Clearly, we need more universal definitions of some of our terms. Most people hear are talking about frequency response, while I know that some also use slam to refer to things more along the lines of macro dynamics, punch, bass impact, presentation style, etc. Since this post compared the LCD to ALL iems, it clearly isn’t referring to tonality.

Also, iems can be pretty reasonable in these categories, and in some regards, the LCD slam is nothing special compared to focals, again, depending on definition.

Can still be done, just have to know how and use the right stuff. There are others (Audeze if I recall correctly) that do glued pads.

I honestly am speechless, aside from being able to communicate my state.

There are a lot of more technical limitations that just don’t really change based on frequency response tweaks. However, tonality is a very big part, and you can often adjust a bad headphone quite a bit with EQ before you start getting distortion, and it really does turn into something good, though I’d argue it won’t get to great.

Ultimately, you can have 2 headphones that essentially measure the same, but still sound/present the sound quite differently.

The absolute best value approach in my opinion is to get a headphone in your budget with the best technical abilities/detail and presentation style that you want, and then “fix it” with EQ.

Most significant comment here. Preference, use case, expectations, what you’re used to - even just 1 or 2 of these can make or break a headphone experience.

Harman incorporates a dip in the upper bass-lower mids, which is part of where the 6X0 line gets it’s beloved vocal tonality/characteristic.

I personally don’t find Harman bad, but it’s not quite my actually preference. Tad bassy, tad lean /pulled back in the mids, and a tad sharp around 10-11k for my ears. It feels kind of like a step towards v-shaped/U-shaped, and I like my mids too much for that.

🥸

My recommendation is to tame expectations. Not saying it won’t be great, but it’s important to go into it as open-minded as possible, while knowing what matters to you, what your preferences are, etc.. there’s just so many subjective factors at play.

Better to be pleasantly surprised than overly wooed or even disappointed, and give your ears/brain a little time to adjust.

I’d say there’s a few primary factors at play, most of which folks have mentioned here. Neither of you are totally wrong, just maybe not considering or know the bigger picture.

1. everyone has slightly different hearing, and their ear/brain actually becomes accustomed to whatever they typically listen to. So, a different sound profile may sound wrong, even if it’s technically “right”. This is likely part of why your friend hears it as good, and you hear it is wrong - he’s used to it, whether it’s good or not.

2. game audio can’t often be trusted, given it isn’t nearly as high of a priority to make it neutral or natural, and compression for the sake of file size often plays a part. Ultimately, games vary a lot and the makers don’t necessarily have “studio” or “reference” audio gear in mind.

3. these beyers don’t play well with compression from my experience due to their treble peaks. To me, it made things sound harsh and digital in a way. They are also on the lean side for the vocal range, lacking things like “warmth”, “body”, and “fullness”.

You basically summed it up at the end. You have different taste and are likely accustomed to a different sound. The Sundaras are essentially the opposite from the 1-3kz region, with a notable dip/darkness to the mids.

Acclimation is huge for tunings like this. I have tried and enjoyed all kinds of tunings over the years, but in recent years, I greatly enjoy present mids, and have to EQ all Hifimans to truely enjoy them. I also have never found the mid hump of the clears or Elex to be that significant from a tuning perspective, but the combination of dynamic range and macro dynamics made the mids/vocals sort of attack you, making them feel more forward than they technically are.

Oh Elegias are way worse for the mids than the clears! This guy will break them if he listens…

I haven’t tried loads of stuff, but what I have tried, definitely goes against this.

Do you have any more pics of the overall case construction? Been thinking of making one for my southpaw FR4 sandwich board.

You do you my friend, but iems drove me nuts! Even some with good staging felt claustrophobic compared to even HD600. I’m sure with time I could get used to it though, and then the large staging would mess me up.

No I had the previous version for a while. Haven’t tried the stealth.

I absolutely love mine for CAD work and excel spreadsheets (and frankly everything…). I’m actually planning to get or mimic one for my work office with a quieter build, as I work 2 days at home and 3 in the office now. I hate the generic keyboard in the office currently…

It took a couple weeks to get properly proficient, but it feels so good now, and is much more seem-less/less hand movement. I’m essentially a presale engineer, and probably 90% of my work involves 2D AutoCad, some 3D Inventor, and Excel Spreadsheets.

I’m a right hander. This is the way.

Everyone’s ears are different! Glad you are enjoying them so much.

I certainly don’t completely disagree, as I’d say they really are one of the best under $500. However, I had a lot of issues with tonality (mids felt super sucked away/recessed, small, and dark), timbre, and comfort, but that’s kind of a side note. Tuning could be a plus for very specific music, but overall even for electronic it still was just “fine” to me - acceptable and on par or a hair better than the average headphone in this kind of price bracket. Where the XS seemed to shine was everything outside of tuning (and comfort haha).

Compared to something like the Ananda, it was immediate which one I preferred. I’m perhaps one of the few that would easily skip and XS and get the Ananda - no question. The price jump to the LCD-X does start to feel difficult. This is where I find diminishing returns to really start hitting hard…

Cheers!

I still think you’re a basshead… 😋 but nothing wrong with that!

Haha yep - that’s basshead territory for sure. As some others have pointed out, that’s around 2X the Harman target bass shelf, and to my ears, is unnatural and even at times, straight up overwhelming to me (and I LOVE good bass).

Cheers

I will note that as you’ve pointed out, music choice and mastering matters a lot here too. Orchestral stuff often doesn’t have a lot of info in the low end below let’s say 100hz, so for someone who likes a lot of that, I would expect a pretty massive increase to bring it to “normal” levels.

Dac and dac/amps can make a difference, it’s just not often that significant, or is hardly apparent at all. There are outlier comparisons though where it can be quite noticeable.

What would LEAD you to ask such a question? Have you been MEDDLING in other people’s business?

Sorry. It’s bad-pun-O’clock.

Any audible difference? I’d argue yes. However, it may be very minor, even to the point that you might not notice without knowing exactly what to listen for.

Many people in this community have done a poor job educating newcomers and learners on the difference and significance of sensitivity ratings and Impedance ratings for headphones. People just throw around vague terms like “hard to drive”.

Here’s a quick (imperfect) analogy I just came up with to start: sensitivity relates to horsepower and Impedance relates to torque… depending on the car/race type (headphone), you will benefit or need more of one or the other, but often horsepower is the first one we look at in most cases.

The generalized summary is that sensitivity rating will make a bigger impact on amp needs than impedance. Sensitivity rating is basically saying how loud the headphone is at a given power rating, so it’s the first thing you’ll notice. Low and high impedance do play a role in volume, but it’s much less impactful - it’s role more revolves around how well it’s driven at a given level and can react to sudden large demands from the driver (torque).

Short answer: Frequency response is not all. It’s a very, very important part that can tell a lot, but “technicalities” do matter and exist.

More Treble does not mean more detail. It MIGHT mean more perceived detail, but it’s not that simple. I’ve heard dark tuning headphones that absolutely resolved information better than some sharp ones and provided more texture and detail, despite it’s dark tuning.