Not long
ago I purchased a pair of the new Focal Alpha 80 monitors. Before I took them home I tested the whole range at 4Sound’s showroom in Trondheim. Here’s what I found:
About the range
Focal are known mainly for monitors for the high-end
marked, so the anticipation was great when they launched three new monitors in
the affordable end of the marked. The range includes a 5-inch, a 6,5-inch and
an 8-inch. All have Focal’s own ‘polyglass cone,’ which is a made from a composite material that
gives it its name. The material is supposed to stiffen up the membrane and
improve the performance. All the models also share the same inverted dome tweeter. The basic design is known from the pricier
SM6-range and the SM9. In ascending order the Alpha-range sport a
solid 55W, 75W and 140W of power. The latter being on the current frontier for
an 8-inch, two-way system at this price.
As always
for my monitor-reviews I’ll leave the tech-specs brief and rather get on with
the testing. For more technical information I’ll refer you to Focal’s own
web-page and recent reviews particularly by Sound on
Sound Magazine. At
the end of my own review I will comment on the articles both from SoundOnSound and MusicTech, since some of our opinions
differ and some coincide.
How do they sound?
The monitors
had a distinct family-sound across the range as could be expected. At the showroom,
the staff had already crowned the Alpha 65 their favourite. This is consistent with several
reviews by Sound on Sound, where they tend to favour mid-sized 6- to 7-inch
drivers (or indeed 5 inch systems) over 8-inch drivers, in two-way systems. The
reason is that many people feel an 8-inch driver with a 1-inch tweeter creates
too much space between bass and treble, which leaves something missing in the
middle. The point is true, but the back of the medal also has a shiny front-side.
I actually tend to favour 8-inch drivers for their capacity to “unfold” everything
from the bass and up through the middle. Think of it as a Chinese fan: the more
you unfold it the bigger it gets. With a bigger membrane you create a space for
the bass and “unfold” the mids—you get more resolution and more sense of space
between the low downs and central elements like vocals.
I
had compiled a CD of tracks ranging from R’n B to Rock, and the speakers were switched
trough a Mackie Big-Knob for quick A/B testing. Here’s my
track list:
For the
tracks containing low bass the Alpha 80 proved an instant success. On Mariah
Carey’s “Fly Like a Bird” it created an impressive space between the lows of the
bass and the highs of Mariah’s voice. The sound was accurate and the full
spectral range of the monitors made it really enjoyable listening! On tracks
with prominent vocal layering (‘Playa Playa,’ ‘I'd Like To’), the Alpha 80 provided
a present, open and spacious vocal-sound. This would make them an excellent
choice to mix vocal harmonies on. The next one in line to impress was the Alpha 50. It had a clear and present vocal sound and
managed to deliver far deeper lows than what you’d normally expect from a
5-inch speaker.
If the
Alpha 80’s bass can be characterised as ‘deep,’ the Alpha 65’s keyword is definitely
‘punchy.’ Dream Theater’s ’Never Enough’ has lots of punch and made the Alpha
65 stand out as the winner. For those familiar with the Dynaudio BM5 mkii, the real treat in the their bass is
the punch they pack—they never went very deep. A great reference track for me
on the BM5 is Dream Theater’s ‘Just Let Me Breathe.’ The Alpha 65 reminded me of that
vibe. The Alpha 80 on comparison does not deliver the same low-end punch (this
may be one of the places where ‘something is missing’ like discussed above),
but they go down deeper. The 4Sound staff favoured the Alpha 80 as an EDM-monitor
(as I believe many will), but I would like to challenge that notion. I would
rather choose a pair of punchy Alpha 65s for EDM-production. And flying in the
face of all convention I would further prefer the Alpha 80 for mixing vocals
and recorded instruments because of its spacious sound and great separation
between highs, mids and lows. Opinions will differ on this, so I encourage you
to seek out a well stocked show-room or to read multiple reviews for the best
overview.
The Alpha
80 goes down to a whooping 35 Hz (entering into the lowest audible octave), and
delivers a total of 140W. This makes it necessary for you to consider the size
of your room. When I first set them up in my home, another member of the
household thought there was a large motor vehicle standing outside on the road.
Yes, they go deep! If you intend to use the Alpha 80’s as a lone pair of
nearfield monitors you should be aware of the resulting implications. If you’re
mixing for radio you’d do well with for instance a pair of Mixcubes on the side, or a way of rolling off the bass
on your output (room correction software, bypassable eq. on master—either
software or hardware). Personally, I might switch to a pair of headphones once
in a while to scale down the size of my listening system.
I ran a
speaker-test with a group of music-production students two years ago. We tested
speakers from 300 Pounds to 3,000 Pounds a pair. The students felt Foo
Fighters’ ‘Weenie Beenie’ sounded almost the same on all
systems because of its limited bandwidth. ‘Alone + Easy Target’ gave a similar
effect across the whole Alpha range. But just as with Dream Theater the Alpha
65s scored a few points extra thanks to their punch.
For the
hip-hop track I can only say that bigger is better, and the Alpha 80 was the
winner. For vocal clarity I also found the biggest to be the better. The Marion
Kristina track was also favoured on the Alpha 80 and the 50 came second. For
tracks where the vocal was central I found the Alpha 65 a little too fatiguing.
There was a little too much mid-range and as a result I might have mixed lower
vocals if I worked on them. On the other hand this makes the most important
part of the track stand out if you like to work that way.
In the
highs the speakers sound quite similar. The Alpha 80 was again the favourite
since it had the biggest separation between highs and lows, and let the highs stand
out alone without competition from the mids. The Alpha 65 also sounded open and
clear in the top, but I perceived them as a little bit harsher than the smaller
Alpha 50. Hence, also when considering the highs I would chose the Alpha 50 as
the first runner up to the 80. The Alpha 50 are the least open sounding of the
three in the highs, but it has a smoother and more comfortable sound to work on
over time.
Technicalities
The eq. at
the back of the cabinets has a +/- 6 dB bass and a +/- 3dB treble adjustment. I
found these useful when adjusting the speakers to the room. On extreme settings
I found the on-board eq. interfering too much with the character of the music
so I used it sparsely.
On the pair
of Alpha 80s that I bought there is a slight hiss. I could hear this on all the
models at the showroom also, but not unless I put my ear close. As long as
you’re playing music this is no problem, but if you’re sat in the studio
writing it can be a little bit annoying. I have a power-switch for the speakers
on my desk so I work my way around it. The hiss is not worse than what I’ve
heard on other similarly priced speakers and it has no annoying artefacts that
stand out, just a very gentle white noise. I’m extremely sensitive to these
things, but it’s not very prominent on the Alpha-range so this shouldn’t be a
problem for most. The speakers have a power-saving device that makes the power
cut if they receive no signal for a while. When they receive signal again they
wake up quickly. If I am listening on low volumes I occasionally have to turn
up the volume a little bit to wake them up. This is no problem once you get
used to it.
Conclusion
Focal has
managed to create an impressive range of studio-monitors that re-defines the
price-point. These stand out from the competition in power, depth and clarity. They
are priced just above KRK Rokit, JBL 3-series and Yamaha HS and just below Adam AX and Eve SC. In a sense they’ve carved out a new
price-point. I would not have bought a current 5-inch monitor priced below Adam
A5X… until now. The power and clarity made the Alpha 80s my favourites, but
next in line is the Alpha 50. For a 5-inch it goes surprisingly deep, sounds as
open as you could hope for and has a good overall balance. Not to mention, it
is also powerful enough to fill a decently sized showroom with power to spare. –A
new affordable 5-inch that I’d be happy to recommend, that’s rare! The Alpha 65
has a punchy bass and a good overall performance. I rank them last of the tree,
but there will be differing opinions in the press on this. Regardlessly, they
are very capable monitors with lots of mids, punchy bass and better performance
for your money than most of its competitors. They get my stamp of approval, and
still has margin to spare.
Summing
them up in one-liners:
Alpha
80—big sounding speaker with lots of clarity and impressively low register.
Alpha
65—all-rounder with punchy bass and wide appeal across genres.
Alpha
50—playing deeper and clearer than almost anything of its size at this price.
Big thanks
as always to the helpful staff at 4Sound Trondheim’s big and hypnotic showroom!
Big thanks also to Norwegian music producer Geir Simonsen for coming along as
an extra pair of well trained ears.
Comments on other reviews
Music Tech Magazine
First, a
correction: The LF eq. is a +/- 6 dB, not 3 a +/- 3 dB as stated. The treble is
+/- 3dB. The same eq. set-up is found across the whole range.
For the
Alpha 80s, Huw Price feels there’s something missing in the upper mids; and
that having another set of monitors to switch to for critical listening would
be good. I agree that having a smaller pair is a good idea, but cheifly for
another reason. As previously mentioned, when your mix is supposed to transfer
to another system (e.g. someone’s kitchen radio) it is good to have a pair of
small speakers with less bass and narrower bandwidth. I do not agree however,
that a smaller pair (or a pair with more prominent mid-range) is needed to
better assess how vocals sit in the mix. Price’s conclusion is that Alpha 50 is
better suited for critical listening to the likes of vocals and guitars. This
overlooks an important point. If you remember the image with the Chinese fan:
with a big membrane like in the Alpha 80, the sense of distance between the
vocals and instruments lower down in the mix increases. This enables you to
hear the separation between the instruments better. Said in another way: For
its size, the Alpha 50’s sound is opened and spacious, but its biggest sibling will
naturally open up much more. To give him his due, Price holds the most
conventional view in the music production press. On another point, we agree
that there is less punch in the Alpha 80s than in the others. Again, I would
emphasize that this is offset against an impressively deep frequency response
that will let you assess low-end content in your mix with great ease.
Music Tech
rated the Alpha 80 at 8/10 and the Alpha 50 at 9/10. I would flip those scores
around or put them both at around a 9, with the Alpha 80 a little higher than
the 50. Yes, no doubt, some details could have been marginally improved, but I
don’t expect it at this price!
Sound on Sound
The Sound
on Sound (SOS) review focuses on the Alpha 65 and does not compare the models.
As a review of the Alpha 65, SOS’s Bob Thomas and myself have pretty similar views.
Not surprisingly, SOS chose to focus on the Alpha 65, as they often tend to
favour the middle options in two-way systems (6 to 7 inches).
Thomas
brings out another important topic, and that is the burn-in process. My pair of
Alpha 80s performed noticeably better after clocking a few hours of music. The
showroom had also burned in their display speakers, and all the eqs were set to
neutral while burning them in.
Excellent review thank you. I could see why artists or engineers would prefer the Alpha 65's but I would have to say they are probably only punchier because they are missing or lacking certain detail in the midrange. Maybe I am incorrect in saying that, but I went ahead and bought the Alpha 80's which I am extremely pleased with. It's overall range response is abolutely amazing and the low end definitely had me mistaken for my sub possibly being on. I actually do prefer punchier speakers, but only for the case of playback and not mixing or recording. It's better to hear as much detail in the production stage as possible and probably always a good idea to just have a second set of speakers, punchier, on the side ready to go for reference anyways.
ReplyDeleteThank you Eric and glad you liked my review! I agree, I need to hear as much detail as possible too and I get what you mean with the sub! All the best with your new speakers! :-)
DeleteGood review thanks a lot, Which of the three would you recommend to make ambient music? Something like Loscil, Fennezs music..
ReplyDeleteThank you Yago!
ReplyDeleteIf you have the room to support the size, I would go for the Alpha 80. It will let you pick out the different elements of the mix easier, and deliver the biggest frequency-range (great for the lows on drones in Loscil's music for example). I think the Alpha 50 could be the biggest surprise with how well it can deliver for its size and cost. The Alpha 65 will be more detailed than the 50, but I think it will give a less open and clear idea of especially the lows than the 80 does. The 50 might also be perceived as a bit less prominent (or a bit flatter) in the mid-range than the 65. Of the tree, I guess I would find the internal balance of the lows on an album like 'Stases' a little harder to gauge on the 65. This is due to its more prominent mid-range and tendency towards a punchier rather than open bass (probably the most subjective opinion of my reply). –Though this would have to be offset against being quite a detailed monitor for the price.
To sum up: if you have the right space, I would go for the 80. If you are going for one of the smaller ones there is a trade-off with two different sets of positives on each side. If I was made to choose between the 50 and 65, I might narrowly choose the 65 due to its better resolution and bigger membrane. If you chose the 65, just burn them in well and then see if you can make an eq. adjustment afterwards (or use room-correction software), if you feel it is required. If you feel they provide what you need to hear, I’d just leave the eqs as flat as possible.
All the best! :-)
Thank you for the great review..!! i'm on the market right now for new monitors and i'm concidering the focal alpha's too....although there are very few reviews about them!!! i want your opinion as an expert to choose between alpha 50 and alpha 65.. There will be my main monitors for mixing rock,hard rock,funk music and i want the most clearer monitor of the two without loosing the low end!! i will be working several hours on them!! I'm comfused a bit ..
ReplyDeleteHi Thanasis and thanks for the comment!
DeleteOf these two the Alpha 50 was my favourite to listen to. But, if you are choosing between them for mixing purposes I would go with the Alpha 65. They will give you a little extra depth (although not a whole lot: 40 Hz against 45 Hz), but more crucially: they will give you more clarity and detail in the mid-range. I prefer listening to the Alpha 50 and was astonished to hear how well they performed for their size. I find the Alpha 65 a little more fatiguing, but the other side of the trade-off is the better clarity.
If you feel you want to do adjustments to them I suggest:
1. Play a little bit with the eq. after burning in the speakers. I found the best eq. adjustments to be small adjustments.
2. If you work on them for a while and want to do further adjustments, you could have a look at a room correction system, like the one IK Multimedia produces:
http://www.ikmultimedia.com/products/arc/
I haven't used it, but Sound On Sound has done a review. But I wouldn't bother doing room-correction from the start. See how the monitors work for you before considering it.
I know I rated the Alpha 65 the lowest of the three, but they are still very capable and clear monitors. If you are looking for a pair of main monitors to use for a variety of modern band-music, I would not hesitate to say that the Alpha 65 are the most useful monitor for the purpose. Even if I liked listening to the 50s a little better, I would prefer to work with the level of detail in the 65s for the type of music you mentioned.
Hope that helps! :-)
Thank you very much for your quick respond,and yes,your advise is a big help to consider.. Best regards, Thanasis
DeleteGreat to hear! All the best! :-)
Delete