Focal Celestee Review (Headphone)

[PeteL]

As for "bad samples", how the hell can one reviewer always be sent to many bad samples? And lets say it actually is a bad sample for whatever reason, this is actually terrible because it means these things are THAT common... That or everyone sending samples made sure they either bought theirs from some bum in an alleyway, or banged on the headphone a few times before sending it in.

Well, no manufacturers would on purpose design a headphone with this much difference between sides, and this headphone is a perfectly symmetrical design. So It have to be a bad sample. I agree with you this is actually terrible, but I don't think the point raised, that it was just badluck and that this doesn't tell the story. Quite the opposite, it raise the flag on Focal Quality control, and they rightfully should be criticized for it. Still it's logical to point that you wouldn't get the same thing on all, maybe next one it will be on the other side, that don't make it any better but it's obviously not part of Focal specifications!

 

[respice finem]

#81: Everybody (me too) is biased all day, every day, for so many reasons, in so many fields.
But then again, headphones can be "special", and stuff really happens.
Years ago, a Hi-Fi shop in Berlin: I tried a headphone, one channel sounded a bit "thin" to me (don't remember make/model any more, I didn't buy it, not important anyway, no cheapo). I consulted the salesman, he verified it and then pressed hard on the pad, which made a click, after this the "thin" channel went back to normal. So the pad was just a bit off, not visible from the outside. His comment: Happens with most from time to time. Oh well... What if it happens with drivers too?
I would really like to know, how consistent the production of those headphone drivers is, this is partly still a case of "manufacture", not the fully automatic production as in case of chips and such. These are small, fullband drivers and many things can go wrong, really.

 

[Racheski]

I guess it is because the left had bad seal.

Headphone Measurement bingo...

• There must have been a bad seal on the GRAS
• The unit has a manufacturing defect
• The unit was damaged during shipping
• Amir needs to modify the EQ

 

[respice finem]

Well, no manufacturers would on purpose design a headphone with this much difference between sides, and this headphone is a perfectly symmetrical design. So It have to be a bad sample. I agree with you this is actually terrible, but I don't think the point raised, that it was just badluck and that this doesn't tell the story. Quite the opposite, it raise the flag on Focal Quality control, and they rightfully should be criticized for it. Still it's logical to point that you wouldn't get the same thing on all, maybe next one it will be on the other side, that don't make it any better but it's obviously not part of Focal specifications!

The difficulty is how to obtain, say, three samples to test, optimally from different batches. If the manufacturer sends them, it instantly triggers the "golden sample" suspition. If I win the lottery I'll send them

Instinctively, I would not be very keen on EQing one channel, unless I can hear it's off (sadly I can't measure). And if I can't hear it (improbable if it's there), it kind of doesn't matter...

But wait: Maybe that's an idea to eliminate sample variation: There will be a few people on the Net with suitable gear, expertise and this type of headphones, one quick check and we know it. It's a big world...

 

[Racheski]

Well, no manufacturers would on purpose design a headphone with this much difference between sides, and this headphone is a perfectly symmetrical design. So It have to be a bad sample. I agree with you this is actually terrible, but I don't think the point raised, that it was just badluck and that this doesn't tell the story. Quite the opposite, it raise the flag on Focal Quality control, and they rightfully should be criticized for it. Still it's logical to point that you wouldn't get the same thing on all, maybe next one it will be on the other side, that don't make it any better but it's obviously not part of Focal specifications!

Or they just said eff it, we are going to sell these anyway despite the issue because we have exhausted our development budget on the Celestee.

 

[amirm]

Someone asked for clipping issue with Celestee that I found with Focal Clear. I tested for that but forgot to put in the review. It definitely does NOT have the same problem. As you turn up the volume, it starts to make ticking sounds which progressively gets worse. It is not like the scary nothing and them bam! problem that Clear has. And ticking sound occurs at very high volume levels. So really not an issue.

 

[amirm]

Also Amir:
RME:

I hear you all but I feel myself lucky just to get the RME DAC to produce sound. I am not going to navigate its menus to do EQ.

 

[respice finem]

The ticking noise warns the user about imminent hearing damage

 

[nhatlam96]

Regarding channel imbalances:
Don't for a single moment think that the same imbalance between drivers is nor will be present in any other Celestee.
Some brands do better in L-R imbalance of drivers than others.

channel imbalance in the new focal clear mg it seems that the new generation of focal headphones have issues with qc

 

[respice finem]

Here we go again with "manufacture"... And yes, QC issues, everybody is busy cost-cutting.

 

[Cahudson42]

everybody is busy cost-cutting.

No No..It's called: 'Value Engineering'..

For younger members who may not not be familiar, the VE idea. Goes like this:

'We are going to design and sell a product with an expected life of 10 years. Obviously, if we use components that last longer than 10 years, we are adding unnecessary cost to it's manufacture, and a higher price to the consumer. Any 'longer life' than 10 year components are going to be a complete waste. Therefore, for Value Engineering, always pick components with a life matching that of the product'..

I was actually taught this in the '60's. Started with GE, I think. Hopefully, not applied to today's GE aircraft turbofans.

Never was anything ever mentioned about the cost of failure, or the waste of scrapping the entire product after it's 'planned life'..

Foam speaker surrounds are a perfect example of the results of this type of thinking..

 

[respice finem]

And plain old greed is nowadays called "margin maximization"

 

[Tks]

I hear you all but I feel myself lucky just to get the RME DAC to produce sound. I am not going to navigate its menus to do EQ.

Don't worry bossman, I'm only pulling your leg, I had to say something sorta funny before the main portion my post since I'm always somehow finding myself writing pessimistic things that are probably annoying for people to always be reading.

Though on a serious note, I remember your first review of the RME where you seemingly want to smash something with how frustratingly bad you found the interface interaction to be. Tbh, I'm surprised to see you replaced the DX3 Pro with the RME given how much you detested trying to navigate or operate with the RME's functions.

Well, no manufacturers would on purpose design a headphone with this much difference between sides, and this headphone is a perfectly symmetrical design. So It have to be a bad sample. I agree with you this is actually terrible, but I don't think the point raised, that it was just badluck and that this doesn't tell the story. Quite the opposite, it raise the flag on Focal Quality control, and they rightfully should be criticized for it. Still it's logical to point that you wouldn't get the same thing on all, maybe next one it will be on the other side, that don't make it any better but it's obviously not part of Focal specifications!

I said that though? If you're not going to accept the line of reasoning that says this isn't bad luck, then this is most certainly a prevalent problem. Which begs the question of which is worse? Green-lighting a design with this much variance, or having QC so bad to not catch this as an unfortunate byproduct of QA tolerances not being up to snuff.

On a personal level, I must disclose I don't hold Focal to a high degree. To me they remind me of a slightly more approachable version of Devialet, and that company is straight dog-shit in my view. There has been constant problems over the past few years with drivers, crackling, the whole Massdrop pad replacement fiasco etc...

Also, their design doesn't strike me as something I like from a practical perspective. The cups look like "if it don't fit you, you're screwed". More of an aesthetic ordeal than some functional one given the articulation range of the headphones themselves given the design limits.. Finally, the price. This much money for dynamic driver driven headphones? I'm sorry but I fail to see what is SO distinguishing between the models. Like I'd have a bit more respect if they could produce something like a planar or something with allure beyond just somewhat eyecandy in terms of CNC milled portions. The higher end stuff seems the same but just using more exotic materials. What I expect is something much more substantial. Like when I see a Meze 99, versus their Empyrean, I personally feel I'm getting something completely different just on sight alone. With Focal I always have to wonder "well is it different enough, is the carbon fiber model sound better given that it's so expensive?".

They strike me as the Apple wanna-be of the headphone world to be perfectly honest. Which would be good if they could deliver on such.

 

[respice finem]

You're right about the price/performance misfit, without doubt. I'm worried about other established manufacturers taking the same path (BD, Sennheiser)... Perhaps it's the cost "overcontrolling", or worse, the "few are going to notice" attitude (pandemic), anyway, it isn't good.

 

[PeteL]

Don't worry bossman, I'm only pulling your leg, I had to say something sorta funny before the main portion my post since I'm always somehow finding myself writing pessimistic things that are probably annoying for people to always be reading.

Though on a serious note, I remember your first review of the RME where you seemingly want to smash something with how frustratingly bad you found the interface interaction to be. Tbh, I'm surprised to see you replaced the DX3 Pro with the RME given how much you detested trying to navigate or operate with the RME's functions.





I said that though? If you're not going to accept the line of reasoning that says this isn't bad luck, then this is most certainly a prevalent problem. Which begs the question of which is worse? Green-lighting a design with this much variance, or having QC so bad to not catch this as an unfortunate byproduct of QA tolerances not being up to snuff.

On a personal level, I must disclose I don't hold Focal to a high degree. To me they remind me of a slightly more approachable version of Devialet, and that company is straight dog-shit in my view. There has been constant problems over the past few years with drivers, crackling, the whole Massdrop pad replacement fiasco etc...

Also, their design doesn't strike me as something I like from a practical perspective. The cups look like "if it don't fit you, you're screwed". More of an aesthetic ordeal than some functional one given the articulation range of the headphones themselves given the design limits.. Finally, the price. This much money for dynamic driver driven headphones? I'm sorry but I fail to see what is SO distinguishing between the models. Like I'd have a bit more respect if they could produce something like a planar or something with allure beyond just somewhat eyecandy in terms of CNC milled portions. The higher end stuff seems the same but just using more exotic materials. What I expect is something much more substantial. Like when I see a Meze 99, versus their Empyrean, I personally feel I'm getting something completely different just on sight alone. With Focal I always have to wonder "well is it different enough, is the carbon fiber model sound better given that it's so expensive?".

They strike me as the Apple wanna-be of the headphone world to be perfectly honest. Which would be good if they could deliver on such.

OK, I guess I didn’t get your point. I fail to see what you are refering too, going trough the thread, I don’t read much praise and love for focal, it’s a unrecommended headphone, rightfully so with obvious Quality control issue, no green lighting here, all have been said is an other sample may be different, It is not a good thing. I get that you don’t like focal. I’m ok with this, mine sound good, I’m ok with the price I paid mine but I haven’t measured them, don’t know if they have issues but it doesn’t excuse the fact that these have. If anything, for what it’s worth, it’s a much more robust built than my Fostex th-x00, which broke and got replaced. Now I still see some bias in your rant, It became clearer with this honest and maybe justified second explanation. bias like “ when something goes well from asian manufacturers, we have accusation of golden samples” There may have been some isolated ones, I don’t remember everybodies post, but It’s definitely not the “pulse“ I get from this community, Actually I see Asian brands quite celebrated generally. By far the most compagny that have been bombarded with this nonsense is Schiit and they are not Asians, I seem to not get the same feel, but sure, there are irrational hate right left and center, I just don’t see it as generally targeted a single way

 

[vkvedam]

That says it all!

 

[ShiZo]

@amirm : Because you mentioned the Aeon RT: do you have maybe the Aeon 2 Noir in for review?

I've been wondering about that headphone.

 

[sarumbear]

Seems like this one's not recommended just due to the subjective test, so I'm skeptical.

You mean the huge difference between channels in the bass section is a subjective reason???

 

[concorde1]

You mean the huge difference between channels in the bass section is a subjective reason???

All right I stand corrected

 

[dmac6419]

It seems inferior to the AKG K371 that sells for 1/8th of the price

That's because it is