They’re extremely efficient, so they’ll get plenty loud off of most any source. However, I do feel they scale well similarly to the original Clear (and most Focal headphones).
I’ve only tried them with the three amplifiers I currently have, and I’ve found the the higher the power/current, the more dynamic the sound.
As much praise as Periapt Cables get, I wasn’t very impressed with them, to be quite honest. The quality is just ok. They’re a bit bulky, the splitter is quite cumbersome, and the finish on the connectors is not that great.
And yet I bet they’re still better than the new Focal cables. 
Hmmm, not sure I agree 
I got the Clear Mg Pro and both the regular and coiled cables are on par with Periapt’s. They are almost as bulky, IMO. But, hey, if it works for you, I’m happy to hear.
Lol I was just goofing, hence the smiley face. Focal’s old cables are not to my liking, and therefore I think the Periapt cables are much more user friendly. But I have zero experience with the new cables - my comment was simply tongue in cheek.
My order from headphones.com for the Focal Clear MG came in today and also the SA-1 Singxer Amp from Apos. Going to spend some time with them over the weekend and share my thoughts on them.
That is interesting to me. I am very new to trying to decipher FR graphs and measurements. But I want to check on something. Would the extended treble response in the 10k region of this HP or any other HP be an indicator of “air” and then also possible soundstage? I guess what I am asking is without hearing a HP is it possible to read a soundstage from a FR? Perhaps this is the wrong place to ask but I thought it was relevant here considering that Focal has said the MG to have bigger stage due to the more open inside and outside grill (honeycomb pattern and whatnot)
I’ll defer to others who know more than me about this but FR graphs can give some clues about soundstage, for instance, re. “air,” as you noted. But there are also other factors at play, and I’d likewise be keen to hear if the bigger stage has something to do with the openness of the grills. These things can matter a great deal.
My apologies if none of the following is news to you… the trick is that just as several things can account for differences in soundstage - e.g. having angled drivers, for instance - so soundstage itself can mean, and consist of, many things, which all work together for the overall perception of staging. There’s the overall sense of spaciousness, of course, which is tied to the perception of width and depth. Then there’s the extent to which a transducer projects the music forward, which can give the sense of hearing music either as though you’re seated among musicians, right in front of them, or a few rows back. And then there are issues of layering, imaging, and separation, which have to do with how distinct each instrument (or cluster of instruments) sound, and where they appear in the soundstage. Many of these factors can’t be understood from FR graphs, as I understand it. I’d gladly be corrected, though, if I’m wrong.
I wouldn’t say ‘bigger stage’. But I do think the sense of ‘openness’ can be correlated with upper treble frequencies above 10khz. Keep in mind that, more ‘open’ does not necessarily indicate ‘bigger soundstage’. There are also FR tricks that you can use to enhance the perception of space, like certain cuts in the upper midrange. But I’m generally not a fan of that, because it introduces tonal imbalances. But yeah, it’s totally doable. I think other parameters contribute more to the actual sense of soundstage. So you might look at the HD800s and go “what’s going on there” beyond just the tuning features that gives it an enhanced sense of space compared to the HD650 for example. There are a lot of potential factors, but I think at least one of them is probably the driver’s physical distance from the ear, and the angle at which it sits.
I got mine in today, seems to have a little more detail, they seem a little faster, and the highs are slightly relaxed compared to the old version.
IDK if its me but they sound more neutral.
I look forward to everyone’s detailed impressions of the Clear MG.
I haven’t yet pulled the trigger, but I’m leaning that way. I’m torn between the Clear MG and the ZMF Auteur, but seeing as I prioritize slam/dynamics and detail retrieval over soundstage size, I’ll probably get the MG’s. Decisions decisions!
Personally, I like both a lot, but the Clear has better technical performance.
The Auteurs natural timbre is amazing however.
You’re not making this any easier haha. I appreciate your insight!
I have a pair of Focal Celestees, which I love, and I have the ZMF Aeolus on order. I feel like I have my open and closed-back bases covered, but can anyone make the case for the Clear MGs as a different third option I should be considering anyway? (Please??!!)
I’ve not heard the Aeolus, so I’ll defer to Darthpool. Check out @TylersEclectic’s latest stream. The chat asks him to compare the Focal Clear (original) with the ZMF Auteur, but then he also does a live comparison of the Aeolus with the Auteur; all of those comparisons should give you a good idea on where he stands regarding your inquiry. And considering the impressions of the MG Clear have been overwhelmingly something like “they’re very similar to the original Clear,” it should be a good resource for you.
.
What is the difference, sound wise, between the Clear Mg and the Mg Professional?
Okay so I’ve spent a long time measuring these and trying to figure out the differences between the Clear MG, OG and Elex (Elear with Clear pads), and I feel more confident using in-ear mics to show this, mainly because they’re more readable and consistent in the treble - where the real differences show up among them.
Sample 1
In-ear mics: Clear vs Clear MG
GRAS 43AG: Clear vs Clear MG
Sample 2
All three compared with in-ear mics
GRAS 43AG: Elear with Clear pads vs Clear MG
While this shows some difference in the bass between the MG and OG, it could just be that the OG I’m using to measure here is a bit of an outlier in the bass (looking at Jude’s measurements at least). But regardless, the main differences here are in the treble as I mentioned.
The MG is noticeably pulled back in the mid-treble, making it somewhat smoother there. While this is a good thing, it also loses a bit of the balance that was created by the Clear and Elex’s three bumps, 6khz, 8khz and 10khz. Importantly, the MG elevates significantly in the upper treble above 10khz, imparting a kind of ‘shimmering’ character to it. While that slight shimmer worked on the OG Clear, due to the three bump balance, the contrast between mid treble and upper treble on the MG is a bit too intense for my liking. I think some may be fine with this though, and how much you notice it will likely depend on factors like age and sensitivity to upper treble.
So, in short, for tonal balance, I think the OG Clear is simply better, with a more even balance in the mid-treble, in spite of the fact that the MG is a bit more smooth there. The OG’s mid treble presence just gives it a bit better focus for cymbal hits, rather than the emphasis towards the upper edge of those tones.
For technical performance, they’re all very similar, but I’d rank them like this:
Clear MG > Clear OG > Elear/Elex
The difference in microdetail and microdynamics is significantly more noticeable between the Elear/Elex and that MG than it is between the MG and the Clear OG. So, I mentioned earlier that the difference in terms of detail isn’t as noticeable as the difference in treble tuning, and I think that’s still true. But the reason I think there’s actually a tangible difference here beyond simply the tuning changes (people often perceive more upper treble as ‘more detail’), is because the differences I hear for detail are primarily in the midrange.
In any case, they’re all great sounding headphones, but my personal preference is for the Clear OG’s treble tuning, even though it can occasionally be a bit ‘gritty’ at times (it’s a tradeoff I’ll take), and I do hear a slight detail advantage on the MG.
For anyone wondering about the MG vs MG Pro, the official word is that they’re supposed to be the same just with different accessories, but I can’t verify that at the moment.
The graph says GRAS 43AG, but it was measured with in-ear microphones?
Well, that one was… Most of the measurements are done on the GRAS. And I’ve also measured these on the GRAS. That’s literally just a watermark.
Ahh, okay. Will you be posting the GRAS measurements?
I’m curious to see how they differ from Jude’s.
