Focal Hadenys

The record's central argument, and it is a measurement disagreement about interpretation rather than about facts. Every rig finds the ear-gain peak sitting near 3.5 kHz instead of 3 kHz. The larger camp hears that as a character trait — vocals rich, timbre natural, nothing fatiguing. A smaller but well-equipped camp hears the same shift as a slightly coarse or thin voice that is measurably less natural than an HD 600. Both camps are describing the identical curve.

The most-agreed strength on the record. Nearly every source is surprised by how much low end an open-back this size delivers, and how far down it reaches — the shelf climbs into the sub-bass rather than stopping at mid-bass, which sources call rare for the format. The spread is about quality rather than quantity: several note it is softer and less controlled than the tighter Focals, one owner finds the mid-bass tips into bloat, and there is a slight smearing where bass hands over to the lower mids.

“it is quite rare to find an open back headphone with a bass shelf that rises up into the sub bass like the Hadenys does”

Resolve (The HEADPHONE Community)

“Roll-off is present on the deepest notes but extension is generally quite impressive for an open-back headphone.”

Headfonics (Thomas)

“The improvement compared to, for example, the Sennheiser HD 600 series is immense.”

Kuulokenurkka (Headphone Corner)

The point of firmest agreement. Sources describe a well-judged, close-to-target balance with a warm tilt — a mild V by some readings, 'reference-adjacent' by others — that stays listenable across genres and forgives poor recordings. It is repeatedly framed as a deliberate break from the older, more forward Focal house sound rather than a budget version of it.

“a competent, well-tuned open back headphone with a bass shelf in the right spot to keep the mids clean sounding”

Resolve (The HEADPHONE Community)

“The Hadenys have a well-balanced signature with prominent mids and elevated bass and treble regions giving it a mild V-shaped signature.”

Headfonics (Thomas)

“very nicely tuned but with some quirks here and there”

Headphones.com (Fc-Construct)

Broadly read as smooth, controlled and non-fatiguing, with the top octave deliberately restrained — several sources point out that, unusually, it measures with less air above 10 kHz than an HD 600. The cost is sparkle: 'good but not the point' is the common verdict, and one measured owner is a real dissent, hearing the lower treble as shouty and sometimes harsh. Two 6 kHz and 8.5 kHz wrinkles show up on one rig that its author attributes to pad compression on the silicone ears rather than the headphone.

“It is suitably bright, yet less fatiguing than many other headphones.”

Kuulokenurkka (Headphone Corner)

“Extension into the brilliance region is enough to give the presentation some shimmer and sparkle, but it is minimal and completely non-fatiguing.”

Headfonics (Thomas)

“the most offensive part of their tuning is the lower treble peak that can sometimes get quite annoying”

r/headphones (atyne_mar, 18-day owner with own B&K 5128 traces)

A clean split, and the two camps are not describing different units — they are weighting the same modest scale differently. One camp, led by the British hi-fi press, hears real three-dimensionality and depth. The other, which includes most of the measurement-minded sources, calls it centred, intimate and unremarkable in size. Kuulokenurkka sits with the second camp on the fact while rejecting it as a criticism, judging the stage well-proportioned and not a factor in the listening experience.

Consistently rated above the soundstage it sits in. Sources describe precise, evenly spaced placement and clean separation, with instruments rendered at believable size and off-centre movement tracked accurately. The main qualification is depth — several find the horizontal plane sharper than the front-to-back one — and one owner finds the whole spatial picture simply unremarkable.

“the headphones delineate the vocalist and different instruments to their true size in their own positions within the sound field”

Kuulokenurkka (Headphone Corner)

“Channel-to-channel movement is done with precision and accuracy.”

Headfonics (Thomas)

“notes in the horizontal field are quite precise and evenly spaced”

Headphones.com (Fc-Construct)

The most consistent 'good, not great' verdict on the record. Sources place resolution as comfortably sufficient for enjoyment and short of what critical listening or the dearer Focals offer, with the smoothness that makes it non-fatiguing also rounding off fine nuance. Owners are the most enthusiastic voices here, professional reviewers the most measured — a gap worth reading as expectation-setting rather than contradiction.

“While not lacking detail, the presentation has a softness that keeps minute nuances from standing out.”

Headfonics (Thomas)

“It sounds detailed, even if the transparency of the reproduction doesn't necessarily surpass the best planar headphones”

Kuulokenurkka (Headphone Corner)

“Transient detail is Focal-familiar: snappy but not etched.”

Sound & Vision (Mark Henninger)

A genuine two-camp split, and the dividing line is what you are comparing against. Sources who put it next to Focal's own Clear, Elex or Utopia hear a clear step down in attack and immediacy. Sources judging it on its own terms — or against Sennheiser — hear a lively, punchy headphone. Headfonics adds a mechanism nobody else tests for: it needs volume, and goes flat when played quietly.

Split, but along a physical line rather than a matter of taste — and the sources say so themselves. At 294 g with deep memory-foam pads and a breathable cloth cover, it draws some of the highest comfort scores of any headphone in this price class. The complaints cluster on two things: a fairly firm clamp that several reviewers notice after 30 minutes to an hour, and a headband that is both narrow and short on adjustment range. Reviewers with average or small heads report near-perfect comfort; those who run the band near its limit warn that larger heads may not be accommodated at all.

Widely praised, with one caveat and one outlier. Sources call the magnesium yoke, leather-and-cloth headband and French assembly genuinely premium for the money, and Fc-Construct argues this newer chassis fixed the headband and driver failures that dogged Focal's older models. The near-universal complaint is the stock cable, which has so much memory it coils back on itself in use. There is no balanced option at all — one 3.5 mm socket, full stop — which several reviewers call a miss at this price. One forum owner received a unit with a severe channel imbalance and returned it; that is a single report, and Resolve's read was a pad-to-baffle seal fault rather than a driver failure.

“It seems like despite the plastic parts, this newer frame design actually solved the failure points of their older models and the 40 mm driver is better installed.”

Headphones.com (Fc-Construct)

“The Hadenys cable constantly tries to roll itself back onto the reel, making it difficult to keep straight during use.”

Kuulokenurkka (Headphone Corner)

“the Hadenys is resolutely single ended and has a single 3.5mm input on the left hand housing”

AVForums (Ed Selley)

“excellent build quality - nice smell, materials, everything is nicely finished, headband clicks are crisp, swivel rotation is smooth, it feels quite premium”

r/headphones (atyne_mar, 18-day owner)

As designed: none worth counting. It is a genuinely open headphone — one owner measures it as about as open as an ATH-R70xa or HD 560S, with almost no occlusion — so it leaks outward and lets the room in. SoundGuys scores isolation 2.8 out of 10. The one dissenting note is Headfonics', who found the deep bass shelf survives outdoor listening well enough that the Hadenys can double as a going-out headphone in a way most open-backs cannot.

“Noise leakage might best be described as considerable but not total”

AVForums (Ed Selley)

“there is some on the Hadenys, albeit minimal”

Headfonics (Thomas)

Contested, and the argument has quietly changed since it was written. At $699 the majority verdict was that this is a serious Focal for well under Focal money, with the British press calling it best-in-class under £1,000. The dissent is specific rather than vague: the closed Azurys performs at roughly the same level for $150 less, which makes the open model look like the worse buy on price alone. Owners paying today's discounted street prices are the most positive voices; the reviewer who wanted it cheaper is the sharpest critic.