Flagship, a term that is synonymous with the best of the best. A title that's given to a person, product or establishment that surpasses the norm. An rightly so, when you hear the term flagship you expect perfection, or close to it.
After many years in this hobby, the summer of 2017 was the time I decided to pick up a flagship. I sold my collection of modified mid-range closed backs as I found my self listening only to my open back, and really being unsatisfied when I needed to listen to something that had isolation and didn't leak sound like an Open back does. The question was what? What would I pick up, what headphone would surpass my balanced little trio? Seeing as I enjoyed both Dynamic and Planar-magnetic headphones and I wanted something with a wood housing I decided to listen to both the LCD XC and the ZMF Eikon.
Though, enjoyment and pleasure aside, for me a flagship is defined by it's fidelity It's ability to render music as close to "reality" as possible. In most cases the technicalities or the resolve and imaging of a headphone is what we perceive as an improvement in fidelity. Assuming that the frequency response fits our definition of balanced. An at the time, the Eikon was the newest addition to the ZMF family, it featured their own in house Dynamic Driver and took the helm as ZMF Headphone's ultra-detailed full package offering. While many of their customers are split between which they enjoy more, the Eikon is the more technically impressive headphone. An for me technicalities are what define a flagship. For Audeze Headphones the LCD XC is to date still their top of the line closed-back planar magnetic.
I was able to demo the LCD XC through the kindness of a friend, and the ZMF Eikon as a loaner from ZMF Headphones. I'll be focusing mostly on the LCD XC to start, and ending with how I feel it compared to the Eikon.
Build
The LCD XC is well built, I love the metal gimbals and choice of leather on the headband. There's no noise or creaking as I placed it on and off my head. The large plush leather ear pads were breathable and comfy. My only gripe was with the metal adjustment sliders and their plastic enclosure, while they worked quite well they where a bit stiff to move.
Though my favorite feature of the Audeze LCD XC's build are it's dual XLR headphone connectors and those beautiful wood cups! For functionality, LCD's dual mini 4pin XLR output has always impressed me. Even before owning an Audeze headphone, I took the plunge and had a few of my own headphones modified with the same connectors. As such, I still applaud Audeze for how cleanly they implement the cable connection style I associate with them! I love that the receptors exhibit exceptionally clean design elements.
An as much as I appreciate their attention to detail in functional terms, the wood cups themselves are just as impressive. The shimmer on the finish alone really caught my eye!
Unmatched in their shine, these cups are stunning to look at. Almost like wood mirrors! Though with all this wood, leather and metal some have complained about excessive weight. For better or worse, I had no problems with physical fatigue in my neck or shoulders when I listened. Though I do keep my listening sessions to no more than 2 & 1/2 hours at a time.
Non the less, their high efficiency allowed me to listen from a variety of sources. Even my little LG V20 was able to drive them sufficiently, not only loud enough but also with an acceptable quality of sound. Still, these cans prove transparent enough to merit a cleaner more resolving source.
It offered both excellent isolation and resolve, especially in the central and upper mid range an above! Horns, guitars, trumpet's and piano's were presented with clarity and impact, there was an excellent tactile nature to the presentation. The feeling of each note as the intensity and pitch changed. High hats and percussion drums were sharp and articulate. How ever the LCD XC's envelope focused more on the attack and sustain of a note rather than it's decay and release. This emphasis sometimes left me a little fatigued over longer listening sessions especially when paired with a colder or drier sounding DAC.
Bass
I've always been impressed with how well Planar Magnetic headphones present low frequencies, and the LCD XC is no exception! While it wasn't as fast and taut as other open back planar's in my collection the sheer sense of power and naturalness was breathtaking! Big timpani drums had a beautiful presentation with an almost perfect envelope! Tons of power on the attack, and just enough decay and resolve in the release.
Midrange
For the LCD XC, clarity takes center stage. It's presentation of the mid range has a distinctly aggressive envelope. The leading edge of a sound presents itself with authority while the decay and sustain present themselves effortlessly. My only gripe with the LCD XC was that it lacked some resolve at the quietest levels of sound, namely the release of instruments often lacked vibrato and dissipated unnaturally fast. Often times the LCD XC timbre was rough and tended to be colder than warm. Though, Audeze feels this allows the headphone to be more "transparent" or revealing of faults in both the mix/master or playback chain your listening to. On one hand this presentation lends itself to be extremely resolving of vocals though on the other hand it can also cast on haze on the resolve of larger heavier resonate instruments. Guitars, cellos, double basses, large drums and the most powerful of male vocalists seemed to lack a naturalness to them. While, lighter vocalists and instruments are presented with an excellent sense of articulation.
Highs
Much like the mid range, the top end is characterized with a sincere focus on presence, starting from the upper end of the mid range onward both percussion and stringed instruments have a precise an immediate snap to their tactile interactions with the musician. The plucking of strings, fret noise, breaths taken, lips moistened and the hit of a drum stick. Details like these are presented with focus and vigor! High hats shimmer and crash, the snare drum assaults the listener with an incredible sense of both dynamics and weight. The twang in a folk singers voice pair nicely with each breath taken by musicians and vocalists alike. While this heightened attention to the musician can be nice, It can at times overshadow transients and micro detail within the lower and central mid-range.
Imaging and Resolve
Wider than it is deep, the LCD XC offers the listener an escape into a spacious sound stage. As for the resolve, again there is a touch of emphasis to ambient noise or macro detail. The musicians, the room, and some times unbeknownst passers by get just as much attention as the instruments and the music it self. While micro detail isn't lacking, it's sometimes over shadowed. Audeze claims that the LCD XC offers the ultimate and transparency, and to that end I feel they've achieved that goal.
Though, some of what I perceive as faults may not lie entirely with the LCD XC it self but rather my choice of Digital Audio Converter. Audeze claim's the LCD XC will reveal "everything." With it's "nimble, neutral and transparent" sound. My own audio system is based around an ESS Sabre 9018 fully balanced DAC. A piece of equipment that is also characterized by it's transparency, nimbleness and neutrality. Though what I found through my years is that the ESS Sabre series offers a real focus on clarity, or macro detail and articulate imaging at the expense of naturalness. Where as more Natural Sounding chip-sets like the PCM series from Texas Instruments offer better micro detail alongside a more cohesive image at the expense of some top to bottom articulation and resolve of ambient noise.
So what happens if I source the LCD XC with a more natural sounding Dac?
Synergy
Or a lack there of may be why I wasn't a fan of the LCD XC when paired with my NFB10ES2.
The majority of my impressions where from my home DAC, but I did have the chance to listen to the LCD XC paired with a Hugo 2. Additionally for amplification I tested the XC with the amp stage in my NFB10ES2 alongside a iFi Audio Micro iCan SE and my Garage 1217 Project Ember II.
Touting a high efficiency driver, the LCD XC really paired beautifully with the Hugo 2. The DAC/Amp from Hugo served as a very natural sounding source. While it did not lack clarity, it also didn't demphasize or over emphasize clarity. The presentation of time from the Hugo 2 is very natural, that said it paired very well with the nimble, dynamic and speedy LCD XC. The harsher, thinner, an often edgy sound the LCD XC has in it's central mid-range and upwards was not present in this pairing. Additionally, the Hugo 2 did prove to have all the characteristics of a more natural sounding Digital Audio Converter, it's lack of width and exceptional depth pair amazingly well with the LCD XC's wide but often shallow imaging. Like wise, the LCD XCs emphasis on macro detail is complimented by the Hugo 2s more micro detail focused presentation. These two proved to have almost perfect synergy! The strengths of the one complimenting the shortcomings of the other.
iFi Audio's iCan Micro SE proved to be yet another excellent partner for the LCD XC. It too helped to soften the often harsh mid range of the LCD XC. Additionally I found that the ASP sound circuits did make some improvements to the already spacious presentation of the LCD XC, especially if the track it self suffered from a very flat recording. Though pairing the LCD XC with both the Hugo 2 and iFi Audio iCan Micro SE did prove to emphasize to much of the mid-range for my tastes. I enjoyed the iCan SE the most with a colder less natural sounding dac, especially one presents it self quicker than reality. As opposed to the very real sound of the Hugo 2. So using the warmer more natural sounding iCan Micro SE with the ASP Circuit set to it's lowest level with my own NFB10ES2 proved to be yet another impressive pairing, despite the slight lack of resolve compared to the Hugo 2!
I also enjoyed the sound of my HM901 with the Vintage Filter engaged feeding the LCD XC with my HeadAmp Pico Power. The vintage filter of the HM901 introduces a rather sharp roll off up top, which helped to lessen the LCD XCs over aggressive nature. Resulting in a little more emphasis in the central mid range and a more balanced sound overall!Though not quite as natural as the Hugo 2 in some cases, I also found the HM901 an Pico Power combo to present a more accurate sense of vertical movement as well as a tauter more refined low end than either the Hugo 2 or the NFB10ES2.
Overall, I find portable applications to be where the LCD XC impresses me the most! It's high efficiency makes it easier to pair with often less powerful portable players and amps. The light airy mid range and crisp top end pair nicely with a taut full bodied and very solid low end. Additionally the LCD XC own aggressive nature favors pairing with more natural sounding and organic DAC's and amplifiers. Both my own HM901 with it's Vintage filter and the Hugo 2 served as excellent Digital Audio Converters to pair the LCD XC with. The HM901 offered an even more articular and exciting presentation over the Hugo 2, with Chord's portable all in one DAC/Amp offering an ultimately more resolving presentation with an exceptionally balanced tonal presentation traits that I enjoyed more than the HM901s excitement and articulation.
For better or worse owners of DACs built around the ESS Sabre or AKM chip-sets may not experience the best pairing with the LCD XC, of course implementation means more than the chip it self. As my own HM 901 is itself a dual ESS Sabre 9018 design, but it's use of digital filters helps to create a better experience. Your choice of amp can also create a more pleasant pairing!
Now it's excellent portable performance aside, I did find the LCD XC ultimately lacking at home in my reference system. I personally own and live with an Audio GD NFB10ES2 which features a fully balanced ESS Sabre 9018 implementation without the addition of any optional digital filters.
The ZMF Eikon is tonally quite the contrast to the LCD XC, though at the end of the day while I feel the Eikon pair'd better with my own personal system I did include the Hugo 2 into my comparisons. In an effort to remove "synergy " from the equation the following comparisons will focus on how each headphone paired with the Hugo 2 in addition to my own NFB10ES2 both using their internal amplifiers and one of my own personal units.
Overall the Eikon presents music with a phenomenally natural, organic, nuanced, spacious and airy sound signiture. While it's not nearly as wide as the LCD XC it proves it self deeper and often more precise and at no time did any particular frequency range stand out at me. The entire presentation from top to bottom is simply balanced! While there is a bit of emphasis on the lowest bass notes, it was at no point obtrusive or even apparent.
That said, the Hugo 2 powering the ZMF Eikon directly was an incredibly lack luster experience. The Eikon benefits strongly from having an amplifier with a higher Z output. So to compensate for a lack of synergy I choose my Project Ember II hybrid tube as the external amp for both the Hugo 2 and NFB10ES2 as DACs. I did use different output Z settings for each headphone, with .1 Ohms for the LCD XC and 35 Ohms for the ZMF Eikon.
I'll also be touching on how each sounded with the Hugo 2 as a portable all in one DAC/Amp and the sound with my HM901-Pico Power portable combo!
Bass
Low frequencies are where the LCD XC proves it's self the most! I found it to be consistently heavier, tauter and more textured over the Eikon. Tracks featuring both kick drums, large tom tom drums and synth bass were always clearer and better defined in the lows from the LCD XC. This isn't to say the Eikon sounds, bloated and muffled, but rather out of both DACs the LCD XC maintained a noticeable cleaner, faster more resolved presentation. Additionally, the LCD XC saw little degradation in it's low frequencies when switching between the internal amp of both the Hugo 2, NFB10ES2 and out of my Ember II. The Hugo 2 having the softest presentation, and the NFB10ES2 the hardest.
How ever, with instruments that feature both low frequencies and those in the upper mid bass and low mids, the Eikon takes a clear lead. Bass guitars, cello's, Upright basses, Tuba's and other very large deep wood winds and stringed instruments find a more natural and resolved presentation from the Eikon as the transition from lows to the mid range is smoother and more nuanced. The ideal pairing for the Eikon how ever was with the Ember II as it's amp. Where as the NFB10ES2 helped to add some tautness to the low end of the Eikon, with the Hugo 2 only softening the lows marginally while also further increasing the resolve and texture of the low end as a whole. Using the lower Z output of the NFB10ES2 and the Hugo 2 to drive the Eikon introduces a noticeable degradation to the quality of the low end as a whole.
The LCD XC on the other hand has a slightly rougher some what obvious transition from the lows into the mid range, the lack of decay in the lows translates into an insanely visceral experience with percussion. But that same insane power and super fast decay often rob non-percussive instruments of detail. Giving an almost lifeless sound in some cases, the result of the attack and impact of those frequencies over shadowing the transients.
The NFB 10ES2 exaggerated this fault of the LCD XC and the Hugo 2 minimized it.
At the end of the day, with the Hugo 2 the LCD XC was the most enjoyable, for both it's resolve and sheer power and impact in the lows! The Hugo 2 really helped to add some resolve and texture into the LCD XC, especially as it transitioned from the upper mid bass frequencies into the low midrange! Additionally, adding the Ember II as the primary amp for the LCD XC with the Hugo 2 as source, did bring some small improvements to overall tautness and tonal balance but was some times still a bit over powering compared to using the Hugo 2s own internal amp.
Mid-Range
This is where I felt the ZMF Eikon starts it's slow but undeniable departure from the LCD XC... with the LCD XC falling behind rather drastically in comparison.
While the Hugo 2 minimized it, when compared to the ZMF Eikon the LCD XC can only be described as harsh, edgy and over aggressive. There is a clear lack of transient resolve within the low to central mid range on the LCD XC. With the upper mid-range being a 50/50 toss up with regards to resolve. Guitars, vocals, flutes, brass horns, violins, wood winds, pianos and even big bells all found a consistently more natural and more resolved presentation from the ZMF Eikon. Neither lacking attack nor over emphasizing the decay, the ZMF Eikon owns the mid range. When switching from the Eikon to the LCD XC, the sound from the XC just attacks your face... and while that's kinda interesting the lack of resolve combined with that over emphasized attack is ultimately unpleasant.
Now with portable playback and amplification the LCD XCs faults are some what minimized. The resolve doesn't improve but some of my weaker portable amps do soften sound as a whole enough to make it more pleasurable. In fact the Hugo 2's own internal amp proved most impressive with the LCD XC especially in the mid range.
Pairing the NFB10ES2 though was almost always less desirable, it literally had NO clear advantage or improvements relating to mid range presentation over the Hugo 2. Getting back to this idea of portability, the ZMF Eikon again performs poorly with both the internal amp of the Hugo 2 and my own HM901/Pico Power combo. It's naturalness turns into a bizarre mix of excessively dry soft warmth. Which is as equally unpleasant at the LCD XC's harshness with the Hugo 2 and Ember II.
At home the Eikon owned the mid-range especially when pair'd with my Ember II, but on the go I found the LCD XC to be the better option.
Highs
Again, the XC's over-emphasis up top can often detract from the music your listening to. On one hand this extra clarity does boost the resolve of ambient noise, but often at the cost of transients relating to instruments in the lower, upper and central mid range. All in all, while the Hugo 2 helped to alleviate some of the excessive aggression up top, the ZMF Eikon proved to be equally resolving and more tonally balanced with both the NFB10ES2 and Hugo 2 as a source.
The LCD XC had no real benefits here either, however the Eikons top end tends to be under whelming out of low Z outputs so for portable use both have their faults.
Imaging and Resolve
Once again, I find my self impressed with the LCD XC and Hugo 2 on the go. At home, the XC proves to be wider than the Eikon but not as well defined nor precise. With the Eikon providing more accurate and tangible direction cues and transient resolve. At home from both the Hugo 2 and NFB 10ES2 as my source and the Ember II as my amp the Eikon proves it self superior.
Additionally the LCD XC saw some improvements to resolve with the Ember II serving as it's Amp, especially when paired with the Hugo 2 as it's source.
On the go, the resolve of the Eikon takes a bit of a hit when amped from my portable gear. Thus with both my HM901 -> Pico Power and the Hugo 2 in tow, I enjoyed the LCD XC more than I did the Eikon.
How ever, as I've mentioned I was continually impressed with the performance of the LCD XC when paired with my own portable gear! It's high efficiency and low resistance driver make it an very easy headphone to drive, not at all picky about output resistance like the Eikon. Rather, the LCD XC conveniently provides excellent technicalities, good resolve and a fairly balanced though aggressive sound on the go. Again if you already own a portable DAC/Amp from the likes of Chord or one of Hifiman's Digital Audio Players or any portable gear that characterizes it self with a warm organic sound, you'll find the LCD XC an excellent match for listening away from home!
After many years in this hobby, the summer of 2017 was the time I decided to pick up a flagship. I sold my collection of modified mid-range closed backs as I found my self listening only to my open back, and really being unsatisfied when I needed to listen to something that had isolation and didn't leak sound like an Open back does. The question was what? What would I pick up, what headphone would surpass my balanced little trio? Seeing as I enjoyed both Dynamic and Planar-magnetic headphones and I wanted something with a wood housing I decided to listen to both the LCD XC and the ZMF Eikon.
Though, enjoyment and pleasure aside, for me a flagship is defined by it's fidelity It's ability to render music as close to "reality" as possible. In most cases the technicalities or the resolve and imaging of a headphone is what we perceive as an improvement in fidelity. Assuming that the frequency response fits our definition of balanced. An at the time, the Eikon was the newest addition to the ZMF family, it featured their own in house Dynamic Driver and took the helm as ZMF Headphone's ultra-detailed full package offering. While many of their customers are split between which they enjoy more, the Eikon is the more technically impressive headphone. An for me technicalities are what define a flagship. For Audeze Headphones the LCD XC is to date still their top of the line closed-back planar magnetic.
I was able to demo the LCD XC through the kindness of a friend, and the ZMF Eikon as a loaner from ZMF Headphones. I'll be focusing mostly on the LCD XC to start, and ending with how I feel it compared to the Eikon.
Build
The LCD XC is well built, I love the metal gimbals and choice of leather on the headband. There's no noise or creaking as I placed it on and off my head. The large plush leather ear pads were breathable and comfy. My only gripe was with the metal adjustment sliders and their plastic enclosure, while they worked quite well they where a bit stiff to move.
Though my favorite feature of the Audeze LCD XC's build are it's dual XLR headphone connectors and those beautiful wood cups! For functionality, LCD's dual mini 4pin XLR output has always impressed me. Even before owning an Audeze headphone, I took the plunge and had a few of my own headphones modified with the same connectors. As such, I still applaud Audeze for how cleanly they implement the cable connection style I associate with them! I love that the receptors exhibit exceptionally clean design elements.
An as much as I appreciate their attention to detail in functional terms, the wood cups themselves are just as impressive. The shimmer on the finish alone really caught my eye!
Unmatched in their shine, these cups are stunning to look at. Almost like wood mirrors! Though with all this wood, leather and metal some have complained about excessive weight. For better or worse, I had no problems with physical fatigue in my neck or shoulders when I listened. Though I do keep my listening sessions to no more than 2 & 1/2 hours at a time.
Function
Thankfully the LCD XC is rated at 100 db/1mW efficiency with an impedance of only 20 ohms, this makes the LCD XC an incrediably easy to drive headphone! While Audeze recommends between 1-4w of power for them, I found it to perform quite well with a little less. Of course while I enjoyed their sound from my more modest amps, it did perform best in my system from my Garage 1217 Project Ember II an amp with a 2W output. Though, the numbers aren't nearly as important as the design and build of the amp it self.Non the less, their high efficiency allowed me to listen from a variety of sources. Even my little LG V20 was able to drive them sufficiently, not only loud enough but also with an acceptable quality of sound. Still, these cans prove transparent enough to merit a cleaner more resolving source.
Sound
As for the sound, I found the LCD XC to be airy, quick, dynamic and often tactile in the mid range and up. There is a lot of power in the lows with a pleasent upper mid bass warmth and body from the resonance of the wood cups. I would say the XC is overall more energetic, crisp, and lively than it is dark, wet, and mellow.It offered both excellent isolation and resolve, especially in the central and upper mid range an above! Horns, guitars, trumpet's and piano's were presented with clarity and impact, there was an excellent tactile nature to the presentation. The feeling of each note as the intensity and pitch changed. High hats and percussion drums were sharp and articulate. How ever the LCD XC's envelope focused more on the attack and sustain of a note rather than it's decay and release. This emphasis sometimes left me a little fatigued over longer listening sessions especially when paired with a colder or drier sounding DAC.
Bass
I've always been impressed with how well Planar Magnetic headphones present low frequencies, and the LCD XC is no exception! While it wasn't as fast and taut as other open back planar's in my collection the sheer sense of power and naturalness was breathtaking! Big timpani drums had a beautiful presentation with an almost perfect envelope! Tons of power on the attack, and just enough decay and resolve in the release.
Midrange
For the LCD XC, clarity takes center stage. It's presentation of the mid range has a distinctly aggressive envelope. The leading edge of a sound presents itself with authority while the decay and sustain present themselves effortlessly. My only gripe with the LCD XC was that it lacked some resolve at the quietest levels of sound, namely the release of instruments often lacked vibrato and dissipated unnaturally fast. Often times the LCD XC timbre was rough and tended to be colder than warm. Though, Audeze feels this allows the headphone to be more "transparent" or revealing of faults in both the mix/master or playback chain your listening to. On one hand this presentation lends itself to be extremely resolving of vocals though on the other hand it can also cast on haze on the resolve of larger heavier resonate instruments. Guitars, cellos, double basses, large drums and the most powerful of male vocalists seemed to lack a naturalness to them. While, lighter vocalists and instruments are presented with an excellent sense of articulation.
Highs
Much like the mid range, the top end is characterized with a sincere focus on presence, starting from the upper end of the mid range onward both percussion and stringed instruments have a precise an immediate snap to their tactile interactions with the musician. The plucking of strings, fret noise, breaths taken, lips moistened and the hit of a drum stick. Details like these are presented with focus and vigor! High hats shimmer and crash, the snare drum assaults the listener with an incredible sense of both dynamics and weight. The twang in a folk singers voice pair nicely with each breath taken by musicians and vocalists alike. While this heightened attention to the musician can be nice, It can at times overshadow transients and micro detail within the lower and central mid-range.
Imaging and Resolve
Wider than it is deep, the LCD XC offers the listener an escape into a spacious sound stage. As for the resolve, again there is a touch of emphasis to ambient noise or macro detail. The musicians, the room, and some times unbeknownst passers by get just as much attention as the instruments and the music it self. While micro detail isn't lacking, it's sometimes over shadowed. Audeze claims that the LCD XC offers the ultimate and transparency, and to that end I feel they've achieved that goal.
Though, some of what I perceive as faults may not lie entirely with the LCD XC it self but rather my choice of Digital Audio Converter. Audeze claim's the LCD XC will reveal "everything." With it's "nimble, neutral and transparent" sound. My own audio system is based around an ESS Sabre 9018 fully balanced DAC. A piece of equipment that is also characterized by it's transparency, nimbleness and neutrality. Though what I found through my years is that the ESS Sabre series offers a real focus on clarity, or macro detail and articulate imaging at the expense of naturalness. Where as more Natural Sounding chip-sets like the PCM series from Texas Instruments offer better micro detail alongside a more cohesive image at the expense of some top to bottom articulation and resolve of ambient noise.
So what happens if I source the LCD XC with a more natural sounding Dac?
Synergy
Or a lack there of may be why I wasn't a fan of the LCD XC when paired with my NFB10ES2.
The majority of my impressions where from my home DAC, but I did have the chance to listen to the LCD XC paired with a Hugo 2. Additionally for amplification I tested the XC with the amp stage in my NFB10ES2 alongside a iFi Audio Micro iCan SE and my Garage 1217 Project Ember II.
Touting a high efficiency driver, the LCD XC really paired beautifully with the Hugo 2. The DAC/Amp from Hugo served as a very natural sounding source. While it did not lack clarity, it also didn't demphasize or over emphasize clarity. The presentation of time from the Hugo 2 is very natural, that said it paired very well with the nimble, dynamic and speedy LCD XC. The harsher, thinner, an often edgy sound the LCD XC has in it's central mid-range and upwards was not present in this pairing. Additionally, the Hugo 2 did prove to have all the characteristics of a more natural sounding Digital Audio Converter, it's lack of width and exceptional depth pair amazingly well with the LCD XC's wide but often shallow imaging. Like wise, the LCD XCs emphasis on macro detail is complimented by the Hugo 2s more micro detail focused presentation. These two proved to have almost perfect synergy! The strengths of the one complimenting the shortcomings of the other.
iFi Audio's iCan Micro SE proved to be yet another excellent partner for the LCD XC. It too helped to soften the often harsh mid range of the LCD XC. Additionally I found that the ASP sound circuits did make some improvements to the already spacious presentation of the LCD XC, especially if the track it self suffered from a very flat recording. Though pairing the LCD XC with both the Hugo 2 and iFi Audio iCan Micro SE did prove to emphasize to much of the mid-range for my tastes. I enjoyed the iCan SE the most with a colder less natural sounding dac, especially one presents it self quicker than reality. As opposed to the very real sound of the Hugo 2. So using the warmer more natural sounding iCan Micro SE with the ASP Circuit set to it's lowest level with my own NFB10ES2 proved to be yet another impressive pairing, despite the slight lack of resolve compared to the Hugo 2!
I also enjoyed the sound of my HM901 with the Vintage Filter engaged feeding the LCD XC with my HeadAmp Pico Power. The vintage filter of the HM901 introduces a rather sharp roll off up top, which helped to lessen the LCD XCs over aggressive nature. Resulting in a little more emphasis in the central mid range and a more balanced sound overall!Though not quite as natural as the Hugo 2 in some cases, I also found the HM901 an Pico Power combo to present a more accurate sense of vertical movement as well as a tauter more refined low end than either the Hugo 2 or the NFB10ES2.
Overall, I find portable applications to be where the LCD XC impresses me the most! It's high efficiency makes it easier to pair with often less powerful portable players and amps. The light airy mid range and crisp top end pair nicely with a taut full bodied and very solid low end. Additionally the LCD XC own aggressive nature favors pairing with more natural sounding and organic DAC's and amplifiers. Both my own HM901 with it's Vintage filter and the Hugo 2 served as excellent Digital Audio Converters to pair the LCD XC with. The HM901 offered an even more articular and exciting presentation over the Hugo 2, with Chord's portable all in one DAC/Amp offering an ultimately more resolving presentation with an exceptionally balanced tonal presentation traits that I enjoyed more than the HM901s excitement and articulation.
For better or worse owners of DACs built around the ESS Sabre or AKM chip-sets may not experience the best pairing with the LCD XC, of course implementation means more than the chip it self. As my own HM 901 is itself a dual ESS Sabre 9018 design, but it's use of digital filters helps to create a better experience. Your choice of amp can also create a more pleasant pairing!
The ZMF Eikon is tonally quite the contrast to the LCD XC, though at the end of the day while I feel the Eikon pair'd better with my own personal system I did include the Hugo 2 into my comparisons. In an effort to remove "synergy " from the equation the following comparisons will focus on how each headphone paired with the Hugo 2 in addition to my own NFB10ES2 both using their internal amplifiers and one of my own personal units.
Overall the Eikon presents music with a phenomenally natural, organic, nuanced, spacious and airy sound signiture. While it's not nearly as wide as the LCD XC it proves it self deeper and often more precise and at no time did any particular frequency range stand out at me. The entire presentation from top to bottom is simply balanced! While there is a bit of emphasis on the lowest bass notes, it was at no point obtrusive or even apparent.
That said, the Hugo 2 powering the ZMF Eikon directly was an incredibly lack luster experience. The Eikon benefits strongly from having an amplifier with a higher Z output. So to compensate for a lack of synergy I choose my Project Ember II hybrid tube as the external amp for both the Hugo 2 and NFB10ES2 as DACs. I did use different output Z settings for each headphone, with .1 Ohms for the LCD XC and 35 Ohms for the ZMF Eikon.
I'll also be touching on how each sounded with the Hugo 2 as a portable all in one DAC/Amp and the sound with my HM901-Pico Power portable combo!
Bass
Low frequencies are where the LCD XC proves it's self the most! I found it to be consistently heavier, tauter and more textured over the Eikon. Tracks featuring both kick drums, large tom tom drums and synth bass were always clearer and better defined in the lows from the LCD XC. This isn't to say the Eikon sounds, bloated and muffled, but rather out of both DACs the LCD XC maintained a noticeable cleaner, faster more resolved presentation. Additionally, the LCD XC saw little degradation in it's low frequencies when switching between the internal amp of both the Hugo 2, NFB10ES2 and out of my Ember II. The Hugo 2 having the softest presentation, and the NFB10ES2 the hardest.
How ever, with instruments that feature both low frequencies and those in the upper mid bass and low mids, the Eikon takes a clear lead. Bass guitars, cello's, Upright basses, Tuba's and other very large deep wood winds and stringed instruments find a more natural and resolved presentation from the Eikon as the transition from lows to the mid range is smoother and more nuanced. The ideal pairing for the Eikon how ever was with the Ember II as it's amp. Where as the NFB10ES2 helped to add some tautness to the low end of the Eikon, with the Hugo 2 only softening the lows marginally while also further increasing the resolve and texture of the low end as a whole. Using the lower Z output of the NFB10ES2 and the Hugo 2 to drive the Eikon introduces a noticeable degradation to the quality of the low end as a whole.
The LCD XC on the other hand has a slightly rougher some what obvious transition from the lows into the mid range, the lack of decay in the lows translates into an insanely visceral experience with percussion. But that same insane power and super fast decay often rob non-percussive instruments of detail. Giving an almost lifeless sound in some cases, the result of the attack and impact of those frequencies over shadowing the transients.
The NFB 10ES2 exaggerated this fault of the LCD XC and the Hugo 2 minimized it.
At the end of the day, with the Hugo 2 the LCD XC was the most enjoyable, for both it's resolve and sheer power and impact in the lows! The Hugo 2 really helped to add some resolve and texture into the LCD XC, especially as it transitioned from the upper mid bass frequencies into the low midrange! Additionally, adding the Ember II as the primary amp for the LCD XC with the Hugo 2 as source, did bring some small improvements to overall tautness and tonal balance but was some times still a bit over powering compared to using the Hugo 2s own internal amp.
Mid-Range
This is where I felt the ZMF Eikon starts it's slow but undeniable departure from the LCD XC... with the LCD XC falling behind rather drastically in comparison.
While the Hugo 2 minimized it, when compared to the ZMF Eikon the LCD XC can only be described as harsh, edgy and over aggressive. There is a clear lack of transient resolve within the low to central mid range on the LCD XC. With the upper mid-range being a 50/50 toss up with regards to resolve. Guitars, vocals, flutes, brass horns, violins, wood winds, pianos and even big bells all found a consistently more natural and more resolved presentation from the ZMF Eikon. Neither lacking attack nor over emphasizing the decay, the ZMF Eikon owns the mid range. When switching from the Eikon to the LCD XC, the sound from the XC just attacks your face... and while that's kinda interesting the lack of resolve combined with that over emphasized attack is ultimately unpleasant.
Now with portable playback and amplification the LCD XCs faults are some what minimized. The resolve doesn't improve but some of my weaker portable amps do soften sound as a whole enough to make it more pleasurable. In fact the Hugo 2's own internal amp proved most impressive with the LCD XC especially in the mid range.
Pairing the NFB10ES2 though was almost always less desirable, it literally had NO clear advantage or improvements relating to mid range presentation over the Hugo 2. Getting back to this idea of portability, the ZMF Eikon again performs poorly with both the internal amp of the Hugo 2 and my own HM901/Pico Power combo. It's naturalness turns into a bizarre mix of excessively dry soft warmth. Which is as equally unpleasant at the LCD XC's harshness with the Hugo 2 and Ember II.
At home the Eikon owned the mid-range especially when pair'd with my Ember II, but on the go I found the LCD XC to be the better option.
Highs
Again, the XC's over-emphasis up top can often detract from the music your listening to. On one hand this extra clarity does boost the resolve of ambient noise, but often at the cost of transients relating to instruments in the lower, upper and central mid range. All in all, while the Hugo 2 helped to alleviate some of the excessive aggression up top, the ZMF Eikon proved to be equally resolving and more tonally balanced with both the NFB10ES2 and Hugo 2 as a source.
The LCD XC had no real benefits here either, however the Eikons top end tends to be under whelming out of low Z outputs so for portable use both have their faults.
Imaging and Resolve
Once again, I find my self impressed with the LCD XC and Hugo 2 on the go. At home, the XC proves to be wider than the Eikon but not as well defined nor precise. With the Eikon providing more accurate and tangible direction cues and transient resolve. At home from both the Hugo 2 and NFB 10ES2 as my source and the Ember II as my amp the Eikon proves it self superior.
Additionally the LCD XC saw some improvements to resolve with the Ember II serving as it's Amp, especially when paired with the Hugo 2 as it's source.
On the go, the resolve of the Eikon takes a bit of a hit when amped from my portable gear. Thus with both my HM901 -> Pico Power and the Hugo 2 in tow, I enjoyed the LCD XC more than I did the Eikon.
Closing Thoughts
In conclusion, I find it difficult to justify recommending the LCD XC as an at home flagship. Compared to only a single dynamic headphone in the price range it fell short on both resolve and overall tonal balance. Ideally each of the different flagships that exist should have a different presentation but equal technical merits. A good example of this is the Audeze LCD 2 Pre Fazor and the the ZMF Eikon. Sadly I didn't have my LCD 2 Pre Fazor at while I had the LCD XC on demo, but what I found is that the two share a similar sound signature with rather complimentary presentations. Neither is better than the other but simply different! How ever in an at home set up I see no place for the LCD XC, I just find it too underwhelming.How ever, as I've mentioned I was continually impressed with the performance of the LCD XC when paired with my own portable gear! It's high efficiency and low resistance driver make it an very easy headphone to drive, not at all picky about output resistance like the Eikon. Rather, the LCD XC conveniently provides excellent technicalities, good resolve and a fairly balanced though aggressive sound on the go. Again if you already own a portable DAC/Amp from the likes of Chord or one of Hifiman's Digital Audio Players or any portable gear that characterizes it self with a warm organic sound, you'll find the LCD XC an excellent match for listening away from home!
