Sound: ********
Value: *******

Measurements can be found by clicking this link.

About six years ago, it seemed every speaker company wanted to get into the headphone business. Then about two years after that, it seemed every speaker company wanted out of the headphone business. But a few -- most notably Bowers & Wilkins, Focal, and PSB -- proved they could prosper in both worlds. Curiously, although all three offer high-end speakers, Focal is the only one that also offers truly high-end headphones, with open-back models priced as high as $4000. The new Elegias ($899 USD) are the company’s first high-end closed-back model, similar in look and feel to the open-back Clear headphones ($1500) I reviewed earlier this year.


Much of the pitch for the Elegias is the same as the pitch for the Clears. Both use a 40mm aluminum-magnesium driver with an M-shaped profile, chosen because it gives a larger emissive surface. As in a standard speaker driver, the Elegias’ driver is attached to its frame with a compliant, half-roll surround instead of just using the edges of the diaphragm as the surround, as most headphone drivers do.

The press release stresses the importance of the venting of the driver, front and back. Apparently, one vent travels through the baffle, from the enclosure behind the driver to your ear. The other one vents out the back, through a screen behind the cut-out Focal logo on each earpiece. While most closed-back headphones have one or two tiny (maybe 1mm) vents somewhere in the back to equalize the pressure when you put the headphones on, this vent is much larger and appears to function as an acoustical tuning device. Does that technically make the Elegias a semi-open design? We’ll find out in the measurements.


Otherwise, the Elegias have the same lush touches as their Focal stablemates. The headband is covered in leather and lined on the inside with perforated suede-like fabric. The earpads are covered in velour and lined on the inside with non-perfed suedette, instead of using the perfed suedette all around as the Clears’ earpads do. This means the Elegias’ pads are designed to give a modest amount of seal -- and, all other things being equal, more bass. The earpieces swivel up and down, and their aluminum yokes swivel front-to-back, allowing for an easy fit and a good seal.

In the box

Any thoughts I might have had about doing an exciting unboxing video for the Elegias were crushed when I opened the box to find only the headphones, a travel case, a manual, an 1/8"-to-1/4" (3.5mm-to-6.3mm) adapter, and a single 4' (1.2m) cable terminated in a 1/8" stereo plug on the source end and two 1/8" mono plugs on the earpiece end. But it’s a snazzy-looking cable, and the case is a beautiful, thermo-molded affair covered in dark gray fabric. If you want to do a balanced connection with the Elegias, an aftermarket balanced cable should be easy to find.

201810 focal package detail


There’s not a whole lot to talk about in terms of the Elegias’ ergonomics. You pretty much just put them on and play them. At 14.6 ounces without the cables (versus 12.1 ounces for the Beyerdynamic Amiron Homes I happened to have sitting nearby), they’re not light, but they’re not troublingly heavy, either. The clamping force is firm yet moderate, although John Higgins, one of my listening panelists, thought it a little firmer than he prefers. The earpads feel nice on the skin (to me, anyway), and my rather large earlobes fit easily into the earpads with no rubbing.


The rated impedance is 35 ohms, and while the press materials I received didn’t specify the sensitivity, it’s obviously pretty high for a large set of audiophile headphones -- even driven from my Samsung Galaxy S9 smartphone, with conservatively mastered tunes such as Steely Dan’s “Aja” (from Aja, 256kbps MP3, MCA), the level got uncomfortably loud when I turned the volume all the way up.


It was clear from first listen what the priority was for the Elegias’ voicing: midrange clarity. Voices sounded exceptionally clear through these headphones, almost as if a couple of parts of the recording and reproduction chair were somehow eliminated. This voicing highlights vocals (and saxophones and pianos and electric guitars, too), but in doing so, it doesn’t thin out the vocals so much as just present them naked and clear. There’s no romance here, no added warmth -- it reminds me of the times I’ve heard vocal tracks soloed in a multitrack mix, with all the other instruments removed, or the times I’ve heard singers audition without accompaniment.


For example, in singer Charlie Puth’s recording of “I Won’t Tell a Soul” (from Some Type of Love EP, 16/44.1 FLAC, Atlantic), you can hear every single syllable Puth sings with seemingly perfect clarity -- and without the addition of any annoying sibilance or harshness. It’s smooth, but I wouldn’t say it’s warm or seductive. The bass reproduction on this track (and on many to come) was tight, without the boom and bloat so common to closed-back headphones, but there wasn’t a whole lot of it. I’ve heard this tune through several headphones, and it does seem to me there’s the intent on the part of the producer to have the deep bass propelling Puth’s vocal in this rather sparse mix, but in this case the bass is pushed to the back and Puth brought closer to the front of the stage, so to speak.

Diana Krall’s famous rendition of “East of the Sun” (from When I Look in Your Eyes, 16/44.1 FLAC, Verve) is almost a meta-vocal track, in that it seems to have inspired practically every female jazz vocalist I hear to do her own version. The Elegias brought Krall’s vocal forward in the mix, much as they did Puth’s. Again, they seemed to add no coloration -- none of the boom, or sibilance, or blaring quality I hear in so many headphones -- and Krall’s voice sounded almost like it would if she were singing to you in a quiet park, with nothing to add any resonance to her vocals. To me, it sounded like someone had gone to Krall’s P.A. mixer and turned the vocals up 4dB . . . and the bass down 3dB. The sound was big and spacious, as it was intended to be, but I wanted more bass oomph. In comparison, the NAD Viso HP50s ($249) -- a much less expensive model I use as a tonal reference for closed-back headphones -- delivered a lot more bass without muddying up the mix, even if they couldn’t match the Elegias’ detail and depth.


What about non-vocal recordings? It’s pretty much the same. Anything in the midrange is presented with great clarity, but the bass player gets pushed to the back of the stage. (I am a bass player, so I’ll confess I may be excessively sensitive to this slight.) For example, the Elegias reproduced the Hoff Ensemble’s Polarity -- An Acoustic Jazz Project (16/44.1 FLAC, 2L Records) with a huge sense of space, and they did a wonderful job of revealing the subtleties and definition in the snare drum hits, and in the reverberant decay of those snare drum hits. Of all the headphones I had on hand at the time of this review, the Elegias did the best job of revealing these details -- but the bass was to some extent drowned out by the piano.

I’ve been hearing Led Zeppelin’s “Custard Pie” (from Physical Graffiti, 256kbps MP3, Atlantic) since the year it came out, and it was a treat to hear Robert Plant’s vocals on this tune rendered with perhaps the greatest clarity I’ve experienced to date. Like a lot of Zeppelin’s recordings -- like many of the rock recordings of the mid-’70s, in fact -- this one’s not big on detail, clarity, or dynamics, and I always had a hard time picking out the distorted guitar part from the distorted clavinet part. But through the Elegias, it was easy. Is that because of the headphones’ exceptional clarity, or because the headphones toned down the bass and kick drum?


To get a different perspective on the Elegias, I brought in two outside listeners: John Higgins, who holds a masters in music performance from USC and has served as a frequent contributor to Wirecutter and Sound & Vision, and LeRena Major, a Los Angeles saxophonist who’s held several positions in the music business and is a voting member of the National Academy of Recording Arts and Sciences.

LeRena flipped over the Elegias -- she said she’d never heard the kind of vivid detail she was hearing, even in comparisons with the Audeze LCD-X open-back headphones ($1199) I had on hand. She thought the clarity in the midrange and treble was extraordinary, although she said she’d have liked a little more bass.


For John’s comparison, I was able to borrow a sample of the MrSpeakers Æon Flow closed-back headphones to shoot out against the Elegias. The Æon Flows cost $799, making them $100 less expensive than the Elegias, but I think it’s safe to say the Elegias possess considerably more than an extra $100 worth of fit and finish compared with the Æon Flows. After listening, John and I both described the sound the same way, although we came to different conclusions. We both felt the Elegias’ midrange was clearer and more detailed than the Æon Flows’ (which were fitted with MrSpeakers’ white felt filters with two holes), but we also agreed that the Elegias’ bass and treble response seemed softened in comparison. For me, this meant the Elegias were the leader, but John ended up preferring the Æon Flows.

There aren’t many closed-back headphones in the price range of the Elegias, so it’s hard to make comparisons. Potential competitors besides the Æon Flows include the Bowers & Wilkins P9 Signatures ($899.99), which I’ve heard and found somewhat recessed in the mids; and Audio-Technica’s ATH-W5000s ($1199.95), which I haven’t heard. So I can say with some degree of confidence that the Elegias are competitive within their rather narrow niche.


While I personally prefer open-back headphones for listening at home, if I worked in an office, or was around my family for more than a few weeks a year, I’m sure I’d feel differently. There is an understandable desire among many audiophiles to enjoy world-class sound quality without the intrusion of environmental noises, and the Elegia headphones are clearly one of the best ways to do that. They do have a mid-forward sound, though, so they’re best for listeners who focus on the sound of voices and . . . well, pretty much any instrument other than bass.

. . . Brent Butterworth
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Associated Equipment

  • Headphone amplifiers -- Audio-gd NFB-1AMP, Musical Fidelity V-CANS
  • Sources -- Musical Fidelity V90-DAC digital-to-analog converter, Samsung Galaxy S9 smartphone
  • Headphone amp-DAC -- iFi xDSD

Focal Elegia Headphones
Price: $899 USD.
Warranty: Three years parts and labor.

BP 374, 108 rue de l’avenir
42353 La Talaudière Cedex
Phone: (+33) 4-77-43-57-00

Website: www.focal.com

Say something here...
Log in with ( Sign Up ? )
or post as a guest
People in conversation:
Loading comment... The comment will be refreshed after 00:00.
  • This commment is unpublished.
    Mauro · 3 years ago
    My take for those that might be interested buying Elegia’s:
    They have an incredibly clear midrange and ability to play loud similarly to an open back, they also have stunning isolation that beautifully unperpins dynamic passages in songs. They feel like a noise correction headphone when you put them on.. that’s impressive!
    On the cons a quite recessed bass, which even if equalized doesn’t possess the slam of my Audeze EL-8 nor Blue mofi.
    The weakest point in my opinion is the treble. Not superaggressive but not articulated, which is unexpected. In my experience dynamic drivers tend to have better rendition of nuances and notes decays compared to the more hazy treble of magnaplanars. For a comparison: my EL-8, nad hp50, akg k371 and Blue lola have in increasing order better treble.

    If Focal could tighten and increase the bass, smoothen the treble and (why not) provide a less stiff cable, they would have an incredible good looking and top performer.

    I have had a really good time with them (headphone. Not my favorite anyway!
  • This commment is unpublished.
    DH · 5 years ago
    What about amp matching? SS vs. tube amp? Do you think tube amp can improve the bass? Thanks!
    • This commment is unpublished.
      Brent Butterworth · 5 years ago
      I'm not excited about the idea of matching an amp to a headphone. The amp should be a transparent device, and the headphone should be voiced right. Trying to correct one with the other is very dicey, and not my preferred path. That said, as shown in the measurements, the Elegia's bass response does improve with high-impedance sources, so a tube amp with a high output impedance (and maybe a subtly rolled off treble) could give a more appealing sound. A better path would just be to use EQ (either on the source device or in an app like Sonarworks) to tailor the response. You're basically guaranteed a good result, the expense is minimal, and you aren't forced to join the amp-of-the-month club.
  • This commment is unpublished.
    Ken G · 5 years ago
    Here are Jude’s measurements vs Focal Clear.
    • This commment is unpublished.
      Doug Schneider · 5 years ago
      I hope Brent can comment on this as there might be some reasons for the perceived "drastic" differences. One thing is where the charts line up. If you look at Brent's, they line up at 500Hz, but at 500Hz on Jude's chart, the Eligias are a few dB up. So, either Brent would have to bring his up to match Jude's, vice versa. Also, Brent measured differences in the left and right on the Elegias. By the trend of the line, he plotted the one that showed less bass, but if he plotted the other and the 500Hz points were aligned on both charts, you'd see something that isn't as drastically different.

      Doug Schneider
      • This commment is unpublished.
        S. Andrea Sundaram · 5 years ago
        Assuming you continue to use only one ear simulator, do you
        think you would measure a greater difference, on average, between left and
        right channels, for headphones designed with angled drivers versus drivers that
        fire directly at the side of your head?
        • This commment is unpublished.
          Brent Butterworth · 5 years ago
          The G.R.A.S. 43AG is fully reversible -- it's designed so that the right and left simulated pinna can be installed at 180 degree angles from each other. The differences among them are acoustically very small, and present mainly at frequencies above 10 kHz, which we currently ignore in headphone measurements because the equipment to measure these frequencies reliably appeared only this year, and we have no research showing what >10 kHz measurements mean (and don't mean). Many, if not most, over-ear headphones measure roughly the same in both channels on a 43AG. If a headphone doesn't measure the same -- on a 43AG or any other fixture, because all are very sensitive to slight positioning differences, and most do not use matched ears -- it can be due to manufacturing inconsistencies, elements of design that make the fit less reliable, or operator error. It's very difficult, sometimes impossible, to know for sure which is the cause.

          Incidentally, the 43AG was used for the research in Sean Olive and Todd Welti's landmark paper "The Relationship between Perception and Measurement of Headphone Sound Quality," and has been used for the development of (among many others) the PSB and NAD headphones, so it has proven its efficacy and accuracy, and I will continue to use it.
    • This commment is unpublished.
      Brent Butterworth · 5 years ago
      I don't compare my measurements to other people's unless they are using the same gear I use -- for example, I have compared my measurements to the ones in most of the Harman research papers because they use the same G.R.A.S. 43AG I use (or at least that I was using before I upgraded to the latest G.R.A.S. high-res ear simulator and the new anthropomorphic pinna). Jude and I use measurement fixtures and techniques that are similar, yet still different, and he and I use different analyzers so the charts look different. I hope the sample Focal sent is representative of their production models, but I have no way of knowing for sure unless I purchase the samples myself, which in this case is not feasible from a business standpoint.
  • This commment is unpublished.
    Ken G · 5 years ago
    Brent, do you measure headphones the same as Jude on Head-fi? You both measured the Elegia v Clear with pretty drastic differences in the results.

    Focal has been known to send out some defective samples for review. See here: https://www.innerfidelity.com/content/seven-focal-utopias-measured
  • This commment is unpublished.
    GC · 5 years ago
    Hi Brent, how does the Elegia's signature compare to the Clear's?

    Also, you mention that the AFC's bass response is better than the Elegia's. Would you mind elaborating in terms of quantity and quality? Thanks!
    • This commment is unpublished.
      • This commment is unpublished.
        Dave · 5 years ago
        Hi Brent,

        First and foremost: Thank you for the thorough review and measurements. Really helpful. :)

        May I ask why you took the right channel measurement instead of the left channel measurement?
        The left channel seems way more realistic comparing to other reviewers' measurements (even though they use different equipment). Especially when comparing it to the clear which several reviewers have found to be a very close match.

        • This commment is unpublished.
          Brent Butterworth · 5 years ago
          Sure. The right channel is the standard for the G.R.A.S. 43AG ear/cheek simulator. The standard ear they supply is for the right, and the left ear is an added-cost option. This is because the ears were designed based on average ear shapes, and because your right ear doesn't match your left, the G.R.A.S. ears don't match, either. They had to design the 43AG to work best with one or the other, and they chose the right. Thus, the left ear is more difficult to fit smoothly into the cheek plate. So I've always used the right as my reference, and try to match the left measurement to that as best as I can.
          • This commment is unpublished.
            Doug Schneider · 5 years ago
            Brent, even I learned things from that reply. I didn't know that the right was their standard or that the left doesn't quite match. Interesting!

            Doug Schneider
    • This commment is unpublished.
      Brent Butterworth · 5 years ago
      The Clear sounds flatter and fuller to me. The Aeon Flows (with the white filter installed) have more bass than the Elegias, relative to the midrange. So it's hard to me to comment on the quality of the bass; dialing down the bass tends to make it sound tighter. Anyway, the Elegias don't really have enough bass for me, but the bass is subjectively well-defined.
  • This commment is unpublished.
    bart · 5 years ago
    How would you compare then to audeze lcd-2 closed back which are exactly same price?

Latest Comments

Nice review. Thanks!
Johny Banks 4 days ago DALI IO-4 Bluetooth Headphones
Brent, great review! Your detailed insights on the DALI IO-4 headphones' sound quality and usability ...
Traffic Riderr 6 days ago Technics EAH-AZ70W True Wireless Earphones
@MauroTraffic Rider is an exhilarating first-person motorcycle racing game that offers an immersive and ...
Jollibee burger price 12 days ago Technics EAH-AZ70W True Wireless Earphones
<a href="https://www.jollibeemenuph.com/">Jollibee Burger Price</a>  the price of a Jollibee burger varies depending on the specific ...
steve page 26 days ago PSB M4U 9 Headphones
Hey thanks my new ones were doing the same I started to think my bones ...
Viwen 27 days ago In-Ear vs. Over-Ear for Travel
I have both. I don't go for the premium brands but the better value ones ...
Phil M. 1 months ago How Terrible Is Temu?
Thank you for your sacrifice.
Ulfilas 1 months ago In-Ear vs. Over-Ear for Travel
I've always had on-ears (rather than over-ears) that fold up. Currently using the AKG N60 ...
William of Occam 2 months ago Bryston BHA-1 Headphone Amplifier
@William of OccamBrent Butterworth would not have condoned this.
William of Occam 2 months ago Bryston BHA-1 Headphone Amplifier
@Doug SchneiderDude posts the same thing on all amp reviews, with good reason: science has no ...