Is the Clear MG and the MG Pro still sonically the same headphone?
Important update: Jude on Head-Fi revealed an email exchange with Focal where it states that the Clear MG and Clear MG Pro are still sonically the same. As such, the differences between other available measurements and the unit tested here may be caused by unit variations and positioning on the rig, aside from measurement rig differences.
Intro:
Ever since Focal unveiled their high-end headphone series, I’ve found myself a fan of their tuning. It seems they’ve aimed for a well-defined target, or a ‘house sound’ – it’s usually well-balanced, with some emphasis on bass tactility, clear mids, and smooth treble.
My personal pick out of their early lineup was the Clear OG (with the Clear Pro being sonically the same headphone, according to Focal), which packs what I’ve just described in an enjoyable package. The Clear has earned its place as a market favourite since its launch.
In 2021, Focal introduced the successor, the Clear MG/MG Pro, now boasting pure magnesium driver domes (as opposed to the OG’s aluminium-magnesium alloy). Is this changing the sound for the better? Would these tweaks undermine the market success of the predessor?
Just when I was cusious to find out, a generous reader sent in his pair of the Clear MG Pro for review (the same gentleman who sent the HD820 and LCD-X in, I must add). So, kudos to him, and let’s get into the details.
link to the frequency response measurement & more comparisons
First impression & chitchat:
I listened to the headphones before taking measurements of their FR. And I must say, the Clear MG Pro took me by surprise.
Contrary to my expectations of a lush, warm sound – as indicated by other reviewers’ measurements which show a pronounced treble roll-off on the Clear MG compared to the Clear OG – what greeted my ears was a sound profile remarkably close to neutral, and not nearly as dark as those measurements suggested (source 1, source 2; although source 3 seems to align better with my measurement). Initially, the MG PRo seemed as if they became less airy than the OG, but I then realised that it was caused by a decrease in the elements of ‘sheen’.
Instead, here we have a decently balanced sound profile, one that I would never call ‘dark’ or ‘veiled’. The sense of resolution seems to have taken a step up from the OG. By and large, the MG Pro feels like a more refined iteration of the OG, with slightly better definition in the mids and highs.
After taking the measurements, I know where I got my impressions from. Indeed, the Clear MG Pro closely resembles the OG’s sound profile, but with a boost in treble extension. There’s a bit less energy between 3-6khz, which could explain why some have sound the MG Pro to be a tad less bright. But again, the difference is nowhere as significant as the measurements of the Clear MG by other reviewers have suggested.
This leads to an interesting question: namely are the Clear MG and the Clear MG Pro still acoustically the same headphone? It seems to be a widely held belief that the Clear OG and the Clear Pro were tuned the same, but perhaps we need to be a bit cautious here in the case of the MG. Unfortunately, I don’t have the Clear MG on hand to compare, but it’s plausible that the MG and MG Pro do differ in tuning – this seems the most logical explanation for the discrepancies observed. The differences seem too great to be attributed solely to unit variance or earpad quality control.
Tonal balance:
One thing is clear: the Clear MG Pro unmistakably echoes Focal’s house sound, though somewhat subtler in the rendition of it.
Bass is dynamic, deep and punchy, just as you would expect from a high-end Focal headphone. This is definitely the strong point of the MG Pro. I would even go as far to say that the bass on the Clear MG Pro is about as good as the Utopia 2022, with only a marginal edge to the latter in terms of speed and microdynamic nuances. The scale of impact and slam is remarkable close between the two, with the MG Pro having a tad more bass quantity. Comparing to the Clear OG, the bass on the MG Pro feels deeper and tighter, though the difference isn’t stark. Overall, both the bass quality and quantity on the MG Pro are undoutedly class-leading.
Mids closely resemble those of the OG – smooth, organic, full-bodied, yet still articulate. The dip around 4-5kHz adds a sense of ‘softness’ or ‘romantic tinge’, which helps polishing off some of the harshness or graininess in vocals. Comparing to the classical reference, the Sennheiser HD600, vocals sound fuller and more well-rounded on the MG Pro, which could be considered a kind of colouration. Other than that, the vocal timbre is pretty realistic. The bass bump adds a touch of warmth, but it’s not overwhelming. Still, it’s not the kind of lush and liquidy vocal that you find from headphones like the Audeze LCD-3. It’s more like a meatier, more polished version of neutral. If you find the HD600 a bit shouty and somewhat grainy on certain tracks, then the Clear MG Pro should serve you better.
Treble is very well-tuned, maintaining a lively presence without offensive peaks. As mentioned, the dip around 4-5kHz does impact the timbre of the mids, but other than that, the Clear MG Pro maintains a neutral character in the highs. Noticeably, the sense of treble clarity articulation feels slightly better than the original Clear, thanks to the extra boost in the upper treble above 15kHz. Meanwhile, the area between 6-10kHz is a bit more linear overall. While some have found the Clear OG to be occasionally a bit metallic sounding, the MG Pro rarely exhibits the same issue. That said, with a heightened level of treble extension on the MG Pro, vocal breaths and sibilances may come across as slightly more pronounced than the OG.
Overall, I find Focal’s rebalancing of the Clear sound commendable. The ‘warmth’ or ‘mellowness’ that is often associated with the OG is slightly toned down here. Meanwhile, they’ve addressed the metallic sheen that some critiqued in the OG while enhancing the upper treble, thus improving the tonal balance and definition. The MG Pro might occasionally feel less smooth than its predecessor, but it’s a worthwhile trade-off, particularly for instrumental music, which benefits greatly from this new tuning. Pop enthusiasts might still prefer the Clear OG if the added resolution isn’t a priority.
Differences in driver tuning: the Clear OG with MG Pro pads
Other qualities (‘technicalities’):
- Soundstage and Imaging
The soundstage, while not the most expansive, is typical of Focal headphones. Neither the horizontal nor the vertical stage are particularly impressive. The MG Pro appears to offer an ever-so-slightly broader stage than the OG, likely due to tighter bass and a more extended treble, both of which contribute towards a stronger sense of transparency and openness.
With the Clear OG/Clear Pro OG, I occasionally feel that vocal images can sound a little ‘diffused’ or ‘fuzzy’. The MG Pro improves on this with crisper imaging and layering, although it may come across as less ‘romantic’. This might be a matter of taste, but I find the MG Pro more versatile across various music genres.
- Clarity
Clarity and resolution are commendable. I would say it takes a small step above the OG. The overtones of high frequency instruments like cymbals feels crispier and more distinct than the OG. While not matching the top dogs in this category like the HD800 or HE1000 V2, it holds its ground at its price point.
Compared to the Utopia 2022, it falls short in midrange and treble articulation, but the differences are way less than implied by their price gap. The MG Pro’s fuller bass may have also contributed to this difference. Broadly speaking, the overall improved level of clarity is a pleasant surprise.
- Dynamics and Impact
Focal headphones excel in dynamics, and the Clear MG Pro is no exception. It offers punchy bass, rapid transients, and clean decay. The sense of attack might be marginally slower than planar or electrostatic headphones, but the impact feels much more visceral and substantial.
Against the Ananda Stealth, the MG Pro immediately feels more dynamic and impactful. It’s about on par with the Clear OG in macrodynamics, with small improvements in cleaner decay and the ability to resolve microdynamic nuances. Even when compared to the much pricier Utopia 2022, the MG Pro holds its own very well, with the Utopia offering slightly more bass clarity and dynamic contrast. Overall, the MG Pro excels in these areas.
Conclusion and value:
It’s been a delight to find out how the Clear MG Pro sounds. Some reviews had me thinking they might sound too dark because of the Clear MG measurements, but that wasn’t the case. The MG Pro is well-balanced and versatile, which leads me to speculate – while it’s just my conjecture – that the Clear MG Pro might be tuned differently than the Clear MG. Of course, the perceived differences could also be influenced by other factors like unit variation. I will report back if I had the chance to test the Clear MG in the future.
Now, about the price and value. Focal headphones aren’t cheap, and the Clear MG Pro is up there with an RRP of US$1499 (AU$2199). That’s a lot, especially when you see other good headphones like the Edition XS or the HD6XX for much less. But, you do get what you pay for with Focal – solid build and quality materials.
In fact, Focal headphones seem to go on sale quite often. A more realistic street price tends to hover around 60-70% of the original RRP, making the value proposition quite reasonable, considering the quality and performance they offer. So, would I recommend them? Yes, especially if you like Focal’s sound and want something slightly less coloured than the older model.
Pros: balanced tuning; exceptional dynamics; improved treble extension than predecessor; mildly warm yet clear and articulate sound.
Cons: soundstage still somewhat limited; slightly polished vocals might lack absolute realism for some; not as competent in terms of transparency and airiness with similarly priced planars and estats.
Recommendation rating (BETA):
MEASUREMENTS
Frequency Response Average:
Bass extension cutoff is 10hz instead of 20hz on the extende frequency response measurement, so as to fully capture frequencies which though may not outside of ‘audible range’, may be felt by our ears, bones and muscles and enhance the sense of ‘impact’.
Positional Variation:
This graph shows how the tonality might be affected when you wear the headphones differently on the head.
Note: the response of Focal headphones seem to be highly sensitive to positional on the head. The variations start very early at lower midrange frequencies whereas most headphones only deviate in the treble with different positioning. This is quite interesting, though perhaps not entirely unexpected given the angled driver design, small pad openings and the spring-loaded headband. Three positions are selected to demonstrate the effect of different positions: green (ear in the front of earcup); olive (middle); red (back)
It is plausible that positional variation accounts for some of the discrepancies observed between my measurement of the Clear MG Pro and the other available measurements of the Clear MG on the internet. But still, the differences seem to be too great especially since Crinacle and Oratory1990 also use averaged results instead of individual.
Leakage Test:
This graph demonstrates how a small leakage (simulated using thin-armed glasses) can result in FR change.
Impulse Response:
Impulse response contains information about transducer movement when a test tone is played.
Channel Matching:
Channel matching graphs DOES NOT RELATE TO SOUND PROFILE.
a specialised configuration is used to capture channel differences to mitigate the interference from positioning on rig and the asymmetricity in GRAS pinnae design (legacy of KEMAR).
the Left (blue) and Right (red) channels are measured on a flat plate coupler with an IEC60318-4 ear simulator.
END OF THE ARTICLE
Disclaimer: all the headphones tested here are my personal units unless otherwise stated. All the links and recommendations provided are not associated with me in any financial manner.
the unheard of headphone lab 