Reviews by vrln

DISCLAIMER

This review is based on a loaner unit I got from RHA from their Europe Head-Fi tour. I got the opportunity to audition their IEM for around a week before sending it to the next one in line. Thank you RHA for the opportunity! I have no prior experience of any RHA products, although I’ve almost bought the T20 on a few occasions. As for RHA (or any audio company), I have no financial or personal ties to them and actually did not even keep contact with them much during the time I had these in order to stay as neutral as possible. In addition I purposefully did not read any reviews before writing this up (just saw a few impressions posts on the main CL2 thread, but even there I’ve maybe spent 20 minutes tops). There is no financial incentive to write a positive review. Communication with RHA over the package shipping was a pleasure, they were always quick to reply and professional. All listening was done either at home wired via 3.5mm to RME ADI-2 DAC via its IEM specific port or portable with the included Bluetooth cable.

The official RHA CL2 Planar website is: https://www.rha-audio.com/ca/products/headphones/cl2-planar (I will be referring to the frequency response chart posted there in this review, although I just noticed there's a more accurate one posted in one of the other reviews)

Although I am using the word review throughout this article, please keep in mind that this is all written based on a week of listening and I would have preferred to listen to these more extensively, but it’s a tour with a fixed schedule and I wouldn't have wanted to delay it anyway. What I am trying to say is this: consider these extended impressions instead of a traditional full review (which in my experience needs a month or so of steady listening to form a good solid opinion).



CONTEXT

Since reviews without any context are (if you ask me) often at the minimum quite confusing and at the worst pretty useless, here is a list of some of the IEMs I’ve owned and eventually sold on in the past: Sennheiser IE 80, IE 800, IE 800 S; Shure SE 530, SE 846; Ultimate Ears UE 900; Fischer Amps FA4E-XB, Rhapsody; Jays Q-Jays (current version); EarSonics SM64; HIFIMAN RE-600S. Comparisons are thus from memory, but I'm pretty confident this does not effect things that much as many of those IEMs are ones I used for a very long time.

Why are all these now gone? I intend on going wireless only when it comes to IEMs. For me portable audio needs to be truly portable and nothing is more portable than wireless. Home setups are a different matter entirely, but on the go I want something that gets out of the way and disappears. This is actually the main reason I applied for this tour: the CL2 seemed to me to be one of the ground breakers when it comes to finally getting high end sound quality in a wireless setup. I might be missing some products, but from this point of view I see it its main competition being the AKG N5005 and Beyerdynamic Xelento which both come “wireless ready”. Both are however more expensive than the CL2. Unfortunately I haven't heard either, so I can't make any comparisons there.

As for my tonality preference, out of everything I've heard I consider the Sennheiser HD 600/650 and the Focal Clear to be the best tuned headphone audio products thus far. In the IEM world the Sennheiser IE 800 S takes the crown. From this you may guess that I value a smooth frequency response with mids and treble that do not have any major spikes. Ideally a headphone needs to be able to handle all kinds of music. Being genre-specific is generally a bad sign: the original Sennheiser HD 800 likely being the most famous example.

Now I know many audiophiles are at the very least, well, let’s say conservative when it comes to accepting wireless audio. After all lossless is considered the standard and yes, there is a small difference between modern lossless and lossy files. The difference however in my experience is definitely not as big as is often claimed and and the very least it’s very difficult to hear on anything most mainstream music. Classical, vocals and other genres with minimal compression are a different topic entirely though, in those the difference is much easier to hear. In any case the AAC (and others) codec of today is not the same as five years ago and huge advances have been made in both cods and Bluetooth technology. In other words the sound quality gap between wireless and wired is getting smaller day by day.

The CL2 however strikes the ideal balance: it caters to the traditional audiophiles by offering a wired option (two actually, one cable is for balanced use which many no doubt will appreciate) along with the wireless, so everyone can make up their own mind which one they want to use. This is just my guess, but I’m betting a lot of people will start using these wired and eventually slowly move into using them almost exclusively wireless...


FIRST IMPRESSIONS

I always knew RHA had build quality locked down. It’s pretty obvious: just look at the build materials, online videos and so on. In other words I expected to be impressed with the unboxing and surely enough I wasn’t disappointed. It screams high end and quite frankly makes a mockery out of many competitors. The way the box opens has a bit of an Apple style vibe with the IEMs being in the middle with their cables disconnected. Let’s check out the accessories first: there’s the wireless cable, two wired cables (one copper 3.5mm and one silver-planted 2.5mm balanced), a carrying pouch, an airline adapter and a selection of tips (more specifically a mix of double-flange, silicon and Comply ones in different sizes) on a metal tip holder that works surprisingly well.



The first surprise however were the IEMs themselves. They are much, much smaller than I thought they would be judging by the pictures. The form is quite close to the classic Shure/Westone (+ Earsonics SM64) style, which is actually my favorite shell style. It’s a classic with a good track record. You can already guess how well the shells fit my ears (and I’m pretty sure they will fit most people really well; better than many other designs), but what isn’t apparent in the pictures is how nice these feel. The RHA website mentions that these are built from ceramics and these do indeed have a similar feel as the Sennheiser IE 800, although the CL2 feels more solid, weightier in a positive way and somehow tougher. This is quite a surprise considering the CL2 weighs 9 grams vs. IE 800’s 8 grams without a cable. These are basically built like a tank and feel more or less indestructible, although I have no idea how well these can take hard hits against concrete and so on (with IEMs this expensive that shouldn’t really be happening though). My guess is that the ceramics layer is thicker than on the IE 800 series since they also feel quite cold before warming up. Or it could just be because the material is different: the ceramics they are using here is zirconium. Ceramics in general is probably the ideal material for IEMs since it is extremely stiff and durable, the downside being that it’s expensive to work with and is thus only seen in higher end products.

As for the design, the CL2 looks high end yet minimalistic. It won’t gather any unwanted attention on the subway like perhaps the Beyerdynamic Xelento would. Now aesthetics is obviously a very subjective topic, but personally I’m a big fan of this approach. They don’t draw attention to themselves, look good with any clothing style and aren’t really that divisive compared to something more brash looking.



As for the cables, the wired ones I feel are bound to divide opinion. They are quite thick, heavy and the colors are a far cry from the minimalistic and understated look of the IEM itself. Some will love them, others will feel they are too thick and difficult to handle (and may not be a fan of the aesthetics). I personally fall into the latter group, although I must admit the silver cable to me looks much better than the copper one. Hopefully RHA will sell the silver one in a single ended configuration someday?

The wireless one is a different matter entirely: it follows the same minimalistic design philosophy as the IEM itself and well, it just disappears. The design is beautiful. The plastic/rubber mix feels nice to touch, it doesn't feel cheap in any way and is just something that looks like it belongs with the CL2. It initially feels a bit heavy when you pick it up, but when actually wearing it the weight distribution is so good that it basically disappears. The wires coming from the battery section are also just the right length and do not to hang out in an annoying way. It's also worth emphasizing that it has a USB-C port for charging. Finally... Audio for whatever reason has been very slow to adopt USB-C despite its obvious advantages. The Chord Hugo 2 for example still uses Micro-USB, which if you ask me diminishes the value of the product somewhat. Micro-USB has a habit of breaking down and is just very flimsy feeling in general. You’ll find none of that with USB-C plus the cable orientation doesn’t matter anymore. The cable charges quickly and I didn’t have a problem with running out of power during the day. Never experienced any audio cutouts either and the pairing process with an iPhone X was a breeze. I unfortunately forgot to measure how long the cable charge lasts, but hopefully someone else from the tour can do that since it’s probably something a lot of people want to know.



These IEMs use MMCX connectors. I’ll be honest with you: I’m not a fan. I’ve had a UE 900 and Shure SE 215 that both used this connector and developed audio cutouts to the point where I found using them very annoying. However on the other hand I had the Shure SE 846 for quite a long time and they never had a single issue despite using the same connector. I’m hoping the CL2 will be similar, but in addition to potential cutout issues my main grievance with this type of connector is the basic swiveling function they have. In my experience it doesn’t improve finding a good fit, it makes it more difficult as you have to adjust them more often. With a classic 2-pin connector like on the EarSonics models you just bend the memory wire to suit your ears and forget about it: since it won’t swivel they will always feel the same when you put them on. This is however a theme that divides opinion a lot, there are also a lot of fans of this connector. That being said, however one feels about MMCX in general, fact is that these have more or less become a standard in the industry so from that point of view I understand RHA going this way. For me it’s definitely a minus though; even if they never develop cutout issues, I just don’t find MMCX cables as comfortable/solid feeling (with over ears IEMs) compared to the traditional 2-pin connector that’s used in many custom made IEMs and also some universals like in the EarSonics ones.

As for the included tips, well, with universals it’s always down to luck. When I saw the tip selection I was pretty sure I wouldn’t encounter any issues, but to my surprise I could not get a decent seal with any of the double-flange or silicon tips. Only the Comply ones seemed to seal, and those aren’t tips that I would normally use just because they are slow to put on, wear out fast and because of that just aren’t all that suitable for portable use if you ask me. I'm not sure, but the nozzle looks quite similar to the classic Logitech style on UE 900 so I was left wondering if perhaps the UE 900 tips would fit these well. Unfortunately I don’t have them anymore so I couldn’t test. Don’t get me wrong, the Comply foams feel very comfortable once they settle in, but for me IEMs need to be used with silicon tips so you can quickly take them out and put them back in without having to replace tips that often. Hopefully RHA will expand the silicon tips selection in the future, although I have to say it’s not currently bad at all (instead it's better than on many competitors like the IE 800 series); I was just unlucky.

Unfortunately the CL2 does not feature RHA’s tuning filters. This has two downsides: first of all if the stock tuning isn’t to your liking you are out of luck (unless you EQ them, but EQ is not something I am willing to do with portables unless there's a product specific app that uploads the choices to the IEM itself so they work universally), but also there is now no 100% safe ear wax filter (except on the Comply tips which have one, but that’s another matter) on the IEM itself. On an IEM this expensive I would have prefered to see some system that is 100% safe. There is however a metal spiral part that likely helps keep ear wax away from the grid section.



Once I finally pressed play I was instantly impressed: bass was very deep and punchy as expected, but it never overshadowed the mids. Resolution seemed high and soundstage was far larger than I expected from a closed design planar driver. Even the treble extension – traditionally a weak spot with planar drivers – was very good. However as I listened to different songs I noticed there was kind of a rough feel to the sound as if the drivers hadn’t really settled in yet. So I left them to burn in and continued later. It turned out this was a smart move: these were apparently straight from the factory without much (or any) burn in and they did indeed settle down a lot. So a note to all future listeners: burn these in for at least 24 hours before starting to listen. Oh and for the record I’m not even a big believer in burn in, but planar drivers seem to be an exception (I’ve had similar experiences with full size planar headphones; balanced armature IEMs on the other hand never seem to need any burn).

That being said, first impressions in audio are notoriously unreliable. If something really wows you the first time you listen to them it may even be a bad sign: the HD 800 is a good example. It’s probably the best case study of a product that creates an almost unbelievably good first impression when listened to which carefully chosen music, but then in the long run many end up selling due to the treble spikes (or lack of bass). In my experience high end audio products typically have at least some major flaws, it’s more or less to be expected. Finding an all rounder with a smooth frequency response is extremely rare and that's the ideal to aim for. That’s why the Sennheiser HD 600/HD650 series are still so popular even after all these years: they may sound unremarkable at first, but they have no serious flaws and offer some of the smoothest frequency responses on the market. The IE 800 / IE 800 S are also interesting in this regard: the original IE 800 has too much bass and treble for a lot of people making it good for outdoors use in noisy areas, but a bad for indoors use. Or a genre specialist for pop/hiphop/electronica, depends on who you ask… The IE 800 S took a different direction and toned down both the treble and bass leaving a very smooth frequency response, but on the other hand some will feel it lacks the “fun” factor the original had. But let’s finally get to the more in depth sound quality parts of this review...


RESOLUTION AND SOUNDSTAGE

Planar drivers aren’t really generally known for being the most resolving ones. They have a lot of other virtues like class leading bass performance, but raw resolution in my experience just isn’t one of them. That’s why I was very surprised to notice that these are actually very resolving IEMs. Not on the same level as the IE 800 S for example, but clearly superior to your average 300-400 euro price range IEMs. Now I haven’t heard that many planar headphones, but I would say these are more resolving than the Audeze LCD-2 Classics (which I’ve owned) or likely even the HIFIMAN HE-1000 I’ve auditioned. That being said, I’m not completely sure if this subjective feeling of a high resolution is entirely down to “real resolution” or if it is partly enhanced by the boosted upper midrange. My guess is that the truth is somewhere in the middle: that this is an exceptionally resolving planar driver, but the tonality is also designed to provide some added “fake” sense of detail. More on that in the midrange section though.

The thing I expected the least out of these was hearing a wide soundstage. I know many disagree, but I’ve never heard a planar that didn’t sound at least somewhat claustrophobic and closed in. There’s none of that here, which is almost a miracle considering these are not only a planar design, but in addition to that a closed shell design. To put things short: these have a wide and tall soundstage that often makes you forget that you are listening to IEMs. Not many IEMs pull this off, so this is definitely one of the high points here. The only minus when it comes to the soundstage is that the depth is not on the same level as the rest (for example the IE 800 series is clearly superior in this regard). Instrument separation is also very good: above the typical cheaper IEMs, but not best of class. Out of everything I’ve heard that award still goes to the IE 800 series. All in all considering the technology being used here and the closed design the soundstage performance is exceptionally good.


BASS

So far so good… Now this part you probably already guess what I’m about to write. This is a planar driver after all and bass is simply what this technology does the best. This is where planar drivers excel and one of the main reasons many find it very difficult to go back to dynamic or balanced armature drivers after getting used to planar bass performance. That being said, there were also a couple of surprises here. Let’s start with what you probably do expect: yes, the bass is ultra clean, tight and goes very deep. However it also fast: subjectively there isn’t a lot of extra decay, so instead it sounds tight, tuneful and never bloated.

The surprising part here that there is no artificial bass quantity boost, which is usually common with planar drivers because it's a nice way to show of the technology. You won’t find that here. These aren’t bass cannons at all and instead go for neutrality. This doesn’t mean the bass quantity is lacking per se, but these do not have the added bass boost some IEMs have that lead to a “fun” sound tonality that often suits genres like hip-hip/electronica well. That being said while I didn't try EQ with these, planar drivers typically respond well to EQ so on a home rig at least it should be easy to add a couple of dB of sub bass for that extra kick. The official frequency response chart (although very smoothed over as official ones always are) seems to support impression. All in all these probably have the cleanest, fastest and deepest bass I’ve ever heard out of an IEM. Personally I would have preferred to have a bit more sub bass boost though, but unfortunately that option is only there with EQ. The inclusion of tonality adjusting filters would have helped here.


MIDS

This is where things for me got problematic. Now I’m a fan of smooth, linear midrange that does not have any major dips or spikes. Our ears are also the most sensitive in this area too. For me this part in the frequency response makes or breaks an IEM. In my experience IEMs that stray too much from linear here can often sound shouty, fatiguing and the realism of the vocals suffers as well. I’ll start with the good news: due to the neutral tuning the bass never, ever intrudes on the midrange. It doesn’t matter how much bass is in the mix (or how deep it goes), midrange will always stay clear of bass influence. In fact it’s not just a matter of not intruding on it, but parts of the midrange are actually boosted on this IEM to bring vocals forward. I’m again referring to the official frequency response chart on the RHA website: notice the rise beginning from the midrange (500Hz to 2kHz) and then the clear spikes in the upper midrange (2kHz to 4kHz). This spike in the upper midrange is often used in headphones and IEMs among other things to boost the sense of detail (however one can argue that it’s fake in a way), but nothing comes free: it can also make sibilance worse or just sound unpleasantly shouty/sharp on certain material. Unfortunately the midrange tuning style in the CL2 is not something I generally like and I have to say that in many aspects this proved to be a deal breaker for me. Sibilance wasn’t the issue, but the CL2 had the latter issue on many songs. On a home rig I would definitely want to EQ this down.

As it generally is with headphones with similar midrange tonality, it really depends on what you are listening to: in many albums there are no problems and the tonality may even sound subjectively better than a more neutral approach, but on many albums I found the sound too fatiguing/piercing after a while. Overall this breaks the CL2 as an all rounder for me. I would personally have preferred a more linear midrange (no upper midrange spike) at the expense of less perceived detail. Generally speaking this kind of tuning (at least to my ears) is more of a problem with mainstream genres than audiophile ones though, so it partly depends on what kind of music you listen to the most. Note however that I am probably a lot more sensitive when it comes to midrange: for example I found the Shure SE 846 midrange to be too shouty/edgy as well (not as much, but to an annoying degree). All this being said, there are of course also a lot of people who prefer boosted upper mids, so it all comes down to personal preference.

The resolution on the other hand continued to impress: vocals were often very realistic and when an album is mastered in a way where the upper midrange spike doesn’t offend, the results are often stunning. However due to the dB level difference between lower and higher mids some vocals can sound a bit off/muddled depending on where they hit on the frequency response. This is another downside to the chosen midrange frequency response tuning.


TREBLE

Planar drivers can’t do treble well. That’s at least the stereotype and to my best knowledge getting treble right is one of the main challenges when working with a planar driver (vs. getting bass right on a dynamic). Well, this one defies the odds here and is definitely not your typical Audeze LCD-2 Classic or even the Shure SE 846 (where the treble seems to fall off a cliff pretty fast). Now the treble here isn’t the smoothest or most detailed out there compared to the highest level of competition (IE 800 S for example is on different level), but it is very impressive for a planar driver and a critical part in creating that awesome soundstage. The CL2 treble is nicely extended and that's something I wasn’t expecting to hear at all. The is a slight roughness in the treble that isn’t apparent in high end balanced armatures or dynamic driver IEMs, but it wasn’t something that annoyed me much. Due to the slight roughness the resolution here didn’t sound as it was quite on the same level as in the midrange and bass, but the difference wasn’t drastic enough to make it stick out too much.


CONCLUSION

This one is tough… From the moment I opened the box I wanted to love them. They do so many things right: a superb wireless cable design, industry leading build quality and comfort, they're priced fairly and of course the quality impresses in many ways. On the downside however it goes with the MMCX connectors and the only tips that worked for me were the Comply ones (just bad luck; I doubt many will have this problem). It’s main issue however to me is the midrange tuning that artificially boosts the sense of detail, makes certain material sound shouty/fatiguing and for me that simply breaks it as an all rounder. The treble is also slightly problematic, but that is something I would gladly take in return for getting freed from the traditional claustrophobic planar driver sound.

Would I recommend it? Yes if you have a preference towards this kind of tuning, are ok with MMCX connectors and know from past RHA products that the tips fit you well. For others I would say it’s an IEM that you need to audition before making a decision or buy from a place that accepts returns. Then again that’s what I would say of more or less every expensive universal IEM out there. To sum things up: add 1+ star if the midrange tonality is to your liking and you have nothing against the MMCX connector type. Personally however I believe IEMs need to be all rounders and I place a high value on frequency response smoothness so for me this is unfortunately (despite all its virtues) a pass. I just wish RHA would have kept their sound tuning filters technology or perhaps supported an app that can upload EQ settings to the bluetooth cable. That could have solved the most pressing issues for me (except for the Comply one, but fit with universals is down to luck).

Disclaimer: I bought these from a local reseller some time ago and kept them for a bit less than a week. In other words this review isn’t based on as much experience as I would usually prefer to have, so this may have an effect on things. The price for these in Europe is currently around 900 euros without a case, so I’ll be treating them as a ~1k product. My main motivation for getting these was to find a good complementary can for my Focal Clears and to finally experience what Audeze is all about.

Introduction:

Audeze (along with HIFIMAN) to most headphone hobbyists is probably synonymous with planar magnetic headphones. Personally I’ve never been much of a planar magnetic tech fan, but they still interest me. Every technology has its strengths and weaknesses. With planars my impression is that if the driver is large enough they usually excel at bass extension, low distortion rates and how the frequency response rarely changes much when you move the headphones around. The only planars I’ve actually had before these are the very first original LCD-2 and more recently the HIFIMAN HE-560. The first one I didn’t really like much: they had wonderful bass, but the treble was just way too rolled off and there wasn’t much of a soundstage either. Their biggest sin though was the high weight in combination with a traditional headband that simply wasn’t comfortable at all for me. As for the HE-560 I bought one recently online for 350 dollars (+ shipping and customs), but only used them for a while as both drivers were unfortunately defective (rattling) so I decided to send them back. My initial impressions of the sound quality were quite positive though and I found them to be one of the most comfortable headphones I’ve ever tried.

These days there of course numerous updates to the LCD-2 range and new flagships from Audezze too. What kept me from auditioning them despite otherwise keeping up with new stuff pretty actively was simply the ergonomic design that I just knew wouldn't fit well with me. So when the LCD2 Classic was announced sporting a new headband design I was naturally very interested. Suspension headbands tend to very comfortable. My thinking was that if Audeze gets anywhere near the same result as the HE-560 they now finally seemed like headphones I could start using. After trying the LCD-2 Classics briefly at a store it seemed they were comfortable to wear so I decided to give them a try as I’m in need of a warm, forgiving and more relaxed headphone to complement the forward, energetic and engaging Focal Clears.

Presentation:

This one is easy… There’s not much to talk about. The LCD2 Classic ships in a standard grey cardboard box with foam inserts inside. In the box you’ll find the headphones, a black cable with a standard 6.3 mm jack and the warranty card along with a USB key. There’s no case included. It’s obvious Audeze is trying to save as much costs as possible to make it possible to ship these at their current price, but the downside is that a lot of people will probably have to buy the official case if they want to transport these around. I don’t really mind though: I’m all for including as little accessories as possible and keeping them optional if that enables a lower price.

These were however initially sold for 600 dollars in the US during a launch campaign. At that price this all makes good sense, but now at their standard market price this is a lot more difficult to justify. It’s not a big deal for me, but I think many buyers will be surprised at the presentation for a product in this prince range.

Build quality and ergonomics:

The LCD2 Classics have a very industrial, almost indestructible look and feel to them. These are basically built like a tank. Audeze these days has a generous three year warranty for their drivers (one year for the headband etc.) so these should last for a very long time. I much prefer this design to their other models that use wooden rings. There is however still a slight (high end) DIY feel to them, for example in how the screws are all very visible and the build just doesn’t feel as polished as high end Focal, Sennheiser or Beyerdynamic headphones. Edges are sharper, the finish on materials is not as nice and so on. It is a noticeable step up from the HIFIMAN HE-560 (and the HE-1000 I’ve auditioned) though. This build quality would be very good at 600 euros, but at 900 euros (+ without a case) there’s a lot of competition in this regard. I’m also a bit worried about some quality control issues. My headband arc for example is not 100% identical to the one at the store and the lowest headband setting is quite loose compared to the other steps. In addition to this the store demo model had issues with both cable connectors not locking in correctly. These are small things, but at this price range these kinds of issues shouldn’t really be happening.



On the plus side the build is very modular and parts can be exchanged easily due to the standard screws. It’s very easy to swap to another headband for example. The pads unfortunately are glued in, but from what I’ve read Audeze sells a kit for changing them so that’s not really a problem. I don't see most users having to ever replace them either: the pads feel extremely durable. While they don’t quite feel as nice as the ones on the Clears, they are very comfortable and seem to have a good memory effect too. They are also very deep so using glasses with these headphones is both easy and comfortable. The pads are thinner on the front side to effectively make the drivers angled like on many other designs these days. I much prefer these new pads to the leather ones Audeze used to have on their cans. There’s also a lot of space inside the earpads. Great work here!

The headband size is controlled through what Audeze calls yokes: small metal rods that go through a small box that houses a locking mechanism. I like this design a lot as all it takes a lot of force to swap the setting so they stay well in place, except mine as I already mentioned had a small build quality issue on the smallest setting. The local Audeze distributor was ready to send me replacement yokes though so this isn’t really an issue. The only real downside to the yoke mechanism is that you lose the ability to fine tune things as you're stuck with the steps.

The actual headband consists of two components: there’s the spring steel metal arc and the soft thin headband. The soft thin part is narrower on the sides and becomes larger in the middle to spread the weight as well as possible. It also has small holes in it to breathe well. For most people it’ll go like this: the metal arc never touches your head and the new thin headband material will spread the weight perfectly making these otherwise very heavy headphones surprisingly comfortable. They won’t feel as if they disappear, but no headphone weighing this much does...

Despite my positive early impressions at the store I unfortunately wasn’t as lucky: when wearing these for several hours the front part of the metal arc started pressing towards the thin headband creating a nasty hotpot. I tried all kinds of remedies: gently bending them, adding some foam in between, trying to tie the thin headband part to the sides and so on. Nothing really helped and for me this was a deal breaker that lead me to sell them soon after. Without this fault I would have gladly kept them. It’s important to emphasize however that this just depends on your head shape: for most people this won’t be an issue, but what bothers me is how easily this could have been avoided. Why didn’t Audeze make the spring steel part arc higher/have more distance to the thin headband part instead of almost hugging the headband? The new HIFIMAN Sundara uses a similar design but I can already see from the pictures that it probably won’t have this issue. To me this is a bit of a sloppy design as stuff like this should be caught and fixed through focus group testing.

If you are considering buying these make sure the spring steel part does not come too close to your head as this may end up being a major deal breaker as it was for me. Hopefully Audeze will revise the design someday or start offering a headband with an arc shape that doesn’t have this issue.

One last thing… The cable connectors are angled forward to make it easier to keep on a table without a stand. The downside to this is that you can see the cables more than usual when you are wearing them. I didn’t find this distracting though, but it is something check before buying.

Sound quality:

I’ll start with something I guess every review will praise: the bass response is the best I’ve ever heard. Great impact, clean and extremely extended. Not a surprise considering how well these measure in the bass range. Due to the low distortion measurements you can also EQ in extra bass and they will stay clean (good luck trying that with the HD 600 series ) too. The fantastic bass response makes these awesome for genres like hip-hop, electronica and rock.

These are smooth, warm and forgiving headphones. They are going for a very different frequency response compared to traditional higher end dynamics like HD 800 and T1 mk2. I would characterize them as “easy listening” oriented. The stock frequency response however just sounds too far away from neutral for my taste. The biggest offender is the uneven midrange which has a strong lower midrange emphasis making most vocals sound quite “off”. This makes lyrics sometimes difficult to understand and they have a muted, boring quality to them. Some parts of the treble are scooped too. From what I’ve read the higher end Audeze cans are more neutral, but luckily there is a remedy for this: the Reveal plugin or the Audeze Roon presets. If it were not for this plugin I would not have liked the frequency response of these that much, but with the plugin most of these tonality issues are fixed. I enjoyed the plugin enough to always leave it on (system wide using Equalizer APO). The rest of this review is written with the assumption that the Reveal plugin is left on. I used the 100% on setting (= wet) and added in a couple of dB of extra sub bass. Here's what the plugin does after the bass range where it adds a couple of dB:



If you hear these at a store or a meet somewhere I highly recommend trying to check if you can audition them with the plugin enabled. For me this was a complete game changer and transformed these from a “nice, but not for me” headphone into ones I really liked. A lot of people will enjoy the stock sound tuning though, I guess the Audeze house sound just isn't for me. Without EQ I would probably much prefer their studio oriented products like the LCD-X.

With the Reveal plugin the midrange is much more neutral, although still a bit dull sounding due to the downward slope in the frequency response. This however also makes them very forgiving of less than perfect recordings and great for background music listening. The emotional engagement with these headphones mostly comes from the bass while on the Clears it’s from the whole energetic presentation. It’s an interesting contrast and the two complement each other very well. Or to be more precise the Classics are a great complementary can to any neutral to bright dynamic headphone like the HD 800 series, Beyerdynamic T1 mk2 and so on.

While the original LCD2 I once had didn’t have much treble, planar magnetics have evolved immensely since then. The Classics actually have more treble than I expected. It’s not the most sophisticated and cleanest treble around and has a sort of a rough or grainy texture to it, but it's surprisingly extended. The treble is still somewhat rolled off to enhance the “easy listening” factor, but not the extent where you feel the treble is missing way too much like on the original LCD2.

The soundstage is also better than I expected. It's wider than the classic 3-blob presentation on the HD 600 series for example, but these are still fairly closed in sounding. The bigger issue however is the somewhat imprecise imaging. Compared to the Clears or HD 800 S you just don’t hear where instruments and effects and are coming from that well. With music it's something you eventually get used to, but I wouldn't recommend these for gaming. Playing PUBG for example I couldn’t really tell where shots are coming from except for the general direction (vs. pinpoint accuracy with the Clears or HD 800 S).

Another drawback is that to my ears they are just not as resolving as top of the line dynamic headphones (and probably higher end planars as well). They sound very clean, but when compared to the Clears or HD 800 series there’s just a lot of microdetail missing. It’s not like the microdetail is hidden behind a haze like on the HD 650, it’s just not there in the first place. This lack of microdetail on the other hand is an aspect of what makes them so easy to listen to, especially with less than perfectly recorded material. The Classics also get a bit confused and smeared sounding when a lot of stuff is happening simultaneously. For example if you listen to Unspecial Effects by deadmau5 the Clears or HD 800 series always stays composed and if you concentrate you can hear every single small detail and everything has a precise position. They sound as if everything is coming from separate speakers (in a good way). In comparison the Classics just can’t really hold up.

The Audeze also has this enveloping “wall of sound” presentation where you know everything is coming from one huge driver. In my experience this is typical to planar headphones. Some people love it, it all comes down to preference. Personally I'd like to have a complementary can with this kind of a presentation, but as a main headphone I still prefer the traditional dynamic driver sound.

Conclusion:

If you ask me these are made for easy listening/chilling out. Their biggest single draw is likely the industry leading bass response, but they aren’t necessarily that good all-rounders. That being said they do the best with a lot of mainstream genres that most higher end headphones tend to struggle with, so it's a very useful specialization and doesn't have much competition. They also finally have good ergonomics despite their heavy weight and are perfect for using EQ so you can always tune their frequency response to your liking.

As you can see I still have some mixed feelings on these though. They do some things extremely well, but they have their share of weaknesses too. It all comes down to the pricing. At their present price here in Europe they almost cost the same as a Sennheiser HD 800, Beyerdynamic T1 mk2 or the Focal Elear. All of them have superior build quality and the HD 800 and T1 mk2 are also much more comfortable due to their lower weight. The LCD2 Classic however does not really compete with the HD 800 or T1 mk2 as they are both bright headphones with severe treble spikes. The LCD2 Classic presentation is completely different. As for the Elear they aren’t very suitable for easy listening either as they are just too forward, energetic and dynamic (like all high end Focal cans) compared to the LCD2 Classics.

The biggest competitors to the LCD2 Classic are probably the HIFIMAN HE-560 and Sundara (neither of which I’ve heard well enough to comment), the Sennheiser HD 650 and the AudioQuest Nighthawk (which I haven’t heard at all). The main problem however with the new LCD2 is simply that at this price they just come too close to the Focal Clears for my liking. Aside from the bass response (which is still surprisingly competitive) the Clears are just on a completely different level in both sound and build quality. One should of course always audition yourself and form your own opinions, but for a lot of people it probably makes more sense to save up more and jump to to the next level instead. In other words these are quite expensive for a genre specialist headphone.

The Classics are a solid offering, but just imagine if they had kept the initial pricing? They would have went from a product definitely worth considering to a market disrupting one. Perhaps these are still just too expensive to manufacture at that price and turn in a decent profit, but they still feel like a missed opportunity. They are a significant improvement in many ways compared to their predecessors though and you have to keep in mind that what these excel at is usually exactly what most headphones struggle with (bass response, treble spikes and so on). If that's what you're looking for these are definitely worth an audition.

Disclaimer: I bought the Focal Clears from the local distributor after auditioning them several times with my own music. My first impression was that these were the first headphone I've heard that was as good or better than my previous favorite the Sennheiser HD 800 S. Comparisons will be primarily against the HD 800 S and the HD 600 series that I am very familiar with. Also sorry for the poor photo quality (taken with a smartphone).

Introduction:

Focal may be new to enthusiast level headphones, but they have a long history in the high end speaker market. They also famously merged with the British Naim in 2011 to create one of Europe's largest hi-fi companies. As such they possess significant research and development grunt, so when they turned their eyes on the high end headphone market in 2016 a lot of hobbyists were naturally quite intrigued. There was a lot of hype for the Utopia and Elear back when they were released, but for me both were actually big disappointments. I haven't owned either one, but I did audition them and quickly noticed they just weren't my cup of tea at all. The Elear was otherwise interesting, but the dip in the upper midrange made all vocals sound "off". I suspect it was done to make it sound more forgiving with a lot of contemporary music, but it was just a very odd voicing decision as the midrange is the area to which our ears are the most sensitive to. The Utopia on the other hand didn't really fit my head shape well and the extra weight didn't help either. There just wasn't enough clamp and the headphone would easily start sliding off if I moved my head too much. Not sure if I had a good seal either. I wasn't a big fan of the sound: while technically extremely detailed and fast, it didn't have enough bass for my taste and most importantly there was a fairly severe treble spike that I found annoying with a lot of music. There never was a chance I would buy one though, simply due to the extremely high 4000 euro price. I'd still easily pick the Sennheiser HD 800 S over the Utopia. It's on the same level technically (resolution and clarity) in most regards, loses in some (speed and dynamics in particular) and wins in others (soundstage and imaging). Most importantly it's also less than half the price. It has a brighter/thinner sound, but the treble is less harsh/spiky despite being more emphasized.

What initially got me interested in the Clears were early forum comments that while it was technically inferior to the Utopia it no longer had the Elear upper midrange dip or the Utopia treble spike (both deal breakers for me). Then the InnerFidelity review came out and convinced me to go and audition these despite being disappointed in their predecessors. I didn't really expect anything, but to my complete surprise what I found was my new favorite headphone. Why? Read on.

At 55 ohms and a high sensitivity rating the Clears are exceptionally easy to drive and can reach nice volume levels even from mobile sources like phones and tablets. Just make sure you pair them with a low output impedance source as otherwise the frequency response in the bass range is going to be altered due to the impedance/phase characteristics. A high output impedance is also going to result in a poor damping factor which means poor bass control. These do of course benefit from high quality source electronics, but they are nowhere near as demanding of them as the Sennheiser 300 ohm headphones for example. This is both a good and a bad thing: you won't have to spend a lot to have these sound awesome, but on the other hand they won't scale as much with top of the line sources either.

Presentation:

The Clear ships in very minimalistic black packaging. There's the Focal and Clear logos, a brief "Open-back reference headphones" statement and the technical specifications on the side. Everything is also stated in French, which nicely highlight the fact that these are produced at their local factory similarly to what Sennheiser does with their high end products.



The packaging doesn't draw much attention to itself and has a very understated look. Inside you'll find another black box for the included cables and the carrying case with the headphones inside. The included accessories are very generous. There's a standard 6.3mm and a balanced 4-pin XLR cable plus a short 3.5mm cable for portable use. The cables are a bit stiff, but they are well built and fairly light too. That being said they definitely look and feel like "use at home" items. It's a huge upgrade compared to the original heavy and probably too long cable included with the Utopia though. The only minus I can see is that the 3.5mm cable is made from the same material and it's just not very good for actual portable usage: a thinner, more flexible and lighter cable would have been more optimal.

The included carrying case is another highlight: it feels high quality, fits the headphones perfectly and looks very stylish too. From a value point of view I'd say the included accessories are something that would be quite expensive if bought separately, but on the other hand personally I would have preferred to have the choice if I want to buy them or not. Packing them in does help in creating the impression of a high end product though, so from a marketing point of view it makes good sense to include them. Unfortunately you will have to remove the cables for the headphones to fit in the case, but since they use a standard 3.5mm connectors they are easy and quick to swap around. The standard connectors should help these become a popular target for third party cables.

Build quality, design and ergonomics:

The first thing that strikes you is the build quality. They follow the example set by their predecessors the Elear and Utopia: simply superb and in my experience on a completely different level than high end Audeze or HIFIMAN headphones for example. I would say they are on the same level as Sennheiser HD 800 series, but with a very different design philosophy. There's not a hint of a DIY look anywhere and all of the materials exude high quality. Everything feels very solid, there are no sharp edges anywhere and there's tremendous attention to detail right down to the Focal logo on the cups. The memory foam microfiber pads feel nice and breath very well too. They also work fine glasses.

The Clears with their silver color theme have a quite unique look since most of the time high end headphones tend to favor darker color themes. For a long time I thought I'd prefer if they were black, but I've kind of gotten used to them now. They certainly give look different than most other headphones which is always good for marketing. The cables also match the color scheme which is a added nice touch.



It is however important to emphasize that the Clears are not a very modular design. Time will tell if this proves to be an issue or not. Sure you can change the pads, but the headband doesn't seem to be user replaceable at all. The HD 800 (and 600) series in comparison are completely modular. Almost all parts are user replaceable and Sennheiser's spare part prices aren't usually that high either. What happens if/when the padded Clear headband gets too dirty/old and needs to be replaced? Who knows. Maybe Focal will start selling a headband replacement service via their dealers or something similar. We also don´t know how long the earpads will last in daily use. The price for new ones seems to be around 200 euros so they are very expensive to replace.

These aren't light or small headphones either. At 450 grams these are among the heaviest dynamic driver headphones ever made. For example the Sennheiser flagship weighs just 330 grams. But what actually causes this? In the beginning I thought it´s because they use a lot of aluminium, but those parts are actually quite thin and besides it´s a very lightweight metal anyway. The headband looks heavy, but if you pick the Clears up and move them around you´ll quickly notice where most of weight is coming from: the earcups and their internal driver assemblies.



As you can see it's a very open design. The outside grills are quite thin and there´s a double protection system: first against force/touching via a sturdy metal grill and after that a fine mesh to protect the drivers against small debris/hair. It's a very thought out design as there is no way to accidentally break the drivers by pushing them in and it should be safe for pet households too. Time will tell if the fine mesh is enough to stop debris/hairs from getting in, but I'm pretty sure Focal has tested it extensively.

The unique M-shape dome has a very distinctive look. The drivers are also angled. This isn't what a typical headphone driver looks like. It seems like the driver with its suspension system has quite a lot in common with speaker driver designs. Focal going for a custom driver is no surprise though as they have been manufacturing their own speaker drivers for a very long time already. The diaphragm material is quite unusual too: most headphones use plastic, but here you'll find a magnesium/aluminium alloy.

When you first listen to these headphones you'll quickly notice what I consider to be their main technical innovation: the bass goes very deep for an open design and sounds exceptionally clean, fast and has a great sense of impact. My guess is that this new driver likely moves far more air through high excursion than typical designs do: this kind bass response would otherwise be extremely difficult to achieve in an open design where the air pressure can always escape the enclosure.

Nothing comes without a cost though: looking at the Focal driver picture you can see that it's a pretty large assembly including a hefty magnet. Their frame also looks like it's made of stainless steel for added rigidity. Most of the weight is likely simply due to these two. Using different materials for the enclosure/headband probably wouldn't have (at least) dramatically reduced its weight. The heavy weight is just the price you have to pay for the sonic performance. Would these have been better headphones if they were lighter though? Absolutely and I hope Focal manages to bring the weight down in the inevitable successors and trickle down models. As with all heavy headphones the comfort factor is then of paramount importance. Did they get it right?



When I first got my Clears I actually initially attached two HD 650 headband paddings to the headband. I was so used to the fantastic design philosophy Sennheiser uses with their headbands: there's usually no weight directly on top of your head as that's where hotspots tend to form. Needless to say I was very sceptical as the Clears do the exact opposite: they place most of their weight directly on top of your head. The thing is that it actually works this time due to some ingenious engineering. First of all note how the headband actually gets wider in the middle. The headband shape is also much less curved downwards than usual. These two features together ensures that the top of the head hotspot area is actually significantly larger than on most headbands and the rigid structure helps to spread the weight equally. In other words they basically took a design that is usually something that's not a very good idea and made it work. This coupled with a good amount of clamp ensures that I don't really get any hotspots with these on, which is something I found very surprising as I to be honest expected the complete opposite to happen. That being said these won't disappear on your head though: they just weigh too much for that to happen, but they are remarkably comfortable for their weight. Your mileage may vary though: it all depends on your head shape. As usual always audition before buying.



Another key to the good ergonomics is also in the headband design. At first glance using a lot of aluminium sounds like a horrible choice for engineering a comfortable headphone. Just try riding an aluminium bike compared to more flexible steel one for example. Look closer however and you'll be surprised at how much the cups move/swivel. The headband also flexes in several directions. All this is done with an elaborate suspension mechanism inside the headband. To me it looks and sounds like there are lot of springs involved. The downside is that there is some mechanical creaking/clicking sounds when you swivel the cups, but never when you are actually wearing the headphones. I´ll be keeping a close eye on this though to see if it ever gets any worse. Another minus is that this design probably makes the headband replacements very expensive.

What can I say... Focal have done their homework. This isn't a quick "let's just throw something on the market, our brand name will sell it" cash grab. It's obvious they have invested significant R&D resources into doing this well. In other words they are in this to seriously challenge Sennheiser and others in the long game. Good times to be in this hobby!

Sound quality:

I've now used the Clears for around a month and these have basically replaced my previous favorite HD 800 S as my daily go to headphone. This is already becoming a cliche to say, but these headphones opened my eyes towards placing more value on tonal balance. During my ~decade of following this hobby I had become so used to high end headphones being worse in this regard than the legendary HD 600/650 that I basically started taking these flaws for granted. The most important thing to say about the Clears is that are in my experience the first high end headphone that doesn't suffer from this. The tonal balance is simply the best I've ever heard. They just sound ”right” with no major dips or spikes anywhere in the frequency response. This in combination with the low distortion makes them headphones you can easily turn the volume up with without them almost ever sounding fatiguing or harsh. What they don't do however is making you want to turn up the volume all the time, which is actually a really good thing. It my experience that only happens with headphones with severe tonality issues like the Elear with its upper midrange dip or headphones that roll off the treble too much (= you easily keep increasing the volume to get the vocals or treble to sound right, but they never will). I wouldn't be surprised to see these end up being very popular for pro audio purposes too (and actually Focal did just launch the Clear Professionals; different paint job/accessories, but same sound).

Let's start with the bass. Overall to my ears it has the best bass performance in an open dynamic headphone so far. The measurements on various sites look wonderful and it doesn't disappoint subjectively either. While the bass lacks the absolute extension of the high end planars, it goes very deep and does not roll off much in the sub bass range like most open dynamics do. Slam is great for an open can too. The bass is high in resolution and very clean, although it is not the cleanest or most defined bass I've ever heard in an open headphone. That award still goes to the HD 800 series, but the Clears are not far away either. Is it more enjoyable however than the bass on the HD 800 series? Due to the much better extension and quantity the answer is absolutely and that's what counts. The HD 800 sounds lean and thin in comparison while the Clears sound neutral. The bass is also miles beyond the in comparison muddy mess the HD 600 series outputs.

The bass to midrange transition is well done, but there is some very slight bass bleeding into the midrange. I would not pair these with electronics that emphasize bass through adding harmonic distortion for example. This issue is mitigated by using more neutral sources. Personally I feel the bass quantity is just about optimal as it is enough to make a lot of contemporary genres like electronica sound good without sacrificing more traditional audiophile genres like jazz/classical/vocals.

When it comes to the midrange the first thing I noticed was the fantastic sense of realism and the lack of any hint of sibilance. Vocals often sound so real I've been rediscovering a lot of my favorite vocalists lately. The mids are also more neutral compared to the somewhat recessed mids on the HD 800 series. I'm not sure if it's the more neutral presentation, but here to my ears the Clears also surpass the HD 800 series in midrange clarity and resolution. These headphones get the most important part of the frequency response just right. The measurements do show a small dip in the upper midrange though, but I could not have picked that up if I didn't know about it.

While the bass and midrange forms a coherent whole, the highs can sometimes sound a bit disconnected from the rest. This is probably a deliberate tuning choice to enhance the soundstage. It's actually a bit similar (yet not as drastic) to what Earsonics did with the SM64 IEM. I find this effect quite enjoyable on many records, but sometimes it doesn't work that well. It's a very small issue, but something to keep in mind. I rarely notice it as it doesn't bother me much. That being said the highs, while tonally more balanced compared to the rest of the spectrum than in the HD 800 series, are less smooth than on the HD 800 S. This isn't apparent on all songs, but sometimes you notice it. For example the Clears while generally being less "hey look at this click in this record!" than the HD 800 series, on some songs they can actually highlight this kind of stuff more, especially in some pop music. For example on Taylor Swift's Blank Space there's an odd percussion or distortion effect that sounds downright nasty on the Clears. You can still hear it well on the HD 800 series, but it seems more annoying on the Focals. That being said these are still a much better choice for contemporary music due to the more balanced tonality (vs. HD 800 series treble emphasis with a lack of bass extension). I'd also say that the highs have a higher level of resolution on the HD 800 series and it's not just due to the fact of how emphasized they are. The HD 600 and HD 650 are both smoother in the highs as well so if you are very treble sensitive this may bother you. For me however the treble here is still a very smooth listening experience, on a completely different level than the Beyerdynamic T1 mk2 for example.

When it comes to the soundstage that is quite intimate for an open headphone. I would characterize it as listening to music in a somewhat narrow tunnel while sitting closer to the musicians (vs. back row in a concert on HD 800 series). This is both a good and a bad thing and ultimately there's no right or wrong here. This is the more traditional headphone presentation. Both approaches are enjoyable though and have their own strengths and weaknesses. I find the Clears presentation more emotionally engaging in general, but I do like the speaker like sensation the HD 800 series pulls off too. Imaging within the fairly small soundstage is really sharp though and there is also a good amount of air between the instruments. You quickly get accustomed to the presentation style and after a while you don't really notice it much anymore. Instrument separation is fantastic, much better than on the HD 600 series although still not quite as good as on the HD 800 series.

There's a slight softness/politeness to the presentation, but I'm not quite sure if this is just the sound of neutrality or some intentionally added smoothness. It's nowhere near the level of an HD 650, but it is something that isn't there on the Utopia or HD 800 series for example. The Clears simply do not have that ultimate last bit of resolution/resolving capability, but on the other hand this can also be a very good thing if you´re listening to a lot of less than perfectly mastered mainstream records. I sure am. Almost anything usually sounds at least quite good out of the Clears (vs. try listening to mastering "classics" such as Red Hot Chili Pepper's Californication on the Utopia/HD 800 series).

Last but not least, the Clears just like all of the high end Focal headphones sound exceptionally fast, punchy and dynamic. The energetic and forward presentation more or less grabs your attention and holds it. It doesn't do this as much as the Utopia, but the same style is still there. Sure there is a hint of added smoothness this time, but I would never call these "easy listening" headphones like especially the HD 650 are. They also handle high volumes well without ever sounding strained or grainy, nor do they get confused when a lot of stuff is happening at the same time. These features are what makes them so addictive, but on the other hand I think due to this and the heavy weight a lot of people may want to complement these with a different can for background listening. My current solution is to listen to these on very low volumes when trying to concentrate on something else, but I do often miss my HD 650 for this purpose. Maybe I'll buy them again someday.

Conclusion:

All in all I'd say these are the best HD 600 series upgrade in the industry right now. It's a bit odd that they eventually came from Focal, but since the "Super HD 600/650" is something a lot of enthusiasts have been waiting for (including me) I'm just super happy that these were finally made. I've been an almost lifelong Sennheiser fan and have mostly used their headphones, but now for the first time my main go to cans are something else. I haven't used my HD 800 S much since I got these, which probably tells just as much as this review. They will most likely be sold on in the near future, possibly to help fund a very likely HD 820 purchase as I'm in need of a closed headphone.

The Clears aren't technically superior overall to the HD 800 S (except in bass extension/quantity, speed, macrodynamics and mids resolution), but they are definitely more enjoyable to me due to the fantastic tonal balance and their lack of any major SQ drawbacks. They are simply a superb all rounder suitable for any genre: clear, balanced, dynamic and always draws you into the music.

Looking back the Clears are in my opinion exactly what the Elear should have been, but it would have been too much for a company new to high end headphones to achieve with their first try. These are still very expensive headphones, but the performance and build quality does fit their price. You are getting a lot in return. I'd easily take the Clears with a 250 euro all in one DAC/amp over any speaker setup even remotely in the same price range. Personally I would have preferred these to sell for 1250 euros and keep the the case/extra cables optional, but even at the 1500 euro price these can be considered good value when you look at the prices top of the line flagship headphones tend to sell for these days. The Clears now leave both the Elear and Utopia in a weird position. At 1000 euros the Elear is just way too expensive now considering how much better the Clears are. The Utopia on the other hand while technically superior in certain aspects, can (also) be argued as having a significantly worse tuning and being too expensive considering how close they are in sonic performance. I'm almost certain its successor will take notes from the Clear, but for now it suffers greatly from being launched back in 2016.

As for downsides there are several, but most of them have nothing to do with sound quality. The biggest minus is the heavy weight and while the ergonomic design works for my head shape, I would guess that it is probably less universal than the one on both the HD 600 and HD 800 series. Other potential issues are the high prices for replacement pads and the non-modular headband design which may end up being very expensive to replace someday. I've also read that the warranty is non-transferable, so buying these off the used market is a big risk as no one really knows how well the drivers will last (vs. there have been reports of Utopia drivers failing and the Elear drivers hitting mechanical clipping on high volumes). Many enthusiasts would also have preferred these to have a higher impedance to make them match better with traditional high power amps, but on the other hand this makes them much less demanding of source electronics. You certainly get the most for your money when buying actual headphones, plus "upgrading" source electronics can easily lead to a vicious and very expensive cycle of never ending sidegrades (it did for me at least). With these you won't have to worry that much about your source. That being said these are of course revealing enough to highlight better electronics, it's just that you get to 90% or so of what these can do for quite cheap.

Sound quality wise the only major nitpick I have is that these lack the final 5% or so of resolution headphones like the HD 800 S and the Utopia can pull off, but at least without EQ I still find these far more enjoyable than either of those. These are my new favorite headphones out of everything I've heard so far. Props to Focal for their contribution in pushing the high end headphone industry forward. It's going to be interesting to see how Sennheiser, Beyerdynamic and others are going to reply to the Focal high end lineup as they inevitably sooner or later will have to.

This is a traditional Benchmark DAC-1 style "wire with gain" sound for a very low price. Not the last word in emotional expression, but the O2 has a very silent inky background and good clarity. 
 
For people new to Head-Fi, you can now get an amazing budget rig by getting this and the EDAC. Pair them with good mid-range headphones like the Sennheiser HD 600/650 and you have a fantastic beginners setup. For those who don´t want to make headphone audio a more serious hobby it´ll even be a good "buy, use and forget about Head-Fi.org" setup.

Perhaps the most over engineered CD transport ever built. Fantastic synergy with the REF7. Its largest problem is the weak plastic CD tray that could easily be accidentally broken with too much force. Otherwise it´s built like a tank. Looks suprisingly good too! 
 
I originally wrote in 2011 that it´s hard to review a CD transport these days: today in 2016 I would say they are obsolete. But if you are looking for the best way (judged by sound quality) to feed a REF7, this is it.

Not mass market gear, but a dream for R2R multibit sound enthusiasts. Even after all these years still in 2016 the most natural sounding DAC I´ve ever heard...

Not mass market gear, but if you are looking for an enthusiast class A headphone amp that can drive very power hungry headphones the Phoenix remains a solid choice as long as you have the space for it.