AsciLab F6B Bookshelf Speaker Review

[kemmler3D]

The only problem is they’ll probably be a long wait.

In another thread someone mentioned getting their stuff in the US in (IIRC) 4 days. They are definitely using air freight. Now, what that entails for shipping to your country and how expeditious your local customs officers are are different questions.

 

[phoenixdogfan]

I feel like I should buy a pair purely out of respect for how great they've been shown to be.

I look forward to seeing their next effort put under the scrutiny of our Audio sage , thanks for showing these off in your review Amirm .

Congratulations and thanks to all at AsciLab. Buying in the UK being super simple as Keith of Purite is keeping these in house too !

Thats the only decent thing about the UK at the moment, finally some national competitive advantage ( beyond our common tongue) , how truly novel ha ha

I think the one to wait for if you're willing to spend is the A6b which will compete with the Kef Reference 1 and the March Audio Sointuiva for the title of world's best passive bookshelf.

 

[Matt_Holland]

I think the one to wait for if you're willing to spend is the A6b which will compete with the Kef Reference 1 and the March Audio Sointuiva for the title of world's best passive bookshelf.

Didn’t they also announce S6B? Which is like A6B but uses the Purify tweeter?
That’s the one to wait for I reckon, although A6B will be exceptional no doubt.

 

[Purité Audio]

S6B C6C shootout!
Keith

 

[SMen]

S6B C6C shootout!
Keith

I think I am right but you have compared the C6B and F6B, albeit briefly? Don't want to break any forum rules ... but I was just looking up these in the UK and could not help but notice.

 

[Karmacoma]

It is so impressive for a FIRST design from this company that I'm at a point I'm wondering what will their next line will look like in a couple of years or so. Right now I'm happy with what I got but the possibility I'll buy one of their product in the coming years is very high! I can't wait for their cardioïd designs to be reviewed.
But, first things first, they need to make deals with some distributors in EU.

 

[Stick Figure]

Can you play it loud?

 

[Matt_Holland]

But, first things first, they need to make deals with some distributors in EU.

Ascilab alluded to this in an earlier post, possibly in the main thread, that they need dealers and distributors to compromise on the margin share in order to make the current end user pricing work.
What I think they need are importer/reseller partners who can offer local direct to end user sales from a good level of stock. I think the traditional distribution->dealer->customer model is dying anyway and I’m not sure that the legacy hifi press will give the brand the backing it will need to exist via traditional hifi retail channels at the current retail price points which look to not have room for the margins expected by both distributor and dealer.

 

[Purité Audio]

I think I am right but you have compared the C6B and F6B, albeit briefly? Don't want to break any forum rules ... but I was just looking up these in the UK and could not help but notice.

I have but because not really valid because my Eversolo arrived broken!
Keith

 

[MatthewS]

@AsciLab I love the science-based approach to speaker design and you all have done a fantastic job here. A few thoughts on the current naming convention (C6B, F6B, S6C, etc.) that might help these products reach more people.

I understand the desire to buck industry trends, but there's a reason most consumer brands use tiered naming - it works. Whether it's BMW (3, 5, 7 Series), KEF (Reference > R > Q), or Apple (Pro > Standard > SE), customers instantly understand the hierarchy without needing a decoder ring.

The current system requires customers to memorize that S=Signature Purifi, C=Ceramic-Aluminum, F=Fiber, etc. before they can even begin comparing options. More importantly, why should a customer care whether it's fiber or ceramic? Without significant technical knowledge, these material differences are meaningless. The average buyer wants to know "is this better?" not "what's it made of?" - and the current naming forces them to research driver materials just to understand the product hierarchy. And, who is Purifi and why should I care?

Consider something like:

AsciLab Signature (current S-line)
AsciLab Caliber (current C-line)
AsciLab Foundation (current F-line)

Then you can give numbering to different models--though whether you tie it to woofer size is something that I think could be up for debate.

Technical details belong in spec sheets where enthusiasts can dive deep. But product names should communicate value proposition, not construction details.

The engineering is world-class. Let's make sure the naming doesn't get in the way of people discovering it!

 

[Matt_Holland]

@AsciLab I love the science-based approach to speaker design and you all have done a fantastic job here. A few thoughts on the current naming convention (C6B, F6B, S6C, etc.) that might help these products reach more people.

I understand the desire to buck industry trends, but there's a reason most consumer brands use tiered naming - it works. Whether it's BMW (3, 5, 7 Series), KEF (Reference > R > Q), or Apple (Pro > Standard > SE), customers instantly understand the hierarchy without needing a decoder ring.

The current system requires customers to memorize that S=Signature Purifi, C=Ceramic-Aluminum, F=Fiber, etc. before they can even begin comparing options. More importantly, why should a customer care whether it's fiber or ceramic? Without significant technical knowledge, these material differences are meaningless. The average buyer wants to know "is this better?" not "what's it made of?" - and the current naming forces them to research driver materials just to understand the product hierarchy. And, who is Purifi and why should I care?

Consider something like:

AsciLab Signature (current S-line)
AsciLab Caliber (current C-line)
AsciLab Foundation (current F-line)

Then you can give numbering to different models--though whether you tie it to woofer size is something that I think could be up for debate.

Technical details belong in spec sheets where enthusiasts can dive deep. But product names should communicate value proposition, not construction details.

The engineering is world-class. Let's make sure the naming doesn't get in the way of people discovering it!

I second this fabulous suggestion and reasoning.

 

[MatthewS]

@AsciLab I love the science-based approach to speaker design and you all have done a fantastic job here. A few thoughts on the current naming convention (C6B, F6B, S6C, etc.) that might help these products reach more people.

@AsciLab

And also, (not to pile on) but even if you want to keep the BOM style part numbers, it's still really confusing.

C= Ceramic

But C also = Cardioid

It depends where it is.

But B = bookshelf... but isn't that C6C cardioid also kind of a bookshelf? What if you have a cardioid tower?

Cardioid is how it radiates sound, not the enclosure. I guess your Cardioid are MTM designs--but I'm not sure that qualifies as an enclosure. If feels like those speakers should be a different line--or up or down the existing line.

Aaaahhhh.

 

[kemmler3D]

Ascilab alluded to this in an earlier post, possibly in the main thread, that they need dealers and distributors to compromise on the margin share in order to make the current end user pricing work.
What I think they need are importer/reseller partners who can offer local direct to end user sales from a good level of stock. I think the traditional distribution->dealer->customer model is dying anyway and I’m not sure that the legacy hifi press will give the brand the backing it will need to exist via traditional hifi retail channels at the current retail price points which look to not have room for the margins expected by both distributor and dealer.

At this point @AsciLab might want to look into 3rd party fulfillment instead of dealers in that case. Most retailers want 30-50% or more, I don't get the sense they have that much margin to give away. But a simple warehouse/ fulfillment house can enable international DTC pretty well. There are plenty in the US, I worked with a pretty good one out of Texas, and I think there are some in the EU but I only worked with actual distributors there (they also managed our Amazon stuff) so I can't say for sure.

 

[anphex]

The passive radiator helps a little in bass extension and moderately in bass performance distortion. It's a tought question whether to get these or just the ones without the passive radiator and just get a sub with crossover at about 100-120 Hz.

Anyway, great design. I never knew common two ways speakers could have this clean vertical dispersion. (

 

[Matt_Holland]

At this point @AsciLab might want to look into 3rd party fulfillment instead of dealers in that case. Most retailers want 30-50% or more, I don't get the sense they have that much margin to give away. But a simple warehouse/ fulfillment house can enable international DTC pretty well. There are plenty in the US, I worked with a pretty good one out of Texas, and I think there are some in the EU but I only worked with actual distributors there (they also managed our Amazon stuff) so I can't say for sure.

Yes. Fulfilment is definitely an option worth investigating especially as the offerings these services are quite sophisticated now.

Ascilab could also learn from Buchardt in terms of on-line marketing. It’s a pretty simple pay to play equation.

 

[SMen]

Just observing, but there is quite a significant difference in depth between the two models: 10.4 inch vs 6inch, and I wonder if the passive radiator might not also help with internal resonances / standing waves etc. Also directivity / location of the bass (<80hz) makes integration of sub woofer easier (perhaps not an issue with processor) ... all things making me lean towards the F6B vs F6Bs

 

[J0my]

@AsciLab I love the science-based approach to speaker design and you all have done a fantastic job here. A few thoughts on the current naming convention (C6B, F6B, S6C, etc.) that might help these products reach more something like:

AsciLab Signature (current S-line)
AsciLab Caliber (current C-line)
AsciLab Foundation (current F-line)

I really like this!

 

[Billy Budapest]

Question—why so many variations of the speaker using different driver materials? Seems sort of like an engineering exercise rather than a marketing strategy, with the measurements of the fiber and ceramic models taken so far seemingly very close.

 

[Reddoc]

Seems sort of like an engineering exercise rather than a marketing strategy, with the measurements of the fiber and ceramic models taken so far seemingly very close.

Usually if they are functionally similar then one might call it a marketing exercise rather than an engineering one.
But AsciLab seem pretty engineering-driven, so I wonder what the real thought process is?

 

[dtaylo1066]

What for the price will outdo this speaker? Nada.