No, I've never used EQ for anything (headphones or speakers). I know it works for some folk, but I feel that planting another 2 sets of interconnects and a box of electronics (or a bunch of software jiggerypokery) between my brain and the 1's and 0's is hard to justify- I would think that a good part of the required EQ'ing would just be to correct the presence of the EQ hard/software. Perhaps I could be convinced one-day but having used an EQ app (wasn't impressed), my belief is that it's better to get the sound you want by choosing the right headphone in the first place, rather than trying to change the basic character of a headphone. I realise however that, that is easier said than done these days- not many places to demo headphones.
Sound signature-wise, I'd say the focals are fuller sounding, but I find the textures of the bass are less well differentiated than the AKG's. I wouldn't go as far as to say the focals have a one-note bass, but the AKG's for me just sound more interesting in the bass dept. I feel that the AKG's go deeper/lower. Mid range is good but more 'in your head' than the AKG's which for me, place the vocalist back a bit- out in front, almost speaker-like. The Focal's are more immediate. Focals are not as bright as the AKG's, so if you find that too much, the focals are definitely smoother at the high-end, though I don't perceive any loss of detail because of the smoothness. As mentioned, the focals may in fact be more accurate with regards to soundstage, but for me I find it little too closed-in. I'm used to the wide-open soundstage of the AKG's which i prefer, regardless of whether the music should sound that way or not!
