Spot On analysis of the Elacs! I wish you reviewed them before i bought a pair !! Mine lasted less than 2 days before they were re boxed and sent packing !
I have 50 year old B&W transmission line DM2As - they sound great with my NAD pre&power amps from 35 years ago...the laws of Physics haven't changed and therefore the laws of Acoustics (which have to obey the laws of Physics) haven't changed either.
Here I be pretty much on the other side of the planet and UA-cam provides you and another Brit for audio enlightenment. Now my hut is full of wharfedale, Kef and Mission products. Thanks man.
It always amazes me how quickly most speakers go out of favour simply because of age; not being the latest thing. There's lots of quality out there from years past, if you can find it and it hasn't been abused.
Yes I agree, I never liked the LS50 oh the abuse I got, now there are many for sale, I bought the r100 on a friend's recommendation, and he was on the money, not perfect but do the majority well .
Speaker reviews are my least favorite these days. Nothing has really changed with speakers since they were first invented, while electronics seem to be advancing rapidly these days. Better and cheaper amps, DACs and streamers show up regularly these days. But speakers are just a mechanical device, and there really ain't much new.
I agree with some of your views about the MA R252, up to a point. But it’s important to remember that they were truly entry-level hi-fi speakers, selling at about £120/pair in the early 1980s - and at that price (and certainly bearing in mind what you’d get for the inflation-equivalent price today, which would be nearer £450), I think they were very good. Looking at the internal construction, as I have, shows the cabinets were really quite well made and internally braced with thick foam lining and high-quality internal copper wiring hard-wired to the drivers and an OK quality, minimal crossover (with an air-core inductor in the treble circuit). There is definitely the stamp of Robin Marshall’s design genius in there. I think you say that the R252 you had was cheaply finished in vinyl, which makes me wonder whether you had the ‘bargain basement’ 252V model which lacked the cabinet bracing and was vinyl-wrapped, whereas the R252 always had real-wood veneer. The point about the lack of bass is one I’d partly agree with, but I think that has to be considered against the backdrop of current consumer expectations, which seems to be for exaggerated, ‘one-note’ boomy bass. As you’d expect, the R252 doesn’t have masses of low bass, but what it does have is really quite tuneful and rolls off gently, is still there at 40 Hz, and is also very ‘punchy’ with great time resolution - that may be a product of the sealed cabinet (no bass reflex port). Some judicious damping of the stamped-steel woofer baskets and replacing the (by now very old) electrolytic caps in the crossover with good-quality film caps would clean up the sound considerably - leaving (to my mind) a well-balanced speaker that would be hard to match at anywhere near the price with modern kit.
Excellent! The stuff written in hi-fi magazines about speakers is usually garbage. They always say how good a speaker is! You're able to look at each one from an honest standpoint. Good
Kelvin’s hifi review here is very honest & yes as he mentioned, nobody supplies him any equipment so there’s no need to sugarcoat anything here. Alot of YT reviews cannot be trusted at all as these reviewers have to say good things about the equipment that they are reviewing if they want to keep getting equipment for reviews. So many so called popular reviewers here are all talking crab. Every piece of equipment they review is always the best. There seems to be no end to the best. A load of BS.
The mid range dip seems to be common in modern speakers and so many sound hollow and nasally, even if bass is ok. I spent ages trying various electronics on some modern speakers, but you can't polish turd. And it being a Sunday I've decided to get some vintage gear out 'the collection' and put my modern system in the bold corner.
Love this kind of review. Kelvin is straight to the point and keeps things concise. Loved the bit at the end. A lot of the hifi channels are all about new, crazy-expensive gear that’s just not realistically attainable for normal un-rich lovers of hifi. Anyway, Kelvin’s reviews of vintage pieces are perfect advice for getting your hifi sorted out within a reasonable budget.
I've owned R352 which I enjoyed a lot, because box is bigger( compared with 252), also port helps bass impact. I paired them with NAD 7020(3020 with radio). Drivers are quite good and pushed extra a bit by NAD, worked just fine for me. Cheers!
I used the b6.2 on an old Yamaha AS500 for a long time (with a pair of good cables), and they sound great. I tried them on a Naim XS2, and really no issues in sound quality. The Elac Debut B6.2 are simple, honest affordable speakers... I think Yamaha amps offer the best pairing. Pairing matters a lot.
Afternoon Kelvin, another seat of the pants, honest review ,really strange to me that given the age difference between those two speakers the newer one isn't head and shoulders better in every way...according to Reviews It's very well rated..just more proof newer is not always better. P.S. like you choice of test track..Boz is a underated Icon in my book..Cheers Pal.
I’ve a few speakers, but the ones I use in out in a summer house are celestion county’s and they literally even at low volumes tingle my ear canals and my teeth. The range blows me away, I must move them in the house.🎉
Those & some other bass-reflex reflex speakers with large front ports, peak at the port's single resonance frequency designed to peak at the only note reflex port's can ever peak at, below 70 to 50'htz, depending port size, width & depth, or total internal volume as if both ends were flat & sealed ..if you like. but note-wise, depending purely on the above & the port tube's depth into the speaker, hence a one-note lift of maybe 6 or 12'db or more(?) that's fixed at the port's internal single resonance frequency that cannot change, it cant alter without a different internal air volume. Ports can be put on the back for less intrusiveness but still always a one note of ultra narrow frq' band to give "the illusion of" wide band deep-bass lift that just ain't there except for that 1 narrow fixed frequency lift. I always stuck a rolled up pair or 2 of socks in my KEF 3-ways, later dense foam. (They were the KEF B139 race-track shaped bass, not the passive magnet'less version, my two other KEF drivers were a T27 tweeter & a i4get.. (B100 / or 200? but prob' not) ...midrange, the same 2 drivers as the famous BBC 2-way monitors I 4get but thev are "still very expensive 2'nd hand" faves of many, I'm not mad about them but wouldn't say no to a v.very cheap perfect pair, which won't happen on eBay & normal Hi-Fi s/h shops & sites online, they were once always used in beeb recording-vans as monitors. But with the rolled up socks, my KEF bass was fantastic, no boom at all, hearing individual notes of walking baselines with & deep & not one note, like you get with many normal unblocked reflex port's deep single note lift, that I thought they didn't need on m KEFs. One first visitor told me "turn the music off Steve..." as he stood up panicking, soon as an L.P. first track's music started & not loud to need raising our voices, saying "..there's something going on in another flat". I said " no, that's just the bass line" he said "no, it's not, can't you hear that, somebody's smashing or hammering a flat to pieces or something" I had to prove it was a bass line & he was often visiting after he settled to wotever I played first, he bought L.P.s round he was changing for CDs (as his plan at least) & once said, despite CDs "I can't believe records can sound so good" he said B4 knowing "real" full range sound. i hate overblown bass & it wasn't even loud, he'd just never heard any other stereo than tiny hardboard half-cerial box sized lightweight boxes, only slightly heavier (I presumed, with what wad 1 single 4" inch full range driver a ch' fed from a toy C.D. player / amplifier combo by Sharpe, which I'd heard, but never bass at all & never said "turn the music off, there's something wrong, there'sno bass whatsoever". (Bless him) I could see the speakers hardboard backs as they hung on a nail in the wall & were tilted inwards, I'd have tilted them in the bin, but when you've never heard better, it's natural to get used to whatever sound you got & grow to accept it as the normal & "true sound" every one hears on any stereo. That was yrs back with my then all s/h cheap for price & fine sounding system of a Heybrook TT2, / Alphason Xenon,/ Denon 301 M.C., PS audio's1978'ish modular phono stage, into a Crimson pre-amp with inferior phono stage, hence then expendive s/h £70 P.S. Audio's 3 box modular phono stage with their upgraded & dedicated Hi-Current Power Supply (they called it) of 3 boxes, inc' M C. Step-ups put in the M.M. eq box for M.C.s & it remained unbeaten till I went fullly valved (not a transistor in or out of sight) 2 box fully regulated & hi-cap smoothed P/supply, huge transformer'd Phono Stage (Gr8, a s/h buy, not very cheap but a "now ive heard it at home, it cannot leave'" type of sound, by my installments request which were accepted) & very good (without the valve pre'amp's M.M. noisy phono stage with no step-up trannies like the P.S. Audio's, & my Quad II valve mono amps, always made with a fitted single 'to ground / chassis input resistor, that can be removed to lift Quad II power'amps input sensitivity from 1.5 volt to 0.75 volt for 15'watts RMS (clean watts) per mono valve poweramp which sounded excellent for the money back then. The Crimson Power later bought alone, was excellent with much better bass / lower mids that the Quad II's power'amps. The bass was natural but my friend had only heard Dansettes & "toy" stereos, the bass was natural & normally deep to other real hi-fi owning visiting friends. But to this new visitor, he thought the block of flats were being demolished or the bowls of the earth were banging tectonic plates around, I had no tone controls nor loudness buttons, just selector, volume & a ballance trimmer. Good Vid, I guessed at start you'd prefer the M.Audio tho wasn't entirely sure.
I had those same Elacs and returned them after a month. They did nothing for me. I felt the same about the Sony SSCS5s. My favorite pair of cheap speakers have been the Polk Audio TSI-100s. Sadly they no longer make them but they have a great sound for the price. I was surprised by the amount of separation and clarity. I bought a pair, each, for my sisters and they love them for 2 channel listening. I enjoy your channel. Tim in California
Hi stereo review X, i love your honest opinion on hifi and vintage speakers,your one of the very few channels i watch,once i see promotions on a channel, its hit that home button straight away,I cannot understand why people just don't give there own opinion on whatever there talking about or reviewing.
With modern equipment allowing things like sound/room "correction" (or rather: tonality adaption to your room and taste) I wonder when we'll start seeing reviewers describing a speaker's properties with room correction enabled and disabled. With the Wiim products this technology becomes more available and might make consumers happier in many cases (not all of course, as quite a few stair clear of this technology).
Agreed, that specific elac would be at the top of my list of disappointing speaker purchases, I sent that model out the door rather quick. It had nothing to give really anywhere, no engagement.
Nostalgia is a powerful drug Kevin. Review some Tannoy Dc 200s with 10 inch drivers. They r seriously rolled off in the treble... Nothing like my large Tannoys
Good for you Kelvin. So many reviewers have raved about the Elac B5.2 that you have there. A friend of mine bought a pair on the strength of those reviews. I heard them in his system and I agree with you. The sound was flat and boring and I literally switched off after 10 minutes.
The 80s gets a bad rep for the black receiver era but the reality is there was a lot of peak engineering going on in the good stuff especially out of Japan during the height of their economic boom. It was the peak of the 2-channel era before everything started going surround sound and downhill IMO. My Luxman R-115 still puts the modern stuff to shame.
@@mikeg2491 . Agreed. Surround sound exploded with VHS & the Bose Acoustimass Satellite System. The design progression of 2 channel hifi speakers died right there. Tiny cube satellites turned 2-way, then got bigger as bookshelf surrounds, then became stand mounts which became tower surrounds. And all of them need a subwoofer. Speaker designers, if tasked to build a good hifi speaker, would never choose those ways. Their handcuffed making what the consumer thinks they want sound as best as they can and that's it. So we get an enumerable choice in limited surrounds and only a handful of good stereo speakers. But there are ways................... Acid Jazz, Funk & Brass 🔈🔉🔊
I got myself a pair of monitor audio 352 's about 3 years ago and must say i love love love them i do have a big room but they give me everything i could want The box is veneered oak and of good quality and they are still on there stands and they are nice They are good value at the 55£ i paid. I am unfortunately moving house now so had to put them away And have a bose acustomas 5 now i got for again 50£ i am not happy with music but they dont take up any room and they are i must say amazing for home cinema with the 50£ yamaha dspa A1 amp i got O well soon as i get 2 my new home i will get my r325s out again I love the channel Keep it up
Wow. Seems Monitor Audio really dropped the ball between the MA and R ranges! I've still got the MA16s I bought with my first-ever wages in 1980. They cost £79 new, the cabinets were rock solid and they had real teak veneer. They were a bit light in the bottom end, but they had good imaging and detail, no nasty resonances and they're still going strong 44 years on. And they were the bottom of the range.
I'd guess the Monitor Audios have a more benign impedance curve and higher efficiency than the Elacs - just based on the larger cabinet and lack of reflex port.
Kelvin interesting to hear your opinion. It does concern me how those modern speakers get good reviews. I sometimes think there must be an issue with my hearing as I have listened to some modern kit and I don't find it rewarding yet others do. One speaker I would like to hear is those Buchardt s400mk11. That crossover has no expense spared on components looking at it.
For the trailing bit... YES reviewers are in a game to keep their game going. Dump hard on a bad product and you're likely to find your supply drying up. Some of the "big" reviewers are even on the record saying they won't review a bad product and probably for this very reason. But if you think about what we, as consumers, really want it's not to hear how wonderful the new best thing ever is. We actually want to weed out the stinkers so we don't end up wasting hard earned money and our limited time on bad or marginal products. I don't look to product reviews to know what to buy... I look for what to avoid. Keep up the good work, Kelvin.
It's not the quality of products that make magazines and some reviewers praise them - It's the money they get under the table for doing it. Not that many buy magazines anymore, and they have to get the money from somewhere. That way they scare off even more costumers and have to praise even worse crap.... They might tell a great story, but you better not believe it. Another problem is there's not much new gear worth writing about, but they still need something to fill the magazines. They might tell you the Elac's are good speakers - But your ears will tell you otherwise. That's when you stop listening to words and starts listening to the gear before wasting your money and filling their pockets. Don't trust magazines - Trust your ears. Great video Mate. Thanx.
I’ve always been given to understand that Uk built cabinets and speakers are built to work well in a brick built homes. Perhaps I read or heard that back in the 80’s. Strong bracing in book shelf cabinets are the what I see in the hi end . 86 db 4 ohm 6.5” drivers seem to be the flavour of the day. It’s such a competitive market.
The monitor audio remind me of the bowers dm10 .. this is the first time I've commented.. keep up the great videos.. my journey back into hi fi at 43 .. has been helped by your knowledge... I need to stop buying speakers tho.. my latest is like a car restoration
Even the Pioneer equipment from the 70s is quite expensive for it’s time. My dad had to beg for my mom’s approval which is like asking the UN for funding. The Monitor didn’t deliver bass, it’s a bigger speaker? Lido Shuffle is a good tune for testing.
Hi Kelvin, love your videos. I own a Sonneteer Alabaster integrated amplifier with Falcon LS 3/5a Gold Badge speakers. Any experience with the Sonneteer Alabaster ? If yes, how do they compare to Sugden a21 and Lavardin amplifiers?
Kelvin, gustos and preferences change from time to time. They moved from the tube era to the transistor era, then it was the shift to minimalism, no tone controls, no preamp section, then the speakers started to produce a "tecnhical" sound with lots of "detail" i.e. an annoying treble. Maybe - I say, maybe - the Elacs are not "bad" speakers. Maybe they are "new" speakers.. Twenty years ago I went with my little brother to choose some standmounts. The only speakers that I liked were the QUAD 11L. Not very uplifting and enthusiastic but a warm, full, seamless sound. And then a pair of Mission 780, more snapy and rythmic, albeit "smaller" sound, but still colourful. All the rest of the speakers in the hi-fi shop (and I mean all) were unbearable...
Having not heard the Elac’s it’s interesting that that Andrew Jones originally worked at KEF. Maybe it’s that the Elac’s were developed for the Company’s push into America and thus tuned to that market.
Thanks for the video and your opinion. Those Monitor Audio speakers, they look like Wharfedale woofers and Vifa tweeters to me. Do you know if I'm right? If so I like both of the drivers when I've heard them in other boxes. Cheers.
Even before watching Kelvin’s video i already know that the vintage Monitor Audio is going to be better all around compared to the modern Elac. Not wanting to discredit Andrew Jones, but i dun really like the super exotic TAD as well. But Andrew’s work at Mofi do deserve some mention.
Hi interesting video , some speakers of that age was wood veneer. I have kef carinas mi2 , Lovery speaker in its day I had one many years ago. Regards mark
IMO the best value for money bookshelf speakers you can buy today are Celestion 3 Mk2's, what they lack in the bass (like all small speakers) they more than deliver in the mid range because of their revolutionary tweeter and are more musical than any speaker under£500 today and you can buy them under £100 if you're lucky!
I had a pair of Celestion DL4 mk2 and really liked them. Unfortunately they smelt of mould, someone had kept them somewhere with damp and it had got into the fibreboard. I took out the drivers and sprayed it inside the cabinet with mould remover and let them dry out but couldn't get rid of the smell. Sold them on cheap. A shame as I really liked those, will have to get a better pair in future or some the Celestion 3 you mentioned.
Right on dude! Celestion 3 mkii was a cracker, a friend of mine was on the design team. Ironically the first speaker I had in my system to beat it was the original debut b5. I agree that the 5.2 was a stinker not sure but I suspect that it was less Andrew Jones designed and more the bean counters at Elac
@@AlexMitchell-sj4sb I was going to get the DL4's before I heard the 3's, they also come in Mk1 format that are not ported and are cheaper and still sound good, but get the ported Mk2;s if you can.
i recently bought a pair of old (80's) Rogers LS big box speakers quite cheap but was very disappointed with the sound compared to my BW 602's, the treble was very sweet but there was hardly any bass and the midrange disappeared into the next room. We get very few opportunities to try new / old speakers, it would be nice to be able to hire them.
It amazes me how reviewers can have such opposing opinions. Maybe it's system synergy. Except for GR research where nothing is good and they all need expensive upgrades.
@@stereoreviewx i am not sure if he does any listening at all. But he sure puts alot of emphasis on things like spectral decay, flat frequency response, jus like what u mentioned, statistics. However, we all know that flat frequency response does not mean good sound. Anyway, GR research is running a business & therefore only keen to sell his so called “upgrades”. He basically condemns almost every speaker that he gets to upgrade.
Well im now the proud owner of b@w dm4s on Kelvin's review, they are very good.. My Goodmans 45's compete but the hf on these is quite delightful.. Spent a day cleaning them, again from Kelvin's review . They look great ..
Is that an Arcam Alpha 8r poking out the side at 0:40? I got one given to me with a pair of Vandersteen Signature 2ce's and never known if it's a good amplifier or not.
Totally agree , I’ve had some of these Chinese all conquering 5 star budget speakers and they lack interest to my ears. I found an old pair of Mordaunt short speakers recently - ms35ti / £30 - I guess they were also budget in their day (early 90’s) I think. They do a lot of things well , I enjoy music through them / something very sterile about a lot of these modern budget speakers . I don’t think it’s me being old fashioned , if the newer ones sound great I’d say so , they just don’t .
i bought those ELAC UB-5 / they sounded like garbage, gave me a headache after 10 minutes... i have to say the worst speakers i have ever purchased in my life... later i traded them for a turn table which i still use today...
Good one, CD rules for s myriad of reasons I could fill a 3 or 4 page pamphlet with, tho nobody would want to read it, that's if they've got a half decent turntable & phone stage first & foremost, with capable speakers & amp. imo, & both formats of course, then they would know this very well indeed.
Over the decades I've found little to no improvements in loudspeaker sound, just changes in appearance and design, use of smaller woofers, baffles and cabinet. Modern small speakers may be improved over small speakers from the past but overall not much improvement. Speakers like the 1980 Kef 103.2 or Rogers Studio 1a can hold their own against any bookshelf made today at their respective prices.
I found the elacs struggled with detail when I heard my mates but I did a comparison between my mates elacs and my dad's old kef coda2s found the coda2s delivered detail but also percussive sound and felt the 80s coda2s were a much better speaker
I totally agree with you stereo review X give me some really good deep warm bass some up-tempo treble high frequency Clarity or that mid-range punch to the stomach and I'm happy but give me none of those things and the speakers are crap but just give me one of those things and the speakers become decent give me two of those things in the speaker becomes awesome give me three of those things and look out world we're taking off like a rocket🎉❤ Rock and Roll Ain't Noise Pollution rock and roll will never die and other good music for that matter love your channel great reviews and real thought process involved in your ratings and reviews❤ love it great Channel
Monitor Audio speakers? Just build a better box for each, and upgrade the crossover networks. Mission speakers have the magic, and I bet those Monitor Audio speakers could too after a complete upgrade.
I do a lot of expperimenting with more expensive midrange drivers than you are likely to get in a speaker under $4,000 a pair. There does seem to be progress made since the 1980s, especially in terms of low distortion. Most1980s drivers will sound a bit strained and few will have that ultra purity that will tickle you on every note. But for most people what is important, is how do cheaper midtanges and tweeters from vintage speakers compare to cheaper drivers in more modern ones, because cheap drivers and cheap crossovers is what you are going to get inside speakers that cost $1,500 and less today. I don't hear any tweeters as good today in reasonably priced speakers as the old Infinity Emit tweeters, which Infinity gave you in even their budget models back in the 1970s and 1980s. You don't see polypropolene midrange and woofers hardly ever nowadays anymore either. You can forget berrylium midranges and tweeters included in speakers nowadays, unless you buy something incredibly high end. Yamaha gave you a great berrylium tweeter in it's less than $500 pr. speakers back in the latter 1970s. So I think there was a real pioneering spirit back then, and they gave you more for your money. A lot of cheap dtivers that they give you in todays speakers, would have been outright rejected as far as using them, back in the days when they cared more about the consumer. With modern speakers that are under $1,500, you ARE getting cheap drivers; and cheap crossovers. Some are a bit better than others. Using your own ears to ferret out which ones are bette,r is better than going by reviews. But the virtual disappearance of brick and mortar stores makes more people have to go by reviews.
Kelvin, I had those Elacs. I agree, they are terrible. They sound exactly as you described. People say they get better with hours, but nope! I had traded for mine. My buddy had hundred of hours on them. I put another couple hundred before I gave up. Now, other speakers by Jones sound a lot better.
Articulate review. I have a pair of ELAC unifi reference, would agree with your overall analysis regarding the sound signature. What amp were you using? Do you add a sub? Have you tried different combinations of amps/ DACs /sources etc. with your speakers in the pursuit of greater hifi gear synergy?
You cannot review Elac with no breakin time. Elac's need many hours of breakin say about 100 hours for Elac Debut 2.0 B5.2 as I have. Would not trade for any Monitor Audio as the sound of Elac 5.2 is very neutral. Have had MA4's in past.
My sscond favorite speaker manufacturer is Boston Acoustics..You dont really here a lot about them anymore because there supposdly not designing speakers for home audio.anymore.?...id put them up against a lot of the british makes..They can easily hold there own i know cause ive compared against kefs & missions that I own as well.... Theres a a lot to be said for american speakers ,,
I have a pair of Boston Acoustics CR85s hooked up to a 100 -watt Onkyo running with a Velodyne CT-120 powered subwoofer. That combination is frankly more than my small listening room can handle if you crank it up. CR85's frequency response is 48Hz-20KHz +/- 2 db. The tweeters lack a little "slap" compared to some, but that is perfect for my paneled room.
@@stereoreviewx Yeah the missions are bit more refined for my personal tastes but are bloody well built at the same time ,.the bostons possess a nice warmth in the mids but might not be to everybodys liking but I luv em ..Great apt speakers
Nothings new it’s all repeated off the old my friend brought £3000 speakers and he’s upset because his don’t sound like my tannoy dual concentrics there from the 80’s 12” driver 😊
HELLO. CALVIN. Joe HERE I share you with the world. Anyhow. Yes most two ways have flat midrange. 1 one reason. Companies too cheap to add a mid. 2 TWO reason they are trying to emphasize bass and treble by having no mid driver and IT CAN'T BE DONE. You have to have a cone for each ection of music ll Extra low bass 40hz Bass 55hz - 150hz Mid bass. 150 - 300hz Mid 300hz to 2k Mid treble 2k to 8k High treble 8k to 20k That's how I set up my speakers. Sounds ABSOLUTELY 💯 ANAZING.... SO AT LEAST 3 CONES MINIMUM Hey I'd take two Samui amps 771 661 and put a Roger's monitor on one and put a bassier speakers on other one and play both. It will blow you away. Honestly
I hope you keep the channel going, we need someone like you to tell the truth
Spot On analysis of the Elacs!
I wish you reviewed them before i bought a pair !!
Mine lasted less than 2 days before they were re boxed and sent packing !
I had mine since 2018 and they still sound great. Like any speakers got to get them the break in over time.
I did review ages ago lots old review on my channel K
I have 50 year old B&W transmission line DM2As - they sound great with my NAD pre&power amps from 35 years ago...the laws of Physics haven't changed and therefore the laws of Acoustics (which have to obey the laws of Physics) haven't changed either.
ii bet it sounds great
I have dm2a as well, really nice speakers, especially the bass is great, hard to beat a transmission line speaker.
Kelvin's got a van load of vintage monitor audio r252s he needs to shift 😂
you get a free leg of lamb also
@@stereoreviewx 😂👌
Your approach to defining quality is really spot on.
Here I be pretty much on the other side of the planet and UA-cam provides you and another Brit for audio enlightenment. Now my hut is full of wharfedale, Kef and Mission products. Thanks man.
I can really recommend Celestion Dittons as well. I have the 33's. Very nice.
sounds great don't forget to tighten the bass drivers 🤪
@@stereoreviewx yep always a screw or 2 loose here😅
It always amazes me how quickly most speakers go out of favour simply because of age; not being the latest thing. There's lots of quality out there from years past, if you can find it and it hasn't been abused.
Yes I agree, I never liked the LS50 oh the abuse I got, now there are many for sale, I bought the r100 on a friend's recommendation, and he was on the money, not perfect but do the majority well .
Speaker reviews are my least favorite these days. Nothing has really changed with speakers since they were first invented, while electronics seem to be advancing rapidly these days. Better and cheaper amps, DACs and streamers show up regularly these days. But speakers are just a mechanical device, and there really ain't much new.
same here if people read or hear something ten times they are convinced its true
Glad you're back, this is great info
I agree with some of your views about the MA R252, up to a point. But it’s important to remember that they were truly entry-level hi-fi speakers, selling at about £120/pair in the early 1980s - and at that price (and certainly bearing in mind what you’d get for the inflation-equivalent price today, which would be nearer £450), I think they were very good. Looking at the internal construction, as I have, shows the cabinets were really quite well made and internally braced with thick foam lining and high-quality internal copper wiring hard-wired to the drivers and an OK quality, minimal crossover (with an air-core inductor in the treble circuit). There is definitely the stamp of Robin Marshall’s design genius in there. I think you say that the R252 you had was cheaply finished in vinyl, which makes me wonder whether you had the ‘bargain basement’ 252V model which lacked the cabinet bracing and was vinyl-wrapped, whereas the R252 always had real-wood veneer.
The point about the lack of bass is one I’d partly agree with, but I think that has to be considered against the backdrop of current consumer expectations, which seems to be for exaggerated, ‘one-note’ boomy bass. As you’d expect, the R252 doesn’t have masses of low bass, but what it does have is really quite tuneful and rolls off gently, is still there at 40 Hz, and is also very ‘punchy’ with great time resolution - that may be a product of the sealed cabinet (no bass reflex port).
Some judicious damping of the stamped-steel woofer baskets and replacing the (by now very old) electrolytic caps in the crossover with good-quality film caps would clean up the sound considerably - leaving (to my mind) a well-balanced speaker that would be hard to match at anywhere near the price with modern kit.
Excellent! The stuff written in hi-fi magazines about speakers is usually garbage. They always say how good a speaker is! You're able to look at each one from an honest standpoint. Good
Kelvin’s hifi review here is very honest & yes as he mentioned, nobody supplies him any equipment so there’s no need to sugarcoat anything here. Alot of YT reviews cannot be trusted at all as these reviewers have to say good things about the equipment that they are reviewing if they want to keep getting equipment for reviews. So many so called popular reviewers here are all talking crab. Every piece of equipment they review is always the best. There seems to be no end to the best. A load of BS.
The mid range dip seems to be common in modern speakers and so many sound hollow and nasally, even if bass is ok. I spent ages trying various electronics on some modern speakers, but you can't polish turd. And it being a Sunday I've decided to get some vintage gear out 'the collection' and put my modern system in the bold corner.
Love this kind of review. Kelvin is straight to the point and keeps things concise. Loved the bit at the end. A lot of the hifi channels are all about new, crazy-expensive gear that’s just not realistically attainable for normal un-rich lovers of hifi. Anyway, Kelvin’s reviews of vintage pieces are perfect advice for getting your hifi sorted out within a reasonable budget.
I've owned R352 which I enjoyed a lot, because box is bigger( compared with 252), also port helps bass impact. I paired them with NAD 7020(3020 with radio). Drivers are quite good and pushed extra a bit by NAD, worked just fine for me. Cheers!
yeah I like those spks too. im not down on monitor audio generally btw
Best channel on UA-cam
I used the b6.2 on an old Yamaha AS500 for a long time (with a pair of good cables), and they sound great.
I tried them on a Naim XS2, and really no issues in sound quality.
The Elac Debut B6.2 are simple, honest affordable speakers...
I think Yamaha amps offer the best pairing.
Pairing matters a lot.
Great video. More reviews of current speakers would be very welcome.
more reviews on my channel btw K
Afternoon Kelvin, another seat of the pants, honest review ,really strange to me that given the age difference between those two speakers the newer one isn't head and shoulders better in every way...according to Reviews
It's very well rated..just more proof newer is not always better.
P.S. like you choice of test track..Boz is a underated Icon in my book..Cheers Pal.
The speaker makes the sound great have a great day kelvin and everyone who likes quality
I do enjoy your show. Far better than other similar.
Dare I say it, but Robin Marshall was a better designer than Andrew Jones.
Yeah , loved the Epos ES11 and ES14.
ditto
👋GREETINGS KELVIN 🤗 GREAT TO SEE YOU SHARE THE PROGRESS, AND THE PROS AND CONS 🧐 using a Lazy Susan is very clever🧐💚💚💚
oh they said angry Margret in the shop 🙃
Is that what they call it there?
Honesty is the best policy, and where hi-fi is concerned it's more than needed. keep up the great vids thanks.
Super, a perfect description. Thanks Kelvin.
Thanks for this informative video! I'm curious to know your opinion on Harbeth speakers. Any possibility of doing a video which includes them?
I’ve a few speakers, but the ones I use in out in a summer house are celestion county’s and they literally even at low volumes tingle my ear canals and my teeth.
The range blows me away, I must move them in the house.🎉
Great tweeter on county
I'd rather have nice present female vocals than boom boom.
agreed
Those & some other bass-reflex reflex speakers with large front ports, peak at the port's single resonance frequency designed to peak at the only note reflex port's can ever peak at, below 70 to 50'htz, depending port size, width & depth, or total internal volume as if both ends were flat & sealed ..if you like. but note-wise, depending purely on the above & the port tube's depth into the speaker, hence a one-note lift of maybe 6 or 12'db or more(?) that's fixed at the port's internal single resonance frequency that cannot change, it cant alter without a different internal air volume. Ports can be put on the back for less intrusiveness but still always a one note of ultra narrow frq' band to give "the illusion of" wide band deep-bass lift that just ain't there except for that 1 narrow fixed frequency lift. I always stuck a rolled up pair or 2 of socks in my KEF 3-ways, later dense foam. (They were the KEF B139 race-track shaped bass, not the passive magnet'less version, my two other KEF drivers were a T27 tweeter & a i4get.. (B100 / or 200? but prob' not) ...midrange, the same 2 drivers as the famous BBC 2-way monitors I 4get but thev are "still very expensive 2'nd hand" faves of many, I'm not mad about them but wouldn't say no to a v.very cheap perfect pair, which won't happen on eBay & normal Hi-Fi s/h shops & sites online, they were once always used in beeb recording-vans as monitors. But with the rolled up socks, my KEF bass was fantastic, no boom at all, hearing individual notes of walking baselines with & deep & not one note, like you get with many normal unblocked reflex port's deep single note lift, that I thought they didn't need on m KEFs. One first visitor told me "turn the music off Steve..." as he stood up panicking, soon as an L.P. first track's music started & not loud to need raising our voices, saying "..there's something going on in another flat". I said " no, that's just the bass line" he said "no, it's not, can't you hear that, somebody's smashing or hammering a flat to pieces or something" I had to prove it was a bass line & he was often visiting after he settled to wotever I played first, he bought L.P.s round he was changing for CDs (as his plan at least) & once said, despite CDs "I can't believe records can sound so good" he said B4 knowing "real" full range sound. i hate overblown bass & it wasn't even loud, he'd just never heard any other stereo than tiny hardboard half-cerial box sized lightweight boxes, only slightly heavier (I presumed, with what wad 1 single 4" inch full range driver a ch' fed from a toy C.D. player / amplifier combo by Sharpe, which I'd heard, but never bass at all & never said "turn the music off, there's something wrong, there'sno bass whatsoever". (Bless him) I could see the speakers hardboard backs as they hung on a nail in the wall & were tilted inwards, I'd have tilted them in the bin, but when you've never heard better, it's natural to get used to whatever sound you got & grow to accept it as the normal & "true sound" every one hears on any stereo. That was yrs back with my then all s/h cheap for price & fine sounding system of a Heybrook TT2, / Alphason Xenon,/ Denon 301 M.C., PS audio's1978'ish modular phono stage, into a Crimson pre-amp with inferior phono stage, hence then expendive s/h £70 P.S. Audio's 3 box modular phono stage with their upgraded & dedicated Hi-Current Power Supply (they called it) of 3 boxes, inc' M C. Step-ups put in the M.M. eq box for M.C.s & it remained unbeaten till I went fullly valved (not a transistor in or out of sight) 2 box fully regulated & hi-cap smoothed P/supply, huge transformer'd Phono Stage (Gr8, a s/h buy, not very cheap but a "now ive heard it at home, it cannot leave'" type of sound, by my installments request which were accepted) & very good (without the valve pre'amp's M.M. noisy phono stage with no step-up trannies like the P.S. Audio's, & my Quad II valve mono amps, always made with a fitted single 'to ground / chassis input resistor, that can be removed to lift Quad II power'amps input sensitivity from 1.5 volt to 0.75 volt for 15'watts RMS (clean watts) per mono valve poweramp which sounded excellent for the money back then. The Crimson Power later bought alone, was excellent with much better bass / lower mids that the Quad II's power'amps. The bass was natural but my friend had only heard Dansettes & "toy" stereos, the bass was natural & normally deep to other real hi-fi owning visiting friends. But to this new visitor, he thought the block of flats were being demolished or the bowls of the earth were banging tectonic plates around, I had no tone controls nor loudness buttons, just selector, volume & a ballance trimmer. Good Vid, I guessed at start you'd prefer the M.Audio tho wasn't entirely sure.
Kelvin keep doing your thing we love it mate! Greetings from Cyprus ❤
Thanks will do K
Have the crossovers on the R252's been recapped? If not, they have lots more to give.
I had those same Elacs and returned them after a month. They did nothing for me. I felt the same about the Sony SSCS5s.
My favorite pair of cheap speakers have been the Polk Audio TSI-100s.
Sadly they no longer make them but they have a great sound for the price.
I was surprised by the amount of separation and clarity.
I bought a pair, each, for my sisters and they love them for 2 channel listening.
I enjoy your channel.
Tim in California
Debbie Harry sounding like John Lennon singing Mr. Moonlight came to mind in your description.
Great vlog Kelvin, just goes to show never trust the reviews, always trust your own ears 😊
Hi stereo review X, i love your honest opinion on hifi and vintage speakers,your one of the very few channels i watch,once i see promotions on a channel, its hit that home button straight away,I cannot understand why people just don't give there own opinion on whatever there talking about or reviewing.
With modern equipment allowing things like sound/room "correction" (or rather: tonality adaption to your room and taste) I wonder when we'll start seeing reviewers describing a speaker's properties with room correction enabled and disabled.
With the Wiim products this technology becomes more available and might make consumers happier in many cases (not all of course, as quite a few stair clear of this technology).
DSP is very cool. it can't do miracles on crappy speakers though!
@@peterlarkin762 Yup
Agreed, that specific elac would be at the top of my list of disappointing speaker purchases, I sent that model out the door rather quick. It had nothing to give really anywhere, no engagement.
Nostalgia is a powerful drug Kevin. Review some Tannoy Dc 200s with 10 inch drivers. They r seriously rolled off in the treble... Nothing like my large Tannoys
My Ruark Solstice reference monitors are 30 years old about an sound fantastic..
Good for you Kelvin. So many reviewers have raved about the Elac B5.2 that you have there. A friend of mine bought a pair on the strength of those reviews. I heard them in his system and I agree with you. The sound was flat and boring and I literally switched off after 10 minutes.
They made quality audio back in the 1980s. No receiver sounds better than my dad's Luxman.
My amp of choice is a Luxman L-114A from the early 80s. Wish they still offered an affordable range!
The 80s gets a bad rep for the black receiver era but the reality is there was a lot of peak engineering going on in the good stuff especially out of Japan during the height of their economic boom. It was the peak of the 2-channel era before everything started going surround sound and downhill IMO. My Luxman R-115 still puts the modern stuff to shame.
@@mikeg2491 .
Agreed. Surround sound exploded with VHS & the Bose Acoustimass Satellite System. The design progression of 2 channel hifi speakers died right there.
Tiny cube satellites turned 2-way, then got bigger as bookshelf surrounds, then became stand mounts which became tower surrounds. And all of them need a subwoofer.
Speaker designers, if tasked to build a good hifi speaker, would never choose those ways. Their handcuffed making what the consumer thinks they want sound as best as they can and that's it.
So we get an enumerable choice in limited surrounds and only a handful of good stereo speakers. But there are ways...................
Acid Jazz, Funk & Brass 🔈🔉🔊
Great review, I like old speakers better too , new bookshelves you have to spend a lot of money to get good ones
Definitely!
Ahhhh, it melts my mind😊
Thanks Kelvin.
Great work.
I got myself a pair of monitor audio 352 's about 3 years ago and must say i love love love them i do have a big room but they give me everything i could want
The box is veneered oak and of good quality and they are still on there stands and they are nice
They are good value at the 55£ i paid.
I am unfortunately moving house now so had to put them away
And have a bose acustomas 5 now i got for again 50£ i am not happy with music but they dont take up any room and they are i must say amazing for home cinema with the 50£ yamaha dspa A1 amp i got
O well soon as i get 2 my new home i will get my r325s out again
I love the channel
Keep it up
Wow. Seems Monitor Audio really dropped the ball between the MA and R ranges! I've still got the MA16s I bought with my first-ever wages in 1980. They cost £79 new, the cabinets were rock solid and they had real teak veneer. They were a bit light in the bottom end, but they had good imaging and detail, no nasty resonances and they're still going strong 44 years on. And they were the bottom of the range.
Thanks for the info!
I'd guess the Monitor Audios have a more benign impedance curve and higher efficiency than the Elacs - just based on the larger cabinet and lack of reflex port.
Kelvin that’s my Sunday evening sorted watching another great post 😊
I was planning to buy some new loudspeakers and this is now on hold 1) I don’t want a product made in China 2) second hand gear can be fun. Thanks
Kelvin interesting to hear your opinion. It does concern me how those modern speakers get good reviews. I sometimes think there must be an issue with my hearing as I have listened to some modern kit and I don't find it rewarding yet others do.
One speaker I would like to hear is those Buchardt s400mk11. That crossover has no expense spared on components looking at it.
yes im guessing its not your hearing
bucharts look interesting
Dziękujemy.
Thanks a lot Kelvin,
For the trailing bit... YES reviewers are in a game to keep their game going. Dump hard on a bad product and you're likely to find your supply drying up. Some of the "big" reviewers are even on the record saying they won't review a bad product and probably for this very reason.
But if you think about what we, as consumers, really want it's not to hear how wonderful the new best thing ever is. We actually want to weed out the stinkers so we don't end up wasting hard earned money and our limited time on bad or marginal products. I don't look to product reviews to know what to buy... I look for what to avoid.
Keep up the good work, Kelvin.
"...what to avoid." Well said.
Your review is spot on but after hundreds of hours the ELAC’s midrange does get better. Who knows why.
Because you get used to its subpar sound , that's why speakers don't need mechanical break in especially not hundreds of hours that's myth
100 hours ,,,😅medieval torture
It's not the quality of products that make magazines and some reviewers praise them - It's the money they get under the table for doing it. Not that many buy magazines anymore, and they have to get the money from somewhere. That way they scare off even more costumers and have to praise even worse crap.... They might tell a great story, but you better not believe it.
Another problem is there's not much new gear worth writing about, but they still need something to fill the magazines.
They might tell you the Elac's are good speakers - But your ears will tell you otherwise. That's when you stop listening to words and starts listening to the gear before wasting your money and filling their pockets.
Don't trust magazines - Trust your ears.
Great video Mate.
Thanx.
I’ve always been given to understand that Uk built cabinets and speakers are built to work well in a brick built homes. Perhaps I read or heard that back in the 80’s. Strong bracing in book shelf cabinets are the what I see in the hi end . 86 db 4 ohm 6.5” drivers seem to be the flavour of the day.
It’s such a competitive market.
also uk homes probably smaller than us ,good comments
The monitor audio remind me of the bowers dm10 .. this is the first time I've commented.. keep up the great videos.. my journey back into hi fi at 43 .. has been helped by your knowledge... I need to stop buying speakers tho.. my latest is like a car restoration
The dm10s are ported tho
Still using my NAD3130 & MA R252 after 39 yes. Everyone likes the sound
You can't go wrong with a NAD...
So buy the mission speakers and add a sub bass. . How can a company like elac get to manufacture a lifeless speaker.
wish I knew
Even the Pioneer equipment from the 70s is quite expensive for it’s time. My dad had to beg for my mom’s approval which is like asking the UN for funding. The Monitor didn’t deliver bass, it’s a bigger speaker? Lido Shuffle is a good tune for testing.
I haven’t heard the Elacs but my understanding is Monitor Audio is really good and highly rated next to Bowers and Wilkins
there are some great monitor audio for sure MA4 for instance
Hi Kelvin, love your videos. I own a Sonneteer Alabaster integrated amplifier with Falcon LS 3/5a Gold Badge speakers. Any experience with the Sonneteer Alabaster ? If yes, how do they compare to Sugden a21 and Lavardin amplifiers?
Kelvin, gustos and preferences change from time to time. They moved from the tube era to the transistor era, then it was the shift to minimalism, no tone controls, no preamp section, then the speakers started to produce a "tecnhical" sound with lots of "detail" i.e. an annoying treble. Maybe - I say, maybe - the Elacs are not "bad" speakers. Maybe they are "new" speakers..
Twenty years ago I went with my little brother to choose some standmounts. The only speakers that I liked were the QUAD 11L. Not very uplifting and enthusiastic but a warm, full, seamless sound. And then a pair of Mission 780, more snapy and rythmic, albeit "smaller" sound, but still colourful. All the rest of the speakers in the hi-fi shop (and I mean all) were unbearable...
Having not heard the Elac’s it’s interesting that that Andrew Jones originally worked at KEF. Maybe it’s that the Elac’s were developed for the Company’s push into America and thus tuned to that market.
interestingly Andrew jones is like designer like clothes .
but they all get designed anyway
Thanks for the video and your opinion.
Those Monitor Audio speakers, they look like Wharfedale woofers and Vifa tweeters to me. Do you know if I'm right? If so I like both of the drivers when I've heard them in other boxes.
Cheers.
yes vifa tweeter not w dale
I don't know about that ELAC model in particular, but I have heard that series needs a lot of time to break in.
Agreed, I own 6.2s and they are just smoothing out after hours of high volume use.
something to do with that bass cone material ?
never seen a tweeter anchored with TEN screws before, that’s crazy
Even before watching Kelvin’s video i already know that the vintage Monitor Audio is going to be better all around compared to the modern Elac. Not wanting to discredit Andrew Jones, but i dun really like the super exotic TAD as well. But Andrew’s work at Mofi do deserve some mention.
Hi interesting video , some speakers of that age was wood veneer. I have kef carinas mi2 , Lovery speaker in its day I had one many years ago. Regards mark
the veneer got progressively thinner then vinyl
I know I've said it before, but you really need to try some old JPW P1 AP2 or AP3. They have a lovely midrange, super tight bass and clean highs.
Good to know!
IMO the best value for money bookshelf speakers you can buy today are Celestion 3 Mk2's, what they lack in the bass (like all small speakers) they more than deliver in the mid range because of their revolutionary tweeter and are more musical than any speaker under£500 today and you can buy them under £100 if you're lucky!
I had a pair of Celestion DL4 mk2 and really liked them. Unfortunately they smelt of mould, someone had kept them somewhere with damp and it had got into the fibreboard. I took out the drivers and sprayed it inside the cabinet with mould remover and let them dry out but couldn't get rid of the smell. Sold them on cheap. A shame as I really liked those, will have to get a better pair in future or some the Celestion 3 you mentioned.
Right on dude! Celestion 3 mkii was a cracker, a friend of mine was on the design team. Ironically the first speaker I had in my system to beat it was the original debut b5. I agree that the 5.2 was a stinker not sure but I suspect that it was less Andrew Jones designed and more the bean counters at Elac
@@AlexMitchell-sj4sb I was going to get the DL4's before I heard the 3's, they also come in Mk1 format that are not ported and are cheaper and still sound good, but get the ported Mk2;s if you can.
@jonboy9912 I think I will do thanks. Just seen an absolute battered pair for £15 online, think I will give those a miss though!
У меня были МК 2,могу сказать, что они мне не понравились. У них нет середины, ещё и верх завален
i recently bought a pair of old (80's) Rogers LS big box speakers quite cheap but was very disappointed with the sound compared to my BW 602's, the treble was very sweet but there was hardly any bass and the midrange disappeared into the next room. We get very few opportunities to try new / old speakers, it would be nice to be able to hire them.
yes it would
It amazes me how reviewers can have such opposing opinions. Maybe it's system synergy. Except for GR research where nothing is good and they all need expensive upgrades.
GR research is running a business after all.
@@ganck1147 So are the companies that produce the speakers he tries to improve.
does that gr guy do much listening or is it all statistics
@@stereoreviewx i am not sure if he does any listening at all. But he sure puts alot of emphasis on things like spectral decay, flat frequency response, jus like what u mentioned, statistics. However, we all know that flat frequency response does not mean good sound. Anyway, GR research is running a business & therefore only keen to sell his so called “upgrades”. He basically condemns almost every speaker that he gets to upgrade.
Well im now the proud owner of b@w dm4s on Kelvin's review, they are very good.. My Goodmans 45's compete but the hf on these is quite delightful.. Spent a day cleaning them, again from Kelvin's review . They look great ..
nice t hear dm4 give you something good
Is that an Arcam Alpha 8r poking out the side at 0:40? I got one given to me with a pair of Vandersteen Signature 2ce's and never known if it's a good amplifier or not.
yeah arcam 8 it is not a bad amp with phone stage they are bargains
Totally agree , I’ve had some of these Chinese all conquering 5 star budget speakers and they lack interest to my ears. I found an old pair of Mordaunt short speakers recently - ms35ti / £30 - I guess they were also budget in their day (early 90’s) I think. They do a lot of things well , I enjoy music through them / something very sterile about a lot of these modern budget speakers . I don’t think it’s me being old fashioned , if the newer ones sound great I’d say so , they just don’t .
yeah truth seems old-fashioned these days 🥲
i bought those ELAC UB-5 / they sounded like garbage, gave me a headache after 10 minutes... i have to say the worst speakers i have ever purchased in my life...
later i traded them for a turn table which i still use today...
I bought some Elac's that were constantly pushed on the cheapaudioman channel. Awful lifeless dull sound, sold them straight away.
@@nicksundbyOh dear, sounds like another one to avoid then.
@@The-Spotlight-Kid say what ? a long Ramble man :)
Good one, CD rules for s myriad of reasons I could fill a 3 or 4 page pamphlet with, tho nobody would want to read it, that's if they've got a half decent turntable & phone stage first & foremost, with capable speakers & amp. imo, & both formats of course, then they would know this very well indeed.
Always good to trade up audio that you don't like for something better hope you got a good turntable for your trade
What is yout favorite speaker new and old? Or a top 3 or top 5 maybe?
How about a sub woofer paired with your old speaker? Sub woofers are not all that expensive and do they cure the base issue?
Hi Kelvin .
Can you live with a definitive system?
yes interesting I could but I never think I have found it
Over the decades I've found little to no improvements in loudspeaker sound, just changes in appearance and design, use of smaller woofers, baffles and cabinet. Modern small speakers may be improved over small speakers from the past but overall not much improvement. Speakers like the 1980 Kef 103.2 or Rogers Studio 1a can hold their own against any bookshelf made today at their respective prices.
I found the elacs struggled with detail when I heard my mates but I did a comparison between my mates elacs and my dad's old kef coda2s found the coda2s delivered detail but also percussive sound and felt the 80s coda2s were a much better speaker
I totally agree with you stereo review X give me some really good deep warm bass some up-tempo treble high frequency Clarity or that mid-range punch to the stomach and I'm happy but give me none of those things and the speakers are crap but just give me one of those things and the speakers become decent give me two of those things in the speaker becomes awesome give me three of those things and look out world we're taking off like a rocket🎉❤ Rock and Roll Ain't Noise Pollution rock and roll will never die and other good music for that matter love your channel great reviews and real thought process involved in your ratings and reviews❤ love it great Channel
Are the old 70,s wharfdale Linton speakers any good,can they compare to modern speakers?
(Newbie)
no I had them didn't like at all
The cheaper Elacs are lacking in all areas.
harsh 🤣
Monitor Audio speakers? Just build a better box for each, and upgrade the crossover networks. Mission speakers have the magic, and I bet those Monitor Audio speakers could too after a complete upgrade.
agree
Hallo! What You think about Canton speakers( Ct or Ergo) greatings from Upper Silesia
don't know enough
I do a lot of expperimenting with more expensive midrange drivers than you are likely to get in a speaker under $4,000 a pair. There does seem to be progress made since the 1980s, especially in terms of low distortion. Most1980s drivers will sound a bit strained and few will have that ultra purity that will tickle you on every note. But for most people what is important, is how do cheaper midtanges and tweeters from vintage speakers compare to cheaper drivers in more modern ones, because cheap drivers and cheap crossovers is what you are going to get inside speakers that cost $1,500 and less today. I don't hear any tweeters as good today in reasonably priced speakers as the old Infinity Emit tweeters, which Infinity gave you in even their budget models back in the 1970s and 1980s. You don't see polypropolene midrange and woofers hardly ever nowadays anymore either. You can forget berrylium midranges and tweeters included in speakers nowadays, unless you buy something incredibly high end. Yamaha gave you a great berrylium tweeter in it's less than $500 pr. speakers back in the latter 1970s. So I think there was a real pioneering spirit back then, and they gave you more for your money. A lot of cheap dtivers that they give you in todays speakers, would have been outright rejected as far as using them, back in the days when they cared more about the consumer. With modern speakers that are under $1,500, you ARE getting cheap drivers; and cheap crossovers. Some are a bit better than others. Using your own ears to ferret out which ones are bette,r is better than going by reviews. But the virtual disappearance of brick and mortar stores makes more people have to go by reviews.
great stuff thanks for sharing this K
Kelvin, I had those Elacs. I agree, they are terrible. They sound exactly as you described. People say they get better with hours, but nope! I had traded for mine. My buddy had hundred of hours on them. I put another couple hundred before I gave up. Now, other speakers by Jones sound a lot better.
yeah I've had mine couple of years they destroy my faith in humanity
@@stereoreviewx Haha! I got rid of mine. Sold them on.
One is a ported design and the other is bass-reflex, so really in some ways you are comparing apples to oranges.
the sound is the thing ?
@ 01:23 "the box isn't that good"....WHUaaagh?..... it's like 50 years old and looks brand new.
I'd say it's pretty good yo
they are that light you can juggle with them.
Articulate review. I have a pair of ELAC unifi reference, would agree with your overall analysis regarding the sound signature. What amp were you using? Do you add a sub? Have you tried different combinations of amps/ DACs /sources etc. with your speakers in the pursuit of greater hifi gear synergy?
I have tried these speakers every which way
Budget, Monitor Audio, Made in England , not exactly crap . I had some old Teac in my bedroom. It was cheap ,crap, extremely light.
You cannot review Elac with no breakin time. Elac's need many hours of breakin say about 100 hours for Elac Debut 2.0 B5.2 as I have. Would not trade for any Monitor Audio as the sound of Elac 5.2 is very neutral. Have had MA4's in past.
have he'd elacs for 2 yers for sure
My sscond favorite speaker manufacturer is Boston Acoustics..You dont really here a lot about them anymore because there supposdly not designing speakers for home audio.anymore.?...id put them up against a lot of the british makes..They can easily hold there own i know cause ive compared against kefs & missions that I own as well.... Theres a a lot to be said for american speakers ,,
I wanna here them
I have a pair of Boston Acoustics CR85s hooked up to a 100 -watt Onkyo running with a Velodyne CT-120 powered subwoofer. That combination is frankly more than my small listening room can handle if you crank it up. CR85's frequency response is 48Hz-20KHz +/- 2 db. The tweeters lack a little "slap" compared to some, but that is perfect for my paneled room.
@@stereoreviewx Yeah the missions are bit more refined for my personal tastes but are bloody well built at the same time ,.the bostons possess a nice warmth in the mids but might not be to everybodys liking but I luv em ..Great apt speakers
Nothings new it’s all repeated off the old my friend brought £3000 speakers and he’s upset because his don’t sound like my tannoy dual concentrics there from the 80’s 12” driver 😊
Enigmatic
You are Good but can you keep it brief and come straight to the point
I wil not 😂
HELLO. CALVIN. Joe HERE I share you with the world. Anyhow. Yes most two ways have flat midrange.
1 one reason. Companies too cheap to add a mid.
2 TWO reason they are trying to emphasize bass and treble by having no mid driver and IT CAN'T BE DONE. You have to have a cone for each ection of music ll
Extra low bass 40hz
Bass 55hz - 150hz
Mid bass. 150 - 300hz
Mid 300hz to 2k
Mid treble 2k to 8k
High treble 8k to 20k
That's how I set up my speakers.
Sounds ABSOLUTELY 💯 ANAZING....
SO AT LEAST 3 CONES MINIMUM
Hey I'd take two Samui amps 771 661 and put a Roger's monitor on one and put a bassier speakers on other one and play both. It will blow you away. Honestly
sounds interesting thanks
for sure three way is superior K