By aspect — in detail
The defining argument, and it runs three ways rather than two. Everyone measures the same thing — the original Clear's low-treble peaks have been damped — but they read it differently. The largest camp calls that the fix the Clear needed; a second says it went too far, with RTINGS filing the range as recessed and sibilants as dull; a third still hears a hard edge or a narrow ringing band around 5–6 kHz. Air above 10 kHz is the one place several sources agree it gained.
Measured
Three independent rig classes agree on the direction. SBAF (MiniDSP EARS plus a flat-plate coupler) reads the upper mids and lower treble as muted with the highs returning from the mid-treble up; Head-Fi's Brüel & Kjær 5128 overlay of Clear vs Clear Mg shows the same smoothing plus better extension above 10 kHz; RTINGS scores the treble range underemphasized and notes its delivery varies with fit and seal. Headphones.com adds a ~4.5 kHz dip that dampens instrument overtones and a little extra energy in the air band.
⚠ vs. listeners — The damping is not in dispute — where it lands is. The same measured dip is 'easier to listen to' and 'veils the upper harmonics' depending on how much low treble you want, and the surviving 'it's still sharp' reports cluster on narrow bands (a lower-treble edge, a 5–6 kHz ring) that a smoothed average curve hides and that RTINGS says fit and seal move.
Where it splits
Smoothed in exactly the right place — the fix the original Clear needed.43%
“I think that the new Clear MG tuning is an improvement over the original as the changes to the treble I think make it quite a bit easier to listen to”
Headphones.com (Chrono)
Over-damped — the top end is recessed, and detail and bite go with it.29%
“their treble range is a bit recessed, which veils the upper harmonics of vocals while sibilants are dull”
RTINGS
Still hot somewhere — a hard edge or a narrow ringing band survives the damping.28%
“Initial listening shows up a slightly hard and sharp edge in the lower treble region, but this eases off in use to leave an etched but informative sound.”
What Hi-Fi?
Sources split — but the split resolves once you separate the bands. Most hear it as a highlight: rich, punchy, well-extended for a dynamic and clean under load. A mixing engineer hears too much of it, a broad hump in the upper bass that masks low-mid detail. RTINGS and one listener hear too little, because the sub-bass is where it gives out. Both complaints are about the same curve: the added weight sits above roughly 100 Hz, and below 35 Hz the driver runs into its physical limits.
Measured
Headphones.com measures a more generous shelf below 100 Hz than the original Clear with only the slightest roll-off under 35 Hz; RTINGS scores low-bass as lacking; SBAF's distortion sweeps at several SPLs find the overall pattern clean — second order above third, no peaks — but note the driver hits physical excursion limits below 35 Hz when pushed hard, the same limit Focal's other big dynamics share.
⚠ vs. listeners — 'Too much bass' and 'lacks low-bass' are not a contradiction — they describe different bands of one response. The lift is upper-bass (a hump Cheriff places around 120–200 Hz), which is exactly what a mixing engineer objects to and what a listener enjoys; the shortfall is sub-bass, which is what a lab bench flags. How loud you listen decides whether the excursion limit ever shows up: The Headphoneer reports it staying clean on demanding bass tracks, while SBAF finds the limit on the bench.
Where it splits
A highlight — rich, punchy and better extended than almost any dynamic at the price.57%
“As with the original Clear, the Clear MG delivers some of the best bass I’ve heard on a dynamic driver headphone.”
Headphones.com (Chrono)
Too light down low — the sub-bass is where it runs out.33%
“they lack a bit of low-bass”
RTINGS
Too much of it in the upper bass — it masks low-mid detail and undercuts the monitoring pitch.10%
“I find that the increased bass does mask some detail in the low mids, slightly, compared to the transition between bass and mids on the original Clear.”
Jake Cheriff (Medium)
Near-evenly split, and the split is about the same headphone at the same price. One side says it is a genuinely high-end open-back that earns its money on build, dynamics and tuning. The other says the cheaper headphone it replaced does nearly as much, that rivals at or below the price out-resolve it, and that the update is too small to charge for. Which side you land on now also depends on where you buy: it spans about $1,101 at Amazon to $1,599 at specialist dealers, with used pairs near $700.
Measured
Launched at $1,499 (£1,399 / AU$2,199) and still $1,499 at Headphones.com and Audio Advice, but $1,599 at Bloom Audio, Upscale Audio and House of Stereo, and $1,101 on Amazon; a 2026 owner reports paying $700 used. SoundGuys scores value 5.0/10 against a 9.4 for comfort and a 9.2 for design — the clearest statement of the trade in the set.
Where it splits
Worth it — right up there with the best at the price.48%
“Add excellent build and finish into the equation and we think they're right up there with the best at the price.”
What Hi-Fi?
Hard to justify — the cheaper predecessor does nearly the same thing.52%
“Significantly undercut in price by predecessor, with little improvement to performance”
Headphones.com (Chrono)
Tonality
Moderate · 11 srcThe one thing nearly every source agrees on: warm, full-bodied and a touch dark, with the energy moved out of the low treble and into the bass relative to the original Clear. Most reviewers count that a strength — it makes long sessions easy and works across genres. Two dissents are worth knowing: Headphones.com lists 'too colored or far-from-neutral for some listeners' among its own dislikes, and a minority of listeners find the result dry or emotionally flat rather than warm.
“They have a smooth and warm sound profile with a flat mid-range, well suited for accurately reproducing vocals and lead instruments.”
RTINGS
“In a nutshell: Focal has adopted the Audeze sound for the Clear Mg.”
Super Best Audio Friends (purr1n)
“The first time I listened, the sound felt so dry and exposed that it honestly brought me down.”
r/HeadphoneAdvice
Measured
SBAF's compensated curves put the muted upper-mids-and-lower-treble shape close to an Audeze; Head-Fi's B&K 5128 comparison shows the Mg measuring similar to the original through bass and mids with the real change in the treble; RTINGS files it as smooth and warm with a flat mid-range. Pads move it: The Headphoneer reports Dekoni fenestrated sheepskin makes it tighter, crisper and more neutral, though still slightly dark.
Dynamics
Strong consensus · 7 srcThe most consistent strength in the whole set, and the trait every camp defends. Punchy, immediate and speaker-like, with the macro swings arriving without strain — even the critical sources concede this one. It is also the quality most often named as the reason to pick it over more analytical rivals.
“It’s rare that headphones can communicate sonic authority so well.”
What Hi-Fi?
“I’m happy to report, at least, that the bass dynamics hit just as hard as they do on the original Clear.”
Jake Cheriff (Medium)
Measured
SBAF's burst response shows a pronounced leading edge on the 500 Hz, 1.5 kHz and 4.8 kHz attacks — the measurable side of the 'fast' transient impression — with decays that stay quick and, notably, no second- and third-wave bump on the 4.8 kHz attack, which is the pattern that usually reads as sandy or grainy timbre.
Imaging
Strong consensus · 4 srcUniformly strong. Placement is called precise, stable and sharply focused, and the layering — how cleanly individual tracks in a mix stay separated — draws specific praise. One listener who disliked almost everything else about the headphone still rated its imaging above the Clear Professional's.
“its soundstage is fairly forward and intimate like on an HD 600-series headphones, but it’s got precise imaging that perfectly delineates the positioning and directionality of sound”
Headphones.com (Chrono)
“It placed instruments in sharp focus across the soundstage”
Super Best Audio Friends (guest listener, via Erroneous)
Measured
A perceptual verdict rather than a bench one, but an unusually unanimous one: What Hi-Fi, Headphones.com and The Headphoneer all rate placement precision highly, and the sharpest critic on the record singles it out as the Mg's clearest gain over its Professional predecessor.
Isolation
Strong consensus · 4 srcOpen-back by design: essentially none, and it leaks freely in both directions. Every source treats this as a property rather than a fault, but it rules out offices, commutes and shared rooms completely.
“these Focals are open-backed, meaning they leak quite a lot of sound”
What Hi-Fi?
“As the Focal Clear MG is a set of open-backed headphones, you can’t expect it to block out noise because it’s not designed to do that.”
SoundGuys
Measured
SoundGuys scores isolation 0.4/10; What Hi-Fi lists 'Lots of sound leakage' and 'Lack of isolation from noise' among its two cons. The upside the sources name is breathability — less heat build-up in the cups over long sessions.
Two-sided. The materials, finish and case are near-universally called premium — aluminium, leather, microfibre and the chestnut honeycomb grilles — and RTINGS files it as very well-built. Against that sit real ownership costs and risks: the headband is not replaceable and is the documented failure point, replacement pads are expensive, the 3.5 mm cable connectors don't lock, and at least one reviewer's first unit arrived with a channel imbalance.
“extremely well put together, feeling like an undoubtedly premium piece of audio equipment”
Headphones.com (Chrono)
“Unlike the ear pads, the headband is not replaceable. This is an unfortunate design flaw.”
Jake Cheriff (Medium)
“I've read a few horror stories of the headband snapping and people having to swap drivers onto an Aliexpress headband.”
r/headphones
Measured
Aluminium yokes, perforated-leather headband, microfibre pads that snap on and off, two cables (1.2 m 3.5 mm with a 6.35 mm adapter, 3 m 4-pin XLR) and a fabric case; made in France. SoundGuys scores durability 7.0/10 against 9.2 for design. Owners consistently name the headband — specifically where the metal meets the plastic — as the weak point, and recommend two-handed removal and a headband cover; long-term owners of the same chassis in other Focal models report no failures.
Good, with two named caveats. Most reviewers wear it for hours — five-hour sessions are reported — and one calls it unreasonably comfortable for its 450 g. But the spring-back cup mechanism makes clamp feel stronger than the numbers suggest, and the cups barely swivel, so fit is head-shape dependent in a way lighter open-backs are not.
“I could use the Focal Clear MG for about 5 hours at a time without having to remove it for comfort issues.”
SoundGuys
“The ear cups don’t swivel much, so getting a good fit can be tricky if your head shape isn’t compatible.”
The Headphoneer
Measured
450 g on a wide, thickly padded headband with perforated microfibre-over-memory-foam pads. SoundGuys scores comfort 9.4/10 and RTINGS lists 'Comfortable fit' among its three pros; Headphones.com counters with 'Strong clamp force' among its dislikes and flags the 400 g+ weight over long sessions.
Broadly natural and well-bodied — RTINGS calls the mid-range flat and well suited to vocals, and the lower mids are repeatedly described as rich and linear. The reservations are specific and consistent: a Focal-family bump near 2.5 kHz that can read as slightly honky or nasal, politeness in the upper mids that pulls presence back, and — for one engineer — upper bass encroaching on low-mid clarity.
“The lower mids on both headphones are rich and well represented, with a linear response from 300-1000hz.”
Headphones.com (Chrono)
“The midrange is nicely present with a smooth and mostly natural-sounding timbre, but slightly polite in the upper regions”
The Headphoneer
Measured
Headphones.com measures a linear 300–1000 Hz stretch, the ~2.5 kHz bump it finds on every Focal, upper mids cooled about 3 kHz relative to the original Clear, and a more aggressive dip near 4.5 kHz; SBAF's curves show the same muted upper mids plus a very small 1 kHz bump. The cooling at 3 kHz is why the Mg reads less shouty than the OG and also less present.
Competitive for the class rather than class-leading, and framed that way by most sources: it holds its own against the HD 800 S, Arya and LCD-X without out-resolving them. The dissent is structural — the same treble damping that makes it easy to listen to is what RTINGS says veils the upper harmonics of vocals, so the resolution complaint and the tuning praise are the same fact.
“These headphones certainly live up to their name by delivering a refined yet explicit sound that makes it easy to follow low-level instrumental strands in the busy production.”
What Hi-Fi?
“The detail level is pretty high, but not mind-blowing compared to some rivals.”
The Headphoneer
Measured
Focal quotes THD of 0.25% at 1 kHz / 100 dB SPL and SBAF's sweeps find a clean pattern with no distortion peaks, so the driver is not the limit; Headphones.com lists 'Excellent resolution' among its likes while placing it level with, not above, its price rivals.
Soundstage
Moderate · 6 srcThe most common reservation. For an open-back at this price the stage is called intimate to medium — several sources put it near an HD 600-series presentation, and RTINGS says it is not as spacious as other open-backs while still projecting outside the head. A minority hear it as genuinely wide; nobody calls it expansive.
“their soundstage doesn't sound as spacious or wide as other open-back headphones”
RTINGS
“The soundstage is medium-sized for an open-back headphone in this price class, but the imaging is very good.”
The Headphoneer
Measured
What Hi-Fi hears placement as precise and stable but 'much more in the head than a typical set of speakers', while crediting the open back for a sense of space no closed-back rival matched; Headphones.com lists 'Intimate soundstage' among its dislikes. The one dissenting listener called it wide but still narrower than the Clear Professional — so even the positive read is relative.
