[Wildcatsare1]

I've already read a few comparisons here between the Ether and Clear, but don't recall seeing any direct comparisons between the AFO and the Clear...which I think is a more interesting comparison than the former, being that the AFO seems more universally liked than the Ether and is $700 cheaper than the Clear

Unfortunately I haven’t heard the AFO.

 

[swmtnbiker]

The Clear is not a headphone that will sugarcoat the sound.

I have tried playing around with cables to bring some warmth to the sound when I wanted to more relaxed listening session (I am using RME ADI-2 Pro which is pretty neutral sounding).

Personally I do not think that Opportunity HA-1 is a good fit with the Focal Clear.

Of course we all hear differently, but have you actually heard it with the HA-1? IMO Mimby -> HA-1 -> Clear is very nice indeed.

 

[gb21011971]

Thanks, I've read an unbelievable amount of contradictory reviews on the Z1R. It seems to be the most polarizing flagship to date.

I do like headphones that sound relatively "speaker like" in regards to dynamics, but they have to be versatile. I listen to everything except metal and opera, so an expensive one trick pony probably wouldn't work out for me. That being said, I do like my B&W P9 which is very dynamic and "fun", so I'm also a bit worried that the Clear might be a bit too thin sounding for my tastes.

I'm beginning to consider the Aeon Open as well. Maybe take the $700ish in savings vs the Clear and Z1R and buy a better amp. It seems to be universally loved, but I'm not sure how much of an upgrade it would be over my P9 in regards to detail retrieval, transparency/clarity, and tonality.

The Z1R is polarizing indeed. It polarized myself so to speak, I had a love - hate relationship with this headphone. Probably no use rehashing all the characteristics. I ultimately sold it, because I could not justify its price, given that it is a special use headphone IMO. I still have the Z7, which costs a fraction and gives you the same sound signature, with 90-95% of the quality.

I don't know the P9 but owned a P7 for years. If it is true what I read that these 2 are quite similar in terms of sound signature, then the P9 should be very different from the Z1R. In my memory, the P7 is probably much closer to the Clear than the Z1R. Just interpolating for what it's worth....

 

[qrtas]

I have both, enjoy both, the Clear is more dynamic, the Ether has a bit bigger headstage. I tend to reach for the Clear first, they get far more head time. With the Ether Flow being held for when I want a more relaxed presentation. You really can’t go wrong with either one.

I see people keep mistaking the Aeon and Ether. @conquerator2 is referring to the Aeon vs clear, not ether vs clear.

The Aeon has the most narrow sound stage I’ve heard on an open back headphone. It is supposed to be open or semi open but it sounds like a sealed headphone. I had de Aeon flow open and the clear is better than it in every regard.

 

[SilverEars]

The Aeon has the most narrow sound stage I’ve heard on an open back headphone. It is supposed to be open or semi open but it sounds like a sealed headphone. I had de Aeon flow open and the clear is better than it in every regard.

I've only tried the Aeon closed(out of the two Aeons) and I would say a narrow sounding response, and it's well known it's weak on the low-end and needed a bit of body help with the overal tonality. A bit of lower treble boost than to my liking further adding to a thin sounding sig. Wasn't a fan of the tonality overall. But the pricepoint is where I don't see too many headphones so I don't know what is a fair comparison. My experience with at least the Ether Flow Open is that, it's not as open as a typical what we considered fully open.

Overall my experience with MrSpeakers stuff isn't very good.

 

[Ekul61]

Correct me if I’m wrong.
Aeon open is a planar magnetic headphone.
Focal Clear is a dynamic driver headphone.
It always boils down to. Better clarity with a dynamic driver
Compared to amazing bass from a planar magnetic.
Seems like all the reviews on dynamic hp say. Great hp just needs a little more bass.
Reviews on planars go. Great hp, just a little lacking in the clarity.

 

[SilverEars]

If you compare general frequency response of both dynamic and planar open headphones, dynamics typically doesn't extend as planars and there tend to be a mid hump. The hump follows a typical hump of the impedance response. I thought the pattern had to do with being open, but Planars tend to extend despite being open. Interestingly, not all follows the generalization. Aeon closed for example is closed and is a planar.

But, Focals seem to extend better than what I'd expect of dynamic open.

 

[franz12]

Correct me if I’m wrong.
Aeon open is a planar magnetic headphone.
Focal Clear is a dynamic driver headphone.
It always boils down to. Better clarity with a dynamic driver
Compared to amazing bass from a planar magnetic.
Seems like all the reviews on dynamic hp say. Great hp just needs a little more bass.
Reviews on planars go. Great hp, just a little lacking in the clarity.

I wouldn't say quantity or quality of bass with planars are better than dynamic drivers. clear has great bass in terms of both quality and quantity. But in my experience, planar bass has different sound character from dynamic drivers. Its bass delivers different feeling. Hard to characterize, but to my ears, planar bass is more transparent and clear.
To me, planar bass is sort of acquired taste. For whatever reasons, there are some people who rave planar bass.

 

[doraymon]

Checking in as I just bought my Clear.
I previously owned or still own HD-650, Edition X V1, Edition X V2, Ether C Flow.
The Clear beats every one of them. To my ears at list.

 

[canali]

I don't understand paid reviewers..i work in the telecom industry and we have very clear rules about
any potential conflict of interest....if, for example, we do an install for a cust and he/she loves our work and offers us a gift there is no
way we can accept it.....not even a free beer/appy/cup of coffee from a small shop owner that we've helped out with faster ADSL or lower landline rates.

i'm sure it's like this for many industries, too...
thus i have no clue why the audio industry thinks it's exempt from such clear conflict of interest guidelines.
it's a joke to read that any reviewer will remain unbiased if given a free anything from a company.....
want unbiased? then pay for the product you're reviewing (at the same prices we would) or return it after the review.

 

[gb21011971]

....or return it after the review.

That's exactly what most do in my understanding.

 

[snafu1]

Just got word from my dealer, he says Focal postponed the delivery to 15 February. Same for pretty much all dealers here in the Netherlands.

Oh man. That really sucks.
I don't want to rub it in by saying that the shipping status for my clear states it's being delivered today (but it is ..... I'm in California ).

 

[esauseesaw]

I don't understand paid reviewers..i work in the telecom industry and we have very clear rules about
any potential conflict of interest....if, for example, we do an install for a cust and he/she loves our work and offers us a gift there is no
way we can accept it.....not even a free beer/appy/cup of coffee from a small shop owner that we've helped out with faster ADSL or lower landline rates.

i'm sure it's like this for many industries, too...
thus i have no clue why the audio industry thinks it's exempt from such clear conflict of interest guidelines.
it's a joke to read that any reviewer will remain unbiased if given a free anything from a company.....
want unbiased? then pay for the product you're reviewing (at the same prices we would) or return it after the review.

It's a little bit different as in your example you are being paid for the service you offer. If I send a product to a reviewer, which 99% of the time is returned, I am not paying for their services (not directly at least - see below). Most magazines or bloggers appreciate the opportunity of begin able to try different products and indeed, their blogs and publications rely on getting new products to keep their readers happy. From my perspective I need products reviewed because it gives them exposure and helps customers understand what's on offer. In it's pure form it's a simple exchange.

However, you can take a more cynical view. The bigger and more persuasive the publication the more sway they have and often they will get indirectly paid through advertising. There is always the possibility of corruption, where the biggest advertiser's get the most support. That's certainly not anything new and not really any different to giving an individual reviewer product for free. It's a payment either way.

Whatever your view on the legitimacy of reviews they still serve an important role in helping everyone make their final purchasing decisions. At the end of the day only you can decided what suits you best, even if that's the opposite of what you read.

 

[SilverEars]

Have anybody tried various amp types(OI, tubes, SS, etc..) with Clear? Curious what differences people hear out of various amp types.

I've only tried low OI SS amp, and it sounded highly damped. It sounded one of the most damped response I've heard. A positive is clean and clear sounding as result since it has such a tight response. The highly damped sound may not be for everybody.

 

[canali]

It's a little bit different as in your example you are being paid for the service you offer. If I send a product to a reviewer, which 99% of the time is returned, I am not paying for their services (not directly at least - see below). Most magazines or bloggers appreciate the opportunity of begin able to try different products and indeed, their blogs and publications rely on getting new products to keep their readers happy. From my perspective I need products reviewed because it gives them exposure and helps customers understand what's on offer. In it's pure form it's a simple exchange.

However, you can take a more cynical view. The bigger and more persuasive the publication the more sway they have and often they will get indirectly paid through advertising. There is always the possibility of corruption, where the biggest advertiser's get the most support. That's certainly not anything new and not really any different to giving an individual reviewer product for free. It's a payment either way.

Whatever your view on the legitimacy of reviews they still serve an important role in helping everyone make their final purchasing decisions. At the end of the day only you can decided what suits you best, even if that's the opposite of what you read.

-----------------
thanks for your imput, Esauseesaw.

but i'm talking about any reviewer whether it be here or on another forum on pro writing for a publication wherein ad revenues are concerned. and i don't think i'm being cynical: just that imo naturally hard to be objective if given a free or greatly reduced item and thinking one's assessment of it will be totally unbiased.

also looking forward to the clear 'pro' reviews when those cans arrive...i guess not til March?