I think Amir is right in not recommending the LCD-X. While it may be true that Audeze is sacrificing FR for other important parameters, people judge audio gear out-of-the-box with some time allowed for break-in as necessary. They don't expect to have to learn EQ, even if it is made easy, to make their purchase shine.
The problem is that a lot of retailers I spoke with when doing my purchase research either don't know, or feign they don't, that the cans need EQ correction, most likely to avoid discouraging sales. Customers buy the X's expecting great sound and are inevitably disappointed, if not feel downright misled.
Some reviewers discuss it but others don't, leading to confusion. It's hard enough to differentiate among the various Audeze models. Audeze is lucky to have an exceptional product and enough people willing to EQ to make it a business.
I love my X's. I've never had better headphones and have stayed up nights because I can't put them down they sound so real and musical. But then I understand EQ and love doing it, particularly because to get the most out of often less than stellar recordings you have to EQ.
I would venture that a majority of consumers just want to enjoy the music without having to tinker with EQ. If Amir were to recommend the X's without a caveat he'd lose credibility. If he were to recommend them conditionally he would be criticized for endorsing a product that needs consumer intervention to work as advertised.
There's too much misleading and shading of truth in the audio industry. There's no point contributing to it.