Elac Uni-Fi 2.0 Review (bookshelf speaker)

[amirm]

Don't need an NFS to see that you are a goon.

This is not proper language in this forum. Please try to be cordial.

 

[Rock Rabbit]

It's truly amazing what computers can accomplish nowadays.

It seems they can't understand graph information, but if you really take the time you can see clear resonance issues (no music neccessary for this) at 585 Hz. But in doubt you can (again) see same indication of resonance in the other model at 500 Hz (due to box size difference), so it's not a damaged unit.
Worst than that, in this thread AJ has confirmed a 600 Hz resonance (I suppose you read that (?)), he read first of the resonance here!,....so he's not wasting time at all, he extracted useful information from the thread, as you know he read all 15 pages first!...before emitting any opinion.
It seems that you follow this from day 1 as I do, then you know that the external test don't meet same level at far field (he don't even look for resonances as suggested), as sound velocity depends heavily on temperature the resonance frequency could change a bit and could not be triggered by same music note, specially if not tested at same power.

 

[JohnBooty]

It seems they can't understand graph information

I understand them quite well. Some things point to a design issue, some (such as the other poster's recording that does not exhibit the issue) point to damage or other source of unit variance. As Amir himself said,

No one knows at this point what is going on, shipping damage or otherwise. First step is Andrew replicating the problem and then he can investigate what is causing it

...so I don't think I'm being particularly controversial there! I'll be ignoring you after posting this and I suggest you do likewise. This is not adding to the discussion. Nobody wants to read this. Please stop insulting people.

 

[SmackDaddies]

I understand them quite well. Some things point to a design issue, some (such as the other poster's recording that does not exhibit the issue) point to damage or other source of unit variance. As Amir himself said,

...so I don't think I'm being particularly controversial there! I'll be ignoring you after posting this and I suggest you do likewise. This is not adding to the discussion. Nobody wants to read this. Please stop insulting people.

Besides, if anyone is going to insult JohnBooty, it will be me

 

[Rock Rabbit]

I understand them quite well. Some things point to a design issue, some (such as the other poster's recording that does not exhibit the issue) point to damage or other source of unit variance. As Amir himself said,

...so I don't think I'm being particularly controversial there! I'll be ignoring you after posting this and I suggest you do likewise. This is not adding to the discussion. Nobody wants to read this. Please stop insulting people.

Sorry for the confusion (if any)...but I don't insult you, I only answer in the same tone that you use, and only with facts deduced from the reviewer and A. Jones measurements at same frequency...that's all

 

[boselover61]

Regardless of the discussions going on and the conclusion from amir; you can make your own conclusion on whether you would like the sound signature of these elacs or not looking at the graphs provided. I doubt most have the power capability to listen as loud as Amir did to recreate the tin can sound. It is a broken design if you listen loud but it you dont then its probably fine is my conclusion

 

[More Dynamics Please]

No need to rush into choosing between the two possible conclusions reached in the review that there is either a design issue or an individual unit issue when the speaker's designer is in process of scheduling tests to provide the definitive conclusion.

 

[NgtFlyer]

This is happening. No one knows at this point what is going on, shipping damage or otherwise. First step is Andrew replicating the problem and then he can investigate what is causing it. He is in contact with the owner to acquire his pair for testing.

This is one of the reasons I am proud to own and use a pair of Elac speakers of Andrew's design. Even my "basic" Debut 2.0 B6.2 make me happy every time I sit down for some music listening with them. I hope the issue is found and resolved. Will keep an eye out here to see if there are updates.

 

[hardisj]

No, no. All listening is performed in my 2-channel listening room, not in the garage:

I really wish you had gone with the dungeon narrative.

 

[hardisj]

Besides, if anyone is going to insult JohnsBooty, it will be me

Fixed it for you.

And, yea, John does have a messed up Booty.

 

[Vini darko]

@New Record Day welcome Ron good to see you here m8. Enjoy your channel.
Also aways great to see the designers of products getting involed be it a positive or negative review.

 

[BYRTT]

Uni-Fi 2.0 curves so far side by side to its popular Elac brother DBR62, thanks publish and share the data Amir ..

 

[richard12511]

Uni-Fi 2.0 curves so far side by side to its popular Elac brother DBR62, thanks publish and share the data Amir ..
View attachment 106227
View attachment 106228

Really close, but the Uni-fi does look a little better overall(to my eye).

 

[Rock Rabbit]

Uni-Fi 2.0 curves so far side by side to its popular Elac brother DBR62, thanks publish and share the data Amir ..
View attachment 106227
View attachment 106228

Same with distortion please

 

[Rock Rabbit]

And to see the problems with temperature, ...and with some people too
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...eumann-kh80-dsp-monitor-measurements-3.14637/

 

[mtmpenn]

Disclaimer: I am hoping to learn and not trying to stir the pot:

Those both look relatively good to me, with maybe similar voicing. More perplexing still is the fact that the DBR62 seems to have a worse resonance near 600hz than the uni-fi, at least in the on-axis/listening window/PIR curves.

Do I have that right? What am I missing and/or is their something that can be pointed to on those graphs to explain the subjective performance discrepancy?

 

[GimeDsp]

I had these speakers and they didn't sound balanced at all. They smelled horrible of chemicals and had to go back. Even with there return policy they put up a fight for the return. Too bad!

 

[BYRTT]

Really close, but the Uni-fi does look a little better overall(to my eye).

Tend to agree that's the case looking those objective curves in isolation, but how they are percieved subjective with music playing in a real world room is probably not garuanteed to get exactly same conclusion ..

Here they are in overlaid animation using same DI EQ policy..

 

[thewas]

Tend to agree that's the case looking those objective curves in isolation, but how they are percieved subjective with music playing in a real world room is probably not garuanteed to get exactly same conclusion ..

Definitely not for a single listener but rather a trend for a large population sample size
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...tc-speakers-monitors.17448/page-6#post-638184

 

[BYRTT]

Same with distortion please

What Amir share into post 1 per acoustic review is spindata txt-files, so sorry that to print your request one will need the physical impulse response wav-file from the sweep and also to directly compare them prints think it must be important that the two DUTs had absolute 100% exactly same conditions.