This will probably change over time, as I find mental burn-in to be a very real phenomenon. My very early impressions of the LCD-X are as follows. For your reference, I have been listening almost exclusively to the Focal Elex for over a week: 1) Hello sub-bass. Welcome to headphones. These things handle low frequencies very well, without being muddy/sloppy with it. Attack/decay is still pretty good. The DT1990 has a great textured thumpy bass, but with less extension and more mid-bass emphasis. 2) Vocals sound odd. Non-electronic genres sound kind of wrong in timbre. I hate spiky treble, and had to EQ the 1990's down between 7-8k in order to tolerate them. But the LCD-X seems a bit to the opposite extreme, in that they sound veiled. The whole sound feels lacking in air/presence. Based on my reading, this must be even more pronounced on the LCD-2's vs. the more neutral LCD-X. 3) Dynamics are impressive compared to the majority of the headphones I have owned. However, there is a notable step down from the Focals on this front. On a few recordings, that actually makes the LCD-X sound better, as the Focals expose oddities in the macro-dynamics of recordings. On something like Daft Punk's album Homework, the Focal's really shine in comparison, with the exception of low bass. 4) LCD-X handles louder volumes better than the DT1990 and especially better than the Elex. With the DT1990, the brightness limits enjoyment with increasing volume. With the Elex, there is just something unrefined about the sound that comes out with increasing volume, and it becomes too aggressive of a sound. Maybe it is the relative darkness of the sound signature with the LCD-X that makes it seem like more volume is needed to enjoy fully. Will experiment. I need a more time to come up with anything of value. I want to experiment with Sonarworks, as I have heard good things about use with the LCD-X. The Elex sounds like garbage with Sonarworks IMO, so will have to see if it helps with these.