Focal Utopia Review (Headphone)

[Garrincha]

Just my opinion, but those that believe that how a product sounds can be fully captured in just a few measurements are as incorrect as those that are switching cables to get an extra octave of bandwidth….

For headphones, measurements tell less than for IEMs which tell less than for amps or DACs, but still they give a good indication of the overall sound characteristic.

 

[PGAMiami]

Of course, measurements cannot control for your own ear or brain. They can however provide exceptional context (with high confidence) not only on how the component will sound but that the component will perform well for the average human. We accept this logic in all facets of life - for example we cannot say any study or test proves a pharmaceutical will be safe to take for you specifically, but we can say it is so likely to be safe for an average person like you that it can effectively be considered safe.

True, but that’s different than saying that two headphones should sound the same because the FR, design parameters and distortion levels happens to be similar. For one FR is measured at a set level, typically not very loud, and looking at this measurement alone will tell you nothing about how a driver compresses dynamics as things get loud.

 

[Blorg]

@Garrincha OK, so you accept it does actually sound different. Your issue then is purely a linguistic one, you don't like the word "punch". I'm not imagining it that they sound different, I'm just using the wrong word to describe the difference. Crackling is OK, soundstage is OK, but punch is out. Punch triggers you for some reason. You have never heard the Utopia, of course, or any other Focal, but you know all about what they sound like. And it is impossible for any headphone to be "punchier" than the HD800. Because... reasons. A headphone someone once described, I think accurately, as "light on its feet", nevertheless simultaneously has unrivalled punch. Or not punch, because what's punch. It doesn't exist, right. Unless you're claiming that the HD800 has it, in unbounded quantities, for your techno. Then it exists. Schrodinger's punch.

So maybe we could refer to the difference between the Utopia and HD800S, that we both accept exists, by some sort of symbol, rather than the word "punch". "Ƭ̵̬̊", the sonic quality formerly known as punch. So it's not punch, it's "Ƭ̵̬̊". We can at least both agree that the Utopia has more Ƭ̵̬̊ than the HD800S. The indescribable quality in which the Utopia is different from the HD800S. Looping back,

I have the the HD650, Hifiman Sundara and since recently the HD800, which I really love. I wonder if with EQ the Utopia has anything the HD 800 does not?

It has Ƭ̵̬̊

And as "soundstage" is still an acceptable term, the HD800S wins that one.

 

[Garrincha]

True, but that’s different than saying that two headphones should sound the same because the FR, design parameters and distortion levels happens to be similar. For one FR is measured at a set level, typically not very loud, and looking at this measurement alone will tell you nothing about how a driver compresses dynamics as things get loud.

Well this is exactly what the distortion measurement is.

 

[Garrincha]

@Garrincha OK, so you accept it does actually sound different. Your issue then is purely a linguistic one, you don't like the word "punch". I'm not imagining it that they sound different, I'm just using the wrong word to describe the difference. Crackling is OK, soundstage is OK, but punch is out. Punch triggers you for some reason. You have never heard the Utopia, of course, or any other Focal, but you know all about what they sound like. And it is impossible for any headphone to be "punchier" than the HD800. Because... reasons.

Crackling is audible and measureable, soundstage is a psychoacoustic phenomenon which is harder to specify, but as far as I know nobody really denies. Punch is probably just made up and no real thing.

A headphone someone once described, I think accurately, as "light on its feet",

Who was it, Joshua Valor, Jude, DMS, Zeo Pantera or some other definitive authority on headphones?

nevertheless simultaneously has unrivalled punch. Or not punch, because what's punch. It doesn't exist, right. Unless you're claiming that the HD800 has it, in unbounded quantities, for your techno. Then it exists. Schrodinger's punch.

So maybe we could refer to the difference between the Utopia and HD800S, that we both accept exists, by some sort of symbol, rather than the word "punch". "Ƭ̵̬̊", the sonic quality formerly known as punch. So it's not punch, it's "Ƭ̵̬̊". We can at least both agree that the Utopia has more Ƭ̵̬̊ than the HD800S. The indescribable quality in which the Utopia is different from the HD800S. Looping back,

You are really bad in trying to be funny. Lets say the HD800 sounds like a planar bass with a bit of Beryllium-tinged sound.

It has Ƭ̵̬̊

And as "soundstage" is still an acceptable term, the HD800S wins that one.

Yes.

 

[AdamG]

If you guys can’t get along and communicate instead of talking past each other. Well let’s just say, things may not turn out how you expected. Dial it back, show respect for others, especially when you disagree. If you can’t do that don’t post. If we get any more Reports from this thread a few perm thread bans will be handed out. I don’t want that and I’m sure you don’t.

Thank you for your support and understanding. Keep in mind that not everyone here speaks English as their first language. Considering for a moment that we may have a language barrier to overcome.

 

[Blorg]

@AdamG247 OK, point taken

 

[PGAMiami]

Well this is exactly what the distortion measurement is

Well this is exactly what the distortion measurement is.

Yes, but there again, distortion is measured at a specific spl and without regards to EQ. Amir did not measure the HD800 at above 104db, while he took the Utopia up to 114db. That is a huge difference. We don’t know why he didn’t push the HD800 as far, but even at 104db, you can see them compressing bass more and at a higher frequency than the Utopia. Also the EQ for the Utopia is a mild plus 6db. For the HD800 it’s double that, which is again quite a lot of lost headroom. So when folks say the Utopia have more slam, this may be why. Engineering SOTA equipment is all about deciding which compromises are best for the overall design goals. The Utopia aren’t perfect, and I suspect neither are the HD800, which I’ve never heard. I expect both are great examples of design and manufacturing excellence, but I doubt you can get them to sound identically the same, and I don’t know why you even would want to do that. Let each shine with its own strengths.

 

[Garrincha]

If you guys can’t get along and communicate instead of talking past each other. Well let’s just say, things may not turn out how you expected. Dial it back, show respect for others, especially when you disagree.

That sounds like a good idea.

 

[Garrincha]

Yes, but there again, distortion is measured at a specific spl and without regards to EQ. Amir did not measure the HD800 at above 104db, while he took the Utopia up to 114db. That is a huge difference. We don’t know why he didn’t push the HD800 as far, but even at 104db, you can see them compressing bass more and at a higher frequency than the Utopia. Also the EQ for the Utopia is a mild plus 6db. For the HD800 it’s double that, which is again quite a lot of lost headroom.

True, the measurements show higher distortion for the HD800 in subbass, but I even use sometimes EQ far above the Harman curve and never heard any distortion, including loud listening to tracks with a lot of subbass content.

So when folks say the Utopia have more slam, this may be why.

No, I am pretty sure they somehow refer to the "quality" of the bass, not that it is distorted. Better slam should correlate with faster impulse response or something related, yet I have not seen measurements for this and doubt there would be any signifcant difference.

 

[PGAMiami]

True, the measurements show higher distortion for the HD800 in subbass, but I even use sometimes EQ far above the Harman curve and never heard any distortion, including loud listening to tracks with a lot of subbass content.there


No, I am pretty sure they somehow refer to the "quality" of the bass, not that it is distorted. Better slam should correlate with faster impulse response or something related, yet I have not seen measurements for this and doubt there would be any signifcant difference.

 

[PGAMiami]

There is a mathematical relationship between impulse response and frequency response. You can derive one from the other. My EE degree is 42 years old, and I moved on to Wall Street soon after, but others with more current knowledge can chime in. As far as I know, slam or punch will have much more to do with SPL and dynamic range than impulse response. The concept that a woofer sounds fast is more about lack of resonance and distortion, than it being “fast” as the LPF will determine how fast it is (Not).

 

[lateralous]

True, but that’s different than saying that two headphones should sound the same because the FR, design parameters and distortion levels happens to be similar. For one FR is measured at a set level, typically not very loud, and looking at this measurement alone will tell you nothing about how a driver compresses dynamics as things get loud.

I guess I'm not sure who you're making the point to then, I don't see anyone claiming measurements prove two headphones sound the same nor that measurements alone are enough data for an individual to determine how a product sounds to them. I expect your reply was directed towards Garrincha's comments - to that I would challenge the subjective opinion that one headphone sounds more "punchy" should have a quite obvious correlation to measured FR differences. The problem is that the subjective term "punchy" can be interpreted an infinite amount of ways, but when we qualify that with real measurements it can have real meaning to someone else.

 

[Garrincha]

I guess I'm not sure who you're making the point to then, I don't see anyone claiming measurements prove two headphones sound the same nor that measurements alone are enough data for an individual to determine how a product sounds to them. I expect your reply was directed towards Garrincha's comments - to that I would challenge the subjective opinion that one headphone sounds more "punchy" should have a quite obvious correlation to measured FR differences. The problem is that the subjective term "punchy" can be interpreted an infinite amount of ways, but when we qualify that with real measurements it can have real meaning to someone else.

I think the claim is that one headphone might sound "punchier" or with more "slam" than another, even both having the same FR. But how this is supposedly possible you should ask the adherents of this hypothesis. But if the phenomenon does exist, it must be measureable somehow.

 

[PGAMiami]

I think the claim is that one headphone might sound "punchier" or with more "slam" than another, even both having the same FR. But how this is supposedly possible you should ask the adherents of this hypothesis. But if the phenomenon does exist, it must be measureable somehow.

FR alone does not say anything about max undistorted SPL. Slam or punch is about dynamic range, and is the opposite of a compressed sound.

 

[lateralous]

FR alone does not say anything about max undistorted SPL. Slam or punch is about dynamic range, and is the opposite of a compressed sound.

This is exactly my point, you've now ascribed specific technical, measurable phenomena to a word that can be interpreted in infinite ways. Why not just show measurements comparing these technical aspects of both headphones, and eliminate the pointless word salad?

 

[AdamG]

I think the claim is that one headphone might sound "punchier" or with more "slam" than another, even both having the same FR. But how this is supposedly possible you should ask the adherents of this hypothesis. But if the phenomenon does exist, it must be measureable somehow.

Could this be partially accounted for by an improved/better seal over the ears? Less cup leakage and possibly a tighter air seal in the headset in each or one transducer mounting/cup. So many variables when you talk about a device that is fitted over your skull/ears. Nobody’s anatomy is the same and the ear structure of one person as opposed to another person has infinite minuscule variations. Even the cupping of the ear shape can magnify the sound having varying effects on different frequencies. If we’re splitting hairs, tiny variations in the cushion shape produced under manufacturing tolerances, and how well it conforms to the wearer’s body.

This difference would not be readily measurable using industry standard testing methods. JMHO.

 

[Garrincha]

Could this be partially accounted for by an improved/better seal over the ears? Less cup leakage and possibly a tighter air seal in the headset in each or one transducer mounting/cup. So many variables when you talk about a device that is fitted over your skull/ears. Nobody’s anatomy is the same and the ear structure of one person as opposed to another person has infinite minuscule variations. Even the cupping of the ear shape can magnify the sound having varying effects on different frequencies. If we’re splitting hairs, tiny variations in the cushion shape produced under manufacturing tolerances, and how well it conforms to the wearer’s body.

This difference would not be readily measurable using industry standard testing methods. JMHO.

Well, in post #386 this was dismissed as a possible source by @MayaTlab, and he seems to know what he is talking about.

 

[PGAMiami]

Could this be partially accounted for by an improved/better seal over the ears? Less cup leakage and possibly a tighter air seal in the headset in each or one transducer mounting/cup. So many variables when you talk about a device that is fitted over your skull/ears. Nobody’s anatomy is the same and the ear structure of one person as opposed to another person has infinite minuscule variations. Even the cupping of the ear shape can magnify the sound having varying effects on different frequencies. If we’re splitting hairs, tiny variations in the cushion shape produced under manufacturing tolerances, and how well it conforms to the wearer’s body.

This difference would not be readily measurable using industry standard testing methods. JMHO.

Agree 1000%. Acoustics is very complex, and even the smallest things make a huge difference in how things will sound to us And also, some rather large measurable differences are many times not noticeable. This is why we have to measure and hear. This is one of the most endearing features of Amir’s reviews, where you can see how he’s always looking for his ears to confirm his measurements and also for his measurements to confirm what he hears.

 

[Blorg]

Pad type, pad wear, and seal does significantly change the sound, and this is also very evident in measurements of the frequency response. I'm not sure how this can be dismissed as not relevant.