Focal Clear Review (headphone)

[Rottmannash]

So even if you can play music directly from iPhones and laptops into these HPs, this is not a proper way to listen to them, flat, bass almost inexistant.
Otherwise, the Rotel pre amp handles them very nicely so now, I need to test them thoroughly, wasn't able to get them clipping even with a considerable bass boost (pre amp tone control) but I need to do it with APO/Peace from the PC hooked in the pre amp.

Overall, satisfied with this pair of HPs as when I auditioned them a week ago. Let's see how I like them on the long run.
I really fancy this black and red pro version

(For anyone in Europe, I can tell you auditorium.de is a very reliable seller, competitive, fast, package was neat and they even wrote a dedicated very thoughtful note in french!).

Couldn't agree more- listening the this level of HP on a smartphone (except possibly the LG quad DAC models) is akin to having your Grandma race your Moto GP bike at Philip Island.

 

[Tatalor51]

That Pascal Gaigne track (Un espejo en el Cielo) seems to be a killer for quite a few headphones. Tested on Audio Tehnica ATH MSR7, Sony 1AM2, Sennheiser 660, 6xx, Verum One, Focal Clear Professional (same as Clear, different color) and Audeze LCD-3.

Past a certain volume (not ear splitting but not regular listening volume either), on both Sennheisers (660 and 6xx) and Clear there is that crackling and popping, Verum sounds heavily distorted. Granted, Clears sound the worst and from a lower volume but 660 are not that far. Actually its the one song at which must keep Clear below my listening level, with my usual stuff sounds perfectly fine way past my usual volume even with Oratory EQ (5.5db to sub-bass).

Sony and ATH are doing way better, almost no distorsion at VERY high volume.

LCD-3 is just breezing through it, no distorsion at all at Atom max volume with gain on. Even with a low shelf of 5.5db (Oratory EQ). Granted, cant reach ear splitting levels because of low SPL but still way louder than my normal.

The way LCD-3 and Sony vibrate on ears at very high volume feels kinda great too, new thing for me

Some of the tests were made on a JDS OL DAC/Atom stack and some on an Ifi Micro Black Label.

 

[solderdude]

The way LCD-3 and Sony vibrate on ears at very high volume feels kinda great too, new thing for me

Now you know what Amir means when he talkes about his earlobes.

 

[JIW]

Beautiful music...but extremely clipped in every note at 29 Hz (but not detectable by my ear). Oversampling at 176.4 detects many overs

Here is the version provided to YouTube by the record label (9 views when I discovered it).

The original file - recorded from Tidal HiFi with Audio Hijack at 16 bit/44.1 kHz - seems to have no clipping. There are no instances of 2 or 3 subsequent sample values either at the positive or negative maximum sample value. Neither are there instances 2 or 3 subsequent samples of the highest positive or negative sample value of the track. The level is -17.80 dBFS RMS and -17.86 dBFS RMS for the left and right channel, respectively, while the peaks are -0.05 dBFS for both channels.

The version above - recorded from Google Chrome with Audio Hijack at 16 bit/44.1 kHz - seems to have only a little clipping. There are 3 and 4 instances of 3 subsequent sample values either at the positive or negative maximum sample value and additionally 2 and 3 instances of only 2 subsequent sample values either at the positive or negative maximum sample value for the left and right channel, respectively, though none are coincident. The level is -17.82 dBFS RMS and -17.88 dBFS RMS for the left and right channel, respectively. Thus, it seems YouTube's codec (mp4a.40.2(140), 128 kbps AAC at 44.1 kHz) has been overloaded by the track. However, according to YouTube, the content loudness is -1.9 dB and thus the level was not reduced.

However, this is nothing compared to the version linked by @amirm - also recorded from Google Chrome with Audio Hijack at 16 bit/44.1 kHz - which is clipped many times more. For the left and right channel, respectively, there are 980 and 661 instances of 3 subsequent sample values either at the positive or negative maximum sample value of which 242 are coincident and additionally 48 and 30 instances of only 2 subsequent sample values either at the positive or negative maximum sample value of which 18 are coincident. The level is -17.81 dBFS RMS and -17.87 dBFS RMS for the left and right channel, respectively. Thus, it seems YouTube's codec (opus(251), 160 kbps opus) has overloaded even more by the uploaded file.

 

[Tatalor51]

Now you know what Amir means when he talkes about his earlobes.

Yeah, indeed Poor Clears can't get there, no way in hell.

Assuming you don't mind not going there though, awesome headphones.

 

[nhatlam96]

and lowering of the peak at 11.3 kHz. The latter was important to get rid of the brightness.

When we lower the peak, shouldnt we do this instead?: Filter 4: ON PK Fc 11319 Hz Gain -2.0 dB Q 3.0

 

[amirm]

When we lower the peak, shouldnt we do this instead?: Filter 4: ON PK Fc 11319 Hz Gain -2.0 dB Q 3.0

After I typed the review, I realized the sign was inverted. Was going to fix but thought I wait to see how long it takes before it is detected. Took a long time.

 

[Robbo99999]

After I typed the review, I realized the sign was inverted. Was going to fix but thought I wait to see how long it takes before it is detected. Took a long time.

I mentioned it days ago though in my first post in this thread!

Happy Christmas to everyone, it is that day!

 

[oliveoilthansnakeoil]

Under 200hz of harman target was made according to preference. So some people(SBAF) don't agree with it as 'neutral'

I think people should think about 'Open Back'. There are already a lot of measurements on internet. In my memory, most open back headphones don't follow Harman bass preference. I wonder if it is because of technical limit.

I had fidelio X1. their FR is pretty good on harman target except 3khz around. But low frequency THD is bad. I like harman target. So I have been waiting for hi resolution openback headphones well targeted on harman target for a long time.

 

[Thomas_A]

Yet another one of my speaker killers: Burak Malçok - Toz Ruhu

This brings out the problem right at the start:

Level about 17 on RME. The track is not loud at all. The deep bass is there but not loud either. Yet it crackles the poor Forcal Clears.

BTW, these last two tracks are music I like. They are not pathological tracks picked to stress things. I saved them as listening to these albums on my Revel Salon 2 speaker and having them sound wonderful. The Focal Clear as such simply is not suitable for my everyday use.

I don't have the Focal, but tried all the example tracks on my modded DT-150 closed cans, and seems to play the deep bass without problem.

 

[Fluffy]

I haven't visited this site in a long while, pretty much since the HP measurements begun. This review caught my eye though, because I own the Clear for a couple of years now. As I suspected, these technical reviews don't reflect how headphones would sound "in the wild". The target curve in itself is a flawed concept, that describes the "ideal sound" with as much accuracy as describing the average American family as having 2.3 kids. Every person listens a bit differently and variations in FR can appeal to some people but not others. Preference also hugely depends on choice of music. For me this is still my number one favorite headphone to listen to metal with (with a very slight EQ), and I've heard dozens of others at the same price range and higher that couldn't compare. And I also find it the most comfortable headphone I ever put on my head. I guess the dimensions just fit me perfectly.

I very much doubt a "perfect headphone" exists that would achieve Amir's high expectations. Headphones are a much more personalized item than any other reviewed on this site, and it's very hard to make generalized statements on this topic. I don't think anyone should make purchasing choices purely based on these reviews.

 

[Thomas_A]

Three examples of music with extreme low bass of different genres:

Bass below 40 Hz with no overtones, so you won't hear it on a standard loudspeaker setup, is pretty normal these days. But with the right headphones and EQ you can.

Perhaps already known, this also use some fine bass.

 

[Daaadou]

Perhaps already known, this also use some fine bass.

Nice.
The first track of this album, fading sun, do also have great bass. I thought a neighbor fell on the floor upstairs

 

[nhatlam96]

you’ll immediately want to take them off and throw them across the room.

What is the problem here specifically?

 

[Robbo99999]

I haven't visited this site in a long while, pretty much since the HP measurements begun. This review caught my eye though, because I own the Clear for a couple of years now. As I suspected, these technical reviews don't reflect how headphones would sound "in the wild". The target curve in itself is a flawed concept, that describes the "ideal sound" with as much accuracy as describing the average American family as having 2.3 kids. Every person listens a bit differently and variations in FR can appeal to some people but not others. Preference also hugely depends on choice of music. For me this is still my number one favorite headphone to listen to metal with (with a very slight EQ), and I've heard dozens of others at the same price range and higher that couldn't compare. And I also find it the most comfortable headphone I ever put on my head. I guess the dimensions just fit me perfectly.

I very much doubt a "perfect headphone" exists that would achieve Amir's high expectations. Headphones are a much more personalized item than any other reviewed on this site, and it's very hard to make generalized statements on this topic. I don't think anyone should make purchasing choices purely based on these reviews.

If you're one of the people that know they like the Headphone Harman Curve then you can know with quite some degree of confidence how these headphones would be once they've been measured on here. Distortion measurements are quite revealing too & applicable to everyone, even those that don't like the Headphone Harman Curve. Soundstage qualities are elucidated a little through Amir's subjective listening, so if you take it all together then I think you've got a pretty excellent package on which to base headphone purchasing decisions.

On a personal level as someone who knows they like the Headphone Harman Curve then I would look for a headphone on here that is pretty compliant to following the Headphone Harman Curve or one that can be EQ'd with ease to the Harman Curve, e.g. no ugly sharp dips away from the curve. I'd also be looking for low distortion measurements across the board, and I'd be paying attention to any soundstage notes that Amir references in his listening tests - that would all be my approach to sensibly buying a headphone to try. So...if you like the Headphone Harman Curve, then I think that's a good approach to take. If you don't like the Heaphone Harman Curve, then there's still qualities like distortion and soundstage impressions to take value from.....and to be honest you could still take value from the frequency response too, because no one likes sharp dips (or peaks to a lesser extent) that can't be EQ'd away!

 

[Kei]

Now I've made it through all 23 pages...

I've had my Clears for almost three years now, and I currently do not experience any pops or other issues even when listening at levels I know I should not be at. I drive them with a Little Dot MK III tube amp, sporting a pair of 6N30P-DR tubes. However, I did experience this issue when I was setting everything up when I bought the headphones.

This amp has two dip switches letting you change the settings to accommodate different headphones' sensitivity.

Currently I have it set to switch 1 OFF, switch 2 ON, and I have absolutely no pops at all (also tried with amirs's test tracks posted in this thread). At whatever setting I was using when I bought the Clears and initially hooked them up to my amp, I did get pops even at normal listening levels, so I suspect the amp is boosting low frequencies differently with certain settings.

I guess differences like this could explain why some don't get any pops at all while it apparently is an issue for others.

Edit: And for what it's worth, I also have zero issues when hooking my headphones up directly to my Apollo Twin.

 

[Fluffy]

If you're one of the people that know they like the Headphone Harman Curve then you can know with quite some degree of confidence how these headphones would be once they've been measured on here. Distortion measurements are quite revealing too & applicable to everyone, even those that don't like the Headphone Harman Curve. Soundstage qualities are elucidated a little through Amir's subjective listening, so if you take it all together then I think you've got a pretty excellent package on which to base headphone purchasing decisions.

On a personal level as someone who knows they like the Headphone Harman Curve then I would look for a headphone on here that is pretty compliant to following the Headphone Harman Curve or one that can be EQ'd with ease to the Harman Curve, e.g. no ugly sharp dips away from the curve. I'd also be looking for low distortion measurements across the board, and I'd be paying attention to any soundstage notes that Amir references in his listening tests - that would all be my approach to sensibly buying a headphone to try. So...if you like the Headphone Harman Curve, then I think that's a good approach to take. If you don't like the Heaphone Harman Curve, then there's still qualities like distortion and soundstage impressions to take value from.....and to be honest you could still take value from the frequency response too, because no one likes sharp dips (or peaks to a lesser extent) that can't be EQ'd away!

How would you know if you like the Headphone Harman Curve? There is not a single headphone that perfectly comply with it. And personally I never heard a headphone that's supposed to be compliant with it (either naturally or with EQ) that sounded good to me.

Amir's subjective parts in the review are not any more accurate than any other subjective review. People hear soundstage very differently.

 

[Robbo99999]

How would you know if you like the Headphone Harman Curve? There is not a single headphone that perfectly comply with it. And personally I never heard a headphone that's supposed to be compliant with it (either naturally or with EQ) that sounded good to me.

Amir's subjective parts in the review are not any more accurate than any other subjective review. People hear soundstage very differently.

I know I like the Headphone Harman Curve because I own 3 different headphones (in my sig) that I EQ'd to Harman Curve based on measurements, and it's an improvement for each headphone, as well as sounding tonally accurate to my flat Anechoically EQ'd JBL 308p speakers.

 

[Fluffy]

I know I like the Headphone Harman Curve because I own 3 different headphones (in my sig) that I EQ'd to Harman Curve based on measurements, and it's an improvement for each headphone, as well as sounding tonally accurate to my flat Anechoically EQ'd JBL 308p speakers.

Well, it's still a very subjective preference. A recommendation based on compliance with the Herman target response is only relevant to those who find that curve to sound good. Not all people do. I find it frustrating that the myth of this target curve being the ultimate ideal sound for every human ever is being reinforced with these reviews.

 

[Robbo99999]

Well, it's still a very subjective preference. A recommendation based on compliance with the Herman target response is only relevant to those who find that curve to sound good. Not all people do. I find it frustrating that the myth of this target curve being the ultimate ideal sound for every human ever is being reinforced with these reviews.

Yeah, I don't think anyone said that, but it is a curve that would be preferred by most people, which has been said a lot.