[akg fanboy]

  At least a few of you were waiting for my impressions of the Focal Elear with the Mojo.
 
I am taking endless notes that may evolve into a full review, but this is the gist of it:
 

1. It is my new favorite headphone.
2. Tonal balance is tuned like the HD 650. (Click here and here.)
3. Technical performance is akin to the HD 800. It seems to have even better resolution and imaging. Picks up all the details the HD 800 does, but sounds far more natural and musical. Soundstage is a bit narrower, but more three-dimensional.
4. Not as neutral or transparent as the STAX SR-207.
5. EQ makes it pretty neutral. Just tone down the bass, bring up 3-8 kHz, and cut the peak around 9 kHz.
6. With softer recordings, it's the most gorgeous thing I have ever heard. ️
7. Has good microdynamic snap...
8. ...but lacks macrodynamic power. When I want strong impact and dynamics for more energetic music (like metal and electronic), I easily prefer the Yamaha HPH-MT220.
9. Comfortable for its size and weight, but the lightweight Koss Porta Pro is many times more comfortable.
10. Build quality and aesthetics are superb. (But don't run over it with a tank. This isn't a Chord DAC.
    
    )
11. The cable is ridiculously long, but probably the sturdiest, nicest stock cable I've seen.

better resolution, imaging, and 3 dimensional soundstage than the hd800? Not a chance, the hd800 gets a lot of hate for those who like warmer and bass heavy headphones, but the hd800 is a technically unmatched dynamic.

 

[Music Alchemist]

  better resolution, imaging, and 3 dimensional soundstage than the hd800? Not a chance, the hd800 gets a lot of hate for those who like warmer and bass heavy headphones, but the hd800 is a technically unmatched dynamic.

 
The HD 800 just sounded overly tight, dry, mechanical, synthetic, and artificial to me, even when I equalized it to have a balanced frequency response. (And no matter whether it was driven from the Mojo or DAC/amps costing thousands.) Nothing at all like what real instruments sound like. (And believe me, I know.) That's fake resolution. The Elear picks up all the same details but sounds natural. That's real resolution. It has better depth too. I could hear sounds coming from behind my head and all around at times, whereas the HD 800 just puts everything beside my head.

 

[akg fanboy]

   
The HD 800 just sounded overly tight, dry, mechanical, synthetic, and artificial to me, even when I equalized it to have a balanced frequency response. (And no matter whether it was driven from the Mojo or DAC/amps costing thousands.) Nothing at all like what real instruments sound like. (And believe me, I know.) That's fake resolution. The Elear picks up all the same details but sounds natural. That's real resolution. It has better depth too. I could hear sounds coming from behind my head and all around at times, whereas the HD 800 just puts everything beside my head.

I DUNU, the hd800 has the most 3 dimensional soundstage I have ever heard in my life and makes my q701 sound 2d in comparison which is the first time my q701 ever sounded BAD compared to another headphone, and many people tend to agree that this is a strength of the hd800, as well as being an imaging king only rivaled by e stats. Are you saying any treble happy headphone has artificial resolution? You can cut the treble down by EQ and it still has unrivaled micro detailing that is simply unmatched. The hd800 sounded very bright on my first listen but I eventually got used to it, it's actually my go to headphone for METAL. If you are looking for a flat response the elear isn't exactly the way either, the bass quality is another factor that made me love my hd800. It may not have the quantity many people die for, but it definitely has some of the most 3 dimensional and crystal clear tight textured bass.

 

[Music Alchemist]

  I DUNU, the hd800 has the most 3 dimensional soundstage I have ever heard in my life and makes my q701 sound 2d in comparison which is the first time my q701 ever sounded BAD compared to another headphone, and many people tend to agree that this is a strength of the hd800, as well as being an imaging king only rivaled by e stats. Are you saying any treble happy headphone has artificial resolution? You can cut the treble down by EQ and it still has unrivaled micro detailing that is simply unmatched. The hd800 sounded very bright on my first listen but I eventually got used to it, it's actually my go to headphone for METAL. If you are looking for a flat response the elear isn't exactly the way either, the bass quality is another factor that made me love my hd800. It may not have the quantity many people die for, but it definitely has some of the most 3 dimensional and crystal clear tight textured bass.

 
All headphones sound two-dimensional to me, but the Elear sounds more three-dimensional to me than the HD 800.
 
As I already said, it still had that artificial robotic sound no matter how it was equalized. My statements apply regardless of EQ.
 
I did say that the STAX SR-207 is more neutral, but you can equalize any headphone to be pretty neutral.

 

[akg fanboy]

   
All headphones sound two-dimensional to me
 

^true dat
 
A lot of people praise the sr207, may I ask why you got rid of them?

 

[Music Alchemist]

A lot of people praise the sr207, may I ask why you got rid of them?

 
Because I needed quick cash at the time.

 

[acap13]

All headphones sound two-dimensional to me, but the Elear sounds more three-dimensional to me than the HD 800.

As I already said, it still had that artificial robotic sound no matter how it was equalized. My statements apply regardless of EQ.

I did say that the STAX SR-207 is more neutral, but you can equalize any headphone to be pretty neutral.

I demoed Focal Elear alongside my Mad Dog Pro driven by Chord Mojo via lightning out of Iphone 6 feeding Tidal Hifi files..I felt confused of how are Elear is much better than my MDP. Elear being an open designed is not really open in sound to my ears and overall still a little bit better in terms of imaging and soundstage compared to MDP.Elear is warmer than MDP and has more bass slams and mid bass punch than MDP..MDP however is cleanly textured in bass retrieval and tighter than Elear's ..

When I stumbled across the Sultan of swings(The Alchemy)-Dire Straits, the guitar shimmering on the background usually portrayed the highest ceiling on the stage compared to other instruments on the recordings. My MDP and HD800S succeeds to show this as compared to the Elear which I suspected was masked due to the heavy bass synths. Other than that, on the female vocals appeared that Elear is reccessed and less neutral than HD800S.. It is great pair though but not overall better than my HD800S(Its still better than my MDP almost overal attributes except depth front and back) and it is what is at $1000 and not more than that..Still there are stiff competitions around the price and even lower than that I have heard like the Fostex TH-610,Nighthawks, and some Audio Technica headphones. Bear in mind,source and amplifications really do play the roles for the afforementioned headphones..Glad you like the Elear on Mojo though.

 

[Music Alchemist]

I demoed Focal Elear alongside my Mad Dog Pro driven by Chord Mojo via lightning out of Iphone 6 feeding Tidal Hifi files..I felt confused of how are Elear is much better than my MDP. Elear being an open designed is not really open in sound to my ears and overall still a little bit better in terms of imaging and soundstage compared to MDP.Elear is warmer than MDP and has more bass slams and mid bass punch than MDP..MDP however is cleanly textured in bass retrieval and tighter than Elear's ..

When I stumbled across the Sultan of swings(The Alchemy)-Dire Straits, the guitar shimmering on the background usually portrayed the highest ceiling on the stage compared to other instruments on the recordings. My MDP and HD800S succeeds to show this as compared to the Elear which I suspected was masked due to the heavy bass synths. Other than that, on the female vocals appeared that Elear is reccessed and less neutral than HD800S.. It is great pair though but not overall better than my HD800S(Its still better than my MDP almost overal attributes except depth front and back) and it is what is at $1000 and not more than that..Still there are stiff competitions around the price and even lower than that I have heard like the Fostex TH-610,Nighthawks, and some Audio Technica headphones. Bear in mind,source and amplifications really do play the roles for the afforementioned headphones..Glad you like the Elear on Mojo though.

 
 
I have owned the Elear, HD 800, and NightHawk. To my ears, the Elear is superior in pretty much every way. I have extensively equalized all of them, so I have a better idea of what sound the drivers impose on them that you can't fix with EQ. The NightHawk is overly soft and smooth while the HD 800 is overly tight and dry. Again, this is no matter how they are equalized. The Elear sounds much more natural to me. If you equalize it properly, you can also make it more neutral, and then some of the weaknesses you mentioned are no longer there. All headphones (including the HD 800) sound very small to me in terms of soundstage and imaging. They're nothing like live performances and loudspeakers, so I don't care much about that aspect of headphones. Those three headphones are also poor when it comes to aggression and impact. I don't really love any of them with more energetic music like metal and certain electronic genres, and reach for other headphones for that type of music.

 

[acap13]

I have owned the Elear, HD 800, and NightHawk. To my ears, the Elear is superior in pretty much every way. I have extensively equalized all of them, so I have a better idea of what sound the drivers impose on them that you can't fix with EQ. The NightHawk is overly soft and smooth while the HD 800 is overly tight and dry. Again, this is no matter how they are equalized. The Elear sounds much more natural to me. If you equalize it properly, you can also make it more neutral, and then some of the weaknesses you mentioned are no longer there. All headphones (including the HD 800) sound very small to me in terms of soundstage and imaging. They're nothing like live performances and loudspeakers, so I don't care much about that aspect of headphones. Those three headphones are also poor when it comes to aggression and impact. I don't really love any of them with more energetic music like metal and certain electronic genres, and reach for other headphones for that type of music.

Yeah, Im quite curious for the result of equalized headphones..I heard so many glorious results between modded hd800/sdr mod with Sonarworks..Some of them even said the results was hd800/sdr mod could wipe the floor with Abyss ab-1266..

Compared to loudspeaker,headphone can be easily beaten if the room is properly treated accoustically and the loudspeaker matching with the source and amplifier..They could really project something out of world and none headphone could re-create it..

However, I would want my headphone to have an acceptable level of resolution,openness, imaging ,linear frequency responses and proper depth.. I think HD800/S is really hard to beat at its price point..I have an opinion too that Mojo alone couldn't bring the HD800/S to its limit,give it a proper source(files+Mojo) and right amplification(in terms hd800/S, tube is generally favoured) could make them sing like a champ..I think you will love your result with planar magnetic more with those genres mentioned and of course pair it with Mojo is enough to make one satisfied due to the high damping factor..

 

[Music Alchemist]

Yeah, Im quite curious for the result of equalized headphones..I heard so many glorious results between modded hd800/sdr mod with Sonarworks..Some of them even said the results was hd800/sdr mod could wipe the floor with Abyss ab-1266..

Compared to loudspeaker,headphone can be easily beaten if the room is properly treated accoustically and the loudspeaker matching with the source and amplifier..They could really project something out of world and none headphone could re-create it..

However, I would want my headphone to have an acceptable level of resolution,openness, imaging ,linear frequency responses and proper depth.. I think HD800/S is really hard to beat at its price point..I have an opinion too that Mojo alone couldn't bring the HD800/S to its limit,give it a proper source(files+Mojo) and right amplification(in terms hd800/S, tube is generally favoured) could make them sing like a champ..I think you will love your result with planar magnetic more with those genres mentioned and of course pair it with Mojo is enough to make one satisfied due to the high damping factor..

 
The HD 800 is hardly linear. Painfully bright and tinny, sucked out mids, and due to the overly tight/dry nature of the drivers, the bass never sounds right even when you boost it to basshead levels. (Though the actual quantity of the bass isn't bad even in stock form. It just sounds like less bass than it is due to what I mentioned.) And the HD 800 S has the same drivers and measures nearly the same.
 
In most areas, the HD 800 is easily beaten by cheaper headphones, especially STAX. In some categories, it's downright poor. Since the S is roughly $700 more expensive now, I think it's a major rip-off.
 
I got better results than Sonarworks by doing EQ myself.
 
Without EQ, the SR-207 is far more neutral:
http://cdn.head-fi.org/6/6d/6de6f4f3_STAX_SR-207_EP-507_SB2217.png
 
(This is with upgraded pads. With the stock pads, the 10 kHz peak isn't there.)
 
The SDR mod doesn't do that much to change it. The Abyss (which I have also heard) is a very different headphone.
 
To my ears, the Elear has better depth and dimensionality than the HD 800. I could hear sounds coming from all around my head, whereas the HD 800 just sounded like everything was right next to my ears and slightly more spread-out than average. The HD 800 did not sound any more open to me than the Elear. Both have the intimate presentation of headphones. And as I covered, I think the Elear has better resolution, picking up the same details but sounding more natural and realistic. This is coming from someone who owned both instead of auditioning things briefly.
 
I have driven the HD 800 from absurdly powerful solid state DAC/amps costing thousands, and its basic sound signature remained the same. I'm sure it could sound different with certain tube amps, but since I already equalized it every which way, I am skeptical about what type of improvements could be had.
 
I've already mentioned most of this stuff multiple times in the past. I don't intend to upset anyone; just stating my opinion and sharing my experiences.

 

[JaZZ]

 
The HD 800 is hardly linear. Painfully bright and tinny, sucked out mids, and due to the overly tight/dry nature of the drivers, the bass never sounds right even when you boost it to basshead levels. (Though the actual quantity of the bass isn't bad even in stock form. It just sounds like less bass than it is due to what I mentioned.) And the HD 800 S has the same drivers and measures nearly the same.
 
In most areas, the HD 800 is easily beaten by cheaper headphones, especially STAX. In some categories, it's downright poor. Since the S is roughly $700 more expensive now, I think it's a major rip-off.
 
I got better results than Sonarworks by doing EQ myself.
 
Without EQ, the SR-207 is far more neutral:
http://cdn.head-fi.org/6/6d/6de6f4f3_STAX_SR-207_EP-507_SB2217.png
 
(This is with upgraded pads. With the stock pads, the 10 kHz peak isn't there.)
 
The SDR mod doesn't do that much to change it. The Abyss (which I have also heard) is a very different headphone.
 
To my ears, the Elear has better depth and dimensionality than the HD 800. I could hear sounds coming from all around my head, whereas the HD 800 just sounded like everything was right next to my ears and slightly more spread-out than average. The HD 800 did not sound any more open to me than the Elear. Both have the intimate presentation of headphones. And as I covered, I think the Elear has better resolution, picking up the same details but sounding more natural and realistic. This is coming from someone who owned both instead of auditioning things briefly.
 
I have driven the HD 800 from absurdly powerful solid state DAC/amps costing thousands, and its basic sound signature remained the same. I'm sure it could sound different with certain tube amps, but since I already equalized it every which way, I am skeptical about what type of improvements could be had.
 
I've already mentioned most of this stuff multiple times in the past. I don't intend to upset anyone; just stating my opinion and sharing my experiences.

 
Even though it's labelled as a personal opinion (at one point), the wording of your post sounds more like a damnation of the HD 800's sonic capabilities. As I see it, it's just not your kind of sound. And if you think the many people who like it are misguided or don't have enough experience with really good sounding headphones, there's still something to learn for you. There's not a single headphone that's free from tonal flaws, and the HD 800 is no exception. Therefore the many approaches to fix them – damping modification, Helmholtz resonator, equalizing, recabling, amp matching... –, like with barely any other headphone. The most likely reason for this is that despite its flaws it also has a lot to offer in terms of resolution, detail, clarity and imaging, which makes it worth the effort. And I seriously think you haven't allowed it enough time or yourself to get familiar with its sound (I for one consider the damping mod mandatory for removing most of the artificiality you mentioned earlier), especially when you consider equalizing a must (and rightly so!) – which usually takes me weeks and months for getting it right.
 
I don't agree with you on the bass. Appropriately equalized it's one of the best I ever heard from a headphone. I don't know the SR-207, but from my own occupation with electrostats I'd say that there's no way it can come close in terms of bass quality and particularly punch and dynamics. Sadly I still haven't heard the Focals, but you seem to be in a tiny minority pretending its soundstage be subjectively better. BTW, I have my own reservations against electrostats because of their general artificiality (as I hear it with my ears), although I really like them nonetheless. On the other hand, 55% of their often lauded superior resolution is in fact fake (a trick contributed by reflections between and at the stator grids).
 
No offense meant!

 

 

[Dobrescu George]

   
Even though it's labelled as a personal opinion (at one point), the wording of your post sounds more like a damnation of the HD 800's sonic capabilities. As I see it, it's just not your kind of sound. And if you think the many people who like it are misguided or don't have enough experience with really good sounding headphones, there's still something to learn for you. There's not a single headphone that's free from tonal flaws, and the HD 800 is no exception. Therefore the many approaches to fix them – damping modification, Helmholtz resonator, equalizing, recabling, amp matching... –, like with barely any other headphone. The most likely reason for this is that despite its flaws it also has a lot to offer in terms of resolution, detail, clarity and imaging, which makes it worth the effort. And I seriously think you haven't allowed it enough time or yourself to get familiar with its sound (I for one consider the damping mod mandatory for removing most of the artificiality you mentioned earlier), especially when you consider equalizing a must (and rightly so!) – which usually takes me weeks and months for getting it right.
 
I don't agree with you on the bass. Appropriately equalized it's one of the best I ever heard from a headphone. I don't know the SR-207, but from my own occupation with electrostats I'd say that there's no way it can come close in terms of bass quality and particularly punch and dynamics. Sadly I still haven't heard the Focals, but you seem to be in a tiny minority pretending its soundstage be subjectively better. BTW, I have my own reservations against electrostats because of their general artificiality (as I hear it with my ears), although I really like them nonetheless. On the other hand, 55% of their often lauded superior resolution is in fact fake (a trick contributed by reflections between and at the stator grids).
 
No offense meant!

 

 
Whoa! 
 
Now that you mention the reflection between stator grids, Ultrasone does something remotely similar with their headphones, which are a dynamic driver design. 
 
They place the driver on a metal plate with holes in it;
 
The sound that escapes from the back of the driver enters the cup and reflects, eventually entering the holes and hitting the ear, but with a short delay compared to the rest of the sound. With enough math, this concept makes the soundstage sound realistic and open, even within a closed back headphone. Really interesting learning their secrets! 

 

[JaZZ]

From what I know Utrasone's trick tries to shift the sound source to the front and down for a more natural soundstage – according to their experiments. Of course their design doesn't allow for high transient accuracy, as there are a lot of reflections involved.

 

[Music Alchemist]

Okay, the conversation was moved to its own thread. This is for the better, as it indeed was a little too off-topic from the Mojo.
 

  Even though it's labelled as a personal opinion (at one point), the wording of your post sounds more like a damnation of the HD 800's sonic capabilities. As I see it, it's just not your kind of sound. And if you think the many people who like it are misguided or don't have enough experience with really good sounding headphones, there's still something to learn for you. There's not a single headphone that's free from tonal flaws, and the HD 800 is no exception. Therefore the many approaches to fix them – damping modification, Helmholtz resonator, equalizing, recabling, amp matching... –, like with barely any other headphone. The most likely reason for this is that despite its flaws it also has a lot to offer in terms of resolution, detail, clarity and imaging, which makes it worth the effort. And I seriously think you haven't allowed it enough time or yourself to get familiar with its sound (I for one consider the damping mod mandatory for removing most of the artificiality you mentioned earlier), especially when you consider equalizing a must (and rightly so!) – which usually takes me weeks and months for getting it right.
 
I don't agree with you on the bass. Appropriately equalized it's one of the best I ever heard from a headphone. I don't know the SR-207, but from my own occupation with electrostats I'd say that there's no way it can come close in terms of bass quality and particularly punch and dynamics. Sadly I still haven't heard the Focals, but you seem to be in a tiny minority pretending its soundstage be subjectively better. BTW, I have my own reservations against electrostats because of their general artificiality (as I hear it with my ears), although I really like them nonetheless. On the other hand, 55% of their often lauded superior resolution is in fact fake (a trick contributed by reflections between and at the stator grids).
 
No offense meant!

 

 
I don't doubt that the HD 800 would be improved with physical modifications and perhaps tube amps. My comments on it were only relating to the headphone in stock form, with and without equalization, and driven from solid state DAC/amps such as the 430HAD, HDVD 800, and Mojo. (I have mentioned in the past that its basic sound signature remained the same no matter how powerful the amp was.)
 
All I know is that when I listen to STAX, it sounds a lot like real instruments, and when I listen to the HD 800 (regardless of amplification or EQ), it sounds...well...like how I described it here. I acknowledge its abilities, but they come at too dear a cost. I've had my entire life to become familiar with the sound of real instruments, and the HD 800 just comes off as an alien robot to me. If the various tweaks available could make it stop sounding like that, and also have proper power/impact/aggression, that would impress me.

 

[Dobrescu George]

  From what I know Utrasone's trick tries to shift the sound source to the front and down for a more natural soundstage – according to their experiments. Of course their design doesn't allow for high transient accuracy, as there are a lot of reflections involved.

Oh, also that, but the idea is that that metal plate is a big part of how their magic works
 
I did see a pair disassembled and the idea looks as it follows:
 
http://www.head-fi.org/products/ultrasone-dj1-pro/reviews/17937
 

 
 
You can see those white holes covered with paper, the reflection from the back of the driver will come out through those. 
 
Also, half of the driver is covered by metal, so there will also be some direct relfections there - I suspect there are three degrees of reflection for every single sound - that would make sense. 
 
First is the sound which is pure 
 
Then the first degree of reflective sound that came from between the metal plate and the driver
 
The reflection that comes from the sound being reflected in the metal plate from the front of the driver, but coming from the holes covered with paper
 
Then the reflection from the back of the driver and that comes out those holes 
 
Then the final sound that might have some reflective traces between ear and the metal plate. 
 
They sound very good in practice though I do doubt as well how exact and clear is the transient response and the final sound is smeared for Dj One Pro - kinda like unclear like a fuzzy sound for many notes. 
 
I am still using them because I do need a closed back headphone with crazy soundstage. They do have the largest soundstage of the closed back headphones that I tried so far...