With quite a bit of EQ’ing, they really come alive. The problem I had in my use-case for them, however, is that it is precisely that aggressive EQ’ing that can create some issues at the crossover points, making for a slightly unruly presence and top end (the MX4s I am trying out now are smoother in that regard, fwiw). But, they have great forward throw at its furthest width points, unusually large image size, and are just a lot of fun during fast, hard, and complex rhythmic passages. The width is almost a dead on equivalent of a 90° speaker array.
I found that my face, amongst its other drawbacks, is completely the wrong shape for the Aryas. And while they didn’t have as much percussive value, I did find them to be beautiful, with an incredibly wide and spacious width, and an incredible forward throw at its furthest width points. Of the HPs I compared, it was the best at listening to a solo instrument recorded in a gorgeous room. The bite of the bow of a cello, I found, seemed to have as much to do with its tuning as its resolving capability.
The HEDDs are all about detail. So much so, that, as @Resolve put it best, it has a ‘physicality throughout the entire frequency spectrum’. I, personally, find these to have the most detail of the HPs we’re talking about. None of them are slouches, but these best them by at least a hair. The bite of strings is there by texture, as opposed to a frequency bump. And while they don’t really need eq, they take to them very well, a touch of it brings out some of the characteristics mentioned with the other HPs, but always stemming from its detail physicality. I can replicate the LCD thump to a small degree, but these are more about texture rather than structure, so I find them to be much more contained than unruly or wild. They are brilliant with fast percussive passages, and make dialing in compression times, transient designing, and volume automation much more reliable. The width is tremendous, but no real forward throw at the widths edges. Early reflections are another thing these excel at representing, as do the Aryas and LCD-Xs, its just in a more directionally linear fashion. The headband is a total bummer, however, as it shares a similar approach as the Clears, but have a much heavier lift to try to accomplish. After trying them with a suspension strap, however, weight and hotspots became a non issue, even after my 16 hour mix days.
I find them to be the most useful for my use case of the bunch, although I do miss the fun of the LCD bounce. While the LCD- MX4’s I have now are performing well, my choice would still be the HEDDphones for mixing.
There are more resolving headphones, evidently, but, of course, at a greater expense, which is the only reason why I’ll move on from these. I pulled the trigger on a pair of Ironwood Verites, and still to consider are the LCD-4, the Rad-0s, the yadada, yadada, yadada….
. d
Chain buddy… 
heyy! I have the same chain as you! Niceee haha 
… even, I don’t imagine taking the HEDDphone on holidays somewhere.