Infinity R162 Bookshelf Speaker Review

[BYRTT]

I live in germany there is no such low price.I update my profile and add country
cost around 850 eur new. the horizontal diirectivtity diagram look good. but i want also vertical a good one. because then the area in cm 2 of reflections is biggest and vertical is not good on the aria 906.so much less cm ^2 than R162 . the tweater of aria 906 look identical in horizontal and vertical, maybe the small waveguide givt the worse results

Thanks update profile, i cant understand you say 850€, did you go to that French link (Here: https://www.homecinesolutions.fr/) and pick Aria 906, they offer 269€ per speaker (538€ a pair) in dark ebony colour and at 10. of November (look at the right side of product page) they can offer in Walnut (Noyer) colour for 249€ (498€ a pair), and should you not like their sound then return them to France and call it a audio experience ..

Can see R162 looks spead wider in verticals but remember if they down the road open up for a new sales batch that overseas shipping is probably costly and German customs will probably tax you for vat and import fee.

Here is good old radar animations overlaid for those two..

Here are overlaid animation those two for the 9 directivity curves that when avaraged form the listening window in Spinorama plot, note they normalized to on axis..

And here are overlaid animation of early reflections hor/ver for those two..

 

[bennybbbx]

Thanks update profile, i cant understand you say 850€, did you go to that French link (Here: https://www.homecinesolutions.fr/) and pick Aria 906, they offer 269€ per speaker (538€ a pair) in dark ebony colour and at 10. of November (look at the right side of product page) they can offer in Walnut (Noyer) colour for 249€ (498€ a pair), and should you not like their sound then return them to France and call it a audio experience ..

in the diagram the r 162 look better. or do i maybe understand diagram wrong. when 162 data is show then r 162 is on right side black ?. also the radar animations are hard for me to read. for wide stereo is maybe the presonus eris e44 better. at least their marketing say it have a large stereo width.

 

[Alice of Old Vincennes]

in the diagram the r 162 look better. or do i maybe understand diagram wrong. when 162 data is show then r 162 is on right side black ?. also the radar animations are hard for me to read. for wide stereo is maybe the presonus eris e44 better. at least their marketing say it have a large stereo width.

You will love the Infinity.

 

[BYRTT]

in the diagram the r 162 look better. or do i maybe understand diagram wrong. when 162 data is show then r 162 is on right side black ?. also the radar animations are hard for me to read. for wide stereo is maybe the presonus eris e44 better. at least their marketing say it have a large stereo width.

Yes black colour is the actice graph in the animations, shure R162 looks good and sounds like its your personal preference and the one to go for but in the technical objective Harman preference rating list Aria 906 score bit higher than R162, link preference list: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...i_eE1JS-JQYSZy7kCQZMKtRnjTOn578fYZPJ/pubhtml#..

 

[ClassicGuy]

@BillG I just ordered an Infinity R152, how much am I missing out by not going with R162?

 

[Alice of Old Vincennes]

@BillG I just ordered an Infinity R152, how much am I missing out by not going with R162?

Not much. 152 will integrate with tweeter better.

 

[ClassicGuy]

It's interesting that the R162 has lower preference rating than the Pioneer BS22, and lower preference rating w/ sub than the Sony SSCS5. Yet R162 is considered an upgrade from both of them. Is it a failing of the preference rating in terms of assigning appropriate weight?

 

[Cahudson42]

Is it a failing of the preference rating

'Value' of the Preference Rating gets debated ad nauseum.. Personally, I look at it on a 'pass/fail' basis. Over 4, pass. Speaker worth looking further at. Under 4, forget it. Look elsewhere.

Meaningful to a single digit - at most.

 

[BillG]

@BillG I just ordered an Infinity R152, how much am I missing out by not going with R162?

I own both. The only thing you'll be missing with the 152 is deeper bass extension. Backing them up close to a wall - 3 to 6 inches - will noticeably mitigate that, though.

 

[ClassicGuy]

'Value' of the Preference Rating gets debated ad nauseum.. Personally, I look at it on a 'pass/fail' basis. Over 4, pass. Speaker worth looking further at. Under 4, forget it. Look elsewhere.

After looking through a few reviews, I wonder if the Preference Rating is even useful. The Wharfedale Diamond 220 wasn't even above a 4.

 

[More Dynamics Please]

It's easy enough to interpret that a speaker that scores a below average preference rating without sub and an average or better preference
rating with sub is losing points for below average low bass performance. All aspects of the reviews, both objective and subjective, need to be considered in proper context.

 

[ClassicGuy]

It's easy enough to interpret that a speaker that scores a below average preference rating without sub and an average or better preference
rating with sub is losing points for below average low bass performance. All aspects of the reviews, both objective and subjective, need to be considered in proper context.

Thanks for the reply. Both Wharfedale 220 and Infinity R168 score worse than Pioneer BS22 or Sony SSCS5 with subs. I understand the scores are just for reference, so I won't belabor the point.

 

[Cocktails]

Hi, first post here after reading many reviews and learning a lot!
The review mentioned that

it doesn't take long until that extra treble energy gets to you. I played with a few EQ settings and the one that worked best was aimed at reducing the distortion shown earlier:

Would that be automatically corrected when running an AV receiver calibration using Audyssey or the likes? Or does it require manual intervention afterwards?

 

[BillG]

@AudioQuestShill asked me to design an EQ for this speaker
Here it is.

Hello Maiky,

First of all, thanks for the EQ profile for the 162's. I'm using it as you read this and am quite happy with the result.

I was wondering if you've happened to come across accurate measurements for their little brother, the 152's, from which you could create a profile from as well? I'm actually surprised no one has sent one to @amirm to analyze seeing as they're quite popular, too. I would, since I own them as well, but I'm in New Zealand and the shipping would probably cost as much as the speaker itself.

Kind regards,
Bill

 

[ClassicGuy]

Received my R152s a few days ago, love them. They easily outperform all my other speakers, and I especially love the clarity these speakers provide. I wish there are more reviews out there for the R152s as well.

 

[Maiky76]

Hello Maiky,

First of all, thanks for the EQ profile for the 162's. I'm using it as you read this and am quite happy with the result.

I was wondering if you've happened to come across accurate measurements for their little brother, the 152's, from which you could create a profile from as well? I'm actually surprised no one has sent one to @amirm to analyze seeing as they're quite popular, too. I would, since I own them as well, but I'm in New Zealand and the shipping would probably cost as much as the speaker itself.

Kind regards,
Bill

I don't have the data, if you can find the spinorama (even a graph is fine) I may be able to help otherwise, sorry, I can't do anything.

 

[boselover61]

I don't have the data, if you can find the spinorama (even a graph is fine) I may be able to help otherwise, sorry, I can't do anything.

You can see here the spinorama provided by Harman, not sure if accurate tho.

 

[Maiky76]

@BillG, @boselover61
There you go:

Some notes to start:

• The scores are only indicative as the resolution of the scans, although interpolated to a correct 1/20th octave step, is most probably too coarse, especially since we have no information regarding the calculation of the ER which may or may not be off like for the NFS’.
• The calculated scores are not directly comparable to the others form ASR but I would be inclined to say that the EQ benefits are correctly captured

The raw data:
Score no EQ: 5.13
with sub: 7.54
Score no EQ:
With Sub:
Spinorama with no EQ:

• Not as Flat as i would expect?
• Some issues in the 800-2000Hz range
• Probably need to play with toe-in 10deg or more and have the axis crossing in front of the listening location, to get the right balance

EQ design:
I have generated one EQ.
The APO config file is attached.

Score EQ Score: 6.31
with sub: 8.64

Infinity R152 APO EQ Score 96000Hz
December112020-134007

Preamp: -1.8 dB

Filter 1: ON HPQ Fc 54.6 Hz Gain 0 dB Q 1.16
Filter 2: ON PK Fc 120 Hz Gain -2 dB Q 1.6
Filter 3: ON PK Fc 962 Hz Gain -1.48 dB Q 6
Filter 4: ON PK Fc 1343 Hz Gain -2.1 dB Q 5.2
Filter 5: ON PK Fc 1830 Hz Gain -1.55 dB Q 3.11
Filter 6: ON PK Fc 2608 Hz Gain 2.17 dB Q 1.14
Filter 7: ON PK Fc 4552 Hz Gain -1 dB Q 1
Filter 8: ON PK Fc 14244 Hz Gain -1.66 dB Q 0.97

Spinorama EQ Score

Zoom PIR-LW-ON

Radar no EQ vs EQ score
Nice improvements

 

[boselover61]

My in room measurement. Nothing terribly wrong except for room mode. Fairly neutral in the mid and a little peaks in the high. This speaker is great!

 

[boselover61]

Dialed in some EQ filters and now it's a lot better... The sound is very natural! just a bit bright but that's ok for my old ears