Focal Elear and Utopia

Mainly because it's true, at least in stock form.

I've always wondered why it seems to be so hard to measure such colorations. Driver materials, driver technologies, etc..., they all sound different, even if they measure very similarly. Maybe I just haven't seen the right measurements yet.

 

Maybe it has something to do with dynamics relying on the voicecoil/spring's elasticity vs planar diaphragms relying on their own tension to return to equilibrium?

 

The different materials might manifest themselves in certain measurements if you know what to look for and how to interpret. Resonant frequencies in certain areas (metallic woofers and tweeters come to mind)....maybe a sort of comb-filtering or triple-penetrator peaks (probably caused by acoustic/mechanical geometries more than the materials actually)....or perhaps in a hashy IR/CSD (STAX and other playnar technologies come to mind).

Also worth considering that the measurements do not fully encapsulate the scope of these textural colorations. That is, if the plastic STAX sound or the metallic Beyer sound were just the product of FR abberations, you would expect it to go away with a bit of PEQ. Not my experience in this regard, and I think others would agree. As @Marvey said, it goes beyond frequency response and THD metrics into more audiophiley phenomena (See Post #239). Nothing wrong with that.

 

The messiah has spoken, chaps! Sennheiser planars confirmed, without all the problems of planars of course and with superior distortion measurements, decay and frequency response to any headphone.

 

As requested, here are my impressions that I posted earlier on another site regarding the Elear and the Utopia:



Hey everybody, I was at The Source AV today, and I got some decent listening time in with the Focal Elear and Utopia (especially towards the end, where there was less people).

Before I go any further, I'll say what systems I used for comparing which headphones.

I compared the Focal Elear and the Mr. Speakers Ether (open) using the AK500N as the source and DAC, and the Cavalli Liquid Gold as the amplifier. I was able to listen to the Elear and the Ether with balanced cables.

For comparing the Focal Utopia and the Sennheiser HD800S, I used the the Questyle "Gold Stack" (CAS192D DAC, CMA800P pre-amp, and 2x CMA800R paired in monoblock mode). I used balanced cables for both headphones in this comparison.

To compare the Focal Utopia and the Hifiman HE1000, I used the AK500N as the source and DAC, and the Cavalli Liquid Gold as the amp. I was only able to do this comparison in single-ended because there were unfortunately no balanced cables around for the HE1000.

I tried to do some volume-matching by ear when doing each comparison, but obviously this isn't going to be perfect. Also, the reason I used these systems was because out of everything there, I felt they brought out the best of the headphones.

Two more things: I actually own the HE1000 myself, and I prefer a neutral sound signature with perhaps a hint of warmth.

And one final disclaimer: YMMV, these are just my opinions, etc. (I'm saying this because I know there are going to be people who disagree with me on stuff like how I implicitly compare the HD800S and the HE1000).

First up, the Elear vs. Ether Open comparison:

To begin with, while the Ether has a mostly neutral overall sound signature (perhaps some would consider the bass a tad bit bumped up), the Elear has a more U-shaped signature. For another comparison, I would say that the Elear (FR-wise) sounds a bitlike the Fostex TH-X00. Interestingly, this doesn't really mean that it has more apparent bass, but it does mean that it is somewhat brighter at the top end. However, this is done in a way so that the Elear still has some pretty clear mids.

Speaking of the top end, personally I like the Ether's better. It's somewhat more restrained so it pretty much never gets sibilant. So the Elear (with its relatively higher treble) can sound a tiny bit sibilant and unrestrained with certain music.

As for bass, I would say that at first listen, the bass on the Ether and the Elear are pretty similar - they're both decently punchy, with similarly good extension and control. However, the Ether still has that textured, really solid planar bass that the Elear doesn't quite have. It's hard to explain, but I find the bass presentation of planar headphones to be different from that of dynamics, and the Elear doesn't buck this trend.

As for overall detail, they're similar, but I simply feel that the Ether is more clear, and thus notes and instruments sound more true-to-life. This is not a tonality thing - I feel that there is a very, very slight veil on the Elear that prevents it from being as transparent as the Ether. Again, I must emphasize the "very, very slight" part.

Related to what I just said above is the mids - this extra bit of clarity simply makes the mids more come to life for me on the Ether. It also doesn't help that with the Elear, mids are a tiny bit subdued in comparison.

I feel that the soundstage of the Elear is a major weak point (at least in comparison to other headphones). Simply put, while the Ether doesn't have the widest soundstage, I felt it was a bit wider than the Elear. But more importantly, the Elear is definitely lacking some depth to its soundstage - everything just sounds closer to you on the Elear, and this is the main reason layering (distinguishing far and near sounds) is somewhat tougher on the Elear. However, imaging capability on the Ether and Elear is quite comparable to each other. Also, separation ability on the Ether and the Elear is very comparable to each other, though it may be a bit more difficult on the Elear due to how sounds are just closer to you.

Ether is lighter than the Elear, no doubt about it. However, I must say that the weight distribution on the Elear is quite good, and didn't prove too fatiguing for me even though I have a weak neck. However, whereas Ether almost disappears from my head once I put it on, with the Elear I still feel the weight, though it really isn't that distracting.

Now, for the Utopia vs. HD800S and HE1000 comparison:

HD800S sounds a bit bright compared to the Utopia. To me, the Utopia sounds more natural. When compared to the HE1000, the Utopia sounds a bit brighter, though it is not a very big difference. HE1000 and Utopia are very comparable to me in terms of a realistic sounding frequency response.

As for the treble, the HD800S sounds like it has too much of it compared to the Utopia and the HE1000. Cymbals are somewhat unrestrained, and higher notes just seem a bit too sharp and exaggerated on the HD800S. The Utopia is definitely better behaved in this respect. Same for the HE1000. I don't find the Utopia and the HE1000 to be wildly different in the treble, but perhaps the Utopia does do a very slightly better job in maintaining a balance between detailed and restrained treble.

For the mids, again the HD800S sounds a bit exaggerated in its presentation compared to the Utopia and the HE1000. So less dry and more lively mids on the Utopia and HE1000 IMO.

As for bass, the HD800S actually does a pretty decent job. It extends down decently low, and is well-controlled and textured. The Utopia has more bass, but is no less detailed, textured, or well-controlled than the HD800S. Pretty impressive. I would rate it very similarly to the bass on the HE1000, which I think highly of. However, the HE1000's bass seems to have that extra bit of solidity to it that the Utopia lacks, though I must emphasize that is not a very big difference.

In terms of overall detail level, there's no doubt in my mind that the Utopia is more detailed than the HD800S. The Utopia manages to sound clearer than the HD800S by having less exaggerated treble (so you can actually hear the cymbal fade away instead of it ringing for a tiny bit too long) and simply being slightly less veiled and thus presenting more texture to the notes. Compared to the HE1000, I find the Utopia to be slightly behind. I'm not really sure how to explain it, but the Utopia seems to have a very, very slight veil on its notes compared to the HE1000.

For soundstaging, like its sibling I find this to be the weak point of the Focal Utopia. I simply feel that the HD800S has a better soundstage. Not only is the HD800S' soundstage wider, it is also deeper (not by much, but enough). And at least for me, I more appreciate the somewhat more ethereal, Stax-like quality in that imaging on the HD800S is more effortless and notes just seem to appear around you. Also, due to the reduced depth, layering is harder to distinguish for me on the Utopia than the HD800S, though not by a big amount. As for the comparison to the HE1000, again I feel the Utopia lacks in width and depth in comparison. Again, layering is harder for me to distinguish on the Utopia compared to the HE1000, and imaging is more effortless on the HE1000 (though I don't believe the HE1000 beats the HD800S here).

Don't get me wrong, the Utopia also has very good imaging and separation abilities, but they're only very good and not exceptional.

And finally, the weight. The Utopia definitely feels much better on the head than any Audeze LCD headphone that I've tried - it's simply less heavy and it doesn't clamp as hard. If you can wear the HE1000 comfortably, you'll find no problems with the Utopia - they were about as comfortable as each other for me. Sennheiser HD800S is still the most comfortable to me due to how it tightly fits around your head without needing to clamp hard, and simply because it's the lightest.

Conclusions:

Elear: It's a decent headphone at the $1000 price point. Personally, I liked the Ether better, and I would rather get that even if it is more expensive. However, I will say that this is somewhat due to my preferences in sound signature.

Utopia: This, to me, is now the world's best dynamic driver headphone. IMO it's better than the HD800S. Finally we have something using a dynamic driver that can really compete and to me, even beat Sennheiser's creation. However, I cannot really agree with the reports of it being better than the likes of planars and electrostats like the HE1000 and the Stax SR-009. Personally, I found that it couldn't beat the HE1000 (maybe tie it at best) and based on my previous experiences with the SR-009, the Utopia can't outperform that either.

(There was an SR-009 available for listen today, but the headband was broken so I didn't touch it.)

So is it worth the $4000 to me? No, it isn't. Personally, like @Khragon said I would prefer it to be around the $2000 to $2500 range, because I do feel that it does improve upon the HD800S (and the build quality of the Utopia really is excellent) but not by that much money.

Hopefully people find these impressions to be helpful!

 

yea, but the sad thing is, most of this ''newer tech'' or ''exotic tech'' isn't really new and been done before for years. i know some stuff went up in price due to rarity as of today and lack of abundance as before compared to way back then but, still there is a line to draw between actual achievements vs. maximum profit making. i still think 4k is high especially for something as small as headphone dynamic drivers. i don't care what the company does or their choice on pricing for their product. it's just an opinion. that's all. it's up to the user to overall decide the value if it's worth it or not.

 

if it measured the same. it probably sound the same no mater material. difference is type of harmonic distortions and how well behaved(no ringing) the driver is. like music, lot of drivers measure out differently from both odd and even harmonics. if every speaker/headphone measured with perfect frequency response, harmonic distortion far below hearing in all odd and even orders, and is baby butt squeaky clean, then most likely everything will sound the same.

 

Right, because amps and DACs work like that as well.....

 

Finally someone who agrees that HE-560 is bright. Guys on head-fi says it's neutral LOL. Also something weird going on in the midrange.

 

The HE-560 is dead, sterile, has zero dynamics, and painfully bright. I guess most of the Head-fi defenders are listening to DR 6 or less digital pop crap where the cymbals are super recessed. 30 seconds of Fun House was enough HE-560 for me. It's HE-5 predecessor was dead, warm sounding despite measuring flat, too bright, and had audible playnar walls. The Audezes aren't actually better than them; they just have no treble or some grainy treble spike to remind you that yes you can hear that high. I've only heard the HE-6 out of some Nuforce junk so I can't really comment.

 

Suffice it to say the Elear is no 560. I am just hoping its bass is controlled and it has better layering and depth than the LCD2.2 which IMO has the best balance of the Audezes but is too flat in dimension, and lacks detail in the bass.

Based on the graph, if the Elear is as transparent, has less grain, and better depth and layering, it will be better than the LCD2.2. It already has a better build but it definitely has a stronger clamp and the pads don't come off.

The Kennerton Vali bass was much better than the LCD2. 2f but it doesn't resolve fine details that great.

 

I've already mentioned why hfm suddenly changed their whole sense since he560 appeared. Don't miss the pre-he560 period, it never comes back.

 

Many guy still think the $4k Utopia is an unbelievable steal cos they insistently think if we own this can we can sorta remotely, spiritually make our loves with the $180k Utopia flapship. Ship! That makes a lot of sense inside me

 

why not? there is more dacs,speakers and amps that sound very a like more than headphones. why? because most been already at peak of perfecting and not much more to it. there is other reason why something sounds different than others but, it's very easy to explain or figure out why it does. let say get two amps of different brands but, measure perfectly with very little to no negative feedback and never ran into their limitations of near clipping, they will most likely sound the same.

there is some odd times where something can't be explained. had few experience like that myself. just was pointing if everything was perfect it would sound exactly the same no matter material use.

 

Man defeats his own argument. More at 11.

 

There should be a dedicated thread for the plasticky-ty concept.
I'm still not sure to fully understand it and since I don't have much experience with planars of any type, I'm not in a good position to write much about the topic.
That said, I've always found the Fidelios to sound like plastic despite being thick and slow. If I recall correctly Tyll described L1's treble as papery/lacking refinement. It always sounded plastic and fake to me. Fidelio X1 exhibit a similar behaviour, although less pronounced.
Depending on the recording, HD700 sounds plastic to me as well.

On the other hand, headphones like DT880, HD6x0, T1, HD800 and even the K702 never sounded plastic to my ears.

By the way, here you have a comparison between the Fidelio L1 (red-blue) and the new Focal Elear.
Overlapped FR graphs from Innerfidelity


I find it interesting how close these two can be matched over 1.8kHz and really hope the Elear doesn't portray Fidelio L1's fake tonality.

 

This plasticky sound is the new word of the month, just like ethereal and limp dick bass was that at the time... I would not put too much thoughts into it and just listen for yourself. Besides the stereotyping, these are so far remote from personal experience that I for one take some distance when I read such extreme impressions. We definitely don't all hear things the same way, perhaps because we don't all listen to the same loudness levels nor style of music , have differing reference plane etc...
Among stax phones, the lambdas from late 90s sound metallic, they have milar membrane though so that says something about generalizing.

Cheers, arnaud

 

yea, so? why you guys hate me so much it seems? cause i say most things will sound similar than different? i only candy coated the last sentence to stop the convo there and allow this subject to continue and stay on topic.

 

plasticky more so implies a texture the driver material sounds like vs actual frequency balance. Also, just because Marv has described a few headphones to sound that way doesn't mean its a word we should go throwing at every headphone.

People like planars because they have tonal density and texture, usually low distortion in the bass, and the leading edges of the notes are more etched out vs the flowing and natural sound of dynamics. But they usually, to me, sound somewhat unrealistic , stiff, and arid; nonetheless I love some of the textures and tonal weight. I just love the flow, punch, emotion, and realism of dynamics more.