Well, 99.999% of impressions and reviews are bull schiit you cannot trust blindly, for one reason or another, subjectively or objectively. I've nothing against buying a $1000 headphone and badly limiting its performance with poorly matching upstream gear or someone buying stuff that's not worth 1/10 of its asking price. It's just something I've learnt not to do, because, I found there are more satisfying ways to spend my life.
Focal Clear headphones
- Thread starter mtoc
- Start date
-
- Tags
- focal focal clear
pbarach
500+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2006
- Posts
- 622
- Likes
- 317
I think Amir is on solid ground when his tests show no electrical differences between cheap cables and super-expensive ones. It's hard to mount a rational defense of emptying your wallet when the tests show no difference or even worse results for the more expensive cables.
jonathan c
Headphoneus Supremus
The perennial issue of “tests” versus “ears”. Do you listen to electricity, sine waves, or square waves?
Guidostrunk
Headphoneus Supremus
jonathan c
Headphoneus Supremus
The complete adherence and allegiance to measurements reminds me of the economist situation - with one foot in a bucket of boiling water and the other foot in a bucket of ice water, he says: “on average, I feel OK”...
Golyatx
100+ Head-Fier
Anyone here have LCD X or LCD 2 CLASSIC?
Can anyone compare them to Focal Clear, especialy for melodic death metal/rap?
Especialy this song https://tidal.com/track/63364774 from 00:00 to 04:30?
Thank you so much for effort.
Can anyone compare them to Focal Clear, especialy for melodic death metal/rap?
Especialy this song https://tidal.com/track/63364774 from 00:00 to 04:30?
Thank you so much for effort.
pbarach
500+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2006
- Posts
- 622
- Likes
- 317
That's a false dichotomy. I want what goes into the cable to come out the other end without any modification. If a relatively inexpensive cable does that, but a gimmicked-up expensive cable shows measurable distortion that is absent in the cheaper cable, I'm buying the cheaper one. Confirmation bias might easily lead someone to think that the $8000 (for example) they paid for a pair of speaker cables provides a more faithful reproduction of the source than a $150 pair. It's not easy to be honest with oneself that $7850 could have been put to better use.
jonathan c
Headphoneus Supremus
I do not think that a dichotomy exists here; to me, it is a matter of perspective. Audio and the experience of it does not have to be a “zero-sum game.” The objective is musical enjoyment. How that is achieved and perceived varies by individual. When it comes to cables (headphone/loudspeaker), or other components, my order of preference is:
1. Lifelike authentic sound, minimal levels of distortions measured.
2. Lifelike authentic sound, higher levels of distortions measured.
3. Inauthentic sound, minimal levels of distortions measured.
I believe that minimal / no levels of distortion(s) may be necessary but are not sufficient for the highest fidelity in music reproduction. Even Jason Stoddard, co-founder of Schiit Audio, has stated that he could design an amp with “zero” distortion but that it would sound “terrible”.
Last edited:
davehg
100+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2014
- Posts
- 294
- Likes
- 207
I didn’t intend my comments to turn into a standard subj vs objv thread.
I can also safely say that there are many, many tube amps that measure wretchedly. The Woo WA5 is one such amp. It’s regularly lauded by users on this forum as a top tier amp, for good reason. It sounds wonderful, especially with the Focal Clear.
But even John Atkinson at Stereophile, whose measurements showed high levels of odd order distortion at power levels below that rated by Woo, was able to balance his reactions to these poor measurements, neither validating them nor dismissing them. His conclusion about reconciling what he heard with what he measured was far more balanced, and he correctly noted that the amp design likely contemplated these results as part of the sonic signature it sought to achieve:
It is difficult to sum up the Woo Audio WA5's measured performance. Looked at in traditional terms, it didn't do well on the test bench: Its low power output and high distortion will not be too much of an issue with headphones but would seem to rule the WA5 out of contention for driving loudspeakers. But, of course, the bent transfer function responsible for those failings is due to the designer's decision to use a single-ended output stage topology. Considered in that light, the WA5 performed better than I would have expected
I suspect if ASR had reviewed the WA5, it would have shredded the amp‘s performance, much like he did with the WA7 (which sounds good but nowhere near the WA5’s class). This conclusion says all you need to know about ASR:
Lack of fidelity in measurements simply translates into lack of transparency and listening pleasure.
By contrast, even when confronted with difficult and less than ideal measurements, Stereophile still ranked the WA5 in Class A of its rankings, which as a headphone amp is correct IMHO.
If you’ve listened to both amps and formed your own conclusion using your ears, you’ll be able to calibrate both approaches and decide what is best for you.
I can also safely say that there are many, many tube amps that measure wretchedly. The Woo WA5 is one such amp. It’s regularly lauded by users on this forum as a top tier amp, for good reason. It sounds wonderful, especially with the Focal Clear.
But even John Atkinson at Stereophile, whose measurements showed high levels of odd order distortion at power levels below that rated by Woo, was able to balance his reactions to these poor measurements, neither validating them nor dismissing them. His conclusion about reconciling what he heard with what he measured was far more balanced, and he correctly noted that the amp design likely contemplated these results as part of the sonic signature it sought to achieve:
It is difficult to sum up the Woo Audio WA5's measured performance. Looked at in traditional terms, it didn't do well on the test bench: Its low power output and high distortion will not be too much of an issue with headphones but would seem to rule the WA5 out of contention for driving loudspeakers. But, of course, the bent transfer function responsible for those failings is due to the designer's decision to use a single-ended output stage topology. Considered in that light, the WA5 performed better than I would have expected
I suspect if ASR had reviewed the WA5, it would have shredded the amp‘s performance, much like he did with the WA7 (which sounds good but nowhere near the WA5’s class). This conclusion says all you need to know about ASR:
Lack of fidelity in measurements simply translates into lack of transparency and listening pleasure.
By contrast, even when confronted with difficult and less than ideal measurements, Stereophile still ranked the WA5 in Class A of its rankings, which as a headphone amp is correct IMHO.
If you’ve listened to both amps and formed your own conclusion using your ears, you’ll be able to calibrate both approaches and decide what is best for you.
Last edited:
Looking to replace your Clear? What are you looking to improve, change, sound wise?
Something specific you don't like, bothers you, about the Clear?
What gear do you use?
I've both Clear and LCD2C, had the LCD-X too.
Last edited:
Golyatx
100+ Head-Fier
Hmm Im looking for some earthquake bass where I dont need to be scared from driver clipping (F. Clear thing
). Sometimes I want to blow my head in some melodeath and even if I boost the bass, it play very good! But im still scared that clipp can occur at any time .Well its not much case in my melodeath songs, but some rap songs and instrumental songs, i just want to turn it all the way up and dont care if the HP can or cant handle it.
So Im thinking about trying LCDs, maybe they are for me.
TLDR: Lately Im very satysfied with Clears, but... want to try planars xd
edit: PC, Audirvana, Tidal, USB, RME ADI 2 dac FS, Clear
edit2: im asking about this specific song, esp 3:17-4:30. What gives you more emotions, Clears or LCD?
Last edited:
Imo, find a dealer near you that have some LCD for demo, or local head-fi-er. Audeze has a very specific house sound, especially without PEQ. The problem with the Audeze is they sound flat and not engaging without fixing the presence region with PEQ. Especially for very high energy music, with a lot going on. But they are substantially more physical sounding, they give that "wow" planar effect. Little bit of planar compression perhaps. Clear are the more nuanced, layered.
Try this filter on the Parametric EQ on the RME for the Clear:
Peak filter band 1, frequency 20Hz, gain 10dB, Q factor 0.5, (pre gain -6dB).
Try this filter on the Parametric EQ on the RME for the Clear:
Peak filter band 1, frequency 20Hz, gain 10dB, Q factor 0.5, (pre gain -6dB).
Last edited:
Golyatx
100+ Head-Fier
Yea I will probably try lcds2class or lcdx for demo on my setup for 14 days (why lcd 2 classic over X?)
Im using now shelf 100hz +2,5db, 1100hz -2 and 10khz -2. Sounds good to me.
I will try your tip in one hour. thanks
My mistake, I meant not low shelf but peak filter instead of (your 100hz) low shelf. I've fixed it now
It basically makes an ASR style bass curve, only it uses 1 peak filter instead of 2 low shelf filter like on ASR, since the RME can't have 2 low shelf.
Last edited:
Do you think Focal Clear are more or less difficult to drive than Hifiman Ananda?
Users who are viewing this thread
