[KaiFi]

I've been wanting to try the Radiance for so long and finally received them today!

I can say that I like them a lot. To me, they sound very similar to the Celestee, but they are more comfortable due to the softer pads and have a wider soundstage (not as wide as the NightOwl, but an improvement on the Celestee) and a bit more bass punchiness, which were the main issues I had with the Celestee's sound. They're also very easy to drive and I had to keep the knob my Asgard 3 fairly low or they got really loud. The Celestee also sounded a little wonky with some tracks, like there was a bit of an upper-mid bump that caused some weird resonances with certain sounds. Not hearing that on the Radiance.

I'm glad that these became available on Headphones.com and I think I've finally found an adequate closed-back replacement for my NightOwl.

My one question: can anyone recommend a good balanced cable for Focal headphones? My main priority is microphonics. The default cable isn't great, but it isn't making noise rubbing against my clothing like so many 3rd party cables do.

 

[Mhog55]

I've been wanting to try the Radiance for so long and finally received them today!

I can say that I like them a lot. To me, they sound very similar to the Celestee, but they are more comfortable due to the softer pads and have a wider soundstage (not as wide as the NightOwl, but an improvement on the Celestee) and a bit more bass punchiness, which were the main issues I had with the Celestee's sound. They're also very easy to drive and I had to keep the knob my Asgard 3 fairly low or they got really loud. The Celestee also sounded a little wonky with some tracks, like there was a bit of an upper-mid bump that caused some weird resonances with certain sounds. Not hearing that on the Radiance.

I'm glad that these became available on Headphones.com and I think I've finally found an adequate closed-back replacement for my NightOwl.

My one question: can anyone recommend a good balanced cable for Focal headphones? My main priority is microphonics. The default cable isn't great, but it isn't making noise rubbing against my clothing like so many 3rd party cables do.

I was using the Meze 99 Classics 4.4mm balanced upgrade cable with my Clear MG. No microphonics in this cable at all. They are also releasing a full copper and full silver version.

 

[dle21]

Favourite pair of closed backs I've had

 

[Mhog55]

Favourite pair of closed backs I've had

What else have you owned?

 

[dle21]

What else have you owned?

I've have the MrSpeaker Ether C and had Sony MDR Z7 but the bass and clarity just aren't as great as these. I've also tried the HD820 but their tuning's not as good imo

 

[Kevintj604]

First day listening to the Radiance after about two months. I forgot how crazy I like these.

I've been seeing quite a few units on the second hand market and I have no idea why. With only 1500 ever made these are an endgame headphone for me.

 

[WaveTheory]

I've been seeing quite a few units on the second hand market and I have no idea why.

In general I agree with you about how amazing the Radiance is, and was not at all surprised when Focal decided to make another batch of them. But, to your question, as I keep having more gear coming and going through my listening station I am realizing that the Radiance is a bit signal chain sensitive. Since it already has a warmer and thicker than average tuning, there are some chains where those traits can be doubled- or tripled-down on and they become too thick, tubby, and sluggish sounding. I think they also don't have enough sparkle for some in a market that seems to be slowly trending back toward more overall brightness and treble energy. My guess is it's one or both of these that cause some to move on. I will continue to sing the praises of my Chord Hugo 2 + Radiance combination because the slightly leaner and incisive sound of the Hugo 2 balances the warmth and thickness of the Radiance's tuning in a particularly magical way to my ears. They are also both quite macrodynamically active, which adds in a further element of fun.

 

[Mhog55]

In general I agree with you about how amazing the Radiance is, and was not at all surprised when Focal decided to make another batch of them. But, to your question, as I keep having more gear coming and going through my listening station I am realizing that the Radiance is a bit signal chain sensitive. Since it already has a warmer and thicker than average tuning, there are some chains where those traits can be doubled- or tripled-down on and they become too thick, tubby, and sluggish sounding. I think they also don't have enough sparkle for some in a market that seems to be slowly trending back toward more overall brightness and treble energy. My guess is it's one or both of these that cause some to move on. I will continue to sing the praises of my Chord Hugo 2 + Radiance combination because the slightly leaner and incisive sound of the Hugo 2 balances the warmth and thickness of the Radiance's tuning in a particularly magical way to my ears. They are also both quite macrodynamically active, which adds in a further element of fun.

Aren't all Focals that way? That's been my experience anyway.

 

[WaveTheory]

Aren't all Focals that way? That's been my experience anyway.

What way? I said a few things and am not sure which one you're referring to. If it's the dynamic part, yes, that's a Focal trait. If it's anything in reference to the tuning, no, the Radiance is a bit of the oddball in Focal's line. It's the warmest/darkest and thickest sounding Focal but also the best tonally balanced through the mids and treble after Utopia.

 

[Mhog55]

What way? I said a few things and am not sure which one you're referring to. If it's the dynamic part, yes, that's a Focal trait. If it's anything in reference to the tuning, no, the Radiance is a bit of the oddball in Focal's line. It's the warmest/darkest and thickest sounding Focal but also the best tonally balanced through the mids and treble after Utopia.

Source sensitive

 

[skeeb23]

The Radiance are just a pleasing headphone to listen to, to me. Definitely agree with what Wave said about source case...hell even balanced vs SE depending on the amp. I do prefer them balanced on my Jot2 over the SE after he pointed that out to me.
A fun time was using xbass on the iFi Go Bar/Blu too. At first I probably had the wrong track for it and it was too much...some tracks it just brought back my teenage years of all about that bass (but good bass, no trunk rattling).

As for cables, personally I love my Hart Audio cables with them...no issues. However I am not very fussy on my cables as long as they aren't stiff or kink up too easily. I do have a Periapt cable for my Aeon Noire's and love that cable. I would imagine another great choice for the Radiance.

 

[WaveTheory]

Source sensitive

Oh, gotcha. It varies. I found Utopia and Clear MG to change a lot with sources. Elegia and Elex not as much, but they are clearly on the cheaper end. I'd put Stellia, Clear OG, and Radiance in a middle tier of Focal's line in terms of how much they react to source changes. Some could argue Radiance belongs in the more reactive tier. I think that's tricky. I don't think Radiance changes what it does as much as Utopia or Clear MG, but since it's tuned kinda right up to a line for what many can tolerate in terms of bass presence, warmth, and thickness, any changes further in those directions have a bigger impact on enjoyment.

 

[KaiFi]

I find they are source sensitive. They sound different on my Asgard 3 vs. Zen DAC V2. They're also not forgiving of bad recordings. Bad recordings will show their badness. But I expect that of headphones that cost this much.

I just bought the balanced Meze cable and thanks for the suggestion Mhog55, because the cable is excellent and not microphonic. The headphones sound great with the balanced output of the Zen DAC. With balanced I'm hearing an even wider soundstage and these are not at all constrained.

I don't think of these headphones as "warm" exactly, but I'm quite treble sensitive so often what people call warm I hear as neutral and neutral as too bright. They are less warm than the NightOwl (and to me a bit less so than the HD 660S) but more warm than other Focals I've heard. That said, they are not harsh or sibilant like the DCA Noire was (to my ears, even with the dampening felt).

Been listening to them with jazz today and wow, I think they sound better with jazz than any other genre.

 

[Mhog55]

I find they are source sensitive. They sound different on my Asgard 3 vs. Zen DAC V2. They're also not forgiving of bad recordings. Bad recordings will show their badness. But I expect that of headphones that cost this much.

I just bought the balanced Meze cable and thanks for the suggestion Mhog55, because the cable is excellent and not microphonic. The headphones sound great with the balanced output of the Zen DAC. With balanced I'm hearing an even wider soundstage and these are not at all constrained.

I don't think of these headphones as "warm" exactly, but I'm quite treble sensitive so often what people call warm I hear as neutral and neutral as too bright. They are less warm than the NightOwl (and to me a bit less so than the HD 660S) but more warm than other Focals I've heard. That said, they are not harsh or sibilant like the DCA Noire was (to my ears, even with the dampening felt).

Been listening to them with jazz today and wow, I think they sound better with jazz than any other genre.

You might like the Clear MG if you haven't heard it, and are in the market for an open back. I kinda regret selling mine, though I like my SR2 better, and the MG cost me twice as much. One of those headphones I might purchase again. The only Focal I really enjoyed, but haven't swung for the Radiance yet.

 

[chaz_flhr]

Aren't all Focals that way? That's been my experience anyway.

The Radiance was tuned to approximate the TOTL Naim audio system in a Bentley so it isn't your typical Focal sounding headphone.