Fit and Comfort

Seen above is the Audeze LCD-5 on a headphone stand that is actually a set of two artificial ears complete with soft-molded human ears and a couple of different adapters acting as the top of the head. This has been mounted on a tripod, which also showcases how headphones would look on a human head, with the artificial ears spaced ~20 cm apart. As with all headphones, getting a good fit and seal is crucial, so make sure to properly use the various sizing options and pivoting points of the headband and ear cups. In this case, the extensive movement in all three axes allows the LCD-5 to be placed directly over your ears no matter the size and shape of your head. The new headband, which has been the default for the LCD-5 as of the Dec 2021 production batch, also addresses what was an uncomfortable clamping force for larger heads, and it's not a case where smaller heads will now find it loose, either. My average-sized head noticed a minor change, but for the better as it allowed for the LCD-5 to be worn for longer periods of time. As you stretch the ear cups to go over your ears, the suspension headband stretches, which separates the leather band from the carbon fiber headband and now provides further support for your head as it contours around the top, and the ventilation holes prevent any hot spots from building up.

One thing many reviews omitted is that you need to take more care when actually putting these over your head since the flexible nature of the yoke rods in this assembly can result in one or both sides coming in at an angle rather than going straight down the side. The antenna-like yoke rods have the secondary function of showing whether the headphones are vertically aligned—just make sure the yoke rods point up directly! The highly contoured ear pads, which almost seem triangular in nature, still are the biggest thing to get used to here. The contact surface area being lower, a lot of your ears and cheeks are free-er than before, and the LCD-5 ear cups will feel larger than they actually are. These are otherwise quite small compared to the average set of over-ear headphones, and all the mass savings resulting in a 420 g unit before the cable make the LCD-5 one of the most comfortable headphones once you get used to the ear pads. Sound isolation isn't much of a thing on these open-back headphones, however. Those around you are likely to get a second-hand listen of whatever you are listening to, so it's best used in a quiet environment.

Audio Performance

Audio Hardware

I mentioned that the LCD-5 is effectively re-engineered from the group up to where it has an all-new design on the outside. All the various changes come together to make it a lighter, tighter set of headphones to address the biggest complaint many had with Audeze headphones: weight. But there are plenty of updates to the drivers, too. The LCD-5 is still a set of planar magnetic headphones, as with the rest of Audeze's LCD line-up. If you are curious about how planar magnetic drivers generally work and differ from standard dynamic drivers, take a look at the equivalent section on this page. We still have Neodymium N50 Fluxor magnets and Fazors as with the LCD-XC, but as evidenced by the newly designed Fazor waveguides to make the most of the new diaphragm and voice coil, things have been tweaked further.

This is my first experience with an Audeze flagship, and a flagship planar driver typically has one of the thinnest diaphragms out there to allow for a lower moment of inertia, increased responsiveness to the same magnetic field strength, and a faster transient response compared to a thicker one. The LCD-5 gets Audeze's nano-scale diaphragm that is all of 500 nm (0.5 µm) thick, compared to the ~1.8 µm in the LCD-X and LCD-XC for further context, and it's in the realm of nanomaterials I deal with daily in my lab. The diaphragm, which is really a thin film at this point, also has an ultra-low dielectric constant, effectively being an insulator with low mass high elasticity on top to further those aforementioned aspects. On top is a new patent-pending voice coil implementation Audeze calls a Parallel Uniforce, which builds upon the Uniforce voice coil developed in 2015, whereby the width of conductive traces matches the magnetic field strength for a uniform magnetic force over the voice coil. This new Parallel Uniforce voice coil again has traces of variable width, but breaks a larger conductive trace up into multiple varying width nano-scale parallel traces for more granularity in the matching of trace width with magnetic field strength. The takeaway is that the new technology further goes down the road of ensuring the entire, smaller 90-mm-sized diaphragm responds as uniformly as possible no matter the magnet orientation and placement. The magnets are actually now single-sided to further help reduce headphone mass, which is a further challenge to get right, and has the new Fazors working better as actual wave guides to tone down unwanted resonances in combination with the new ear pads.

For those who simply want to know what it takes to drive the LCD-5, things are not that different from the likes of the LCD-2 Classic and LCD-X (2021). Ultimately, it's still a typical planar driver set of headphones as it has a low rated impedance of just 14 Ω paired with a low sensitivity of 90 dB/mW. This has the LCD-5 consume more current to get to the desired SPL rather than purely depending on Vrms, and make sure that your source is not very current-limited when it outputs ~500 mW to 1 W of power at ~14–16 Ω. To get to 110 dB transients, for example, you would need 100 mW (1.2 V, 85 mA), which quickly increases to 1 W (3.75 V, 267 mA) for those who somehow feel 120 dB transient spikes are necessary. Audeze rates 5 W as the maximum before the drivers are damaged, so stay away from extreme powerhouses and integrated amplifiers. I'll have a source-pairing section further down, but rest assured that the LCD-5 is primarily intended for indoor desk use.

Frequency Response Measurement and Listening

I will mention that I have a general preference for a warm-neutral signature emphasizing a slightly elevated bass and smooth treble range with detailed mids and good tonal separation. I also generally prefer instrumental music over vocals, with favored genres including jazz and classical music.


Our current headphones test setup uses a set of two custom in-ear microphones for the two channels. These microphones closely adhere to the IEC711 class, but have been tweaked to be more reliable in the >10 kHz frequency range that was the issue with my previous setup, which is still very good and will continue to be used for IEMs and earphones. Two soft silicone pinnae are installed on the sides, separated by a distance matching my head, and multiple "height" adapters have been 3D-printed for further customization based on fit and head size and shape. Each set of microphones has an XLR output I separately adapted to 3.5 mm. I used a transparent source, the JDS Labs Element II, for measurements after confirming it was not a bottleneck, and a variety of other sources I will discuss later were also used for listening.

This artificial head simulator feeds the microphone lines into a reference USB sound card, which in turn goes to a laptop that has ARTA and REW running. I begin with an impulse measurement to test for signal fidelity, calibrate the sound card and channel output, account for floor noise, and finally test the frequency response of each channel separately. Octave smoothing is at the 1/12th setting, which nets a good balance of detail and noise not being identified as useful data. Also, the default tuning was used for testing, and no app or program-based EQ settings were chosen unless specifically mentioned. Each sample of interest is tested thrice with separate mounts to account for any fit issues, and an average is taken of the three individual measurements for statistical accuracy. The raw data is then compensated based on a custom curve created after having worked with Crinacle from In-Ear Fidelity to get measurements with this setup on par with a GRAS 043AG industry-standard measurement rig, especially by accounting for the slightly different pinna gain here compared to the KEMAR anthropometric pinna there.


As per usual, you can find my headphone frequency response measurements on VSG.squig.link, along with all the earphone measurements. Scroll to the bottom and choose different targets there, including two from Harman Kardon developed after years of R&D. The Harman 2018 over-ear target in particular is a reference curve many headphone makers aim for now, but I find it too bass-boosted. As such, I am opting for the Harman 2018 curve with the bass target from the Harman 2013 curve, which is what is being referred to as the "Harman Combined" target there.

The first thing I did once measurements were taken was to check for channel consistency, as this is the most expensive Audeze ever and most expensive set of headphones reviewed here to date. Hand-matched drivers are thus expected, and Audeze does measure and match channels for its headphones in addition to performing a burn-in check prior to shipping the headphones. I have left and right channel measurements on both the old and new headbands, which you can take a look at in my measurements database if interested, and seen above are the results on the older headband. Channel matching is excellent throughout the relevant 20 Hz to 20 kHz range. Indeed, even past the coupler resonance point, the two channels line up so well that there is zero perceived difference even when specifically listening for it. The next thing of note is that the newer headband has the tiniest of decreased sub-bass extension owing to the lower clamping force, but it's not felt in person. In fact, it makes the set more balanced overall, although some of the treble differences are measurement artifacts. The takeaway is that the new headband is well worth the small hassle of swapping over and shipping the old one back for the added comfort, as there are no real differences to the sound signature. Nicely done on both counts, Audeze!

As far as the actual sound signature goes, this is quite unlike any other Audeze I've heard to date. Granted, I have not heard anything more expensive than the LCD-X and XC (2021), but even a cursory examination of comparisons from those who love the Audeze house sound and have the LCD-3 or LCD-4 will confirm that the LCD-5 is a unique beast. To say it is mid-forward would be fair, which results in the LCD-5 being one of the most unique flagships out there. It's also incredibly detailed, almost too detailed at times, but that is what makes the LCD-5 a true monitoring set for the various award winning music composers and recording artists who have personally endorsed this set. The bass response is a clear case of quality over quantity, and where many may find the LCD-5 relatively tame. There is excellent extension all the way down, but with a noticeable dip from the lower mids to where those wanting the Audeze bass slam for electronic music may be disappointed with the out-of-the-box experience. In my case, I was more blown away by actually picking out the guitar picks on bass guitar strings, which I didn't even know was possible. Snare drums had the sticks occasionally scraping against the drum surface in a few tracks, another thing I wasn't expecting, or wanted. Notes decay quickly, with trailing edges not leaving anything behind before the new leading edges come in to occupy the space. The LCD-5 is a fast set of headphones! There is a lot of detail and contrast inside a small space, which makes everything vivid when it comes to rock music in particular, and heavy metal is a close second in synergy. It felt as though the band was playing for me personally in a well-treated room, which is the highest of compliments I can give headphones.

Indeed, the soundstage is not very wide despite the engineering making it seem otherwise. This is a double-edged sword since the obvious issue of everything remaining intimate remains, perhaps too much so for many. Yet those with trained ears or looking to pick up any recording errors for their work will absolutely relish it. This combined with the pinpoint-precise imaging makes the LCD-5 a midhead's dream. Channel separation is flawless, and not only are instrument classes easily distinguishable as even similar instruments are easily resolved from one another. A mix of vocals and instruments is also easily handled; there is simply range galore to where even forward-facing vocals don't hold back instruments in some cases. I was also happy to see pinna gain accounted for in the upper mids, but am surprised to see people say the LCD-5 is the only Audeze with pinna gain since the LCD-XC (2021) does this as well. Regardless, this has female vocals and many instrument fundamentals sound realistic and natural. It's about perfect for my particular HRTF preferences too, but may be worth boosting slightly with EQ for those who prefer listening to the likes of opera music and are looking for that high note.

EQ is what makes the LCD-5 go from good to possibly the world's best headphones on the market today, which is a shame since so many users are against the practice of equalization, claiming it hurts the technical performance of headphones. I'll also say that those who believe that cables tangibly effect the sound signature will find the copper cable leaving little room to improve upon for the bass response. Audeze has a first-party EQ solution in the Reveal+ plug-in, and an established music artist is passionately working on generating a Reveal+ LCD-5 profile as we speak. Some user-generated EQ profiles are already available, but my general recommendation would be a +3 dB bass shelf starting from 200 Hz going down, a slight dip at 1 KHz to keep some female vocals from being too forward and potentially nasal-sounding, and a lot more work in the treble region. Distortion is ultra-low and the impedance curve across the frequency range linear, making it amenable to EQ without any practical change to the level of ridiculous detail retrieval. Someone I know personally put out an hour of electronic and trance music recently and asked me to check it out, which was excellent timing to listen with the LCD-5 before and after EQ. There is oodles of bass slam here with EQ, and you could go beyond my suggested +3 dB as needed if you want to nod your head at ~120–130 beats per minute to match the music genres prioritizing sub-bass.

The vast majority of LCD-5 measurements I have seen from reputable sources indicate a dark treble response, with my sample being no different. There are some which measured near-perfectly to my tastes, including for target adherence, but it would be fair to say there isn't much energy in the higher frequencies. This is possibly the biggest issue for me out of the box, even more than the potential bass response miss since I would have loved to see the likes of jazz music and classical music get their due on the most resolving set I have ever heard. The LCD-5 isn't necessarily a laid back set to begin with, with the fast transients and detail making it hard to chill out for longer periods of time, and the darker treble response makes it even somewhat harder to engage with string instruments for me. The LCD-5 timbre could be used as an example of planar magnetic timbre in a dictionary, though. It borders on metallic without being disappointing, while still being very smooth in the mids, which remains the highlight here. Once again, EQ is what changed my opinion of this region. A few filters via Equalizer APO created room for layers in complex musical tracks to come off quite well-rendered now—think faster classical music, such as Flight of the Bumblebee. String instruments now were spectacular. I am eager to see what the Reveal+ plug-in will do here with both an EQ profile and a personalized HRTF, or even just the Roon profiles that are EQ-only.

Source Pairing

Most of my listening with the LCD-5 was with transparent sources that do not color the sound signature in any way, including the aforementioned JDS Labs Element II and some DAC/amp stacks, such as the budget-friendly Topping E50/L50 or even higher-end FiiO K9 Pro ESS (review coming soon). I did try out a few premium DACs and amplifiers as well, with a local audio store having some Chord sources, including the Hugo TT2 and Dave, and R-2R DACs, such as the Denafrips Ares II. Honestly, DACs did not make a big difference once past a certain threshold. Now, a preamp and amplifier is where things are different, though. A combination I wasn't expecting to be as amazing going in was a hybrid amplifier with a tube preamp stage, the ridiculous $15K HIFIMAN EF1000, paired with a DAC that has volume control. It added some warmth to the mid-bass in particular, and the added harmonics play favorably for instrumental music, too. I imagine warmer sources in general, such as other hybrids or tube pre-amplifiers, will go well with the LCD-5 thus, but I have none here to try out.

Comparisons

Given I alluded to this before, here's evidence that the LCD-5 isn't the only Audeze with pinna gain. Indeed, I pointed as much out in my review of the excellent LCD-XC, which remains the best closed-back set I have listened to thus far. The new 2021 driver and ear pad updates were more in its favor than the more popular open-back twin, the LCD-X (2021). The latter came in separately for coverage, so keep an eye out for that, and we see how the LCD-X is older-school Audeze with no upper mids presence, while the LCD-XC borders on being overly bright in a fun way, and the LCD-5 is the more balanced tuning. I omitted the LCD-2 Classic, which is the warmest of the lot and not in the same playing field technically. The LCD-5 is a more mature take on the LCD-X overall, and of course out-resolves everything else by a country mile.


The most obvious comparison to make would be with the flagship HIFIMAN Susvara (review coming soon), another open-back, over-ear planar magnetic set with a nano-scale diaphragm and novel magnet system. The Susvara costs an eye-watering $6,000, at least if you were naive enough to purchase it at MSRP. It's ~6 years in the tooth now and can easily be had for less than the MSRP of the LCD-5 from dealers by simply asking for a discount they will mostly all agree to. I have been in the enviable position to have both sets for a long period of time, which obviously had me compare them. The Susvara is very likely the best-tuned headphone on the market today, save perhaps the $60K Sennheiser HE-1 electrostatic system. It has undeniable presence in the low and mid frequencies, the characteristic HIFIMAN 1 kHz dip that somewhat detracts from things, and a fantastic treble response the LCD-5 can't best for the vast majority of genres. It also requires immense amounts of power to provide the same level of satisfaction as the LCD-5 is capable of with even some powerful portable sources, such as the iFi micro iDSD Signature I have here, and technically, I keep shifting from it being a wash to the LCD-5 nudging ahead. The Susvara has a spiral soundstage that is at times wide and right next to your ears at others, but the LCD-5 is consistently narrow in this regard. Imaging is fantastic on both, timbre is as good as it gets on the Susvara for planar drivers, and the LCD-5 is more resolving in my opinion. The Susvara absolutely works to its best capabilities without needing any EQ, and it is once again EQ that puts the LCD-5 in contention, if not besting it. Build quality is about on par for both, as is customer support and the warranty, and the LCD-5 has a better cable, but the Susvara does come with 2–3 sets of cables and increased aftermarket cable compatibility. The Susvara is a better all-rounder, with the LCD-5 superior at some things and not so much at others. This is an extremely personal decision, but for my preferences, I would pick the HIFIMAN Susvara if I also had the extra cash for a powerful source. Otherwise, the LCD-5 wins by default!


Outside of the Susvara, there remain several other contenders at around the same or even higher price points than the LCD-5, including the Focal Utopia, which I heard briefly at the aforementioned audio store and was extremely impressed by, T+A Solitaire P planar headphones I wasn't too enamored with, and of course the Sennheiser HE-1, which is a statement piece more than a set of headphones for anyone. I can't compare these to the LCD-5 based purely on memory, and will instead point to a few other expensive headphones I have listened to alongside the LCD-5, including the $3,500 HIFIMAN HE1000se, $5,500 HIFIMAN HE-R10 planar version (reviews coming soon), and $2,000 Meze Audio LIRIC. All three are planar headphones, with the latter two closed-back sets, and there is no world where I would get any of these over the Audeze LCD-5. I'd save up more money and get the LCD-5, even as a barely used set from a forum classified, and then spend $2,000 on the LIRIC that is already far beyond a simple purchasing decision. The LCD-5 is also better-tuned than all three and bests all but the HE1000se technically, which is another detail boss, but has a wide soundstage.


Last but certainly not least, I was reminded by a reader that my frequency response of the LCD-5 was quite close to that recorded for the Sennheiser HD 650, which has on TechPowerUp been covered in its Drop x Sennheiser HD 6XX iteration. The HD 650 is one of very few headphone to have lasted the test of time, and the HD 6XX makes it all the more accessible at the ~$200 price point. It is also far more likely that our readers have heard it before, at least over those mentioned above, and thus, the comparison helps put the Audeze LCD-5 in more context. Indeed, I'd say the LCD-5 is a higher-resolution take on the HD 650 with more quantity and quality of bass and mids while still needing some work in the higher frequencies. It's also technically far superior in most regards, but both have the relatively narrow soundstage.