[KjellinMusic]

After 3 month I have to say that Bathys BT mode are for me most musical. DAC mode is little sterile. Use Tidal and files from 24/32

 

[ntemples1]

Just an update on my issue of distortion/clipping, focal have got back to me saying there shouldn't be any of that even at max volumes and have advised me to send them back, which I am going to do, and get them replaced. Great of them to get back so quickly.

 

[steeevo1]

Got mine at the weekend and I’m super impressed , there is a difference with the usb c cable dac switch , I’m using on an i pad pro , Apple music , clamping is a little tight but have been assured that loosens up , can’t fault the build , just one thing I have them at full stretch on the band and I don’t think I have a super big head , might be a problem for real big headed people
I’m assuming once burned in they will sound even better

 

[Revelation Sound]

Doubt anyone has heard all of them. I own the Radiance and Elear (which I use with Elex pads) out of the full size ones and the bathys.

Radiance has slightly better passive isolation in the higher frequencies, but lacks ANC so lower frequencies are easily heard. Build quality is good on both, but materials quality and comfort is on another level on the radiance. The build quality on the Bathys look worse than it actually is due to the finish and design.

The Radiance is pretty close to harman curve, but is a bit subdued in the lower treble and upper midrange, which give a warmer and more relaxed sound (for some it will be too relaxed). The Bathys seems to be very dependent on the person's head and for me they are a bit too low level in the midrange with some peaks that are probably in the 4k to 7k area which can cause them to sound a bit bright and harsh on some material. Overall the midrange and timbre are strengths of the Radiance while they are the main weaknesses of the Bathys. The Radiance has more resolution, especially when it comes to small nuances from instruments, small pitch changes in voices, harmonics etc. They both have fairly good imaging, but only decent soundstage (fairly small).

If the Bathys had the sound quality of the Radiance, then I don't think the PX8 vs Bathys debate would even exist. Listening for 1-2 hours to the Radiance on decent amplification and then switching to the Bathys over USB makes me wonder what is wrong with the Bathys (disappointment). If I go a few hours without listening and then pick up the Bathys then they are fairly good sounding headphone, but with some flaws. It is important to A/B headphones directly after one another as sound memory can be very short term and you may remember something as better or worse than it actually is if you wait a few hours or days.

Basically I find the step down from the Radiance to Bathys to be quite significant, but the Bathys is fairly good as an overall package and priced fairly IMO. With the Bathys you get wireless and wired with a built in DAC of decent quality in one travel friendly package. Even my travel setup for the Radiance is more then twice the price of the Bathys due to needing a DAC with amp, adapters etc. and running a desktop setup makes the price ratio even worse.

Good observations, we have to remember, many who use Bluetooth headphones are doing tasks while listening to music. If it's cleaning the kitchen, looking around while going for a walk or exercise, or traveling including watching YouTube on a exercise machine. We are not focusing on the music like we would in our home with hard wired headphones and are not doing any task. So we are focusing more on the details of the music. So why spend so much money on Bluetooth headphones? Sure you don't want low quality sound and comfort. Once you get to around $400 and higher, many sound good for their purpose. Once you jump over $800 many will feel its not worth it since you can get better sounding hardwired headphones that will sound better. Even the Beyerdynamic 1990's sound better than any Bluetooth headphones I ever heard.

Some people however want a pair of headphones to do it all well. So they don't want to use hardwired headphones. So for those people, the higher end Bluetooth headphones meet their needs the most

 

[Sonic Defender]

Don't agree herel. I have owned quite a few expensive wired headphones, and trying to take the differences in sound signatures into account, well done Bluetooth headphones are equally transparent. I have a pretty nice stereo/speaker rig with very competent speakers and even there there was zero sound difference using my DAC via USB (Gustard X16) versus streaming Bluetooth from my phone to the X16. Gave up bothering with USB and for about 3 years now have just used Bluetooth and couldn't care less. There is no perceptible sound quality loss.

 

[marcr]

Good observations, we have to remember, many who use Bluetooth headphones are doing tasks while listening to music. If it's cleaning the kitchen, looking around while going for a walk or exercise, or traveling including watching YouTube on a exercise machine. We are not focusing on the music like we would in our home with hard wired headphones and are not doing any task. So we are focusing more on the details of the music. So why spend so much money on Bluetooth headphones? Sure you don't want low quality sound and comfort. Once you get to around $400 and higher, many sound good for their purpose. Once you jump over $800 many will feel its not worth it since you can get better sounding hardwired headphones that will sound better. Even the Beyerdynamic 1990's sound better than any Bluetooth headphones I ever heard.

Some people however want a pair of headphones to do it all well. So they don't want to use hardwired headphones. So for those people, the higher end Bluetooth headphones meet their needs the most

As with everything there is no one answer. The Bathys can be for some people a one stop shop and it is a very good one accounting for cost and convenience. I don’t believe Focal ever intended for the Bathy’s to be in a consideration set with the Radiance (Bathys is my first Focal). I work from home and travel a bit but also have a need where I want to listen to music at night when my young kids are sleeping. The Bathy’s, for me, give me a audiophile grade sound on the go but also allow me to critically listen to music at night when otherwise I couldn‘t because of the sound leak from my open back Ananda’s.

I could be in the minority but think most people buying the Bathys are doing so to get as close to “audiophile” grade sound on the go / fill needs like mine.

 

[GungJoe]

Good observations, we have to remember, many who use Bluetooth headphones are doing tasks while listening to music. If it's cleaning the kitchen, looking around while going for a walk or exercise, or traveling including watching YouTube on a exercise machine. We are not focusing on the music like we would in our home with hard wired headphones and are not doing any task. So we are focusing more on the details of the music. So why spend so much money on Bluetooth headphones? Sure you don't want low quality sound and comfort. Once you get to around $400 and higher, many sound good for their purpose. Once you jump over $800 many will feel its not worth it since you can get better sounding hardwired headphones that will sound better. Even the Beyerdynamic 1990's sound better than any Bluetooth headphones I ever heard.

Some people however want a pair of headphones to do it all well. So they don't want to use hardwired headphones. So for those people, the higher end Bluetooth headphones meet their needs the most

I really disagree with this. I think that provided the tasks don't have domain overlap you can place focus on the sound, especially if one task is a motor task which becomes autonomous. There are two key factors that affect multi tasking performance

• Domain specificity: do the two tasks overlap in terms of cognitive pathways. For instance do they both involve working memory? Executive functioning?
• Automaticity: Is the task performed automatically, without conscious thought? For instance, something like a motor skill like walking.

I often find myself focused on the sound when walking from A to B, not really thinking so much about my journey or the next step in front of me. In those moments I lose myself in the journey and the detail of it. Because the activity of walking is both automatic and does not involve executive functioning or any significant demand on working memory, it does not obstruct someone's ability to focus on the sound if they so wish.

My background is cognitive neuroscience, but I must admit attention and multi tasking are not my research areas. Still I'm quite convinced someone can appreciate the detail while doing simple tasks such as walking.

 

[Revelation Sound]

I really disagree with this. I think that provided the tasks don't have domain overlap you can place focus on the sound, especially if one task is a motor task which becomes autonomous. There are two key factors that affect multi tasking performance

• Domain specificity: do the two tasks overlap in terms of cognitive pathways. For instance do they both involve working memory? Executive functioning?
• Automaticity: Is the task performed automatically, without conscious thought? For instance, something like a motor skill like walking.

I often find myself focused on the sound when walking from A to B, not really thinking so much about my journey or the next step in front of me. In those moments I lose myself in the journey and the detail of it. Because the activity of walking is both automatic and does not involve executive functioning or any significant demand on working memory, it does not obstruct someone's ability to focus on the sound if they so wish.

My background is cognitive neuroscience, but I must admit attention and multi tasking are not my research areas. Still I'm quite convinced someone can appreciate the detail while doing simple tasks such as walking.

I think everyone is different. If I am thinking about issues at work while going for a walk with headphones, or my wife is mad at me for buying another pair of headphones, I am not focusing on the music as much. I am an audio engineer with a recording studio. When I sit down with headphones, I focus on the music. When I want to have some fun, the music is there to put me in a good mood as we focus on other tasks.

 

[Revelation Sound]

As with everything there is no one answer. The Bathys can be for some people a one stop shop and it is a very good one accounting for cost and convenience. I don’t believe Focal ever intended for the Bathy’s to be in a consideration set with the Radiance (Bathys is my first Focal). I work from home and travel a bit but also have a need where I want to listen to music at night when my young kids are sleeping. The Bathy’s, for me, give me a audiophile grade sound on the go but also allow me to critically listen to music at night when otherwise I couldn‘t because of the sound leak from my open back Ananda’s.

I could be in the minority but think most people buying the Bathys are doing so to get as close to “audiophile” grade sound on the go / fill needs like mine.

Everyone has different goals, needs, and preferences. What is right for one person is not necessarily right for another. But that does not invalidate your experience or preferences. What works best for you, is what you should have. Perhaps some may like the Bathys over the Beyerdyanmic 1990's, but for me, the 1990's provide more detail and a bigger sound stage. Then of course is there heightened top end that they are known for. But if you want the connivence of Bluetooth as well, I think the Bathy's are one of the best to get without getting into headphones over $900. .

 

[NZtechfreak]

I really disagree with this. I think that provided the tasks don't have domain overlap you can place focus on the sound, especially if one task is a motor task which becomes autonomous. There are two key factors that affect multi tasking performance

• Domain specificity: do the two tasks overlap in terms of cognitive pathways. For instance do they both involve working memory? Executive functioning?
• Automaticity: Is the task performed automatically, without conscious thought? For instance, something like a motor skill like walking.

I often find myself focused on the sound when walking from A to B, not really thinking so much about my journey or the next step in front of me. In those moments I lose myself in the journey and the detail of it. Because the activity of walking is both automatic and does not involve executive functioning or any significant demand on working memory, it does not obstruct someone's ability to focus on the sound if they so wish.

My background is cognitive neuroscience, but I must admit attention and multi tasking are not my research areas. Still I'm quite convinced someone can appreciate the detail while doing simple tasks such as walking.

Doctor here and agree with this take. I wish I could wear headphones doing tasks, but unfortunately if I'm attending to a task I basically don't hear the music at all, so I use speakers when I'm cooking and such and it is very much just background noise adding some ambience. I can listen while walking or doing any kind of mindless activity however -listening while on an exercycle is something I've done a lot. Mostly when I listen to music with headphones I tend to be 'all-in' and that is my sole focus.

 

[GungJoe]

I think everyone is different. If I am thinking about issues at work while going for a walk with headphones, or my wife is mad at me for buying another pair of headphones, I am not focusing on the music as much. I am an audio engineer with a recording studio. When I sit down with headphones, I focus on the music. When I want to have some fun, the music is there to put me in a good mood as we focus on other tasks.

Yeah. I mean you can buy Abyss headphones and not be interested in detail orientated listening obviously irrespective of what is possible it is down to everyone's personal preferences. I was just commenting about the limits of our attention because the poster implied these types of headphones could be a waste of time because of the tasks we engage with. However, I think most people don't need to be sat down still to appreciate the detail in a headphone, and while there are some tasks that will require more focus, many that many people engage with do not inherently do so. Whether the user chooses to attend the music while not performing a task that demands focused attention is another matter. Personally I dip in and out of the music while walking but I appreciate the detail when I do fall back into the sound, even if it's only for a few moments before I start thinking about my work again.

With that said, I think that there also qualities that are more easily perceivable without focused attention where the Bathy's in particular excels. For instance I think the Bathy's has really brilliant tonality, with a fun and exciting sound signature that does not step too far into any one area that it begins to annoy. I think that's something you can pick up without particularly focused attention and in actuality I think that it almost helps more when you are focused on something else as nothing about the Bathy's forces you to attend it. For instance, even someone that enjoys the sharp treble on the 1990 might not find it ideal for casual listening because of how it attention grabbing certain moments are in the music when that treble peak hits your ears.

And for me, that's also where I prefer the Bathy's against cheaper lower end headphones where I find the bloated and muddiness of the bass and mid to be a distraction. I think the Bathy's have a really clean and pleasant presentation which actually helps the music fall into the background if you choose not to focus on it. At the same time, the Bathy's exceeds in technical areas well enough that I enjoy it for more concentrated listening, where I'm paying attention to the detail in the music.

Also, FWIW I think the Bathy's sound quite a bit beyond the 1990s. But it's difficult to compare an open and closed back as they have different inherent strengths. I think the Bathy's actually sound as good as or better than some comparable £700 closed back headphones, specifically I think the Bathy's are quite a bit more enjoyable than the Celeste (without EQ). I think that makes them very worthwhile at their pricepoint even if I do not always use them in a scenario where I am focused on the sound.

 

[Revelation Sound]

I agree we can still appreciate quality headphones when doing tasks as well. Just that we may not focus on it as much if we were not doing tasks

 

[Metalingus]

Today I'm sending mine back, I did a A/B with AirPods Max also. APM Sounds better, looks better, has actual Noise Cancelling and Transparency mode which works. I find usb DAC function to be useless as well. Kinda still mad that they sell it for $699. Focal makes great headphones, just not wireless ones.

Here's my take on video:

 

[GungJoe]

Today I'm sending mine back, I did a A/B with AirPods Max also. APM Sounds better, looks better, has actual Noise Cancelling and Transparency mode which works. I find usb DAC function to be useless as well. Kinda still mad that they sell it for $699. Focal makes great headphones, just not wireless ones.

Here's my take on video:

You look actively upset while reviewing it in the video.

I disagree with your sentiment and the content of the video, almost from beginning to end. Opening with the idea that they sound even close to APM is just ridiculous to me personally. With that said, your opinion is obviously welcome and it's a shame you didn't enjoy them. If you're personally happier with the APM then that's a win because you can save yourself a few hundred £.

 

[marcr]

Today I'm sending mine back, I did a A/B with AirPods Max also. APM Sounds better, looks better, has actual Noise Cancelling and Transparency mode which works. I find usb DAC function to be useless as well. Kinda still mad that they sell it for $699. Focal makes great headphones, just not wireless ones.

Here's my take on video:

Did you let the Bathys break in? Also mine I have zero white noise with ANC soft or loud. There is some present with Transparency.

Break in, for me, was critical to removing the harshness and opening up of a more coherent sound stage.