Magnesium Enters the Picture with Focal's New Clear Mg Headphones

(March 17, 2021) If you're looking for a statement headphone that dazzles the eyes and the ears, Focal's new Clear Mg circum-aural open-back headphones ($1,490) should get you headed in the right direction. Manufactured in France, Clear Mg is an upgraded version of its original Clear design, crafted to retain a neutral and balanced sonic signature with even more refinement than ever before.

Picked for its light and rigid nature, the Clear Mg's new Magnesium "M" shaped 1-5/8" dome driver benefits from natural damping properties for improved dynamics and detail. The headphone's overall frequency response ranges from 28 kHz down to 5 Hz while offering a sensitivity of 104dB (1mW @ 1 kHz) and an impedance of 55 ohms for compatibility with portable audio players. Sound quality is further influenced by a new honeycomb "M" shaped grille that mimics the curves of the driver, which helps to open the soundstage and focus high-frequency reproduction.

The Clear Mg is loaded with luxurious details and comfort. Its chestnut tones and metal accents pop with glitz, while premium leather and microfiber grace the headband and perforated earpads. A solid aluminum yoke completes an elegant design meant to conform to the head.

Focal includes a 9.8ft 4-pin XLR cable and a 3.9ft mini-jack cable with a 1/4" adapter, as well as a matching carry case.

The Clear Mg is available for purchase now through authorized Focal dealers.


Additional Photos

 

[Sonnie]

Nice looking for sure... a bit expensive for me.

 

[Todd Anderson]

Nice looking for sure... a bit expensive for me.

Not cheap, for sure.

Added a few more photos to capture the size and style of the Clear Mg. Looks like it would be a comfortable fit!

 

[studio_est]

More marketing hype (yet again!).
Where is Mr Linkwitz when we need him?

 

[Sonnie]

More marketing hype (yet again!).
Where is Mr Linkwitz when we need him?

Welcome to AV NIRVANA... glad to have you with us.

So talk to us, rather than yelp "more marketing hype (yet again)" ... tell us what you are seeing and back it up with proof. Not because it is required, but because it may be educational for those who are looking for headphones. What's wrong with the article based on testing... assuming you've tested these headphones, and/or have some evidence that something can't be right.

 

[studio_est]

All people's ear channel resonant frequency varies.
Linkwitz also speared the dreaded 7khz resonance caused by the pressure gradient/air volume syndrome.
This means headphones always place the image behind the head, and at best any evaluation of a headphone will be subjective and based on:-

1/ sex (women hear better), but the vast majority of headphone hype is made by guess who?
2/ age (if children's hearing is undamaged by vast amounts of digital listening, they/some can proveably hear up to 23khz.
older men can rarely exceed 8khz, and that after the age of 35-40...

3/ since when was any evaluation ever done by a 16 yr old girl?

4/ Dsp invariably can improve headphones which analogue correction cannot do.

5/ To provide valid evaluation you need to make proper double blind tests, inc bit depth and proper recording.

If you read the above, you would quickly understand, anything else really is just hype.
I would be happy to test anything against a good ESL, and see what the studio engineers think v the young audience..

 

[w_sizer]

Based on recent reviews by majorhifi.com, techhive.com, and headfonia.com, the new Focal Clear Mg actually lives up to the hype and represents an evolution of its predecessor, the Clear. Although there is no indication that these reviewers actually conducted bench tests, the very recent review on YouTube by head-fi did exhaustive frequency response analysis of the Clear Mg and pronounced it an improvement over its predecessor in every way. Finally, “The Headphone Show” on YouTube will almost certainly review this product before long and will include frequency response analysis, as that is part of their protocol.

 

[Sonnie]

I've never seen DBT with headphones, but then again I haven't researched them a lot as far as testing methodologies and studies conducted. While some of them sound pretty good, I can't get past the image not being out in front of me like it is with speakers.

 

[studio_est]

The image with headphones is always behind.
It's one of the reasons (good) sound engineers are taught headphones are "toilet" no matter how good they claim to be....not to be used unless absolutely neccessary.
I use them just and solely to get some "vague idea" if some mix is disastrous or viable, and even then...

Another pet hate..."YOU TUBE" reviews of anything usually recorded with some cheap smartphone, with a crappy microphone with an even more crappy codec.
I've seen and awful lot, but they are almost invariably crapotobasta!

the very recent review on YouTube by head-fi did exhaustive frequency response analysis of the Clear Mg

yea right.
And '"exhaustive" anything means strapping it on a Neumann dummy head, then claiming they can "interpret" the results, then fight over Harmann curves or not...etc as the case may be.err....

Objectivity is totally lost, but it sure inflates the egos of all those "reviewers for Audiphile webzines".

I sometimes wonder, what all this is about, writing reams of meaningless Ascii about meaningless comparisons...,.and don't get me started on"balanced headphone cables" and "Cardas or other wonder cables", which are craziness and silliness all rolled into one.

 

[Sonnie]

The Smyth Realizer did pretty well on getting the image out front, but then I asked myself, why not just use regular speakers.

I'm not going to argue one way or another for headphones. There are those that like them and I suppose a few that don't. They no doubt sound different than speakers, and I suppose have their place for those who like them.

 

[w_sizer]

I prefer regular stereo, too, but high quality (i.e., more expensive) headphones like the Clear Mg project sonic images that are actually in front and to the sides, albeit obviously not to the same degree as images from stereo speakers. In fact, one could argue that a high end pair of cans (e.g., Focal Clear Mg, Sennheiser HD800S, or Hifiman Arya, all of which are in the same price range) gives the user significantly more bang for the buck than a high end speaker system, which of course would run several thousands of dollars, not including the cost of the almost requisite acoustic room treatments.

 

[studio_est]

one could argue that a high end pair of cans (e.g., Focal Clear Mg, Sennheiser HD800S, or Hifiman Arya, all of which are in the same price range) gives the user significantly more bang for the buck than a high end speaker system, which of course would run several thousands of dollars, not including the cost of the almost requisite acoustic room treatments.

Absolutely don't agree. Senn HD800 are not "hi end" they are the usual rather banal SENN sound as started in the 650 series.

The rest all depends on level of technical competence.

Being as I designed and built my own system, I could honestly say not a single pair of headphones I have ever heard, comes even close to the clarity of the speaker array.
The main (huge 235L) cabinets made by a local specialist woodworking company cost me all of 250 EURO, made exactly to my design including buying the tools to cut perfect holes, and all the wood to go with it. (1" ASH fronts with 1" backing template reinforcements ). The chipboard came from an abandoned soviet cupboard, which was beautifully veneered.
I didn't need room treatment because furniture got the required amount of damping and the genuine 45yr old pine wood floor helped with the rest.

The amps I used were totally reworked 1963-65, 100W vintage valve units which turned to be complete gold dust, after being ignored by pretty much the entire "audiophool" community for 50+yrs.
They cost me about 350USD the monobloc PAIR,- proper "industrial metal".

Just because a price tag is in 3-4 figures, doesn't mean it's any good.

 

[w_sizer]

Absolutely don't agree. Senn HD800 are not "hi end" they are the usual rather banal SENN sound as started in the 650 series.

The rest all depends on level of technical competence.

Being as I designed and built my own system, I could honestly say not a single pair of headphones I have ever heard, comes even close to the clarity of the speaker array.
The main (huge 235L) cabinets made by a local specialist woodworking company cost me all of 250 EURO, made exactly to my design including buying the tools to cut perfect holes, and all the wood to go with it. (1" ASH fronts with 1" backing template reinforcements ). The chipboard came from an abandoned soviet cupboard, which was beautifully veneered.
I didn't need room treatment because furniture got the required amount of damping and the genuine 45yr old pine wood floor helped with the rest.

The amps I used were totally reworked 1963-65, 100W vintage valve units which turned to be complete gold dust, after being ignored by pretty much the entire "audiophool" community for 50+yrs.
They cost me about 350USD the monobloc PAIR,- proper "industrial metal".

Just because a price tag is in 3-4 figures, doesn't mean it's any good.

Don’t forget my initial statement above: I too prefer a traditional stereo array to headphones. My point was that it is arguable (i.e., not definite) that good headphones offer better value than speakers available in the new product marketplace. I have no experience with DIY stuff and therefore can’t comment on that.
As far as your system is concerned, it sounds quite interesting. How about some photos?

 

[studio_est]

The strict answer, I can't take my speaker system on a train, or on a plane, so no choice, but a/c are noisy.

I can install it in the car (I have a specialised valve amp in car, c/w DSP & ARM based SBC as media centre), so with all that firepower I can defeat headphones in my own car (and hear the phone ring!), but lots of cars are also noisy. (mine not).

I can do home cinema in my caravan with DVI and projector and decent speakers in there too, and in the studio the only reason for headphones would be because we wouldn't have a decent acoustic space to set them up.

I found frankly that headphones sux when you need them most.
(in the confines of having to RECORD in a concert hall sharing the same space as the musicians).

Headphones particularly DON'T suck when it comes to using good ones as binaural microphones for open air jazz concerts.
Senns are pretty good for that, but the good old Sony pocket DAT, is almost impossible to find now in working condition and DAT tapes are pretty much the same.

For making pirate recordings good headphones are THE BIZ, but few of them are actually any good for that!
Mobile phones absolutely SUCK for recording anything at all, but people are always making believe.

 

[studio_est]

FYI most of the time I usually use a vintage pair of A R Sugden Connoisseur omni-directional speakers.
I swopped the drivers because the originals were frankly not great, and installed some well known and highly rated full ranges in them.
That transformed them.

They are basically the rear channels for the surround system, but TBQH for continous listening with the new "mobile" amp I simply can't be bothered to turn on the entire surround system.
They sound so good I never get tired of listening to them, and leave the things on at night as well. (lots of internet radios have superb historic recordings on during the night you often never heard before).

I have only ever seen one other pair of these in the world, and bought them completely as an off -chance.

They're a vertical base reflex which explains the resonance around 85-100hz, something I have never seen replicated in that manner, but there again,- Yorkshire was a hive of audio activity in the 60s-70s with Calrec and many others busy, and the UK was in advance of most other Europeans in those days.

 

[w_sizer]

While I’ve never gotten involved in the vintage market, it sounds like you have built quite an impressive system there. Perhaps even end-game performance? Happy listening!

 

[studio_est]

A bit OT I know, but I have only seen one other pair of these in the world.
They have to rate as the most perfect surround rear speakers ever invented,or certainly I ever heard...

There's a "diffusion plate" in the top at an angle to the driver which is sited vertically.
The whole thing is clearly a vertical B.R. design.
A R Sugden was a bit of a marverick and these are no exception.

They make the sound have high immersive properties, with no collapse to narrow "sweet spots", so the absolute reverse of "beaming type speakers". Ie, the ideal surround rears.
(I used to have the original pioneer surround headphones for QUAD SQ/UHJ,- they weren't very good).

If you combine this with a front array which has a good flat response across the entire audio band (but in my case +9dB response from 28-50hz compared with most "high end" systems), you have the perfect reproduction for the most difficult of instruments to reproduce, - the organ.
Reproduction of French cavaille-coll or English Willis, then becomes a matter of definition (ie HD), and if you can find anything from any recording company that is any good.

Being as there are very few good 24bit recordings of organs, all we look for now is to try to find anything HD at all, and I am still looking. (One particularly good recording was made by a friend, which he brought into me).
He claimed it sounded exactly like the real thing he was playing himself in the recording.

I have never heard any headphones come even remotely close, unless you really start working hard with a DSP, and even then, the bass is poor and ill defined.

 

[w_sizer]

View attachment 41376
A bit OT I know, but I have only seen one other pair of these in the world.
They have to rate as the most perfect surround rear speakers ever invented,or certainly I ever heard...

There's a "diffusion plate" in the top at an angle to the driver which is sited vertically.
The whole thing is clearly a vertical B.R. design.
A R Sugden was a bit of a marverick and these are no exception.

They make the sound have high immersive properties, with no collapse to narrow "sweet spots", so the absolute reverse of "beaming type speakers". Ie, the ideal surround rears.
(I used to have the original pioneer surround headphones for QUAD SQ/UHJ,- they weren't very good).

If you combine this with a front array which has a good flat response across the entire audio band (but in my case +9dB response from 28-50hz compared with most "high end" systems), you have the perfect reproduction for the most difficult of instruments to reproduce, - the organ.
Reproduction of French cavaille-coll or English Willis, then becomes a matter of definition (ie HD), and if you can find anything from any recording company that is any good.

Being as there are very few good 24bit recordings of organs, all we look for now is to try to find anything HD at all, and I am still looking. (One particularly good recording was made by a friend, which he brought into me).
He claimed it sounded exactly like the real thing he was playing himself in the recording.

I have never heard any headphones come even remotely close, unless you really start working hard with a DSP, and even then, the bass is poor and ill defined.
View attachment 41377 View attachment 41378

Nice speakers! And I’m guessing that the absorption added by Mr. Teddy Bear softens the treble somewhat, too.