ELAC Debut 2.0 B6.2 Speaker Review

[edechamps]

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 three? From that list, only the ELAC Debut 2.0 B6.2 and Pioneer SP-BS22-LR have been measured by Amir. Amir measured the KEF Q100 and Q350 but not the Q150.

 

[pierre]

Score 5.0
Note that with one small EQ (PEAK at 715Hz, Q=8, -2.8dB) Score goes to 5.4.

 

[flipflop]

(PEAK at 715Hz, -2.8dB)

Q? 8?

 

[nniemiec]

Am I the only one who hates these fake wood vinyl finishes? They look so tacky ...

agreed - the entire Elac line = puke aesthetically.

 

[bobbooo]

Which three? From that list, only the ELAC Debut 2.0 B6.2 and Pioneer SP-BS22-LR have been measured by Amir. Amir measured the KEF Q100 and Q350 but not the Q150.

Ah yes you're right, I was confusing the Q100 and Q150. I'd imagine the Q150 would have pretty similar or slightly better measured performance and so preference score to the Q100 though. Obviously this is not a given. The Q Acoustics speakers are the big unknowns really in terms of precise Klippel NFS data. The other three brands have 3-4 models measured by @amirm already however.

 

[ROOSKIE]

Ah yes you're right, I was confusing the Q100 and Q150. I'd imagine the Q150 would have pretty similar or slightly better measured performance and so preference score to the Q100 though. Obviously this is not a given. The Q Acoustics speakers are the big unknowns really in terms of precise Klippel NFS data. The other three brands have 3-4 models measured by @amirm already however.

Actually in a certain sense you are correct as in the previous test series on Wirecutter, the Q100 was the blind test upgrade pick. That test is outdated now as the KEF, ELAC, Q & other speakers are all updated and so the second test is more contemporary now.

 

[tuga]

I'm a bit puzzled that the speaker could play so loud and clear. With the distortion of the woofer at 96 dB I had expected otherwise.

Perhaps because high level is mostly 2nd thus perhaps pleasing/euphonic? Music programme dependent?

 

[Robbo99999]

@amirm , am I missing something re your equalisation...you said you reduced the 700Hz peak but none of your pictured EQ filters target 700Hz, you seem to have an EQ filter targeting 70Hz (well actually it's more like 100Hz looking now), so did you do a "typo" in your EQ or am I misinterpreting something here?

 

[bobbooo]

Actually in a certain sense you are correct as in the previous test series on Wirecutter, the Q100 was the blind test upgrade pick. That test is outdated now as the KEF, ELAC, Q & other speakers are all updated and so the second test is more contemporary now.

I thought I saw the Q100 on there at some point. I would caution against assuming (as I also did) that updated models are always better performing than their previous editions. This is not necessarily the case, and should be confirmed by measurements.

 

[flipflop]

@amirm , am I missing something re your equalisation...you said you reduced the 700Hz peak but none of your pictured EQ filters target 700Hz, you seem to have an EQ filter targeting 70Hz (well actually it's more like 100Hz looking now), so did you do a "typo" in your EQ or am I misinterpreting something here?

The ~100 Hz filter is for a room mode:

The teal one is for the room so ignore that.

Looks like he removed the 700 Hz filter after concluding that "It seemed to only reduce bass a bit and not much else.", which it of course shouldn't do with the right Q-value.

 

[Robbo99999]

The ~100 Hz filter is for a room mode:
Looks like he removed the 700 Hz filter after concluding that "It seemed to only reduce bass a bit and not much else.", which it of course shouldn't do with the right Q-value.

I figured that was an option re 700Hz filter although it wasn't clear from the review. Yeah, with right Q value it would just remove the peak rather than effecting the area around....although removal of that peak is reducing the overall bass a little, but praps not to an audible if just that little peak was removed. Although perhaps it would need quite a high Q value in order to just remove that peak (I've not looked closely), and it's not wise to use high Q unless you're in the bass territory. Although looking a little closer that peak spans 150Hz width so praps that wouldn't need high Q anyway.

 

[Shazb0t]

What are "tube connectors" and what do they supposedly do?

They're snakeoil audio connectors.

 

[mhardy6647]

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?...

Yes, that is correct. That's when I got mine (via Amazon).

 

[ROOSKIE]

Am I the only one who hates these fake wood vinyl finishes? They look so tacky ...

I think some of them look fine, better in person than in photos. I mean they get the job done and you rest assured little to no money was wasted on aesthetics.
Aesthetics are such a personal thing. Like I find high gloss finishes ugly, they remind me of glossy plastic cheap stuff, which makes sense as they are essentially a plastic coated painted job/veneer. Others find the high gloss rich, like a grand piano.
Really if you want a nice finish there are obviously options that cost more, usually a lot more. Finishing the cabinet is a major source of costs and labor. Look at the BDR-62 most of the added actual costs are the cabinet and it is twice the cost of the B6.2 and still uses a fake wood finish.
You could always DIY your own look on the cabinet. Since it uses no round-overs it would be very easy to strip the black and veneer a nice actual wood or even just paint over the black with the proper paint.

 

[bobbooo]

Perhaps, but, the 3020i has 25 percent larger volume and cabinets are big part of the price at this level no?

I don't really see much benefit from that 25 percent larger cabinet volume when Q Acoustics report the low-frequency extension of the 3020i to be exactly the same as the 3020 model. Both would likely be used with a subwoofer anyway.

 

[da Choge]

Yes, that is correct. That's when I got mine (via Amazon).

Those speakers you have the Elac Debuts on top of look almost exactly like my Advents did back in 1972/73, which I kept for many years until their surrounds fell apart . What are they?

 

[MattHooper]

Nice review.

Though Black Ash is the Mullet of speaker finishes. No one deserves a black ash speaker ;-)

 

[Steve Dallas]

I auditioned the 5" version of these against a pair of KEF Q100s back when Amazon had them on clearance. I sent the Elacs back for the ~700Hz peak and the generally boring presentation they had. I thought they were a good speaker for the money, but I found the Q100 to be much more inspiring for the same money. Bass response is not an issue in that room, as everything tends to boom in there.

This was for the living room, where they speakers live inside a bookcase, hence the need for front ports. Power is just a Sony 1100ES AVR with only very basic room EQ capabilities. More than good enough for YouTube and Hallmark Channel and the occasional background music.

 

[mhardy6647]

They're KLH Sixes.
Same guy, you know?

 

[mhardy6647]

agreed - the entire Elac line = puke aesthetically.

I dunno -- some of the pricier ones are (IMO) much more attractive.

source: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...-debut-reference-dbr-62-speaker-review.12232/ (of course!)

(goofy looking woofas, though)


Although -- full disclosure -- I find the titular ELAC to be perfectly OK looking, if profoundly bland.
As always, though: de gustibus non est disputandum.