Since the topic has come up multiple times and I haven't seen some of the following points brought up, I'd like to mention a few things.
The O2 is probably the WORST meet headphone ever. Meets can be pretty difficult to form opinions on various gear because of the noise, time limit, mind exhaustion, and lack of proper approach to auditioning systems. If you go to a meet without music you knew very well, your opinions mean close to nothing IMO. You absolutely need to have reference to make comparisons. The O2 has the following going against it (which is why I call it the worst meet headphone):
1. Very open design. External noise does not get blocked out at all. This is the same as many other headphones though, so it shouldn't be a surprise to anyone here.
2. Accurate soundstaging. People want to be 'WOWd' at meets. A huge soundstage is one sure fire way to impress somebody, but it's not accurate.
3. Upper mids/lower highs that aren't accentuated. Again with the WOW factor. Most headphones are tipped up in this frequency range, so people will hear some meaningless forks and knifes in a live Sinatra recording and call a headphone 'detailed' because it's being shoved in their face. The sound is still there on the O2, it is just placed behind the music as it should be.
4. Lastly, and probably most critically, the O2 is a VERY picky headphone with regards to fit. The only headphone in the same class in this regard is the Qualia. You'd be surprised at how many people wear the O2's incorrectly at meets. And who can blame them? It's not exactly an automatic fitter like the R10. There are even senior members here who wear the O2's incorrectly and thus don't get a complete seal around the ear, which is everything. The thinner your face, the higher up you need to point the seems on the pads. As a meet goes on, the pads can be rotated pretty off from one another. I took my O2/717 to a local meet a year ago and many people loved it but there were a couple of people that didn't like it so much. I took that same setup to two local meets a few months ago and made sure these times that people were wearing them correctly and some of those same people were floored by the O2/717.
The LCD2 has #1-3 going against it if the impressions so far are accurate, so I'm just saying don't be surprised if people aren't amazed by them at CanJam. Expect lots of R10, HD800 and K1000 raving though. This is also why you shouldn't look at meet impressions as very important.
The most valuable impressions are by people who:
1. Have owned the gear for a while.
2. Have much experience with gear in the same or higher classes.
3. Don't rave about every new toy they get and don't exaggerate differences excessively.
No offense intended to anybody, but so far there is NOBODY in this thread that meet all three criteria simply because the LCD2 is still a new headphone. FWIW, most don't even pass #2/#3 IMO.
You want to know how the LCD2 really stacks up? Wait a couple more months. The true impressions will start rolling out and we'll be able to better judge where the LCD2 stands at that time. Has there ever been a new headphone that wasn't claimed to be better than multi thousand dollar systems near initial release only to be drastically less hyped half a year later?
There's a reason the O2 is constantly mentioned as a standard when new flagships come out. It has stood the test of time and is still extremely highly praised. That's the sign of a great headphone. A headphone that got released a day ago and is proclaimed as "better than the O2 that I heard at CanJam a year ago" is not. Those types of impressions hold no water and are a disservice to the potential buyer. People who own the O2 with a decent amp generally LOVE the combination as they get the proper experience to see what all the fuss is about. That's the sign of a great headphone. A headphone that people rant about during the first two months of ownership and later get bored with is not.
All that being said (sorry for the rant, this is my first serious post since HF remodeled, heh) I'm very interested in hearing the LCD2 and keep the impressions rolling in. Just do us all a favor: keep a level head and give your review context (what headphones that you've OWNED recently/currently are you comparing the sound signature of the LCD2 to, mention if you're using a different amp, etc.). Potential buyers, while I don't doubt the LCD2 are a very good headphone please keep in mind that virtually every headphone/gear that has come out in the last whatever years has been FOTM at some point. Learn how to read reviews/impressions; the person and their experiences are much more important than fancy writing and hype inducing text will ever be.
