Focal Elegia - what do you think?

[cel4145]

Your hearing adjustment definitely changes as time goes by. In a similar way that your hearing gets accustomed to a room that has a loud AC, your auditory system gets accustomed to a sound signature as well, but not always for the better either.

From my own experience, the headphones I really keep are ones I tend to not like upon first listen. Usually it takes me 2 weeks to come to the conclusion of whether I actually like the sound signature in long term. The ones that usually blow me away upon first listen are the ones that I usually sell eventually - funny how that happens to me and I would think not many here have the same result.

Makes sense to me. I find that headphones that have a forward sound often seem great out of the box. But then upon longer testing sessions, I realize I like something less forward.

This is one reason I think Klipsch speakers are so popular. Because they are commonly found in stores, their forward sound gives them an edge over other speakers in those short demo sessions people do.

 

[kyotousa]

Good point. I'll give them a week of straight listening and see how my brain adjusts to them. I'm just hoping the congested slightly muddy sound opens up. From all the reviews and comments I've read these are supposed to sound pretty spacious and airy I thought.

Weird, I think Elegia has superb imagine and separation. Sound stage is small but the separation is crazy, I don't see how it could be muddy.

I think to sum up, Elegia is a mid forward with present bass and sound clarity.

 

[Smoothstereo]

Weird, I think Elegia has superb imagine and separation. Sound stage is small but the separation is crazy, I don't see how it could be muddy.

I think to sum up, Elegia is a mid forward with present bass and sound clarity.

That's how I hear it too.

 

[descloud]

Makes sense to me. I find that headphones that have a forward sound often seem great out of the box. But then upon longer testing sessions, I realize I like something less forward.

Interestingly, what I've stated of listening longer to get accustomed to a sound signature poses a conundrum, which the headphone show's recent live stream discussed - where Resolve mentions the term "normalization". By that I mean, when upon the first hour of listening to a headphone and you don't like it, you listen longer (say a week), wouldn't that process make your brain adjust to the flaws of the headphone sound? This means you've normalized the sound signature after a certain period, so your brain will eventually be removing the flaws and shortcomings you disliked previously and present to you a sort of filtered sound (similar to the AC in a room noise example I made a couple of comments above).

This idea is really making me ponder about how to go about actually analyzing sound signatures more and whether what I like currently is due to the fact that my brain already masked the inherent flaws I hated? Food for thought in the meantime. Apologies if this is off topic!

 

[Blueshound24]

Weird, I think Elegia has superb imagine and separation. Sound stage is small but the separation is crazy, I don't see how it could be muddy.

I think to sum up, Elegia is a mid forward with present bass and sound clarity.

I wonder if someone could sum up the Clear's signature? And maybe compare it to the Elear and Elegia. Is the Clear mid forward?

I have the Elear and have a considered the Clear, but all this talk about the Elegia....

 

[cel4145]

Interestingly, what I've stated of listening longer to get accustomed to a sound signature poses a conundrum, which the headphone show's recent live stream discussed - where Resolve mentions the term "normalization". By that I mean, when upon the first hour of listening to a headphone and you don't like it, you listen longer (say a week), wouldn't that process make your brain adjust to the flaws of the headphone sound? This means you've normalized the sound signature after a certain period, so your brain will eventually be removing the flaws and shortcomings you disliked previously and present to you a sort of filtered sound (similar to the AC in a room noise example I made a couple of comments above).

This idea is really making me ponder about how to go about actually analyzing sound signatures more and whether what I like currently is due to the fact that my brain already masked the inherent flaws I hated? Food for thought in the meantime. Apologies if this is off topic!

I think you might enjoy this recently published piece, How Do We Listen: https://parttimeaudiophile.com/2020/09/12/hifi-how-do-we-listen/

I'll say for me, I'm not in the hobby to listen to my gear through the music. I do that in making decisions on what to keep. But then I try to avoid doing that as much as possible.

 

[descloud]

I think you might enjoy this recently published piece, How Do We Listen: https://parttimeaudiophile.com/2020/09/12/hifi-how-do-we-listen/

I'll say for me, I'm not in the hobby to listen to my gear through the music. I do that in making decisions on what to keep. But then I try to avoid doing that as much as possible.

Yeah this question on whether people in this hobby are listening to the music or listening to the gear is a constant question mark. People who are fortunate enough to be content with a high-end headphone purchase and move away from forums like this one are financially in better position.

I'm both a music lover and a headphone nerd. I listen to music where I can, be it with speakers (wireless or stationary) at a different room, when I'm driving, or when working at my desk. At the same time, I am a headphone nerd in the sense that I enjoy learning about the different driver types, the psychoacoustic effects of different components in a headphone, and in general listening to differences and variations from what I perceive to be a reference point. That's mainly why I mentioned about the last post about normalization - more of my own curiosity. I'm also one to share impressions for others who are looking for purchase advise of headphones.

However, that normalization concept is something that might be applicable for people buying new gear. The link you posted did give a couple of books that seems to be an interesting read, despite the article itself mainly expanding on an issue I've been aware of for a while now. Thanks for that

 

[kyotousa]

I wonder if someone could sum up the Clear's signature? And maybe compare it to the Elear and Elegia. Is the Clear mid forward?

I have the Elear and have a considered the Clear, but all this talk about the Elegia....

According to other reviews, it's a better Elegia. Obviously being an open headphone, it has a better sound stage and it doesn't have the weird deep at the 800hz and the 4k hz.
So yes, mid forward. Probably not great for Orchestra. However, I think Elegia is very enjoyable in all types of music as I love mainstream sound signature.

 

[descloud]

I wonder if someone could sum up the Clear's signature? And maybe compare it to the Elear and Elegia. Is the Clear mid forward?

I have the Elear and have a considered the Clear, but all this talk about the Elegia....

I haven't been able to audition the Elegia, so I cannot give a direct comparison unfortunately.

However, I would say that the Clear's tonality is *not* mid-forward. The Clear is well-balanced across the frequency range - so maybe neutral if we go by the common understanding of that term. Because of the slight mid-bass accentuation based on the FR graphs, some do perceive it as being "warm" if you notice this (like Crinacle) and are coming from something like the Utopia, but to my ears it is only a slight accentuation. On the other hand, given the peaks in the upper-midrange to treble region, some can perceive this as being "bright" - especially if you're used to a warm sounding headphone like the HD6XX/650. I sometimes find it bright for recordings that are hotly mastered (usually modern recordings) - you may not.

If you wanted a comparison of the Elear and Clear, you could look up Aornic's review here on the Focal Clear Review page.

 

[Odin412]

My Focal Elegia Impressions

Like many of you I failed to resist the temptation of the Adorama sale on the Focal Elegia, and I’m glad that my self-control failed me. The TL; DR version is that this is a very good headphone, at least to my ears.
This headphone is really well made and there are a lot of design details that I enjoy. The center cover on the earcups is real machined aluminum, the earcups themselves have beveled edges where the edges themselves are polished while the rest of the earcup is matte black. The headband has chromed beveled edges on the end pieces. Overall, IMHO this headphone has a really premium design and feel.
Comfort is excellent – the headband is plush and the earpads are generous and fit well. They aren’t super light, but you don’t feel the weight. To me they are just as comfortable as the Elear, which is to say very comfortable. Dampening of outside noise is good too.
Like other people on this thread have pointed out, this headphone requires burn in. I gave it a good 100 hours and the differences were clearly audible. Immediately after opening the box I found the bass and midrange to be good, but the treble seemed to be both a bit recessed and a bit sibilant – not a good combination to my ears. However, after burn in the treble now sounds very natural to me. The bass extension is very good – these headphones go deep. Some folks have mentioned that the bass volume is a bit light; I don’t hear that – to me the bass sounds very good. The treble (after burn-in) is both smooth and detailed without getting harsh or sibilant. Also, these headphones are not bright – I find the treble to be very pleasant. I’m very treble-sensitive, so YMMV here. To my ears, the midrange is where this headphone really excels. I’ve seen other posters describing it as mid-forward. I’m not sure I agree, but the midrange is definitely where it’s at – it’s very open and natural. It’s very easy to follow the song lyrics and I often hear new things in familiar recordings. And it’s not like the midrange is overly revealing and analytical – I’ve enjoyed listening to older recordings from the 70s and 80s while just enjoying the music and not being distracted by the not-always-great sounding recordings.
Amplifier-wise, I’ve had very good synergy with the Woo Audio WA6 and the Schiit Asgard 3 (both fed by the original Schiit Bifrost Multibit DAC) – especially the Asgard 3 pairing sounds just right to my ears.
In summary, I am very happy with my purchase and congratulate Focal on delivering another excellent headphone! YMMV, as always.

 

[Thompsonkirk]

Well, now we we can guess what happened to the Elegia and why it had so short a run. Focal has announced new wireless versions, with the (Bentley) Radiance priced at 1299 USD. Elegia must have been a not-too-successful closed-back wired product with short cables intended for portable use; and wireless, if they can stand up in sound quality, are likely to sell better for portable application. The price isn't too much more than the original price for Elegia.

 

[DeweyCH]

I like my Elegias a lot - and the Dekoni elite sheepskin pads make a huge difference - but among my closed-backs, I enjoy the sound of my Teaks more, so I'm selling the Elegias.

Not because they're a bad set of headphones, but just because my limited number of ears and listening hours dictates I go with the closed-back cans I like more.

 

[KCXT]

I like my Elegias a lot - and the Dekoni elite sheepskin pads make a huge difference - but among my closed-backs, I enjoy the sound of my Teaks more, so I'm selling the Elegias.

Not because they're a bad set of headphones, but just because my limited number of ears and listening hours dictates I go with the closed-back cans I like more.

Perhaps a fairly obvious question but how would you compare/contrast the Teaks and Elegia?

 

[loregnum]

Well, now we we can guess what happened to the Elegia and why it had so short a run. Focal has announced new wireless versions, with the (Bentley) Radiance priced at 1299 USD. Elegia must have been a not-too-successful closed-back wired product with short cables intended for portable use; and wireless, if they can stand up in sound quality, are likely to sell better for portable application. The price isn't too much more than the original price for Elegia.

The Radiance is not wireless and I've no idea where you got the idea it was. Did you not see the image in the thread on it with the cable connected to the cups? It comes with a 4 ft cable.

 

[HardstyleLoco96]

Well, now we we can guess what happened to the Elegia and why it had so short a run. Focal has announced new wireless versions, with the (Bentley) Radiance priced at 1299 USD. Elegia must have been a not-too-successful closed-back wired product with short cables intended for portable use; and wireless, if they can stand up in sound quality, are likely to sell better for portable application. The price isn't too much more than the original price for Elegia.

Very different headphone. Warmer tuning as well which could be a plus or minus for some. While I do love the looks I am not 100% sure of the tuning. The Elegia were already slightly warm sounding for my liking. If they tuned the Radiance to be warmer but somehow can improve imaging, detail, clarity and soundstage then maybe it can be successor of the Elegia. If it were to be wireless then that would be extremely impressive. But it's not. Maybe a compliment to the Elegia it might be. But the Elegia will be hard to beat unless the Radiance does what I stated above. Warmer tuning but has better clarity, detail, imaging and soundstage.... I can say they are gorgeous looking though. Maybe some of the best looking Focal headphones.