This is highly relevant. Two speakers with very similar scores sound different such that you prefer one over the other. Surely it is apparent from just this simple observation that the score is not a perfect predictor of how satisfied an individual will be with a given speaker.
By the way, I am interested in knowing why you preferred the R162 over the B6.2. Did one sound "brighter" than the other? Did the bass in one seem adequate, or possibly "boomy"? I've heard the B6.2, and I thought it sounded quite good although in need of subwoofer augmentation as I expect the R162 would be as well. But I haven't had an opportunity to hear the R162, and havn't even seen any Infinity home speakers in a store since about the time that Circuit City folded. So I'm curious to know more about how one sounded different from the other.
Howdy, alright even though pretty off topic here goes & just to remind as I said for this comparison they are both eq'd to my house curve.
That curve is FLAT from 200hrz-1000hrz then drops slightly more than 1db per octave to 10k with a faster drop from 10k-20k. Bass rises from 200hrz down to 50hrz and is 6db higher at 50hrz with no rise beyond 50hrz.
My room is not lively.
Additionally both speakers are high passed at 35hrz and the R162 is low passed at 18k (6db down at 18k)
The speakers are 9 feet apart and I am a 9-10 feet away. I have never used either in the nearfield.
By the way I have never listened to the ELAC without EQ. I have listen very much to the R162 without EQ.
Both speakers would benefit from a subwoofer. In fact I have never had a two way speaker that would not. It simply cleans up the bass and I don't ultimately want a 6" woofer trying to hit 40hrz at 95db. That said both speakers sound great in the bass department sans sub. I am very impressed.
Neither speaker is "boomy". Yes I have room modes to tame, this not the speakers fault. There is no boom and the PEQ cuts the modes back.
The bass in both is articulate and slightly warm.
The frequency response is very similar due to the EQ, neither speaker is currently EQ'd beyond 800 hrz. (well the R162 is low passed at 18k so essentially that does EQ that slight something hard to describe up there... ringing? The ELAC is falling by itself up there)
Anyway both speakers have a Harman score of around 5. (EQ brings them both up)
In a nutshell my GF said it best. We listened to the ELAC together for awhile. She loves listening and she really enjoyed the session. I asked her how the speakers sounded and she great they did a great job and loved the tunes, except they don't really have a soul like some of my others actually pointing to the R162 as an example of a speaker with "soul".
IMHPO, that is what I get as well, they sound excellent but somehow inexplicably have this "going through the hifi motions" kind of sound. The system is very neutral (tonally) and well presented and balanced (frequency wise) but somehow it just doesn't hit my heart. Additionally there is this etched quality, a quality that is very subtle but when another speaker doesn't have that it stands out a bit. I actually think a lot of folks will quite like that "etched" quality by the way and I don't mind it but it plays second fiddle to the R162 for my tastes.
The R162 is more lively in the very upper treble. That is why I cut it there. Seems like that might not do much but it does IMHO, some bright edge, a near impossible to hear edge is now gone. (I realize some folks call this the "AIR" zone)
The speaker is very detailed and in this subtle ways "flows" when the ELAC is "etched".
The ELAC seems to congest in the lower mids and upper bass when played loud. The R162 is not doing this and honestly it seems to handle high volume much better. Important for me as I listen fairly loud or at least high medium (depending on mood somewhere between 82-90db C weighted pink noise) The R162 begs to be turned up and up.
"Je ne sais quoi" So what is up here? I can not really say. I know having been able to hear both I found a meaningful difference and I am not sure where that difference shows up in the data.
They are both beyond decent speakers that really, really surprise for the costs on sale ($200 ELAC and $160 R162) and neither is a fully mature speaker.
I really think 10 people out of 20 would pick each speaker set up how I have them.
I had the same experience with the JBL 530 vs the REVEL M105. Both are excellent and Harman score rated well here (Amir did not like the 530 much though) but I picked the 530 and honestly as good as the M105 was, IMHPO it did not have that ""Je ne sais quoi", that somehow the 530 has for me.
Now this is all subtle AND very important to my enjoyment and I rate all 4 mentioned speakers as EASILY worth giving a shot at.
How this relates to Amir truly disliking the SVS speaker and loving the Revel gear I don't know. I hope in some small way it does. My apologizes guys.