So I am fortunate enough to have some good equipment on hand over Christmas vacation! This includes the Cavalli LAu, Abyss and # 16 Code-X. I also have the AGD M6, Vali and my open D7000's for reference.

Long story short, Luis knocked it out of the park. I was able to get #16 early because I was good with keeping the original HiFiMan connectors. Apparently that shaves a shit load of wait time off and allows Luis to expedite the rest of the process.





The Code-X is the best I've heard period. Yes, it's as neutral as all get-up, but that's not what does it for me. It's a very transparent, detailed and clear sounding headphone. Why I like it more than the Abyss is because it presents a fuller, more cohesive image. It has a nicer, smoother treble. The overall timbre is more natural sounding. Bass levels are less than the Abyss, but it's all there. Enough to keep me happy. The Code-X played well with the three amps I had on hand. The Abyss seemed like it was more dependent on amp synergy than the Code-X. Lastly, it's also a great deal more comfortable as you would expect.

Fit and finish is excellent. I love the wood with the classic matte finish. The ear pads are luxurious and a pleasure to wear.

Thank you Luis!

Nice!

I must add that they are a bit demanding to drive... Power-wise. They syngerize well with most amps sound-wise, but for their full potential/detail and control... So far my 2A3 drives them best, followed by Auralic Taurus and then (my late) ZDSE. Would love to give them a go with Mjölnir and LAu, but that ain't likely to happen in the coming year...

/V

FWIW, I've really enjoyed these with (in no particular order) the Liquid Glass, LAu, AGD M6 and even the Vali. The Abyss is harder to drive, which was exemplified by comparison on the Vali. The Abyss benefitted more from use with the full size amps than did the Code-X and required more volume as well.

BTW, these are still my "go-to" headphones. The honeymoon's not over yet!

How do these compare to the Paradox?

So this is where the Code-X thread is...the title had me confused

Anyway I have had the Code-X in my possession for a little over a week.  I thought it was time for me to give some impressions.

I was planning on comparing them with my HE-5 but there is really no contest.  The Code-X improves on the HE-5 in almost every way possible.  Just picture a smoother, more natural sounding HE-5 and you are pretty much there.  The bass is tighter and more well defined.  It adds a nice extra grunt to some vocals/instruments that I seriously missed when I switched to the HE-5 or HD800. 

As with the bass, the mids are again improved over stock.  It has a beautiful, seductive quality that I find really appealing.  There is a richness and fullness to the vocals with the HE-5 that I really like when compared with the HD800.  With the Code-X the vocals become even smoother and more natural sounding.

I don't think the treble has benefited as much as the other areas from the Code-X treatment.  HE-5 really fall down in treble heavy passages with multiple strings/cymbals playing...basically they turn into a sizzly mess.  The Code-X has taken away some of the fizz of an S in vocals.  Still not perfect though.  Obviously you can't blame Luis for this as it is already a huge shortcoming of the HE-5 specifically (and ortho's more generally). 

The only two negatives compared with HE-5 are soundstage and comfort.  Personally I find the pads to be less comfortable than the velours that are on my HE-5.  I think this could have something to do with the clamping pressure but I don't want to mess around with them because they aren't mine (yet).  Soundstage of the Code-X is more intimate and forward sounding compared with the HE-5.  Left to right is narrower however layering and depth are a big improvement.  My guess is that is due to the angled pads but it could also partly be due to less diffuse imaging/less treble with the Code-X.  In my HD800 experiments I have found this to give the illusion of a larger soundstage.


Alright on to the big guns, how do the Code-X compare with the HD800 (stock)?

Let's get this out of the way right now...the Code-X is not the HD800.  Ultimate resolving ability just isn't there for me.  There is a lot of information that is missing.  Imaging on the Code-X is less precise and the soundstage is quite closed in.  No surprises here.

But...I really missed them when I didn't have them for a day!  There is something about the organic quality of these headphones which really draws me in when listening to certain types of music.  They don't give me that spooky realistic quality that the HD800 do, but vocals and bass sound soo good I can overlook it.  There is a physical presence to the Code-X vocals that is really addicting.  I almost never listen to music with vocals and the Code-X has made me crave more vocals.  It is all I have been listening to since I got them.

They do pretty well on some of my old jazz stuff, but with orchestral stuff they really fall apart.  Again, no surprise the HD800 is better here.  I even think the stock HE-5 are better for some classical because of the greater soundstage width.

Overall vs HD800.  Code-X has a more intimate soundstage, more body, and better physical presence (grunt) in the bass and vocals.  Mids are slightly forward, but not excessively.  The vocals are insanely seductive.  Code-X Plankton retrieval is significantly lower.  HD800 treble has much better definition and an overall smoother presentation.  Again this is all RELATIVE to the HD800 and not in an absolute sense.


Conclusion time..HD800's aren't going anywhere, but the Code-X will be joining the stable as a worthy altern ative.  Congrats to Luis on crafting the only headphone that has lured me away from the HD800.  When I am listening to the Smith's or Velvet Underground I know which can's will be on my head.

The more I listen to the Code-X the more I like them.  It is really a pity that they can't be produced in large quantities because I know they would be a huge seller.  I like them a heck of a lot more than any almost any other headphone I have listened to.

After adding in the PWDmk2 instead of the Sabre based Anedio D2 the treble has really improved.  To the point where I think it is less annoying than the stock HD800.  When I listen to the Code-X back to back with the HD800 it is pretty clear that the HD800 are ahead in detail.  That doesn't mean the Code-X are slouches in this category.  The HD800 are able to portray an unbelievable amount of microdynamic detail in vocal inflections and other small dynamic changes that aren't there with the Code-X.  It is the type of thing that you wouldn't really notice unless you were very familiar with the test tracks or doing back to back comparisons.

Other than the lower relative resolution I honestly don't hear that much difference between the HD800 and the Code-X.  The Code-X does seem overall more well balanced than the stock HD800.  If you like the HD800 but want some ortho bass Code-X is a no brainer.

I have also come to regret stating that they fall apart on orchestral stuff.  They really don't in absolute terms.  Compared with the HD800 yes...but with the PWDmk2 I don't have any problems listening to a wide variety of music.  This tells me they are probably slightly system sensitive to treble issues.  Bass and mids didn't really change that much.

They really are fantastic and comparing with the HE560, LCD3, HE5, HE500 they are head and shoulders above for me.

Not entirely sure why I am bothering to add my comments about these since they are pretty much unobtanium at this point (unless you can find a pair of HE-5s).  If you have the means, I would highly recommend you pick them up.