Focal Clear Review (headphone)

[JoostE]

Have people ever tried to check the volumes you are listening to? I just tried to clip my clear MGs with the test songs AMIR posted. And I really couldn't get it to clip within sane listening volumes. I did some research and found this:

https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/280085/9789241515276-eng.pdf

What is your thought on this? The tables on page 16 tell pretty much the whole story imho. If you listen at 95 dB, 75 minutes is about the maximum duration you should listen at per week... At 104 dB, just 9.5 minutes. For a whole week. So even just a few short clips in a movie is a significant stress on your ears.
That might explain why I am not getting any of these distortion issues with normal use. I am going to order an dB meter just to keep my hearing safe.

As for the reviews, I would personally love to advocate for an additional 80 dB curve on the THD graphs for headphones, as that should really be the max volume you listen at if you listen for long periods each day.

 

[solderdude]

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/music-how-loud-is-loud-video.22434/

I would personally love to advocate for an additional 80 dB curve on the THD graphs for headphones, as that should really be the max volume you listen at if you listen for long periods each day.

80dB average is easily 100dB peak. Don't confuse average levels with peak levels.
Also at lower SPL levels background noise starts to dominate actual SPL levels. Most headphones distort very little at 80dB SPL peak, say 65dB average SPL which is very soft listening level.

 

[Robbo99999]

Have people ever tried to check the volumes you are listening to? I just tried to clip my clear MGs with the test songs AMIR posted. And I really couldn't get it to clip within sane listening volumes. I did some research and found this:

https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/280085/9789241515276-eng.pdf

What is your thought on this? The tables on page 16 tell pretty much the whole story imho. If you listen at 95 dB, 75 minutes is about the maximum duration you should listen at per week... At 104 dB, just 9.5 minutes. For a whole week. So even just a few short clips in a movie is a significant stress on your ears.
That might explain why I am not getting any of these distortion issues with normal use. I am going to order an dB meter just to keep my hearing safe.

As for the reviews, I would personally love to advocate for an additional 80 dB curve on the THD graphs for headphones, as that should really be the max volume you listen at if you listen for long periods each day.

I'm not sure on the validity of the pdf you linked, and I've not looked into the research (no time right now), but I'd like an additional lower curve to be added to the distortion measurements too. Given I calculated that my peak (not average) RMS levels are 80-86dB depending which headphone I listen to, then for me it would be applicable to have an 86dB or maybe 84dB (considering that would tally with Amir's 10dB measurement steps) listed as one of the test levels that Amir measures. Yep, I'd like to see him include an 84dB measurement. EDIT: this would also provide better perspective for the mids & treble that most people probably listen at (due to bass EQ on headphones) combined with the frequency level distribution in music that often shows higher bass level content.

 

[JoostE]

I'm not sure on the validity of the pdf you linked.

It is directly from the WHO webpage.

 

[JoostE]

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/music-how-loud-is-loud-video.22434/



80dB average is easily 100dB peak. Don't confuse average levels with peak levels.
Also at lower SPL levels background noise starts to dominate actual SPL levels. Most headphones distort very little at 80dB SPL peak, say 65dB average SPL which is very soft listening level.

Thanks for the link. Watched quite a bit of Amirs video's but forgot to watch this one.

I guess my real problem with the methods of testing is the fact that the refference is so high @amirm? I understand it is convenient, but I honestly think it would be far more valuable to readers if there would be an additional (or two?) lines lower on the graph.

As for the comparison to live recordings... I see your point, but is that really a fair comparison? I personally would never listen to a full Rock concert without ear protection. And I sure won't even get close to that level of volume in a headphone. If we would be comparing PA systems, or maybe home audio systems, I can see where you are going to. But with headphones, I think this isn't all that relevant. This research just shows that these live events also cause quite a bit of hearing damage if you do not wear ear protection. In my experience hearing protection is very strongly encouraged. Some live events I have been to hand out free ear plugs, and I have even seen it being mandatory for people below 18 on some live events 2 years ago!

As for the A weighting and what sound pressure is most prevalent in music, they get partially cancelled out by the Harmon curve. The most sensitive frequency for our hearing (1-5KHz) is also the highest part of the Harmon curve, which is roughly 5dB higher than the bass. So under the line that only leaves roughly 15 dB difference between bass and 3KHz in sound pressure (assuming the song in the video (20 dB difference between 20 Hz and 1Khz) on a headphone following the Harmon curve). So 124 dB of bass gives us still roughly 109 dB(A) at 1 Khz, extremely high, literally off the (WHO) charts.

On the peak vs average dB, that is a very solid point. Assuming the peak/average difference measured by diy-audio-heaven is somewhat representative for most music, we would get another 12 dB difference between peak and average dB.

So to calculate from peak sound pressure (in bass) to A-weighted average sound pressure in the 1kH region (dB(A)), one would have to substract a total of 27dB (+5 from harman curve, -20 difference level in music, -12 peak vs average). That still means a peak level of 114dB in bass results in an average SPL of 87, something you really shouldn't be listening to for longer than 10 hours per week! There are some assumptions in there of coarse, but I think they are fair.

I think it is very fair you try to stress test these headphones. It is, like you said, your job.

So what is my point then? Do I think these graphs are wrong? no, the data is clearly there. Do I think you get deaf from a short burst of 104 dB? no, but hearing damage is not that black and white. However, I do think these graphs show a skewed picture and uneducated people might draw the wrong conclusions.
The graph is heavily skewed towards a loud + EQ listening style, which is not representative for the average user. So honestly, all I am really debating here is the addition of an additional measurement, at 84dB, and maybe take this more into account with drawing conclusions.
124 dB of bass, is an extremely niche measurement, only relevant for people who listen at very high volume with EQ. Even the 114dB is really up there, but probably more represented in a normal distribution of average users (the 1% you talk about maybe?). Taking the above assumptions and the WHO guidelines into account, people who listen to music often shouldn't really get bass levels above 107 dB regularly!

As a practical example to close it off: I haven't heard my focal Clear clip once, and if I wasn't able to read these graphs correctly, I would have never even gave them a fair try in the shop, and I would have missed out on a great headphone for my personal use case.

Just my 2 cents and I hope you take this into account in the future

TLDR: your measurements are not wrong, but you are measuring extremely niche use cases which can lead to people drawing wrong conclusions.

p.s. I absolutely value this webpage as a source of objective information, but like in science, we can only grow from discussion

 

[solderdude]

You can see surrounding noises already in Amir's measurements.
having 10dB or 20dB less signal will not be possibly give any meaningfull measurements as the harmonics would drown in noise.

Also headphones show very little distortion below 90dB in general so is rather pointless to measure that low.
There is a reason 90dB SPL is a standard in headphone measurements..

I can show measurements done at 80d SPL and 70dB SPL but they are so misleading due to noise that it is pointless to post them. People will draw incorrect conclusions and will wonder why distortion numbers are so high. They aren't its noise.

It's not so much peak levels in music that is a problem. It is exposure over time. Peaks in music are in ms not hours.

114dB SPL in the lows is already higher than what others measure (usually 100dB) but noticed others now also test at 110dB SPL.

Not all Focal Clears 'clip' at the same levels. There are plenty out there that owners cannot get to clip and others clip at decent levels already.
You should not see the 'clipping' as something that is happening to all of them and at the same level.

Also do not mix dBA and dBSPL. For low frequencies the differences are 40dB apart. We 'hear' in Phon (close to dBA).

 

[JoostE]

Also headphones show very little distortion below 90dB in general so is rather pointless to measure that low.
There is a reason 90dB SPL is a standard in headphone measurements..

Strange that would call the volume people actually listen to pointless... while the volume people (almost) never listen to important enough to completely disregard a headphone.

It's not so much peak levels in music that is a problem. It is exposure over time. Peaks in music are in ms not hours.

Have you watched the video you quoted? It is a 12 dB difference when measured (in one song though). So even though peaks might be very short, I already corrected for that.

Also do not mix dBA and dBSPL. For low frequencies the differences are 40dB apart. We 'hear' in Phon (close to dBA).

It might be 40 dB apart how we hear things, but what counts is what is in the music. If that is only 20dB apart, you are going to get blasted by the 1KHz tones.

 

[Robbo99999]

Thanks for the link. Watched quite a bit of Amirs video's but forgot to watch this one.

I guess my real problem with the methods of testing is the fact that the refference is so high @amirm? I understand it is convenient, but I honestly think it would be far more valuable to readers if there would be an additional (or two?) lines lower on the graph.

As for the comparison to live recordings... I see your point, but is that really a fair comparison? I personally would never listen to a full Rock concert without ear protection. And I sure won't even get close to that level of volume in a headphone. If we would be comparing PA systems, or maybe home audio systems, I can see where you are going to. But with headphones, I think this isn't all that relevant. This research just shows that these live events also cause quite a bit of hearing damage if you do not wear ear protection. In my experience hearing protection is very strongly encouraged. Some live events I have been to hand out free ear plugs, and I have even seen it being mandatory for people below 18 on some live events 2 years ago!

As for the A weighting and what sound pressure is most prevalent in music, they get partially cancelled out by the Harmon curve. The most sensitive frequency for our hearing (1-5KHz) is also the highest part of the Harmon curve, which is roughly 5dB higher than the bass. So under the line that only leaves roughly 15 dB difference between bass and 3KHz in sound pressure (assuming the song in the video (20 dB difference between 20 Hz and 1Khz) on a headphone following the Harmon curve). So 124 dB of bass gives us still roughly 109 dB(A) at 1 Khz, extremely high, literally off the (WHO) charts.

On the peak vs average dB, that is a very solid point. Assuming the peak/average difference measured by diy-audio-heaven is somewhat representative for most music, we would get another 12 dB difference between peak and average dB.

So to calculate from peak sound pressure (in bass) to A-weighted average sound pressure in the 1kH region (dB(A)), one would have to substract a total of 27dB (+5 from harman curve, -20 difference level in music, -12 peak vs average). That still means a peak level of 114dB in bass results in an average SPL of 87, something you really shouldn't be listening to for longer than 10 hours per week! There are some assumptions in there of coarse, but I think they are fair.

I think it is very fair you try to stress test these headphones. It is, like you said, your job.

So what is my point then? Do I think these graphs are wrong? no, the data is clearly there. Do I think you get deaf from a short burst of 104 dB? no, but hearing damage is not that black and white. However, I do think these graphs show a skewed picture and uneducated people might draw the wrong conclusions.
The graph is heavily skewed towards a loud + EQ listening style, which is not representative for the average user. So honestly, all I am really debating here is the addition of an additional measurement, at 84dB, and maybe take this more into account with drawing conclusions.
124 dB of bass, is an extremely niche measurement, only relevant for people who listen at very high volume with EQ. Even the 114dB is really up there, but probably more represented in a normal distribution of average users (the 1% you talk about maybe?). Taking the above assumptions and the WHO guidelines into account, people who listen to music often shouldn't really get bass levels above 107 dB regularly!

As a practical example to close it off: I haven't heard my focal Clear clip once, and if I wasn't able to read these graphs correctly, I would have never even gave them a fair try in the shop, and I would have missed out on a great headphone for my personal use case.

Just my 2 cents and I hope you take this into account in the future

TLDR: your measurements are not wrong, but you are measuring extremely niche use cases which can lead to people drawing wrong conclusions.

p.s. I absolutely value this webpage as a source of objective information, but like in science, we can only grow from discussion

I like your angle there, I think you're onto something.

You can see surrounding noises already in Amir's measurements.
having 10dB or 20dB less signal will not be possibly give any meaningfull measurements as the harmonics would drown in noise.

Also headphones show very little distortion below 90dB in general so is rather pointless to measure that low.
There is a reason 90dB SPL is a standard in headphone measurements..

I can show measurements done at 80d SPL and 70dB SPL but they are so misleading due to noise that it is pointless to post them. People will draw incorrect conclusions and will wonder why distortion numbers are so high. They aren't its noise.

It's not so much peak levels in music that is a problem. It is exposure over time. Peaks in music are in ms not hours.

114dB SPL in the lows is already higher than what others measure (usually 100dB) but noticed others now also test at 110dB SPL.

Not all Focal Clears 'clip' at the same levels. There are plenty out there that owners cannot get to clip and others clip at decent levels already.
You should not see the 'clipping' as something that is happening to all of them and at the same level.

Also do not mix dBA and dBSPL. For low frequencies the differences are 40dB apart. We 'hear' in Phon (close to dBA).

I sure would like to see an 84dB measurement from Amir for my own usage scenarios, and if that is too quiet to get over ambient noise issues then I think it would be good to invest in somekind of soundproof enclosure thereby giving a bit more relevance of the distortion measurements to a wider audience that doesn't listen loud (as well as it being a more relevant level for the mids & treble). If 84dB doesn't require a soundproof enclosure, then "easy money"!

 

[markanini]

BTW, is there any other target curve used than the Harman one for EQ? I saw something called the "Usound" target.

It's specific to IEMs.
https://www.reddit.com/r/oratory1990/comments/arz0tn/_/el8v0o8

 

[solderdude]

Strange that would call the volume people actually listen to pointless... while the volume people (almost) never listen to important enough to completely disregard a headphone.

Not all people listen at the same volume. I generally listen at low volume and know distortion is very low in that case.
Sometimes i like to play (part of a) song loud and want to listen to that without having to worry.
You do realize that at louder volume masking levels also increase so distortion products can be higher without them becoming audible as long as they are low harmonics. Headphones usually only exhibit lower harmonics.

Have you watched the video you quoted?

yes.

It might be 40 dB apart how we hear things, but what counts is what is in the music. If that is only 20dB apart, you are going to get blasted by the 1KHz tones.

Which 1kHz tones ? It's music there are no continuous tones that 'blast'.

 

[solderdude]

This research just shows that these live events also cause quite a bit of hearing damage if you do not wear ear protection. In my experience hearing protection is very strongly encouraged. Some live events I have been to hand out free ear plugs, and I have even seen it being mandatory for people below 18 on some live events 2 years ago!

Yes it certainly is recommended. I don't visit them exactly for that reason. Being pounded by high levels for hours is not the same as turning up 1 song louder for a while.

As for the A weighting and what sound pressure is most prevalent in music, they get partially cancelled out by the Harmon curve.

Harman curve is just a preference for a few dB more bass and gently rolled of treble. Specifically for those listening below 80dB average the Harman curve makes sense. Less so at louder average levels.

On the peak vs average dB, that is a very solid point. Assuming the peak/average difference measured by diy-audio-heaven is somewhat representative for most music, we would get another 12 dB difference between peak and average dB.

That's correct but you also will have seen the spectral spread of music and that's where the dBA curve comes in when looking at the 'allowance for a lifetime' levels that folks like to show. These have little relation to music enjoyment. Peak levels in the bass are higher than those in the mids. The difference between average and peak SPL does not consider the dBA curve nor Phon curves.
The average levels are still dynamic levels. and not continuous and have a harmonic spread.

uneducated people might draw the wrong conclusions.

Most certainly and that's the point I keep raising every time folks claim measurements are worthless.
Measuring headphone distortion at 114dB (for checking limits) up to a few hundred Hz is useful. It's people that like put measurements and the one doing them in a bad light that claim Amir, or his 'minions' are deaf and listen at those levels. Amir does not, nor others nor does anyone say one does or needs to listen at those levels.
It is just provided data and not many folks are educated enough to understand it and draw the proper conclusions.

124 dB of bass, is an extremely niche measurement

There are no measurements of 124dB in bass nor will many headphones reach that in practice.
In the case of the Clear measurement it says indeed 124dB but that's a typo. It is actually the curve of 114dB @425Hz

I think it is very fair you try to stress test these headphones. It is, like you said, your job.

I have not stress tested headphones I measured nor is it my job. It's a hobby and test at 90dB SPL. I have tested at 70dB and 80dB SPL but do not publish because those measurements will be misinterpreted because you see background noise and not distortion levels.

Here's a recent measurement from SBAF that makes my point.

You see distortion measurements being made at 104, 100, 95 and 90dB SPL. Notice how below 100dB the noise floor is the limit.
Now imagine measuring at 80dB or 70dB. This would result in plots similar to the 90dB SPL plots but when taking the level in consideration the distortion would seemingly increase. Seemingly as the S/N ratio becomes smaller so percentage wise you would 'measure' high distortion levels.
You could then argue to measure in an acoustic dead room. However, certainly in the lows this is very difficult to do.
But then there is something like the electrical noise floor as well which comes into play creating the next limit.

Yes, one can easily make measurements at 80dB and 70dB but they are useless for showing actual distortion. Drivers have very little distortion at those levels anyway.

 

[ifshebreathesshesa]

first time seeing this thread, makes me feel good about not pulling the trigger @ 1K deal (it really should be better for a freaking closeout discontinued headphone that didn't sell out of stock immediately) despite topping Crins list and making an impact on many others as baby utopia.... But I also learned recently to just buy what is a killer deal as far as price (let's be realistic no headphone over $500 is a good deal, if you think it is is you probably consider every headphone I own in the $500-$700 range "mid-fi" which is also a joke.... can a $1k headphone have relative good performance vs $2-4k sets, sure but next to the best under $600ish price/perf is a joke sorry not sorry) and stay with my sound signature, hate Sundara out of the box but it's good with EQ and a good deal/headphone I will regret selling... from now oh I will be buying harman or bigger bass signatures and V and W shaped (just got Elegias and WOW!) headphone only, no neutral, no bass rolled, no "bright" no thanks!

 

[JoostE]

If you love the Elegia, go listen to a pair of clears in a shop. I have both and while the Elegia does good for a closed back, the clear sounds a lot better.

 

[ifshebreathesshesa]

If you love the Elegia, go listen to a pair of clears in a shop. I have both and while the Elegia does good for a closed back, the clear sounds a lot better.

yeah I know but I like the M1570 and want a planar for my TOTL because of the bass performance... also the fact the Clear doesn't EQ well as OP stated leads me away as I HATE neutral sound signature for everything but dramas and I doubt it will beat the Sundara for sounding like you aren't wearing headphones or listening to anything but real life... I would eventually want to just buy a pair for the flip of it but they are being discontinued so I guess I will probably just get utopia or whatever else is top tier one day, just not worth the $900 for me vs Elegias forward mid and better bass response which is what I like as well as being a perfect portable closed back + easy to drive is just loads better for what I want + price

if the Elegia isn't around 90% the performance of the Clears as I saw by a reviewer I trust then I guess I will live in a state of blissful ignorance and remember the sound signature is more up my alley.

 

[Hotwetrat]

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.

This is entirely not relevant for this thread but I came accross it and was curious to try these tracks.

I had a fiddle with both the tracks with my SVS subs, which I run a bit spicy EQ wise.

I took off the grille and thought I would see if the cone moves, which it didn't - I wasn't playing loud as I live in a flat but I turned it up a few times briefly to see if I could get the cone to move, or vibrate in ANY way, I looked closely and literally nothing.

Does this 'indicate' I am listening well within safe distortion limits? Sorry for stupid question I don't even know for sure if the driver moving isa good or bad thing :/

I use 2x SB1000 Pro subs just stacked on top of each other (done for headroom)

EDIT: OH I just realise it might be because my subs are sealed so they don't actually play very low!?

 

[Robbo99999]

This is entirely not relevant for this thread but I came accross it and was curious to try these tracks.

I had a fiddle with both the tracks with my SVS subs, which I run a bit spicy EQ wise.

I took off the grille and thought I would see if the cone moves, which it didn't - I wasn't playing loud as I live in a flat but I turned it up a few times briefly to see if I could get the cone to move, or vibrate in ANY way, I looked closely and literally nothing.

Does this 'indicate' I am listening well within safe distortion limits? Sorry for stupid question I don't even know for sure if the driver moving isa good or bad thing :/

I use 2x SB1000 Pro subs just stacked on top of each other (done for headroom)

EDIT: OH I just realise it might be because my subs are sealed so they don't actually play very low!?

(are they plugged in? )

 

[Hotwetrat]

(are they plugged in? )

LOL They really are! ;D And they make some seriously impressive low end! (impressive to me let's say)

Are they supposed to move?

 

[Jimbob54]

LOL They really are! ;D And they make some seriously impressive low end! (impressive to me let's say)

Are they supposed to move?

If they're working, they're moving.

Can you feel it if you put fingers a cm in front?

 

[abdo123]

LOL They really are! ;D

Are they supposed to move?

only when reproducing between 20 and 40Hz.

 

[Hotwetrat]

If they're working, they're moving.

Can you feel it if you put fingers a cm in front?

They are 100% working but like, the polar opposite of this