• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

ELAC Debut 2.0 B6.2 Speaker Review

edechamps

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Nov 21, 2018
Messages
910
Likes
3,620
Location
London, United Kingdom
I have added the Elac Debut 2.0 B6.2 speaker to Loudspeaker Explorer where it can be compared to other speakers.

Good consistency within the listening window:

visualization(119).png
 
Last edited:

ROOSKIE

Major Contributor
Joined
Feb 27, 2020
Messages
1,915
Likes
3,394
Location
Minneapolis
No Audiophile did a review and measurements of the little sibling B5.2, linked below for those considering the smaller version.

http://noaudiophile.com/ELAC_B5-2/
I had the B5.2 at my house for a few weeks. They were $135 around the holiday and hard to pass up at least to try.

No Audiophile, says they had no bass but my set had very reasonable bass for a 5.25. Nothing special but not off the norm. It wasn't enough on it's own for my tastes but I expect that for the small size. This was in a smaller side of medium sized living room.

For some reason, at least in my room, it sounded wonderful at low and moderate volumes. Above my normal experience though I tend to listen medium loud to fairly loudly so my low volume notes are not all that expert.

The treble had a slight grain and bit of etching that I actually found pleasing. It was a bit like sharpening a photo image for print. I am not sure what to attribute that to. It really stood out in direct comparison to sever other speakers I was playing with.

In the end I was/am more interested in the larger B6.2 thus I sold the B5.2 and purchased the B6.2 to see where that one landed.

I did not make any measurements of them.
 

JohnBooty

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Jul 24, 2018
Messages
632
Likes
1,555
Location
Philadelphia area
Yeah, this could be where frequency weighting comes into play. The formula uses log-spacing, but the presence region which includes the 2kHz-4kHz region, doesn’t get a ton of weighting.
I'm confused! (Not that it's hard to confuse me)

Log spacing? The Notes tab on the Preference Score spreadsheet says, "This formula does not weight frequencies differently." I'm probably missing something basic here.

It would certainly seem to me (a hobbyist, not an expert) that some frequencies are vastly more important. Fundamental voice frequencies being most crucial, followed by the fundamental frequencies of most music (which would generally be below 1-2khz for most music, though up to 4khz in some cases)

But I'm a newborn baby in terms of knowledge compared to a lot of folks here.
 

MZKM

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Dec 1, 2018
Messages
4,240
Likes
11,462
Location
Land O’ Lakes, FL
I'm confused! (Not that it's hard to confuse me)

Log spacing? The Notes tab on the Preference Score spreadsheet says, "This formula does not weight frequencies differently." I'm probably missing something basic here.

It would certainly seem to me (a hobbyist, not an expert) that some frequencies are vastly more important. Fundamental voice frequencies being most crucial, followed by the fundamental frequencies of most music (which would generally be below 1-2khz for most music, though up to 4khz in some cases)

But I'm a newborn baby in terms of knowledge compared to a lot of folks here.
Here is this speaker with no adjustments of spacing (linear):
Screen Shot 2020-06-22 at 7.06.38 PM.png


Anytime you see a speaker measurement, it's using log spacing for the frequencies. I edited my Notes section for clarification.

So, the spacing you see between frequencies in the standard graphs is the weighting applied.

I wish something could be done to weight based on the Equal Loudness Contours, but that would require an intensive study, and it seems no company capable of funding this is interested these days.
 
Last edited:

Selah Audio

Active Member
Audio Company
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 4, 2020
Messages
194
Likes
445
It seems the upgrade cost (it’s DIY mind you) is $345?! That‘s about $700 + your time if you bought these at MSRP.

I would just get a more expensive, better speaker.

I would like to see measurements comparing where the crossover is identical except one model is using cheaper parts and another is using more expensive parts. Maybe the next time someone sends Amir a DIY speaker :)

Measurements without 1/3 octave smoothing would help too. Swapping out parts is problematic because changes in the d.c. resistance of the inductors and ESR in capacitors can affect the transfer function of the crossover.
 

JohnBooty

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Jul 24, 2018
Messages
632
Likes
1,555
Location
Philadelphia area
So, the spacing you see between frequencies in the standard graphs is the weighting applied.
Ah, that makes sense. Weighting based on the log of the frequency makes sense in lieu of something more precise. Better than nothing, I suppose. Thanks for the clarification!
 

bobbooo

Major Contributor
Joined
Aug 30, 2019
Messages
1,479
Likes
2,079
Thanks once again for an excellent review and set of measurements @amirm. That's now measurements of three of the top four speakers from Wirecutter's / New York Time's Best Bookshelf Speakers (priced ~$100-$500), which they say was decided by blind listening tests using an ABX switching device. They also reference Floyd Toole and mention they've taken training courses from Audio Precision. Although obviously not to the level of a scientific study, this is far better than most audiophile publications which don't even attempt any blind testing at all.

Their order of preference from these blind tests seems to agree with the preference scores calculated from the Klippel data, which adds corroborative support to both. It would be great to see if this holds further by getting Klippel measurements of their top pick, the Q Acoustics 3020i, or the 3020 (without the i) which was their previous year's top pick, and can be had for a more reasonable $229 a pair from Amazon. (The 3020i seems a bit overpriced, getting outside the 'budget' range at close to $100 more, for what I suspect is minimal if any noticeable improvement over the 3020 model.)
 
Last edited:

ROOSKIE

Major Contributor
Joined
Feb 27, 2020
Messages
1,915
Likes
3,394
Location
Minneapolis
What are "tube connectors" and what do they supposedly do?
You buy tube connectors and waste time installing and then D. R. buys beer.
 

mhardy6647

Grand Contributor
Joined
Dec 12, 2019
Messages
11,211
Likes
24,170
The Boss's subjective response to these is a lot like mine.
I've fiddled around with my pair (purchased very cheap in late 2018 when they were available from pretty much all vendors at a special sale price of $199 the pair or thereabouts) and... they're just not quite right. The do have image nicely, though -- I'll give them that. Unexciting is a pretty apt description of what they [don't] bring to the table. :(



DSC_6484 (2) by Mark Hardy, on Flickr

DSC_3816 by Mark Hardy, on Flickr
 

Cahudson42

Major Contributor
Joined
Sep 21, 2019
Messages
1,083
Likes
1,556
We really need Amir to review those $59 Tube Connectors. The Piggy Bank Panther needs more exercise..:)
 

Dennis Murphy

Major Contributor
Technical Expert
Joined
Mar 17, 2020
Messages
1,071
Likes
4,535
Thanks once again for an excellent review and set of measurements @amirm. That's now measurements of three of the top four speakers from Wirecutter's / New York Time's Best Bookshelf Speakers (priced ~$100-$500), which they say was decided by blind listening tests using an ABX switching device. They also reference Floyd Toole and mention they've taken training courses from Audio Precision. Although obviously not to the level of a scientific study, this is far better than most audiophile publications which don't even attempt any blind testing at all.

Their order of preference from these blind tests seems to agree with the preference scores calculated from the Klippel data, which adds corroborative support to both. It would be great to see if this holds further by getting Klippel measurements of their top pick, the Q Acoustics 3020i, or the 3020 (without the i) which was their previous year's top pick, and can be had for a more reasonable $229 a pair from Amazon. (The 3020i seems a bit overpriced, getting outside the 'budget' range at close to $100 more, for what I suspect is minimal if any noticeable improvement over the 3020 model.)
Here are the NRC results for the 3200i https://www.soundstagenetwork.com/i...&catid=77:loudspeaker-measurements&Itemid=153 There are definitely directivity issues, but they didn't seem to bother the panelists. The distortion performance is certainly impressive.
 

ROOSKIE

Major Contributor
Joined
Feb 27, 2020
Messages
1,915
Likes
3,394
Location
Minneapolis
Here are the NRC results for the 3200i https://www.soundstagenetwork.com/i...&catid=77:loudspeaker-measurements&Itemid=153 There are definitely directivity issues, but they didn't seem to bother the panelists. The distortion performance is certainly impressive.
Yes that does have low distortion for a 5 incher, deff wonder how their 6incher stacks up.
Part of why the Q Acoustics speaker won is due to the nice ascetics.
The purpose was to pick the best speaker for "most" people to buy and not the absolute best sounding one. Some none-performance factors went into that choice.
What I took away was that they found the KEF q150 and ls50 to be universally better than all the budget systems bar none, and this is in a four person blind test. I find that very interesting. I liked the q150 at first and didn't so much care for the it after some longer listening.

Also the Pioneer budget is on clearance again for $80 a pair.
https://www.newegg.com/pioneer-sp-bs22-lr/p/N82E16882117424?item=9SIAMA9A624232&nm_mc=AFC-RAN-COM&cm_mmc=AFC-RAN-COM&utm_medium=affiliates&utm_source=afc-The+Wirecutter&AFFID=3249826&AFFNAME=The+Wirecutter&ACRID=1&ASUBID=EDTESTzz640&ASID=https://www.nytimes.com/wirecutter/reviews/best-bookshelf-speakers/&ranMID=44583&ranEAID=3249826&ranSiteID=7m8EnekPF5E-Tf2v2MTi_Gl4OHL0VOsBBg

PS also of note on this site, one of the lead audio reviewers at the Wirecutter, Brent Butterworth , uses Revel as his personal reference set - or at least did last I heard.
 

da Choge

Active Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Dec 31, 2018
Messages
231
Likes
220
Location
DFW
I bought a pair of these directly from Best Buy for under $200.00 well over a year ago for my upstairs bedroom setup. Amazon was having an epic sale of these for around $195.00? at the time and I took the Amazon ad back to the store a week after I bought these in person at Best Buy for $299.00 -- they refunded me the difference. They are great to listen to, especially how I have them setup in this bedroom with a sub, and they hardly need the sub. Would I rather have the DB62 References? Of course -- with their light gray/beige screens, the new Debut References even remind me of my first pair of Advents as a teenager back in 1972/73. Those were great and affordable speakers at the time. But, much larger than these bookshelf Debuts - they were almost floor-standing speakers and I had them setup as such. I always thought they were exceptional. Ahh, the good ole' days ;):rolleyes: . . . But these days -- well, these days are even better, despite all the craziness going on! :)
 

napilopez

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Oct 17, 2018
Messages
2,109
Likes
8,420
Location
NYC
Thanks once again for an excellent review and set of measurements @amirm. That's now measurements of three of the top four speakers from Wirecutter's / New York Time's Best Bookshelf Speakers (priced ~$100-$500), which they say was decided by blind listening tests using an ABX switching device. They also reference Floyd Toole and mention they've taken training courses from Audio Precision. Although obviously not to the level of a scientific study, this is far better than most audiophile publications which don't even attempt any blind testing at all.

Their order of preference from these blind tests seems to agree with the preference scores calculated from the Klippel data, which adds corroborative support to both. It would be great to see if this holds further by getting Klippel measurements of their top pick, the Q Acoustics 3020i, or the 3020 (without the i) which was their previous year's top pick, and can be had for a more reasonable $229 a pair from Amazon. (The 3020i seems a bit overpriced, getting outside the 'budget' range at close to $100 more, for what I suspect is minimal if any noticeable improvement over the 3020 model.)

Perhaps, but, the 3020i has 25 percent larger volume and cabinets are big part of the price at this level no? Plus Q acoustics seems to make better cabinets than most, tis kind of their whole thing.

Anyway, here's my spin for the 3020i and 3030i. Note the 3020i is an old measurement with the spin based off incomplete data(15 degree angles, rear measurements simulated), while the 3030i is a full measured spin.

3020i:
3020i spin 2.png


3030i:
3030i Spinorama.png


Clearly cut from the same cloth! Q Acoustics seems to have gone for a bit of an equal loudness contour tuning? Or a coincidence perhaps. The 3030i was the more neutral one to my ear though, which correlates with the flatter listening widnow.

The 3020i looks less jagged, but FWIW, my preference score calculations based on MZKM's sheet got me a 3.9/6.8/7.0 (Listening Window) for the 3020i and a 5.2/7.5/7.8 for the 3030i. Still determining how closely these tend to correlate with Amir's scores, but the differences do seem to follow the differences in captured measurements so far.

The Concept 20 follows a very similar trend btw (I didn't take bass measurements for it). It's interesting because the measurements are so similar to the 3020i, but you can see there's just a little less diffraction bunching:

Spin.png


There's definitely a bit of a house sound.
 
Last edited:

maty

Major Contributor
Joined
Dec 12, 2017
Messages
4,596
Likes
3,160
Location
Tarragona (Spain)
What are "tube connectors" and what do they supposedly do?

http://gr-research.com/electracabletubeconnectors.aspx

cutawayview.jpg


mountedview.jpg


Low mass and without ferromagnetics. It supplies you with the necessary parts, for the connection cables to the loudspeaker and inside loudspeaker and not only the latter.

In a couple of YouTube videos by Ron Brennay I have clearly appreciated the difference in sound, so live it has to be even bigger.

Neutrik's famous professional SpeakOn have no ferromagnetic components either and say the sound is better because of it. And low mass too. They are also better fixed. I guess Neutrik does not have a clue about making connectors.
 

3125b

Major Contributor
Joined
May 18, 2020
Messages
1,352
Likes
2,204
Location
Germany
Am I the only one who hates these fake wood vinyl finishes? They look so tacky ...
 
Top Bottom