2 Proac speakers comparison

[Roy_L]

Hi all,

I used to own Proac's Response 2.5 a few years ago, and really liked them (maybe I shouldn't have sold them...).
I've spotted a few days ago an ad for a used pair of Response 3.8, which is supposed to be the model above the 2.5 of the same model year.

These are Stereophile's measurements of the 2.5:
https://www.stereophile.com/content/proac-response-25-loudspeaker-measurements

And these are the 3.8's measurements:
https://www.stereophile.com/content/proac-response-38-loudspeaker-measurements

How do these measure against one another? is the 3.8 really an upgrade compared to the 2.5?
Also, how well do you think they measure in general? Quite curious about that.

Thanks!

 

[Southall-1998]

Trust your ears, as some will say

Honestly, I can't help you. I'm sure someone will give the answer you need soon.

S.

 

[Roy_L]

Trusting my ears isn't that simple! Since I can't blind test the speakers, I highly regard objective measurements as a good way to deal with "wishful hearing" due to brand recognition and other predispositions. I may like a speaker despite not-so-stellar measurements; knowing them first helps me locate its disadvantages (especially given a short audition at someone's home), and deciding how critical it is for me, instead of realizing it much later after I've purchased it.

 

[Ilkless]

Both are just as dismally-engineered with the dispersion mismatch at crossover. 2.5 is more lumpy, but 3.8 is more prominent. I heard the usual haze, congestion and smear I get from such designs. I would love to hear the Living Voice and Acoustic Zen riffs on the Proac format, but I suspect if ATC/PMC can't engineer speakers right as purportedly engineering-led firms, what chance do these two brands have?

 

[Roy_L]

It's really interesting. I've owned at certain time periods the Acoustic Zen Adagio, and 4 different PMC models: tb2i, fb1i, twenty22 and twenty24. My impressions are as follows: the adagio was simply awful. I Sold it as soon as I could. It had very muffled highs, as if a blanket is covering the speakers. It did have nice, tight bass though. The earlier pmc models (the tb2i & fb1i) were actually quite good, especially the fb1i, which I really liked. It played clean, went low without noticeable distortion and had great imaging (maybe it was big enough for TL to make sense?). I held on to it for about 2 years (a lot of time in my book). The 22 and the 24 were really bad and disappointing, correlating very well with Amir's review. I sold them almost immediately. I couldn't believe what a huge step back they were- they both simply sounded as if they're broken or something. Sharp, unpleasant highs and thin lows. My predisposition due to my good experience with the fb1i couldn't mask how bad they were.

P.s.- see the following link for fb1i's FR measurements:
https://www.hometheater.co.il/p-1.article01469.html

(It's in hebrew. The 1st graph is from listening position, the 2nd from 1 meter away and third from 20 milimeters, facing the tweeter).

 

[Beave]

Both sets of Stereophile measurements for the two Proac speakers are mediocre. I've seen a lot worse - and a lot better.

The 2.5 model uses a good woofer and a good tweeter, but the two don't mate together well. That 7" woofer is good for bass but starts to have problems in the midrange. And the 0.75" tweeter in that model can't be crossed over low. So you have good bass, good highs, but a mess in the middle. The on-axis response is decent, not great, but the off-axis response shows that mating those two drivers isn't a good idea due to directivity mismatch. They need a midrange driver between them.

Same goes for the 3.8 model, which appears to just add another 7" Scanspeak woofer (review says it's a three-way but it looks like it's a two way or two and a half way). Instead of two 7" woofers, they should have used a smaller midrange (4-5") to mate with that woofer and that tweeter. As it is, it has decent on axis response, but probably with some exaggerated midbass, and poor off axis response due to the directivity mismatch of the 7" woofer and the tweeter.

Also, both appear to have an odd port resonance in the upper bass (around 150Hz).

Both have low sensitivity for towers, but with easy impedances.

 

[richard12511]

Hi all,

I used to own Proac's Response 2.5 a few years ago, and really liked them (maybe I shouldn't have sold them...).
I've spotted a few days ago an ad for a used pair of Response 3.8, which is supposed to be the model above the 2.5 of the same model year.

These are Stereophile's measurements of the 2.5:
https://www.stereophile.com/content/proac-response-25-loudspeaker-measurements

And these are the 3.8's measurements:
https://www.stereophile.com/content/proac-response-38-loudspeaker-measurements

How do these measure against one another? is the 3.8 really an upgrade compared to the 2.5?
Also, how well do you think they measure in general? Quite curious about that.

Thanks!

Looks like they’re targeting a v curve. A minority of people prefer that to a more classically neutral curve.

 

[Roy_L]

I've noticed it. Nothing wrong with that for me if it's not exaggerated, and as long as everything else measures well. I've kinda let go of the notion that a speaker must be entirely neural. However, it must sound clean, undistorted, unbloated etc. This can be true for both neutral and "v curve" speakers.

 

[Darvis]

I think a neutral speaker is a safer buy, you can always tailor the sound with an EQ if you so wish. Have you tried any Dynaudio? I could be wrong but there's a good chance you'd like them. And they're very popular, so you'll find some second hand without too much difficulty.

 

[Roy_L]

As a matter of fact, there is also a 2nd hand pair of Dynaudio Contour S3.4 (not the LE). I'm sure that they're good (maybe even very good), and I have no doubt that Dynaudio are a very capable manufacturer who knows what they're doing. However... I just can't get past the industrial design (i.e. they're ugly).

 

[Darvis]

I know, they're really monkey's ass ugly

Well, the expensive ones at least, weirdly enough, the not so expensive are OK, even if very simple looking. The Evoke 50 for instance https://www.dynaudio.com/home-audio/evoke/evoke-50?c=walnutwood#gallery

 

[VintageFlanker]

I know, they're really monkey's ass ugly

Well, the expensive ones at least, weirdly enough, the not so expensive are OK, even if very simple looking. The Evoke 50 for instance https://www.dynaudio.com/home-audio/evoke/evoke-50?c=walnutwood#gallery
View attachment 73334

The Contour line actually looks good to me...

Sad I can't afford any of it (yet).

 

[Roy_L]

The bookshelf speakers looks real nice and classic. The floorstanders looks kinda regular... like something form the early to mid 2000's...

 

[A Surfer]

I like the looks. A classic look never goes out of style and avoids trying to be trendy. Trendy gets dated looking really quickly.

 

[Ilkless]

I've noticed it. Nothing wrong with that for me if it's not exaggerated, and as long as everything else measures well. I've kinda let go of the notion that a speaker must be entirely neural. However, it must sound clean, undistorted, unbloated etc. This can be true for both neutral and "v curve" speakers.

That's the school of thought modern Sonus Faber adheres too. Good engineering, good dispersion but a bit of a V-shaped curve.

 

[Darvis]

The Contour line actually looks good to me...
Sad I can't afford any of it (yet).

That plastic plate looks gaudy (to me), like the old kef reference

 

[Darvis]

It's really interesting. I've owned at certain time periods the Acoustic Zen Adagio, and 4 different PMC models: tb2i, fb1i, twenty22 and twenty24. My impressions are as follows: the adagio was simply awful. I Sold it as soon as I could. It had very muffled highs, as if a blanket is covering the speakers. It did have nice, tight bass though. The earlier pmc models (the tb2i & fb1i) were actually quite good, especially the fb1i, which I really liked. It played clean, went low without noticeable distortion and had great imaging (maybe it was big enough for TL to make sense?). I held on to it for about 2 years (a lot of time in my book). The 22 and the 24 were really bad and disappointing, correlating very well with Amir's review. I sold them almost immediately. I couldn't believe what a huge step back they were- they both simply sounded as if they're broken or something. Sharp, unpleasant highs and thin lows. My predisposition due to my good experience with the fb1i couldn't mask how bad they were.

P.s.- see the following link for fb1i's FR measurements:
https://www.hometheater.co.il/p-1.article01469.html

(It's in hebrew. The 1st graph is from listening position, the 2nd from 1 meter away and third from 20 milimeters, facing the tweeter).

Since you link an article in Hebrew you probably live in Israel. If so, you could also keep an eye on French sites, in summer they sometimes heavily discount French brands (Focal, Triangle...). You have also access to https://arendalsound.eu which measure spectacularly. I'm seriously considering the 1723s Tower and center for myself. The VAT shenanigans and shipment out of the EU could be expensive (or not, Idk) best to ask them.

 

[Roy_L]

Since you link an article in Hebrew you probably live in Israel. If so, you could also keep an eye on French sites,

Thanks for the link! Will look into it. I am in fact looking into such sites every now and then. The problem usually is shipping costs of such heavy and large objects (not to mention customs...). Speaking of good international-shipping stores in Europe, I usually order smaller items from this store in the UK: https://www.analogueseduction.net/

(BTW, I do live in Israel, and I appreciate your trust in my linguistical prowess, but in fact I'm versed in only 4 languages: Hebrew, bad Hebrew, English & bad English. Regarding French, I'm as limited to google translate as the rest of us non French/Quebeckers/Belgians )

 

[Roy_L]

That's the school of thought modern Sonus Faber adheres too. Good engineering, good dispersion but a bit of a V-shaped curve.

I've had and auditioned several SF speakers (I've experienced so many speakers because I used to work in a hifi store for 3 years, as a student, had lots of equipemnt on a loan).
They are no doubt well crafted and well engineered. The thing is, that SF had several different eras, making them fairly inconsistent voicing-wise.

 

[Ilkless]

I've had and auditioned several SF speakers (I've experienced so many speakers because I used to work in a hifi store for 3 years, as a student, had lots of equipemnt on a loan).
They are no doubt well crafted and well engineered. The thing is, that SF had several different eras, making them fairly inconsistent voicing-wise.

Everything from Venere, Chameleon and Sonetto onwards appears than much less idiosyncratic. Stuff like the Extrema are from a different time. But yes, agreed on inconsistency. For Italian speakers I've always preferred Chario and Opera - Opera in particular for straightforward, solid engineering and great drivers for the price (Scanspeak Classic or SEAS Prestige). Are you looking for new floorstanders? What's your budget and where are you located?