This is leading me to believe that the Clear MG is very transparent when it comes to its source. I can already attest to it sounding considerably different on two different stacks I have. Iāll do more testing and see what I find.
Iām primarily listening to the Clear MG on the Jot 2 + Bifrost2 stack where it does not sound bright to me. I never listened to the Elex on that stack. I listened to the Elex on the SMSL SU-8 & 9 and AAA THX 789. I briefly listened to the Clear MG with the SU-9 and the 789 and remembering it sounding considerably brighter (which I did not prefer). I havenāt listened to it on anything other than these two sources yet.
Valentine Luke Youāre listening on a tube amp right?
I think a part of the issue is terminology as well.
For instance shouty is a great example. Shouty is typically a term used to describe elevated midrange (human vocal range) this the name shouty.
So a Dt1990 wouldnāt be shouty even if it might be fatiguing.
Letās also talk about dark - dark could mean one of two things so Iām gonna clarify what I mean.
The Elex doesnāt have huge bass. It could use a bit of a boost imo and thatās one of the places where the MG is hitting a home run
What the Elex does have thatās dark is less upper treble and more upper mids.
I FINALLY understood the comparison to the Sennheiser 600 series with this take on ādarkā
This is what people tend to refer to as veiled.
At the end of the day I think my preference for the Elex comes from what itās doing in the fr area where Bass meets mids.
If the Elex had the treble of the Clears (removing said veil) while maintaining what it does in the lower mids and a bit of a bass boost then it would really be the best for me,
That being said I stick to my opinion that if I had the money I would actually own the MG AND the Elex for the sake of variety and to listen to different stuff, and that itās so strange to me how these headphones can have such a similar sound yet be so different.
Where all Focal headphones are very similar in my opinion is Timbre. Some say itās āmetallicā and that ZMF has the opposite approach to that but I donāt think EITHER are metallic.
I listen to everything I have on the Kann Alpha now which is the only thing I use as a source. This could DEFINITELY make a difference so Iām glad you asked. It could very well be that the MG would sound better (to me) on a different source, but for my preferences that doesnāt matter because the Kann Alpha is the most important part of my set up and is the one thing Iām not willing to change so I need something to particularly match it - whatever that headphone is.
I should add that I think this is a brighter source. Itās very much the opposite of āveiledā in my opinion but not quite as much as the Chord stuff.
Great point to resurface luige06. ZMFās strength on many of their headphones are their outstanding timbre. Especially when compared to FOCAL aluminum/magnesium drivers. For me, the OG Clear, Elex and Elegia (only FOCALS Iāve owned) all had this unnatural timbre characteristic to them. The Clear MG is the first FOCAL headphone that does not have that timbre characteristic which is the largest single reason I much prefer it to all the other FOCAL headphones.
This has been great conversation and I have a feeling weāre getting to the source of the issue. Itās all about your source.
Iām glad this turned out to be constructive and not heated. Iām very intrigued by all of this. Itās probably a combination of everything. Different definition of terms, amps, dacs, sources, cables, ears, muisic. It all makes a difference.
Unfortunately, it makes it impossible to accurately describe these headphones for anyone thinking about purchasing one. I guess with the Clear MG, itās imparitive to know what people will be driving them with to help them determine what theyāll sound like once in-hand.
Given it was subtle, but it did exist. Going back and forth from my Elex to the 6XX, it was obvious how bad the timbre was on the Elex which pissed me off because I enjoyed so many other aspects of the Elex. I think whenever I listened to the Elex, OG Clear and Elegia, I focused on it and it ruined my listening experience.
At the time, listening to the Aeolusā tonality, it was so different and much more natural and realistic. I guess I probably was listening to a headphone at the time that showcased the FOCAL aluminum/magnesium drivers shortcoming.
For me, the FOCAL Clear MG without those timbre issues is nearing-in on perfection for me personally.
I really love some of the Chord offerings, interestingly their lower tiered products. I own a Mojo that I use as my primary DAC, and Iāve listened to the HugoTT2 in my home for over a week.
They have the best transient/soundstage/imaging of any DACs that Iāve tried. The higher up you move in the lineup, the more āreference neutralā they become. The TT2 on its own lacked dynamics for me, but the entry-level Mojo has more dynamic punch (which sounds more natural to me), but is less resolving. Itās a trade-off, but it leads me to believe that the Qutest would be the sweet spot for me (a planned future upgrade).
Another interesting observation Iāve made with Chord DACs is that they appear to smooth over high frequencies just a touch. So they are relatively āneutralā, but thereās some smoothing going on that makes them relatively fatigue-free to my ears. My guess is that the M-Scaler brings about greater details and a crisper sound/image. Just a suspicion.
The Clear MG, and most Focal are extremely sensitive/transparent to source. Synergy is really important when pairing Focal headphones.
Yeah I agree that this was a good conversation and itās why these forums are so valuable!
Itās one thing to watch a review. Itās another thing to see a bunch of people have a discussion and work out where differences in perception may be coming from.
I know I lurk on here a lot for that exact reason. Gives me an idea if a pair of headphones needs to end up getting bought to try and then potentially keep return or sell.
Not sure how this isnāt likeā¦ common knowledge at this point that the focal clear and mg respectively are both very transparent and very picky on their source. Have had quite a few amps where it just makes them sound bad lol.
These, the aryas, upper bracket audezes, hd800S, select iems of the higher bracketsā¦ kinda comes with the territory but not all are as picky as the clears from my experienceā¦ At first, when I picked up the clears I had them connected to a liquid platinum balanced to a bifrost 2ā¦ I honestly hated the headphone immediatelyā¦ overly warm, overly colored, overly smooth, sounded veiled or compressed in the mids, dark on the treble, and dynamically not appealing at all. I had much better experiences with the asgard and violectricā¦ never tried jot 2 and im working on thatā¦ but I ended up sitting with the RNHP which I really like the sound of. Not bothered with others yet such as Rebel or Flux, been meaning to check out geshelli as I think they would do well with clears potentially
Pulled out my Elex today after 10 days of listening to the MG. The MG does everything better, IMHO!
Iām happy to hold on to my Elex for when I want to listen with a friend. Iāll let them use the MG. The Elex is a very good HP for this, and is still, a very good HP, just doesnāt really hold a candle to the MG.
Testing this all out tonight and I can get the Clear MG to sound quite bright with a cable change and running it off a Fiio Q5s with THX amp module. I wouldnāt say fatiguing, but I would say bright. The Jot2 + Bifrost 2 have a smoother and rolled treble signature through the balanced output. I wonder how much of a difference my balanced cable is making as well.
I have a few more mobile amps to listen to and the ultimate test will be my studio interface Universal Audio Apollo.
OK, I submit. I bought the Jot2 + Bifrost2 at the same time I bought the Clear MG and admittedly donāt know that stack like I know my other equipment. Iāve only been listening to the Clear MG on this set up.
The rolled off treble/darker tonality is coming from the Jot2 + Bifrost2 stack.
I just listened to the Clear MG on my Universal Audio Apollo and it sounds so different itās difficult to believe.
It sounds as if the Schiit gear has been specifically tailored to sound a specific way. Using the Clear MG with the Apollo sounds eerily similar in frequency response to my professional JBL studio monitors which are driven by the Apollo.
The Apollo in comparison to the Schiit stack sounds more V shaped with stronger bass and much more elevated treble. The Schiit gear is more mid focused and almost veiled sounding. I can clearly see why the Clear MG can be used professionally as a studio reference tool after hearing it powered from the Apollo in comparison to my monitors.
I have not witnessed my gear sounding this different with any of my other headphones. Obviously the Clear MG is much more revealing than I had expected.
