[Monsterzero]

Looking to pick-up my first pair of LCD-2s and im kinda torn as to which version 2.0/2.1/2.2/2.2f/2.3f is the one to get.

Ive read many saying that 2.2 pre-fazor is excellent,read that fazor brings down the bass,and they lose their "magic darkness"

And then read that the 2016 version of fazor is best yet....

Any Audeze experts care to chime in,please do,im all ears

 

[RMac]

I'd be interested in knowing this too.  Looks like you have the 2.2 Pre Fazor, how is it?

 

[Monsterzero]

Its nice. ...warm sounding with rolled off highs,which works very well with older recordings,and poorly recorded new stuff.

The sub bass extension is incredible too!

Theyre my go to cans for blues and trance,however im actually selling them so I can afford something new.I prefer headphones with a bit more forwardness in the midrange area.

 

[Zero115]

I'm also very curious about this. I decided I want to take the plunge and invest in a good set of planar magnetic's, I listen to mostly electronic genre's, and hear never ending praise about the warmth and "Audeze bass" of the pre-fazor models, which makes them sound perfect, but I'd really rather buy new, and I seem to see a lot of people saying the newer revisions are missing that warmth that Audeze was known for. Are the fazor version cans really that much worse in the low end department?

 

[Tekk83]

I absolutely love my lcd X for electronic music. It's the 2016 model so with favor. I also have lcd 3 fazor but didn't like it as much for electronic. Seems a bit more closed in and warmer. Not as airy and fast with my tube amp.

 

[TWerk]

I had both fazor and non-fazored together and preferred the fazored ones.
 
Fazor one had better imaging, more defined sound, seemed like there was more resolution, just overall the more impressive headphone, more treble extension too. Not that the difference is massive, but it is there and I agree the fazored one is the better one.