[dontfeedphils]

the elear is no where near as dynamic as the 800 S. it's not even in the same conversation. i wanted it to be trust me, but it was not at least to my ears. glad it is for you!

I respect your opinion, but very strongly disagree. I've only ever found the HD800(S) to be lean and anemic, opposite of dynamic.

 

[crayons23]

I respect your opinion, but very strongly disagree. I've only ever found the HD800(S) to be lean and anemic, opposite of dynamic.

maybe we are using our descriptions too vaguely. to me dynamic equals sound stage. i am listening primarily to classical (mostly contemporary) and jazz. i am also very interested in
electronic music which is the sole reason i got the elears. however the bass was not enough in the elear for me to justify them for that one genre. to the flip side i had zero desire to listen to classical on the elear as the soundstage was greatly diminished. to me that's what i mean when i say it was not as dynamic.

 

[PopZeus]

while i concede that the hd 800 S is very bass lean (which is my main fault of the headphones), i would not say that the elear is especially dynamic. not in the same boat as the 800 S in that regard. i did experience treble fatigue with the elear that i never got with the 800 S. I was basically looking for the sound stage of the 800 S with double the bass response and did not find that with the elear. my personal search goes on.

Look, I'm not saying you're not experiencing something you don't like or that is fatiguing. It's just when you say stuff like the Elears are not especially dynamic, it makes me question if you're describing things properly. I've never heard the HD 800 or 800 S but the Focal flagship line carries an extremely dynamic driver compared to virtually every sub $1000 headphone in existence. To say its not "especially dynamic" just makes it sound like you're describing something else besides the driver's dynamics. Same with saying the Elears are treble fatiguing, although I admit the quality of the treble could be a factor (the alum-mag driver sounds more metallic than most), it's likely not the tuning since the HD 800 objectively has way more treble than the Elear.

None of this is really that critical. But I just wanted to be clear as to what was happening and how it was being described because it could send the wrong idea to others. For instance, wanting more bass without sacrificing tonal balance. Adding a lot of bass without changing anything else in the tuning is INHERENTLY changing the tonal balance of a speaker/headphone driver. If you want to add more bass without changing the balance per se, the closest you can get is to add more treble in places to offset the bass boost. Is that really what you want?

 

[crayons23]

it could also be that i am getting a bigger sound stage than you are because i see that you are using a hugo 2 only. i am using a hugo 2 as a dac but a rogue rh-5 as an amp which has a really good synergy with the 800S and it could be argued widens the sound stage of the 800 S in particular. when i ran the elear thru the hugo2 i got a slightly tighter bass. however i still did not have the desire to listen to classical on the elear.

 

[dontfeedphils]

maybe we are using our descriptions too vaguely. to me dynamic equals sound stage. i am listening primarily to classical (mostly contemporary) and jazz. i am also very interested in
electronic music which is the sole reason i got the elears. however the bass was not enough in the elear for me to justify them for that one genre. to the flip side i had zero desire to listen to classical on the elear as the soundstage was greatly diminished. to me that's what i mean when i say it was not as dynamic.

lol, I believe we are. "Dynamic", to me, means how fast and physical feeling the cans are. Do they connect you with the music physically?

When I talk about sound stage, I use the words "sound stage".

 

[crayons23]

lol, I believe we are. "Dynamic", to me, means how fast and physical feeling the cans are. Do they connect you with the music physically?

When I talk about sound stage, I use the words "sound stage".

ok well good that we have that figured out but i did not have the same connection with the elear as i did with the 800S. as i said a lot of it may have to do with amp synergy etc and the type of music i like.

 

[makne]

I didn’t read every word of the last comments, but think I got the essence of it.
Basically, @crayons23 your definition of «dynamics» is not the same as the rest of the community’s Dynamics are in no way the same as soundstage, in fact the two are often opposites in proportions.
A big soundstage (in width and depth) is mostly how far away sounds are coming from, and in some cases everything just sounds big. No question that the HD800(s) is the king of expansive soundstages.
Dynamics, however, are more how hard the sound hits throughout the entire spectrum. The physical impact. Like on the elear, a strike on a piano key will punch your head, with a more physical impact than the hd800 will provide. It’s not just about bass levels, but dynamism through the entire spectrum. If you want an example of headphones with weak dynamics, try Stax (fast AF though) or the Hifiman HEK, which sounds «soft» in comparison.

Now, apparently the entire focal line-up all have pretty intimate soundstages, and some people (like Tyll) speculate that it may be because of their dynamic impact. That it’s hard to make something hit that hard, and still make it sound like it comes from far away. When you look at stuff like HEX/HEK with their more spacious and «distant» soundstages and weak dynamics, I think he’s onto something. One headphone that defies this rule though, is the Susvara. Both dynamic and massive in soundstage.

 

[gardibolt]

Dynamic can also refer to the difference between the loud and soft on a headphone. Elear doesn't do subtle. I still like it because sometimes you want the bang.

 

[Tsukuyomi]

Hello everyone,
Quick question, but first some context, I own a pair of Beyer DT1990 Pros and I love them to death, however I would like another pair with some similar properties but also a little different.
Would you say the Elears are better or on similar playing fields as the 1990 pros? im a bit hesitant to take the plunge into Focal headphones as i've never heard of them until recent popularity.

 

[gazzington]

How would these serve me for hip hop, metal, edm and classic rock?

 

[makne]

How would these serve me for hip hop, metal, edm and classic rock?

dynamics will probably be great for that, and they’ve got decent bass.
For the absolute deepest most hard-hitting bass though, go with an audeze

 

[gazzington]

dynamics will probably be great for that, and they’ve got decent bass.
For the absolute deepest most hard-hitting bass though, go with an audeze

Any particular audeze?

 

[makne]

Any particular audeze?

All of them have the same mindblowingly deep planar bass. Lcd-line is the best.
For other areas of sound I prefer Elear, but one can’t beat the audeze bass.

 

[bidn]

Any particular audeze?

For me the LCD-XC (closed) has the deepest bass, this is the one I prefer.

2 things to keep in mind:

- comfort:
after one hour the Audezes hurt me (old headband hurts on top of the head; newer one = carbon = the pressure hurts around the ears)

- speed:
Compared to the Focals their bass is too slow. They, like most headphones, are anyway slow compared to the Focals. This is quite an issue for metaI for me: I find all headphones (except some electrostats, but they lack in punch, dynamics and often also in bass) too slow for metal (and even for hardrock), except the Utopia, Elear and Clear which are fast (the Utopia being even ultra- fast!). For other genres it is not too much an issue.

 

[Tsukuyomi]

I've heard from people that the Elears have a kind of DSP sound to them, anyone else find this true or are they just speaking porky pies.
Also, people have mentioned that the headphones creak a lot while on the persons head potentially adding unnecessary sounds while listening to music. is there any truth to these complaints or are they unfounded?