Focal Shape 65 vs Adam A7X

WbbS

Experienced
I recently upgraded my studio monitors from Yamaha HS7 to Adam A7X. I’m ok with them, but I’m always thinking about: what if I had chosen the Focal Shape 65? They were the direct contenders for the Adam, almost same price here.

So, I’ll get a pair to try in the next weeks and in the while I’m asking here if someone else had both and what was their experience.

;)
 
I've got some Focal Alpha 65's. They're okay. But they distort on some material, despite low audio levels. I mostly notice it on bass guitar and pianos.

I am going to replace them eventually. But I think I'll avoid the low to mid range Focal stuff, based on this experience.

I was looking at the Adam A7X's actually! Lot of the metal crowd rate them.
 
I've got some Focal Alpha 65's. They're okay. But they distort on some material, despite low audio levels. I mostly notice it on bass guitar and pianos.

I am going to replace them eventually. But I think I'll avoid the low to mid range Focal stuff, based on this experience.

I was looking at the Adam A7X's actually! Lot of the metal crowd rate them.
Well, the Shape I’m considering are definitely different.

Anyway I have the A7X and honestly they lack a bit of definition on the low end. It gets a bit muddy there (you’ll find many that says that as well). A lot of clarity in the high end that make you feel they are precise, but this do not compensate the caos on the low. I was convinced by the reviews as well, but I feel like they are not exactly as I expected in any scenario. They were a huge upgrade over the Yamaha, but I don’t know…I’m not convinced. Have a look at the ones who reviewed the Adam, a lot of top players, how many use them now in their recent videos? Probably just Pete Thorn.

Consider that they are out of production and Adam is replacing them with a new A series that will be released soon. And considering Adam marketing strategy it will be surely prized and reviewed by many as the AX did. So, wait if you want to buy new.

Side note. It’s just me but they are definitely ugly I hope the new A series is a step forward in design. To me they are ugly to a point they ruined the harmony of my desk, and design is part of the value (minimal, but it is).

So I’ll have A7X and Focal Shape 65 side by side in few days. I’ll try them and decide which one to keep. 😉
 
Focal Shape 65 arrived yesterday.

Now I'm doing the 10 hours of running in as suggested by Focal. I'll compare with the Adam A7X in the coming days.

First impression, only from an aesthetic point of view, is just "WOW"! Compared with the A7X it seems like they are a piece of design vs some kind of high tech toy. :rolleyes:
 
Alright, confession time; I purchased a set of Focal Solo6 Be monitors this morning.

Reading your post about the shape 65's vs the A7X's got me thinking about my desire to upgrade my own monitors. I currently have a set of ADAM A5X that I have been meaning to replace. My main reason for wanting to replace them is that one of the monitors has developed a scratchy / static type noise on the woofer that has been annoying me. I have already had to replace the amplifier unit on that monitor (at my own expense as they are no longer under warranty), so I wasn't too keen on putting more money into them again. The build quality seems to be a bit lacking. Also, they just don't offer much low end punch or as much fullness as I think I'd like.

I spent yesterday evening reading up on all of the options in my desired price point and I was thinking I'd end up with either a set of Focal Shape 65's or Focal Shape Twin monitors. The price for a pair of Shape Twins was a stretch of my desired budget so I thought I'd give it a day to contemplate my options. The Solo6 Be were a better fit for what I wanted (I had read that the three drivers of the twin introduce compromises in terms of imaging), but I had removed them from consideration because of their price.

Fast forward to today and I saw that the Solo6 Be are on sale for 28% off (they were not on sale yesterday). I suspect that they're clearing out stock so that they can bring out an updated version. That is purely my own speculation but they did just revamp their entry level monitor range and the SM line has been around for a long time without any substantial revisions. Even though the Solo6 Be will likely be replaced by something later and greater in just a few weeks I couldn't pass up that deal as it puts them below the price for a pair of the Shape Twin monitors that I had been considering.

They should arrive early next week and I'm looking forward to the upgrade.
 
Alright, confession time; I purchased a set of Focal Solo6 Be monitors this morning.

Reading your post about the shape 65's vs the A7X's got me thinking about my desire to upgrade my own monitors. I currently have a set of ADAM A5X that I have been meaning to replace. My main reason for wanting to replace them is that one of the monitors has developed a scratchy / static type noise on the woofer that has been annoying me. I have already had to replace the amplifier unit on that monitor (at my own expense as they are no longer under warranty), so I wasn't too keen on putting more money into them again. The build quality seems to be a bit lacking. Also, they just don't offer much low end punch or as much fullness as I think I'd like.

I spent yesterday evening reading up on all of the options in my desired price point and I was thinking I'd end up with either a set of Focal Shape 65's or Focal Shape Twin monitors. The price for a pair of Shape Twins was a stretch of my desired budget so I thought I'd give it a day to contemplate my options. The Solo6 Be were a better fit for what I wanted (I had read that the three drivers of the twin introduce compromises in terms of imaging), but I had removed them from consideration because of their price.

Fast forward to today and I saw that the Solo6 Be are on sale for 28% off (they were not on sale yesterday). I suspect that they're clearing out stock so that they can bring out an updated version. That is purely my own speculation but they did just revamp their entry level monitor range and the SM line has been around for a long time without any substantial revisions. Even though the Solo6 Be will likely be replaced by something later and greater in just a few weeks I couldn't pass up that deal as it puts them below the price for a pair of the Shape Twin monitors that I had been considering.

They should arrive early next week and I'm looking forward to the upgrade.
Oops…I feel guilty now.

My Shape are ready to go and I’ll test them extensively in the weekend.

I didn’t got the Solo because of my room and the results I had with front ported monitors. The passive radiators was my main reason to try the Shape. I have to put them close to a corner.

First impression is that Adam gets a lot of marketing, much more than Focal, but this does not translate to the same quality level (Adam is part of Focusrite and a bigger group gets more money to promote the products, that’s obvious).

I’ll write a full review on Sunday. But I’m sure you’ll like the Focal a lot! Great deal!!!
 
I have a pair of Dynaudio BM5's that I used since the 90's. In December I purchased a pair of A7X's, acoustically treated my room and added an Adam Audio Sub8. Purchased Sonarworks SoundID Reference. I can listen to this setup for hours on end with no noticeable ear fatigue and my mixes are coming out better than ever. There is no way I could have used those monitors without a Sub. Also, the FM3 sounds incredible through this setup as well. :)
 
I have a pair of Dynaudio BM5's that I used since the 90's. In December I purchased a pair of A7X's, acoustically treated my room and added an Adam Audio Sub8. Purchased Sonarworks SoundID Reference. I can listen to this setup for hours on end with no noticeable ear fatigue and my mixes are coming out better than ever. There is no way I could have used those monitors without a Sub. Also, the FM3 sounds incredible through this setup as well. :)
Good for you, I have the Adam A7X since February 2022 and after the few days of honey moon I was getting progressively unsatisfied.
Monitors are something you really have to try in your room. In my room the Adam are so much inaccurate on the low end. And my room is well treated.
 
I have a pair of Focal Shape Twins and I love them. They took some time to open up, and now I'm hearing gorgeous details that I never knew were present previously. I would conservatively estimate that I've listened to "Permanent Waves" by Rush at least one hundred times. Playing that album via these speakers reveals so many tiny nuances that I hadn't noticed in my other monitors or headphones. It's been a re-education in mastering and soundstage management.
 
Oops…I feel guilty now.

My Shape are ready to go and I’ll test them extensively in the weekend.

I didn’t got the Solo because of my room and the results I had with front ported monitors. The passive radiators was my main reason to try the Shape. I have to put them close to a corner.

First impression is that Adam gets a lot of marketing, much more than Focal, but this does not translate to the same quality level (Adam is part of Focusrite and a bigger group gets more money to promote the products, that’s obvious).

I’ll write a full review on Sunday. But I’m sure you’ll like the Focal a lot! Great deal!!!

Don't feel guilty. I acted of my own volition and you bear no blame. Like I said, I was already intending to replace my current monitors. I was initially thinking I would wait for the announcement of the new A series monitors from ADAM, but the reliability issues I've encountered with the A5X caused me to question why I would risk another roll of the dice with ADAM products in this price point. The S-series monitors look to be constructed in a robust manner, but those are way more expensive. The S-series models also have on-board DSP which I have no interest in because it can add latency to the signal. More latency? No, thanks.

Your post about the Shape series comparison to the A7X simply prompted me to reevaluate my options and consider other brands again. I was well aware of the Focal SM series and the newly released Alpha EVO line. Somehow the Shape series had escaped my notice. The SM series looked great but were too expensive at the time. The Alpha Evo monitors appeared be a step down because they are the entry level line are the direct competitors to the ADAM TV series. They also use class D amplifiers and appear on paper to be a bit underpowered. I don't know how I missed the fact that Focal has an intermediately priced pro level product series. If it wasn't for the sale on the Solo6's I'd most likely be reporting that I had purchased a set of Shape 65's.

The reviews I've read of the Shape 65 were universally positive. It seems that they are thoughtfully engineered to address the issues that people have with monitoring in a smaller space. The sealed cabinetry / passive radiator design is pretty cool and is seen on many substantially more expensive monitors (Bearfoot). If you need to put your monitors in a room corner then the Shape 65 is probably the correct choice over the Solo6.

I am still eager to read your thoughts on the direct comparison with the ADAM A7X.
 
Okay, I think I'm ready to write up my impressions of the Focal Shape 65 (and vs Adam A7X).

First, though, some premises:

  1. Many, but really many people use the Yamaha HS (or other), which many here and in other forums consider somehow "inferior". As I've written elsewhere, are all these people dumber? Do all these people have ears that don't work? Are those who spend, like me, four times as much on studio monitors more "pro"? No, not really. If you are an amateur playing in your homestudio, or even if you have a small recording studio, you don't record for John Mayer, Dream Theater (just kidding), but at most for the band in your town or the tiny band in your country that you know in 10, well, all the extra investments in gear are just whims to satisfy a (sometimes expensive) hobby and have some fun.
  2. As for studio monitors, a lot depends on one's room, how it's acoustically treated, what its characteristics are (which even treatment can't completely eliminate, e.g. size, floor plan). But it also depends on your tastes. Exactly, listening habits and the way we like to listen to music are decisive in the choice. The genres of music we listen to also have an influence.
  3. I stand by what I wrote here: https://forum.fractalaudio.com/thre...fferent-monitor-dilemma-final-verdict.180747/ Assuming we're not all in the same acoustically "flat" environment, assuming we don't all use the same monitors that make for an absolutely "universal" listening experience, a preset or even a "model" made using a reference sound system is unlikely to sound the same in another environment. In a few months, I tested the Yamaha HS7, Adam A7X and Focal Shape 65 in my room and all three gave me slightly different tones for my presets.

Breaking in: I followed the manufacturers instructions for breaking in the monitors. Adam suggests "pink noise"; Focal suggests music with lots of low frequencies.

...continued in the afternoon.

I'll test them some more on presets I don't use, to get a more complete idea.
Spoiler: The Adam's have already been sold.
 
Last edited:
I like the shape series because of the sealed design. IMO, they beat out the Adam at that price point. From there I'd recommend the Focal trio be and then the ATC SCM 25.
 
And here's my evaluation, after using the monitors both for listening to music and with the Axe-Fx.

What impressed me the most. The cleanliness and detail in all sound ranges. While the HS7s lacked a bit in the low end and the A7Xs made up for that, the S65s (Shape 65) are more balanced. Here the low frequencies are more detailed, defined. I can hear the notes of bass lines better on Neo Soul or R&B tracks where the A7Xs became more muddled. Let's be clear, "more definition" doesn't mean the bass is any less present, in fact, it's more immediate. It means they are more accurate, more defined, more precise, in short it's like comparing an HD TV with a 4K TV if you allow me the trivial comparison. The S65 is 4K. Maybe because the A7X have the Sub in class-D while the F65 in class-A/B? I don't know.

Listening experience. The A7Xs sound great with rock, metal and related music. Maybe that's why they are used a lot also by the users of this forum. The problem is that when you move on to different genres that use different frequency ranges, the A7X start not to satisfy 100%. For Neo Soul, POP, R&B, but also classical the definition was lost a bit, I was never, how to say "wow". The S65 proved to be tremendously versatile and even less "attentive" ears (wife and daughter) immediately noticed the difference. I could hear well, they wouldn't let me turn off the music, and we kept it on while listening to different genres together for an entire afternoon. And that made me happy too :)

Additional versatility. The controls on the back of the S65s are much better than those on the A7Xs. First of all, they are easier to use. On the A7X I needed a screwdriver, while on the F65 there are just regular knobs. Second, they are more comprehensive, allowing you to operate the midrange frequencies as well. Surely Adam noticed this lack and in fact the new A series, from what I see, will have midrange controls, but not with knobs, it looks like a 3 position selector switch, and that's not a good premise for versatility. Plus, the "desk", that is a midrange, seems Only to go -Xdb, while the S65 can go +/-3db. But this is just speculation...

Schermata 2022-04-03 alle 17.44.31.pngFocal-Shapes-full-back-panel.jpg

Also, the listening position with the S65s is wider. Whereas with the A7X's I had to be in a certain area to hear well, the S65's have a wider listening position...in fact, we used them, as I wrote, in the family to listen to music as well and it really felt great.

In use with the Axe-Fx. Here the differences are less obvious, in the frequency range of the guitar and my presets on the Axe-Fx the two speakers are equivalent. The differences can be heard, however, on the effects. Reverbs and all room effects sound, shall we say, more 3D on the S65. They sound more natural, spacious, enveloping, while the A7Xs sound flatter, straight in your face. With the exception of this the two are equivalent.

Design. What can I say, on the design front there is no comparison. The S65's are gorgeous, with their wooden case, in comparison the A7X's look like an old toy of the futuristic-vintage type. The S65s have a classic, more elegant, timeless design. They look good in the studio, but would also look good in the living room. Of course, less important aspect, but at this price even design must have its part.

Investment. Here in EU the A7X cost 500€, while the S65 cost 600€ with 100€ difference I must say that there is nothing to think about. The S65 are the monitors to buy especially if: you listen/play many different music genres and if you have complex acoustic spaces, for shapes or dimensions. They are, FOR ME, the most versatile and the best performing.

Final thoughts: marketing strategies? While the HS7s are the most widely used, certainly in part due to their price point and the notoriety of their predecessors, the Adam A7Xs have had a significant marketing push. Lots of people have reviewed them on YouTube, lots of artists have promoted them online, lots of sites have given them awards, but then...after a few years, how many still use them (only Pete Thorn, maybe)? Another dilemma, the A7X were withdrawn from the market because the components were missing, now, if the components that made these A7X "special" are missing, with what components will they make the new A series? Will they be less good, but still supported by a fierce marketing? I don't know, but if I also think about the fact that Adam is part of Focusrite, surely the funds for all this will not lack and we will hear a lot about them...and maybe I will take them to try them out! :p What I can say right now is that they are a bit over-hyped honestly.

Until then, I'm a new and happy owner of the Focal Shape 65s.


IMG_9047.jpeg
 
Last edited:
Yamaha HS7

11625759_800.jpg
Adam A7X

adam-a7x.jpg

Focal Shape 65

12243577_800.jpg
HighThese are the ones that are most unbalanced on the high and mid-high frequencies. It was this very characteristic that prompted me to change them more, they were fatiguing me a bit and the presets seemed too shrill at times.Despite what I've read online, and sometimes even here, I don't think they are particularly balanced in the high frequencies, indeed, after the burn-in they seemed very accurate and precise in this range, never intrusive.Detailed and unobtrusive high frequencies. Perhaps a little less shrill, but smoother, they handle high sounds better by not hiding them in complex mixes.
MidsHere we almost have a gap, to me they seem a bit scooped in the midrange and don't give the proper emphasis they deserve, especially using them for guitar.Midrange frequencies are well present, very present, and pleasant. This in my opinion is the main reason why they have great reviews in the guitar community...the guitar is definitely heardMidrange frequencies are precise, accurate, I find the sound of my guitar without unexpected emphasis or annoying attenuation.
LowThe bass is precise, to the point of being a bit ineffective. It certainly doesn't overpower the other frequencies, but the feeling is that something is missing, that there is no fullness.Here I was a little disappointed. The bass is there, in abundance, but it doesn't return a detailed sound, at times it sounds flooded, chaotic and not precise. Note separation in this range is sometimes lacking.Maybe it's because of the passive radiators that do a great job, but here the bass is more accurate, more defined, more precise, in short it's like comparing an HD TV with a 4K TV. Note separation in this range is just perfect.
ControlsThe controls on the back are practically useless.The controls on the back are ok, but not super-effective. You miss any control on the midrange and the other ones are not enough for room control.The controls are incredibly effective, you can really adjust the final result adapting the performance to your room. It is a knob, so you can dial it exactly to your needs/taste.
PerformanceOverall the performance is ok. Many, but really many people use the Yamaha HS (or other), which many here and in other forums consider somehow "inferior". As I've written elsewhere, are all these people dumber? Do all these people have ears that don't work? Are those who spend, like me, four times as much on studio monitors more "pro"? No, not really. If you are an amateur playing in your homestudio, or even if you have a small recording studio, you don't record for John Mayer, Dream Theater (just kidding), but at most for the band in your town or the tiny band in your country that you know in 10, well, all the extra investments in gear are just whims to satisfy a (sometimes expensive) hobby and have some fun.Lots of people have reviewed them on YouTube, lots of artists have promoted them online, lots of sites have given them awards, but then...after a few years, how many still use them (only Pete Thorn, maybe)? Another dilemma, the A7X were withdrawn from the market because the components were missing, now, if the components that made these A7X "special" are missing, with what components will they make the new A series? Will they be less good, but still supported by a fierce marketing? I don't know, but if I also think about the fact that Adam is part of Focusrite, surely the funds for all this will not lack and we will hear a lot about them...and maybe I will take them to try them out! What I can say right now is that they are a bit over-hyped honestly.What impressed me the most is the cleanliness and detail in all sound ranges. The S65s (Shape 65) are more balanced. Here the low frequencies are more detailed, defined. I can hear the notes of bass lines better on Neo Soul or R&B tracks. Let's be clear, "more definition" doesn't mean the bass is any less present, in fact, it's more immediate. It means they are more accurate, more defined, more precise. Maybe because the A7X have the Sub in class-D while the F65 in class-A/B? I don't know.
With Axe-FxPerhaps it was using them with the Axe-Fx that I began to think there was something not giving me satisfaction. The sounds were always a little too strident and I had to adjust the EQ to get them closer to the sound of the amps I knew.The A7Xs sound great with rock, metal and related music. Maybe that's why they are used a lot also by the users of this forum. The problem is when you move on to different genres that use different frequency ranges or you use presets with more low-end.In the frequency range of the guitar and my presets on the Axe-Fx they are equivalent to the A7X. The differences can be heard, however, on the effects. Reverbs and all ambient effects sound, shall we say, more 3D on the S65. They sound more natural, spacious, enveloping, while the A7Xs sound flatter, straight in your face.
DesignIconic, timeless, this is something we see a lot in studio pictures. So many use these monitors even in commercials.The impression is that on the front panel there is “too much”. I like a more minimalist approach and the shape of the case never matched my taste. They are the ugliest.What can I say, on the design front there is no comparison. The S65's are gorgeous, with their wooden case. The S65s have a classic, more elegant, timeless design. They look good in the studio, but would also look good in the living room. Of course, less important aspect, but at this price even design must have its part.
MY verdict
RANKING
3​
2​
1​
 

Attachments

  • adam-a7x.jpg
    adam-a7x.jpg
    11.4 KB · Views: 1
Last edited:
Yamaha HS7Adam A7XFocal Shape 65
HighThese are the ones that are most unbalanced on the high and mid-high frequencies. It was this very characteristic that prompted me to change them more, they were fatiguing me a bit and the presets seemed too shrill at times.Despite what I've read online, and sometimes even here, I don't think they are particularly balanced in the high frequencies, indeed, after the burn-in they seemed very accurate and precise in this range, never intrusive.Detailed and unobtrusive high frequencies. Perhaps a little less shrill, but smoother, they handle high sounds better by not hiding them in complex mixes.
MidsHere we almost have a gap, to me they seem a bit scooped in the midrange and don't give the proper emphasis they deserve, especially using them for guitar.Midrange frequencies are well present, very present, and pleasant. This in my opinion is the main reason why they have great reviews in the guitar community...the guitar is definitely heardMidrange frequencies are precise, accurate, I find the sound of my guitar without unexpected emphasis or annoying attenuation.
LowThe bass is precise, to the point of being a bit ineffective. It certainly doesn't overpower the other frequencies, but the feeling is that something is missing, that there is no fullness.Here I was a little disappointed. The bass is there, in abundance, but it doesn't return a detailed sound, at times it sounds flooded, chaotic and not precise. Note separation in this range is sometimes lacking.Maybe it's because of the passive radiators that do a great job, but here the bass is more accurate, more defined, more precise, in short it's like comparing an HD TV with a 4K TV. Note separation in this range is just perfect.
ControlsThe controls on the back are practically useless.The controls on the back are ok, but not super-effective. You miss any control on the midrange and the other ones are not enough for room control.The controls are incredibly effective, you can really adjust the final result adapting the performance to your room. It is a knob, so you can dial it exactly to your needs/taste.
PerformanceOverall the performance is ok. Many, but really many people use the Yamaha HS (or other), which many here and in other forums consider somehow "inferior". As I've written elsewhere, are all these people dumber? Do all these people have ears that don't work? Are those who spend, like me, four times as much on studio monitors more "pro"? No, not really. If you are an amateur playing in your homestudio, or even if you have a small recording studio, you don't record for John Mayer, Dream Theater (just kidding), but at most for the band in your town or the tiny band in your country that you know in 10, well, all the extra investments in gear are just whims to satisfy a (sometimes expensive) hobby and have some fun.Lots of people have reviewed them on YouTube, lots of artists have promoted them online, lots of sites have given them awards, but then...after a few years, how many still use them (only Pete Thorn, maybe)? Another dilemma, the A7X were withdrawn from the market because the components were missing, now, if the components that made these A7X "special" are missing, with what components will they make the new A series? Will they be less good, but still supported by a fierce marketing? I don't know, but if I also think about the fact that Adam is part of Focusrite, surely the funds for all this will not lack and we will hear a lot about them...and maybe I will take them to try them out! What I can say right now is that they are a bit over-hyped honestly.What impressed me the most is the cleanliness and detail in all sound ranges. The S65s (Shape 65) are more balanced. Here the low frequencies are more detailed, defined. I can hear the notes of bass lines better on Neo Soul or R&B tracks. Let's be clear, "more definition" doesn't mean the bass is any less present, in fact, it's more immediate. It means they are more accurate, more defined, more precise, in short it's like comparing an HD TV with a 4K TV if you allow me the trivial comparison. The S65 is 4K. Maybe because the A7X have the Sub in class-D while the F65 in class-A/B? I don't know.
With Axe-FxForse proprio usandoli con l'Axe-Fx ho iniziato a pensare che ci fosse qualcosa che non mi dava soddisfazione. I suoni erano sempre un po' troppo stridenti e dovevo regolare l'EQ per renderli più vicini al suono degli ampli che conoscevo.The A7Xs sound great with rock, metal and related music. Maybe that's why they are used a lot also by the users of this forum. The problem is that when you move on to different genres that use different frequency rangesIn the frequency range of the guitar and my presets on the Axe-Fx they are equivalent to the A7X. The differences can be heard, however, on the effects. Reverbs and all ambient effects sound, shall we say, more 3D on the S65. They sound more natural, spacious, enveloping, while the A7Xs sound flatter, straight in your face.
DesignIconic, timeless, this is something we see a lot in studio pictures. So many use these monitors even in commercials.The impression is that on the front panel there is “too much”. I like a more minimalist approach and the shape of the case never matched my taste. They are the ugliest.hat can I say, on the design front there is no comparison. The S65's are gorgeous, with their wooden case. The S65s have a classic, more elegant, timeless design. They look good in the studio, but would also look good in the living room. Of course, less important aspect, but at this price even design must have its part.
MY verdict
RANKING
3​
2​
1​
Thanks much - this is very helpful.

I'm currently deciding on a new set of monitors and am leaning toward the Focal Shape, but uncertain if I should go with the 65 or 50.

I'm also considering the Dynaudio LYD series.
 
Thanks much - this is very helpful.

I'm currently deciding on a new set of monitors and am leaning toward the Focal Shape, but uncertain if I should go with the 65 or 50.

I'm also considering the Dynaudio LYD series.
I suggest you to go for the 65,I always find that the 5'' subwoofer never meets my taste.
The LYD series is a great contender here. But I never had them and I can't help.
 
My Solo6 Be monitors finally arrived yesterday (FedEx is run very poorly as of recent). I have only put 2 hours on them and it will probably take a few weeks for me to reach the 20 hour burn in before I can comment on them in a meaningful way. The manual states that you are supposed to "avoid pushing the speakers very hard during the first hours of use."

Any idea what that means in practical terms? I have kept the volume down to the 80 dB range so far.

First impressions vs the A5X: The Focals have better resolution (I can hear details more distinctly). The bass is more reserved than I was expecting, but I expect that the low frequency response will open up with some burn in.
 
Back
Top Bottom