I really love your videos and I'm thankful you're a resource for youtube. I do feel like you should play the same part of each song passage for each speaker or amp.

@dogsbodyish8403

Жыл бұрын

Exactly - especially for the Chemtrails track, which I think is a very good test for midrange nasties.

I've always liked the R3..it's a good one. I think this model Cambridge is one of their better ones as well. Glad to see some new vids, keep up the good work 👍

First what a great video. I own the Cambridge CXA81, use it daily. I owned the Elac DBR62, which were nice but I was able to score a pair of Kef R3 speakers on Craigslist. For me the Kef R3 is a much better speaker. The Kef produces a wider sound stage stage, more realism in live recordings, excellent broad center image without toe-in.

Wouldn't a comparison with Uni-Fi Reference be closer? I definitely prefer Kef R3 here. Thanks.

This amp sounds very good with both of these speakers

@AmbientWanderer

Жыл бұрын

It's a very good amp. I believe it won a 5 star review on what hifi?

@DougMen1

Жыл бұрын

@@AmbientWanderer I like the CXA61 just as much or more. It even sounded great on Alpha Audio's YT channel driving their $10,000 Focal Sopra 1 speakers, as did the Arcam SA10

@DougMen1

Жыл бұрын

@@AmbientWanderer Here's the original videos of the 61 and 81 with the Elac speaker. At the time I thought that I liked the 61 more, but comparing them now, they sound very similar, but I now think the 81 may be a bit clearer kzread.info/dash/bejne/pI6Do8iyn6SpgLA.html kzread.info/dash/bejne/gH-G0bKAqsXHgbA.html

@AmbientWanderer

Жыл бұрын

​@@DougMen1 Thanks! I just took a listen and i have to say, i can't really hear any difference between the two! But both sound fantastic to my ears :)

@DougMen1

Жыл бұрын

@@AmbientWanderer The CXA61 and 81 both got 5 stars from them

DBR62 sounds fuller and have mass body and also great details in treble. R3 are more open in sound, for my taste little too much, also sounds too thin and too stiff on bass little boxy sound. Track: "Crash & Burn" - DBR62 easly win.

@-MarkWinston-

Жыл бұрын

The DBR62 has great details in the treble? DBR62 does better on Crash And Burn? A very unique of pair of ears you have. In Crash And Burn the DBR62 sounded blunt and scattered to me, it was unfocused, messy and all over the place.

@wirralchap

4 ай бұрын

​​@@-MarkWinston-DBR62 beats the kef handsomely.

У DBR62 мягкое, комфортное, тёплое звучание, думаю, их можно слушать долго и не уставать:)

both sound great kef very lively whereas the elacs a bit more subdued

E, if your really back in business can we finaly hear your Focal 806's compared to the Polk R200s and Diamond 12.2s with the Audilolab, Marrantz...one of your better amps. Thank you, Sir.

@DougMen1

Жыл бұрын

I would lik to hear those comparisons using the Rotel, S301 and AXR85 too, and maybe even the CXA61. The Audiolab and Marantz are good tonally but are too often compromised dynamically for me.

@davidcarr2216

Жыл бұрын

I'd like to hear the 806s with everything, against everything 😀

@DougMen1

Жыл бұрын

@@davidcarr2216 Let's go a step further, and request that E get the 906, and the Marantz 6007 and Denon PMA 600NE too. There's also the Rotel A11, and the Yamaha S701 and 801. I wonder how different they are from the A12 and the S301 and 501. Then we'd have almost all the under $1000 amps covered here

@davidcarr2216

Жыл бұрын

@@DougMen1 Ssssshhhhh. Remember to be nice 🙂

@DougMen1

Жыл бұрын

@@davidcarr2216 Just making my Christmas wish list for E to get, lol

To me the CXA81 notches both these speakers sound qualities up above the Yamaha R202 by one level at best. Slightly different. Slightly better, but I think there's less improvent with the R3s.

@davidcarr2216

Жыл бұрын

Kind of agree with you. It's still really easy to hear when the videoi switches from the DBR62s to the R3s, I don't think any amp will close that gap by much. Having said that, like most things audio, if you're not actually doing a side by side comparison, it might not bother you too much, that's if you even notice it !!

@williammiebach1798

Жыл бұрын

@@davidcarr2216I think It's true that we all percieve a components specific sound characteristics and flaws much more quicky and clearly in direct comparison to other components, particularly ones that are very different sounding, but I think with enough listening time, even without comparisons, we eventualy reach the same conclusions, mostly. Don't you think, Dave?

@davidcarr2216

Жыл бұрын

@@williammiebach1798 This is true. No matter how great you think a component is at the beginning, give it time and you'll start to notice a few little things which irritate you. This is Hi-Fi audio.

Give some oportunity to Klipsch R-51M :(

@eprojectEllie

Жыл бұрын

Thank you for your support!. Please allow me more time to shoot New video.

@davidcarr2216

Жыл бұрын

@@eprojectEllie We all love you E💗💗

I think the DBR 62s sound just about good enough here and nothing stands out as being annoying 😃 And got to bear in mind price point and application. $700 on Amazon currently. I'm sure someone will chime in and say there's better value out there. Polk ES20 is $399 and R200 is $750. Sheesh, the CXA81 is $1920 on Amazon.

@DougMen1

Жыл бұрын

I think it's even better with the CXA61, which was my favorite amp with the DBR62, because it's livelier than this amp, which is just what the Elac needs to sound at its best

@DougMen1

Жыл бұрын

The Q150 is $599. I'd take it over the DBR62, R200, 12.2, or Q350. It was the steal of the century when it was on sale for $300!

Kef

The DBR62 has low sensitivity and is on the same level as the LS50s. It will significantly get better with higher powered amps with higher damping factor for more control. Impedence isnt a problem here unlike the LS50 though. One thing better amps will not do is correct that dull sounding treble to where I personally want it to be. Just not enough air and sparkle.

@DougMen1

Жыл бұрын

I'm still trying to figure out why it sounds dull to us, because the only thing in Amir's measurements are the on-axis dip from 2.5-4.5khz, and the 1k-2k dip in the EIR. It has good wide dispersion and good high frequency response in the on axis and EIR curves, so there's nothing in the data to show why its highs sound dull and lacking, proving to me that our ears can perceive things that the data is still unable to show. Besides that, E's setup is nearfield, which is pretty much all direct sound and removes the room and dispersion and directivity from the equation.

@-MarkWinston-

Жыл бұрын

@@DougMen1 I have a few ideas why it sounds dull to us; imagine every speaker has its own characteristics, A. dull, B. mediocre, C. bright. These speakers are what they are. FR only tells us what sticks out (or recessed) in the overall scheme of things. So a neutral measuring dull speaker would sound dull, a neutral measuring bright speaker would sound bright. A tipped up top end (measured) of a dull speaker would sound neutral to us and a drooping treble response of bright speaker would sound balanced to us too. All this made worse in a direct comparison. This is just how we perceive things. All those measurements only show balance in a relative manner, it does not show what a speaker is doing to begin with. A singer can sing a song starting from C sharp and the same song starting from E flat and still remain in tune and balanced throughout the whole song, but the singer's highest note in both song will either smooth or ear piercing to us. I dont know how correctly I tried to describe this but thats one of the reasons I THINK that is causing many people to perceive the DBR62 as dull. Heck in comparison to the 12.2 (which has a bigger dip at 1-3khz) and the R200, it also sounded flat up top. I might be totally wrong but this is about as good as I can guess right now. Amir has stated that measurements can only indicate 70% of what a speaker would sound like, the other 30% needs actual listening. Thats 1/3rd of the whole process and its no small piece of the pie.

@PeterMacPL

Жыл бұрын

Mark Winston - "DBR62 has low sensivity" totally not agree lol. I had KEF Q100 and this have real low sensivity, DBR62 are much much louder at the same volume level. LS50 are quess are similar to Q100.

@-MarkWinston-

Жыл бұрын

@@PeterMacPL at a specced 86db, it is what I call below average and because it has an acute phase angle at around 120hz which will take away thump and slam, a more powerful amp is needed to drive them optimally. It is not as bad as the Meta, but still below average. 88db is where I draw the average line.

@DougMen1

Жыл бұрын

@@-MarkWinston- So, it's as I've always said, that our ears can perceive things that the data can't show, because of technical limitations that exist in the testing procedures that we have. Because otherwise, all neutral measuring speakers would sound neutral and there wouldn't be some that sound dull and some that sound bright. There's obviously something else going on that static measurements don't show, whether it's in the time arrival, or the distortion levels, or even the texture and character of the sound influenced by the materials used in the drivers. I actually think that it's because the dynamic character of a speaker playing constantly changing frequencies at constantly changing levels is only marginally related to static frequency response measurements, and we won't be able to completely and reliably predict how a speaker will sound until we have the technology to measure speakers dynamically while playing actual music.

Wow… huge difference from upper mid to high frequencies. DBR62 sounds dull & lifeless. R3 is crisp and tight… very typical of Kef; but still has body and some warmth.

@recepkyo

Жыл бұрын

when we think of the price difference dbr62 still wonderful. and yes kef excels more on high definition

@PeterMacPL

Жыл бұрын

R3 sound sometimes like plastic box. Too thin and too stiff, too much open. DBR62 much fuller sound, but also sometimes too much close. Both are not perfect but DBR62 are more similar to studio monitor sounding.