V-MODA Crossfade 2 Wireless (2017) vs Focal Elegia (2018)

The V-MODA Crossfade 2 Wireless (2017) is a great Closed-Back Headphone for its $279 asking price.

The Focal Elegia (2018), however, is merely passable at its $577 price point. If you're considering buying a Closed-Back Headphone in the $330 range, you might want to check out some of its competitors.

The V-MODA Crossfade 2 Wireless (2017) was loved by reviewers at SoundGuys, a highly trusted source that performs reliable in-depth testing. It did great in its "Best Headphones For Back To School 2017" roundup where it was named its "Top Pick", which, in itself, makes it a product worth considering.

As for the Focal Elegia (2018), it wasn't able to earn a top spot in any roundups from trusted sources that conduct their own hands-on testing. Nevertheless, it managed to impress reviewers at Headphone Review, What Hi-Fi?, Head-fi, and Rtings enough to make it onto their respective shortlists.

When we thoroughly analyzed their review scores, we learned that all of the sources that tested both Closed-Back Headphones, including Head-fi and Rtings, preferred the V-MODA Crossfade 2 Wireless (2017) over the Focal Elegia (2018).

We also took a look at which sources they managed to impress the most. The V-MODA Crossfade 2 Wireless (2017) was liked best by Pocket-lint, which gave it a score of 10, while the Focal Elegia (2018) got its highest, 9, score from TechHive.

Lastly, we averaged out all of the reviews scores that we could find on these two products and compared them to other Closed-Back Headphones on the market. We learned that both of them performed far better than most of their competitors - the overall review average earned by Closed-Back Headphones being 7.4 out of 10, whereas the V-MODA Crossfade 2 Wireless (2017) and Focal Elegia (2018) managed averages of 8.4 and 7.9 points, respectively.

Due to the difference in their prices, however, it's important to keep in mind that a direct V-MODA Crossfade 2 Wireless (2017) vs. Focal Elegia (2018) comparison might not be entirely fair - some sources don't take value for money into account when assigning their scores and therefore have a tendency to rate more premium products better.