Focal Celestee Review (Headphone)

[milosz]

I guess I don't get it... Speaking of my sealed Neumann KH310 A, all seems sealed.

So, if you took your Neuman KH310A to Denver, the cones would be pushed out by the sea-level air pressure sealed inside the enclosure?

Neuman is based in Berlin, which is 112 feet above sea level. Denver is at an altitude of 5,280 feet. There is a difference of about 2.5 PSI in air pressure between the two locations. If those Neuman speakers were actually sealed, as in totally gas tight, the air pressure inside the enclosure could be 2.5 PSI higher than the air in a room in Denver, and this would result in a force of about 125 lbs pressing on the woofer cone from inside the enclosure, this would SURELY force the woofer cone to stick OUT, probably pop the tweeter diaphragm as well. And what about transporting those speakers as air cargo? There's a difference or 10.3 PSI between air pressure in Berlin and air pressure at 30,000 ft. in an unpressurized cargo plane. The speakers would explode! Think of 10 pounds pressing on every inch of the inside of the enclosure... an 8 inch woofer has a cone area or about 50 square inches, at 10 PSI that would be 500 pounds of force acting on that cone- that would NOT be ok.

There **HAS** to be a way for all sealed enclosure speakers to equilibrate their internal pressure to whatever ambient atmospheric pressure they find themselves in.

 

[respice finem]

There **HAS** to be a way for all sealed enclosure speakers to equilibrate their internal pressure to whatever ambient atmospheric pressure they find themselves in.

You are quoting my answer to another person's post, but anyway - so maybe they would explode, the main question was, calculated vent or not, and this has clearly been answered. I wasn't negating the general need for adjusting to barometric pressure.

 

[Maiky76]

Hi,

Here are some thoughts about the EQ.
Notes about the EQ design:

• The average L/R is used to calculate the score.
• The resolution is 12 points per octave interpolated from the raw data (provided by @amirm)
• A Genetic Algorithm is used to optimize the EQ.
• The EQ Score is designed to MAXIMIZE the Score WHILE fitting the Harman target curve with a fixed complexity.
  This will avoid weird results if one only optimizes for the Score.
  It will probably flatten the Error regression doing so, the tonal balance should be more neutral.
• The EQs are starting point and may require tuning (certainly at LF).
• The range above 10kHz is usually not EQed unless smooth enough to do so.
• I am using PEQ (PK) as from my experience the definition is more consistent across different DSP/platform implementations than shelves.
• With some HP/amp combo the boosts and preamp gain need to be carefully considered to avoid issues

Good L/R match except at LF

I have generated one EQ, the APO config files are attached.
Quite a bit of work required.

Score no EQ: 73.6
Score Armirm: 86.9
Score with EQ: 95.4

Focal Celestee APO EQ Score 96000Hz
March302021-180155

Preamp: -7.9 dB

Filter 1: ON PK Fc 46.5 Hz Gain 2.45 dB Q 2
Filter 2: ON PK Fc 356 Hz Gain 1.11 dB Q 1.61
Filter 3: ON PK Fc 1844 Hz Gain -3.23 dB Q 0.78
Filter 4: ON PK Fc 2240 Hz Gain 4.33 dB Q 5
Filter 5: ON PK Fc 3707 Hz Gain 5.77 dB Q 4
Filter 6: ON PK Fc 4100 Hz Gain 4.95 dB Q 5
Filter 7: ON PK Fc 6731 Hz Gain 3.67 dB Q 5
Filter 8: ON PK Fc 9911 Hz Gain 5.5 dB Q 5
Filter 9: ON PK Fc 13270 Hz Gain -10.5 dB Q 3.42

 

[Rja4000]

It can, but too few frequency bands, it's rather "shelving-style" EQ - thus I'm EQing my BD T1 via foobar2000.

It's the same in Dual mode than in normal mode, as far as I know.
At least, on the Pro, it is.
So that's B+T + 5 bands full parametric
And each parametric band, it defaults to "peak" EQ (except for first and last, where you have shelf or filter as well)

 

[gazzington78]

What this techie says to me is buy a k371 and a dc noire and have a very a good planar and a decent dynamic headphone

 

[rcmo]

Hi,

Here are some thoughts about the EQ.

Can you optimize for a 5 band PEQ (RME)?

Thanks.

 

[welsh]

I actually like those kind of conclusions, like, I’m not fully sure what’s wrong, but doesn’t put a smile on my face. It should tell us all that there is still room for more data for science to fully assess performance, and also that taste is still a thing and it’s ok to trust it, this hobby s still about enjoyment.

It’s two strikes for expensive focals now. and with some admittance that “conclusion is not without reservation”. Truth is, we are, I believe, all a bit biased, even the most objectivists.

Me personally, I don’t buy Uber expensive headphones, but my Focal Elex was always for me the “correct” headphone. It has a frequency response quite close to the Clear. Still lately it got less and less listening hours.

Now I do have other stuff that I like, my fostex TH-X00, get’s quite a bit of time on my head, even tough, I tought it’s slightly boomy, but it’s not just about the bass, I really like the Grados sr325 tonality, where it’s bass thin. Begs the question is “tonality” and frequency response fully synonymous?

In fact, could there be something about paper drivers? Both those sets of cans use paper, still their response are quite different. Focal use metal drivers. But what about that if it doesn’t show, at least not clearly, in a frequency response graph?

My closed-back ‘phones are Audeze Sine and Audeze LCD Closed. The Sines are discontinued, which is a shame as they are quite exciting and dynamic (they are my go-to ‘phones for playing guitar). Early versions of the LCD Closed were all over the shop (they used the wrong damping material) but the current ones suit me (I like ‘dark’ ‘phones, probably wouldn’t like Focal). I’ve just ordered AKG 371, they seem like a no-brainer for the money.

 

[Helicopter]

Thanks Amir. I am definitely looking forward to listening to them since the objective part looks so good. They probably match the target curve better than anything here. With the channel mismatch, I am fortunate to have excellent measurements if I decide I want to figure out asymmetrical EQ.

Assuming they have the same springs as the Clear, I am surprised you found them uncomfortable. I love the feel of Clear and can wear them for hours hardly noticing them.

I can weigh them when they are back here if you boxed them up, or don't want to bother with it. I have proper gear and expertise for that particular measurement here.

 

[respice finem]

A "loose thought" about the channel mismatch: I know it's difficult, but it would be quite interesting to compare 2-3 "identical" headphones, to see how identical they really are.

 

[Zensō]

Thanks Amir. I am definitely looking forward to listening to them since the objective part looks so good. They probably match the target curve better than anything here. With the channel mismatch, I am fortunate to have excellent measurements if I decide I want to figure out asymmetrical EQ.

Assuming they have the same springs as the Clear, I am surprised you found them uncomfortable. I love the feel of Clear and can wear them for hours hardly noticing them.

I can weigh them when they are back here if you boxed them up, or don't want to bother with it. I have proper gear and expertise for that particular measurement here.

I suspect the clamp is higher on these because of the need for better isolation with closed back headphones. That is true of the Elegia, which has a higher clamp than the Clear, Elear, and Elex.

 

[frix]

Well I bought celestee a week ago. I thought the measurements which appeared early on looked really good. So I had high hopes this may be really good closed back. I read crinacles review and thought he is exaggerating big time, the soundstage and imaging can't be that bad.

Sadly, he is right, it is offensively bad. Even for closed back standards.
Amir is also right calling those outright boring sounding without EQ.
I may add that there is also some honky, echoey quality to the overall sound. I tried fixing it with EQ. It got better (tonality), but not to the point that those things would be acceptable. EQ just can't fix the almost broken sounding soundstage and lackluster imaging.

My guess is the jaggy upper mids and treble (treble is hard to measure) severely harm the spacial cues. Afaik focal just has some diffusing structures on the inside of the cups but no damping.

Yesterday I returned the Celestee. Because everytime I tried listening to them I was frustraded.

 

[respice finem]

That's why, after now almost 50 years of headphone listening, I don't buy headphones I haven't tried. Another factor is comfort. Both are more individual than many think.

 

[frix]

yea you are right. Though the pandamy makes it impossible to listen to anything before buying. At least were I live.

 

[respice finem]

In Germany, you can try but it's not the most elegant way: select one that you are relatively sure to fit, buy it online and send it back if it doesn't. I did this only once and successfully. In my case it was a fairly safe bet, I already had a similar one from the same manufacturer, and I can only have large headphones, but with round earcups, oval ones tend not to seal at the lower end.
What I wouldn't do is what some people do, order 5 and send 4 back, not really fair IMHO.

 

[MayaTlab]

What I wouldn't do is what some people do, order 5 and send 4 back, not really fair IMHO.

If the manufacturer can't be bothered to manufacture their headphones to proper tolerances, effectively package them so that they arrive in a good state at your doorstep, and won't stand behind their product ("it's within our tolerances" - even if it's BS), it's completely fair game IMO.

I've had to send back nearly half of the K371 we received at work because AKG couldn't be bothered to properly manufacture the sliding mechanism or package them in a way that doesn't degrade the memory foam of the earpads. They've recently changed the packaging to prevent that BTW.

 

[respice finem]

Well, actually the case I meant would not be quite fair, because it's the seller who has the loss if you would do it. And, not all manufacturers are equally bad, though all seem to make a lemon from time to time. What I mean is to order 5 different ones and send 4 back.
BTW: I contemplated testing (subjectively only) the K371 because of its good result, but already its visible "cheapness" prevented it.
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/.../akg-k371-review-closed-back-headphone.19657/

 

[MayaTlab]

Well, actually not quite fair, because it's the seller who has the loss if you would do it. And, not all manufacturers are equally bad, though all seem to make a lemon from time to time.

I don't like it either that the seller has to pay somehow for the manufacturer's failings and incapacity to stand by their products, but you gotta do what you gotta do to not get lemons in your hands.
I can single out Sennheiser's lineup of passive, open headphones as headphones which have been far less of a headache as far as QC is concerned than others - but even then I'm actually packaging a pair of HD650 right now to be sent back because of a manufacturing defect (but this time Sennheiser's support is standing by its product and I suppose that Thomann will be able to send it back to Senn).

 

[frix]

I actually did compare the celestee with the aeon 2 noire. Thats a closed back with really good staging.

 

[respice finem]

#78. I've been more lucky with BD than Sennheiser headphones so far, but generally it seems that later offerings are not the old "Made in Germany" any more, which is even more sad, considering the prices have more than doubled since the D-Mark times in the respective market segments. Or maybe it's just me getting old

 

[Tks]

Amir:

I don't have the ability to just EQ one channel but using that, maybe you can fix that.

Also Amir:

Listening tests are performed using RME ADI-2 DAC and its headphone output.

RME:

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



A bit off topic but,

Why is it that whenever there is a problem with a device, it seems to always be lots of people saying its both a probable failed sample, as well as Amir measuring it bad. But when something does well from an Asian brand, we have accusations of golden samples?


Like for this headphone we have a high clamp force, yet at the same time people complaining about seal not being achieved on the mesurement rig?

I find it odd how many folks come through with comments like this (casting doubt on the test methodology performed) yet keep coming around. If Amir said he tried playing with it to see if he can account for the channel balance issue, the only thing left is either call him a liar, or simply ineptitude. If he's lying, you could never know without getting the exact headphone on your own rig to test. And if he is inept to this degree, why even bother with reading reviews of someone THIS inept? I wouldnt read a single headphone review until I saw enough reason such level of ineptitude was rectified by a considerable effort.

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.