Focal Elegia - Closed Back Headphones - Official Thread

After spending enough time to properly evaluate the Elegia on my own equipment now, I’ve decided to compile and revise some of my impressions. I’ve posted similar thoughts in other places, and felt like I might as well put it together with a more complete opinion here. As a general preface, this evaluation takes both the default Elegia tuning and the Elegia with a bit of EQ into consideration. While I don’t think it’s essential to EQ it, I have found that overall my very minor preliminary adjustments have made a notable improvement, and if anyone is thinking about getting the Elegia, know that it does respond well to a bit of EQ.

For the most part my impressions line up with those of antdroid and Torq. But I actually think there’s a perfectly reasonable explanation as to why impressions have been so different for the Elegia.

Source: Burr-Brown DAC -> Cayin IHA-6 balanced 4pin out -> Focal Clear XLR cable -> Elegia

Elegia1

Comfort:

Slightly tighter clamp than on the Clear but not as much as the Aeon or the HD6XX, but I also have a slightly larger than average head that just doesn’t work with the Sennheiser line, even after stretching it. Also slightly lighter than the Clear (I think?). The Elegia has the same slight cup swivel capability of the other Focal’s with a bit of give so it’s able to fit reasonably well. I rate comfort like this: Nightowl (don’t judge me) > Ananda > HD800s > Auteur > Clear/Elegia > TH-X00 > Aeon (without headband mod) > HD6XX > Sundara >>>>>> HE-500. Keep in mind that it’s just over 400g, so it’s lighter than some of these on this list (lighter than the Eikon as well), and although I rate the Auteur more comfortable, many will prefer the Elegia’s comfort due to the lower weight - especially after long sessions.

Performance:

The Elegia was apparently designed to be a closed-back Clear, and just like the Clear, the Elegia has incredible resolution, detail, and transient speed. While the tuning is different, I consider the performance closer to the Clear than to the Elex/Elear. I’m not sure the resolution quite matches that of the Clear but that could also be due to the different tuning of the Elegia. Even without EQ, resolution and detail is still superb and comes very close to that of the Clear. Detail retrieval is definitely superior to the Aeon Flow Closed, and about on par in terms of speed. It’s both faster and more resolving than the ZMF Biodynamics (Eikon/Auteur) - however those have a more agreeable tuning and timbre. Overall the ZMF offerings feel more ‘rich’ and ‘full’ sounding with a bit of extra sweetness to the tones, with the Elegia sounding more clinical and articulate.

Elegia%202

Tonality:

The Bass - Some impressions indicate that the Elegia lacks bass, or feels thin. Rest assured it absolutely does not lack bass. It actually has more than the Clear up until about 100hz (maybe higher). The confusion is likely caused by one of two potential issues (or both):

A) The Elegia sound critically depends on having a good fit. I had to tweak it a bit to get it comfortable and as I was doing so I noticed a substantial change in the bass response. I can imagine someone with glasses that mess with fit feeling super left out when it comes to anything below 300hz.

B) There is a dip in the upper bass region that ensures nothing bleeds into the midrange. Some tracks simply don’t have the frequency range to be able to take advantage of the lower frequencies, and they bottom out at or before the dip. This leaves them sounding a bit thin and anemic. But for the tracks that do reach low enough, you’re never left wanting more quantity. A simple boost at around 100-200hz by a few db might fix the issue but I think if anything, one of the Elegia’s strengths is that it’s so clinical with frequency range.

Overall the bass is well extended and hits deep with good authority. After a 2db boost between 100-200hz, it feels just right.

Midrange - This is definitely a mid forward headphone and it’s one of the highlights, especially the lower mids. It reminds me of the mids from my old HE-500, although perhaps a bit sharp in comparison to something like an HD650 - but super detailed, tight and well-controlled. If you’re after a V-shaped experience, this will not sound good to you without EQ. At first it was a bit forward even for me, and I’m all about mids, so I tried a -1db reduction for lower mids, but quickly got rid of it since I quite like the mid-forward presence after my slight bass boost. The upper midrange starts to get some weirdness in it, but I think this is just the Focal sound, because I found the same quality in the Clear. Without EQ, it can sound a bit claustrophobic and/or ‘metallic’, and my guess is that’s partially due to a cut around 3-4khz. After boosting that by about 3db it started to open up quite a bit. This is honestly the only major adjustment I feel is necessary with this headphone, but that’s also only after switching back and forth between off and on.

Treble - At first, this was my least favourite part of the Elegia, but after a bit of tinkering with the lower treble and upper midrange I’m loving the rest of the treble. Speed, detail, and clarity is all there, with lots of air and openness. From a purely characteristics perspective, the Elegia is one of the most open sounding closed-backs I’ve ever heard. So far I find it most enjoyable with a bit more energy between 5-8khz (2db), and then brought back down between 8.5 and 9khz to remove any sharpness from the sibilance area. Again this is not essential like I consider the boost between 3-4khz to be, but I find it helps a bit.

As far as whether or not it sounds ‘metallic’ - there’s definitely something wonky going on in the upper midrange/treble, but nothing I’d call metallic. I did notice this same quality on the Clear, however, so that might be what Ishca is picking up on. I don’t think this would be all that difficult to EQ though. The limitations of being a closed back do show up in the treble, since, while it’s got lots of treble energy, it’s still not that effortless pillowy airy goodness of something like the Sundara or the HD660s that’s both smooth and resolving at the same time.

Staging

This is also a major strength for the Elegia. As mentioned, it is very open sounding for a closed back. But it also has a surprisingly wide soundstage, with lots of range across the headstage for instrument separation. This isn’t the ‘three-blob’ type of stage we all fear, and it has a very “full circle” in front of me feel. The Auteur sounds like you’re at a concert sitting a few rows back. By contrast, the Elegia sounds like you’re much closer to the stage, but the instruments go just as far in either direction. Depth is reasonable but nothing spectacular. To give a comparison, the Elegia has a bigger and more accurate stage than the Aeon Flow Open (and closed). In short: it comes close and intimate, but it can also throw far when called upon.

Elegia%203

Conclusion

This is one of the best closed backs I’ve ever heard. It’s a step up from the AFC without a doubt. I’ve now also heard the Eikon, and that’s a more difficult comparison because it may have a more agreeable tuning. But the Elegia is straight up faster than both the Eikon and Auteur, with better resolution and detail retrieval. With EQ I’d take it over the Eikon (likely not the Auteur), but Without EQ, I’d still take the Eikon. If you like the Clear, and wish it were closed back, this is the closest thing to it that I’ve found. While it’s an excellent office/work headphone, I’d also consider it quite good for ‘pro’ use, specifically because it’s so revealing of the full frequency range. The one downside is that, in my opinion, it does need a bit of EQ to get it just right. But I also tend to take that approach with just about every headphone I own (the one exception being the Auteur).

Overall, my impression of the Elegia is that it excels in its performant qualities:

  • Speed
  • Resolution

And is unapologetic in its representation of tracks that don’t sufficiently make use of the frequency range, which leaves the following areas to be either a question mark or a matter of musical preferences:

  • Upper bass
  • Upper midrange and treble tizziness and oddities

And I think these drawbacks are fine for a closed back, especially given that it doesn’t look too difficult to EQ. I also didn’t hear the driver clip at all, and I’d never want to play it louder than I heard it.

Here’s my video Review

11 Likes

Like the Elear, Jude pronounces Elegia wrong over and over again, and even when the Focal guy says it correctly. Kind of bothers me, but overall this is a really nice video on the stuff Focal developed to make this headphone.

4 Likes

I like the approach to damping, and I’m impressed with how well it isolates, given the porting on the back. Very cool from a technological perspective. It definitely sounds more like the clear than the elear too, which is a good thing in my opinion.

2 Likes

That is rather grating… I commented on it lol.

1 Like

Hey, figured I’d post an impression since I’ve had these for a couple weeks now. I am not all that great at describing why headphones sound good or bad but I’ll do my best.

First off, thank you to @antdroid for both selling me the Elegias and introducing me to this forum! I have quite enjoyed browsing here and everyone seems to be having fun and enjoying headphones.

The equipment I’ve been using during this period has been a SMSL-SU8 to a JDS Atom and balanced to a Loxjie P20. I’ve also been using these from my OnePlus 6 to a EarStudio ES100 using a balanced 2.5mm TRRS cable. No equalizers. Music through Spotify or FLAC through Foobar.

Featuring a Turtle Friend.

They drive very well to the ES100 and don’t require any crazy power requirements, hell they drive off the phone well enough. 32 ohms, eh? They are able to get loud enough and sound good on the P20 single-ended output which is fairly low power as well.

I am surprised at how comfortable they are, considering the clamping force and that the ear cups do not swivel. I like how the cup kind of spring back up to ensure they stick to your head. When I opened the box and saw the cups didn’t swivel I was positive I was going to hate them. My head is huge and my ears are low-ish on my head so I thought they wouldn’t fit or were going to sit weirdly. Surprisingly, nope. They sit great and snugly on my head. They do press a little hard and I have to take them off every few hours due to the pressure on my temples, but all in all not bad.

Anthony sent the whole box with original cable and all. Carrying case is great. Stock cable really sucks, springy and thick, too short for what it is. Thankfully I had a cable that fit these and Anthony sent a bonus cable.

My initial impressions of the sound weren’t all that great actually. It took me a while to get acclimated to them and I was judging pretty harshly. I thought that the bass was there and decent but sounded thwumpy and wonky. I thought the highs were tinny and the mids were cupped and metallicy in just the weirdest way, more than any other closed-back I’ve tried. I also thought that they leaked too much sound for what I wanted them for, considering they are closed-back.

So after two weeks I am re-evaluating, sitting here listening to them while writing this:

  1. The bass sounds good, still thwumpy and not hyper-punchy but not bad. No bleed in the midrange at all, as expected. Can actually produce sub-bass fairly well. Oi-1 by Biosphere has a part where there is sub-bass thumps but there is almost no noise, which is fun. I wear glasses but tilt them up so as not to break the seal, the bass bumps for the tracks that take advantage of the range where the bass isn’t dipped. Sometimes the bass can sound pretty weak, especially on the Atom and I found listening to these with the P20 to improve this.
  2. I found that the mids and highs being overly cupped and metal were a product of me listening to them too loudly. If I keep the volume lower and let my ears adjust to the closed-back volume they sound much, much better. Going too loud with these makes all of their flaws stand out and creates new ones, but since I tend to blast music a little too loud so I hadn’t noticed. The mids are pretty defined and good but don’t wow me when a guitar string is plucked. I don’t think the highs are the strong suit here, they sometimes can be sibilant but never sparkly and wowing which is interesting.
  3. They do leak sound still but at the lower volumes the damage is minimal.

Aaaand that’s where everything kind of opens up and my pessimism ends.

So while I still think the same of the bass, mids, and highs, they sound amazing at medium volumes. Most headphones I own sound more detailed the more power is added but they don’t help here.

They are pretty darn detailed though. They sound much better and have no graininess on voices and instruments compared to all of the headphones I own under the price-range I paid for them. They sound solid and are very detailed. Soundstage is pretty good for a closed-back headphone as well, though I do find those tones that play far off to not have a lot of impact, making them less noticeable. I did find that they worked on the P20 over the Atom in some cases. Since the Atom is so straight up with the sound and these are analytical enough, sometimes songs can sound pretty lifeless. Having the amp tweak them a little helped.

One of the more interesting things about these headphone is how non-intense they are at this mid volume. The reason why I initially changed my view was using them at my desk at a lower volume and noticing A. they sound pretty good, B. I was able to focus on my work with music I would normally get distracted by. All ranges of laid back and even intense music is surprisingly soothing and laid back. When I was originally listening I would be minor multitasking and find myself completely ignoring that fact that music was shooting into my head. I originally thought this was a bad thing, considering I was also trying to enjoy the music. I attributed this to them being boring for not making my knee bounce and my head sway along with the tunes, but when I think about using them block out sound to focus and have them sound critically great, I changed MY tune. Of course, this could all be because I am listening to these at a lower volume, huh?

Out of all of my headphones that I’ve owned, I put these third in overall performance right behind my Stax and Sendy Alvas. Out of the closed back headphones I own, place them in first overall but third in bass just behind the Sony Z7 and JVC HA-SZ2000 which have stellar bass. I still haven’t tried that many headphones, especially other Focal products and ones over $1000 and would still need to try a higher-end closed-back to make a truly good comparison, since the closed-backs I have really only excel at bass.

Due to these recent experiences I may just keep using them while working; I was able to get a hell of a lot done listening to music all day. That said, if I was going to be reaching for a headphone specifically to listen to music, I probably wouldn’t be grabbing for these. For the benefits I’ve found while working/researching and the fact that they still sound fantastic, I can recommend them for that reason and for anyone looking for a closed-back headphone that sounds amazing in general.

12 Likes

Very well said. I love my Elegias. If they didn’t leak sound they would be perfect for me. Honestly they sound so good on their own coming from an iPhone I sometimes find myself disappointed when adding items to the chain.

2 Likes

With the ES100 into the Elegia you’ll be much better off using the 3.5mm single-ended connection in 2x current mode if you want to listen above mid-volumes.

The 32 ohm impedance of the Elegia, combined with their 105 db SPL/mw sensitivity, means that you’ll be fine with the 1.1v output of the single-ended connection and the doubling of available current will help with bass reproduction. In 2.5mm balanced mode the ES100 cannot provide enough current to cleanly drive low-frequency content at high volumes with the Elegia, and the Elegia is sufficiently low impedance and high in sensitivity to not need the extra voltage available here.

Shouldn’t be an issue with either the Atom or the P20 though.

6 Likes

In this case, I have not. Though I did notice that through testing with other headphones. I am now just realizing why some headphones sounded terrible despite the same impedance and peak-to-peak voltage, balanced needs more power straight up with half the power per channel than what the 3.5mm jack would be getting, then? It didn’t cross my mind, just saw numbers and figured they were equal.

Thanks for that explanation!

3 Likes

Low impedance cans need less voltage to drive, but consume more current, for a given sensitivity rating to reach a given output level. You need to consider both the impedance and the sensitivity of a headphone to determine what it takes to drive.

Amplifiers have fixed voltage rails (there are some rare exceptions), which sets the maximum voltage swing they can deliver. A proper differential balanced amplifier will have double the available voltage of a single-ended version of the same amplifier, as it is basically two amplifiers operating in opposite phase. So if one amplifier is driven to +1v, the inverted (differential) side of the circuit will be driven to -1v in balanced mode, where as in single-ended mode it’ll be just +1v reference to ground (0v).

Amplifiers also have a limit to how much power they can provide (determined by their voltage swing and their current delivery capacity).

Power (W) is voltage x current (V x I). The ES100 can deliver up to 40mw per stereo channel. This limit does not change regardless of whether it is operating in balanced or single ended mode. But what does change is the available voltage.

  • In balanced mode, you have 2.2v of voltage swing available: 40mw / 2.2v = 18.2ma (I).
  • In single-ended mode, you have 1.1v of. voltage swing available: 40mw / 1.1v = 36.4ma (I).

The Elegia, at high volumes will not need even the full 1.1v from single-ended mode to get to 120 db SPL, much less the 2.2v available in balanced mode. However, they will, at 1 kHz, be pulling as much as 30ma of current … which in balanced mode with the ES100 just isn’t there … so you’ll get clipping.

Now, you won’t be listening at that sort of level … BUT bass-frequencies need a lot more current than is required at 1 kHz for the same output level. So, say, a loud 100 dB bass peak will still pull more than the +18.2ma current that’s available from the ES100’s balanced output. And consequently it won’t be a clean tone because the amplifier has run out of current and is, again, clipping.

The ES100 is nice because you can tell it to apply both the differential channels for each audio channel in common phase to a single audio channel to get double the current output. A simpler amplifier might just have half (or one quarter depending on design) the power available in single-ended mode so you wouldn’t be any better off.

7 Likes

I’ll do a more elegant, less rough-and-ready, explanation of this in the technical category at some point this weekend.

It has become “common knowledge” that “low impedance” means “easy to drive”, when in reality it is not enough information to make such a call - and all it really means is “will require lower voltage, but more current, than a higher impedance headphone of the same sensitivity to reach the same volume level”.

6 Likes

Is that why some Amplifiers that are ‘balanced’ aren’t truly balanced? They’re not separating everything out entirely? Do some DACs with two chips then only use one chip when outputting single-ended?

Thank you for the explanation. I’m always interested to learn more about the technology behind it all.

It never takes more than a few clicks to learn something new and realize much I still don’t know.

2 Likes

There are a number of ways, not withstanding misapplied terms and marketing, that a “balanced” amplifier may not be “fully balanced” (which usually means balanced-differential from input to output) or isn’t “balanced differential”. I’ll cover that in a separate, technical post as well, as it’s a bit long-winded.

Actually a large number of common DAC chips have actual stereo balanced-differential output as standard. Thus you only need one such DAC chip to get two, fully balanced-differential, channels.

In most cases DACs that double up on the DAC chips do so to improve noise performance, dynamic range and channel separation. Some DAC chips can be run in mono-mode and when they do they use the additional internal converters to improve their signal to noise ratio etc. For example, the ESS 9018 has a version with 8 internal DAC channels, but it can combine them all to drive a single channel output that gives better performance.

And something like Yggdrasil ALWAYS operates internal in balanced-differential mode, and the single-ended outputs are derived by summing the balanced signal.

5 Likes

I found that while they don’t perform as well as open backs, the Elegia is a good closed back reference tuning, or as close as I’ve heard so far that has some musicality to it. Any sort of leakage can drastically change the Elegia sound.

I found that when I did use them at my previous job, I’d be listening to music with them on and forget about time and get a lot work done. They have a laid back enough sound that I kind of forget about it. It’s a little different than the Elex, which I have a hard time focusing because I’m too focused on the music.

Anyway, hope you enjoy them.

Oh btw, it’s Anthony, not Andrew, but close enough. I’m not quite as cool as the real @andrew on this forum.

6 Likes

This is interesting because I have a 2.5mm balanced cable on the way as my “all purpose” Elegia cable and was planning on using it with the balanced out on the ES100. Now I’m thinking I’ll need to get an adapter and use the 3.5mm… if that’s even possible.

2 Likes

Yep, you can get an adapter from 3.5mm TRS make to 2.5mm TRRS female.

Just don’t try one doing the opposite!

And depending on how loud you listen, balanced my be better in your case.

4 Likes

Lovely write-up and a great read.

1 Like

So, when we talk about truly balanced DACs and amps, do the JDS Atom and Schiit Magni 3 fall into this category?

No, those are both single-ended.

And there’s nothing wrong with single-ended.

Balanced connections have their uses between DAC and amp, but in general that’s more concerned with avoiding noise/interference in electrically hostile environments and/or very long cable runs.

Balanced headphone drive can also be beneficial, as it keeps the grounds separate and tends to result in better separation, lower crosstalk and a slight increase in resolution. How audible this is depends on many factors. Finally, if comparing balanced and single-ended outputs on the SAME amplifier, balanced offers more power (if you need it, most desktop products don’t unless you’re driving very demanding cans).

It costs about double to do a balanced-amplifier that will perform as well as an otherwise identical single-ended design, since it requires twice as many amplification channels and twice as much power supply capacity etc. So, all things being equal, you get a better bang for you buck with good single-ended amplifiers.

5 Likes

I am so so sorry! I fixed that just now.

I have no clue how I let that get through. :frowning:

I use the Geekaria “Apollo” 2.5mm balanced to 3.5mm male adapter. It works quite well. I also have the Fiio version, but it is not very well built and cuts out often with the wiggles.