Elac Debut Reference DBR-62 Speaker Review

[Doenerkunde]

Earlier series used a different (and most likely superior than its debut series) tweeter in reference series, if I am not wrong.

I think it was the same tweeter (same motor, same softdome, same voicecoil) with an ever so slightly different waveguide and a noticably different grille.

Debut Reference:

Debut:

 

[Bernard23]

What are the chances it will be as competent as the 62 though? It's rear ported so not an evolution.

 

[NanoGuidingStar]

The Debut 2.0 to 3.0 shows significant improvements and evolution, whether in terms of appearance, internal components, or overall performance.

The Debut Reference 2.0 series was already quite good to begin with. This time, the 3.0 seems to adopt a similar approach to the Debut 3.0 with some minor refinements. I don’t have particularly high expectations, and it’s also no longer designed by Andrew Jones. If I remember correctly, Debut 3.0 was the last product he worked on before leaving the ELAC US team.

As a side note, I’m really disappointed that the cramped and hard-to-use speaker terminals haven’t been changed.

 

[Rick63]

I could definitely do without the pleather on the 3.0 series.

 

[Chromatischism]

I am really curious to see how the new DBR63s will stack up against the DBR62s, given that both the drivers and the tuning of the DBR62 were exceptionally good.
The older DFR52 and DCR52 models, by contrast, were significantly inferior.

I believe you are mistaken.

The DFR52 is just the tower variant of the DBR62 bookshelf.

 

[Roland68]

I believe you are mistaken.

The DFR52 is just the tower variant of the DBR62 bookshelf.

No, you're mistaken there.
The DFR52 has two 5 1/4" woofers and an additional 5 1/4" driver acting as a midrange unit.
The DBR62 uses a single 6 1/2" driver for both bass and midrange, and the crossover tuning is audibly different as well.
I had several opportunities to listen to both speakers side-by-side in very different rooms, and in direct comparison, the DFR52s were a disappointment every time. Many other interested buyers confirmed this impression.
For quite a while, you could even buy the DFR52s from two major discount retailers for €125–200 apiece because they were gathering dust in warehouses and many customers had returned them.

It certainly would have been better if Elac had simply built a floor-standing version of the DBR62 using two additional 6 1/2" drivers.

Heco demonstrated just how well that approach works with the Aurora 300 and 700 models.

 

[djdragon66]

Hello everyone, I'm using a Yamaha RN800A with Elac DBR62 speakers and an Elac RS500 subwoofer. I also bought a Cambridge Audio CXN100 external streamer for my Yamaha (I'm not satisfied with MusicCast). Since I want to utilize the full potential of the CXN100, I'm thinking of buying different speakers. I'm asking you, how much money do I need to spend to notice a significant improvement in sound? Perhaps I also need to replace the Yamaha RN800A? I'm using a 14 m² room.

A few examples:

1- Triangle Theta
2- Kef R3 Meta
3- Q Acoustics Concept 50 floorstanding speakers (but not too big)
4- Kef Q Concerto Meta
5-wharfedale evo 4.2
6-Monitor Audio Gold 50

 

[Roland68]

Did you also use YPAO to limit the low-frequency range of the DBR62s and check the settings via the app?

You have two acoustic panels and a bed or couch on the right side, but only one panel on the left—along with shelves and a cabinet that cause hard reflections.
The chair also appears to be positioned off-center to the left.
At first glance, this looks like highly asymmetrical room damping (favoring the right side), combined with additional early reflections on the left.
Have you ever taken any measurements?

 

[djdragon66]

Haben Sie auch YPAO verwendet, um den Niederfrequenzbereich der DBR62s zu begrenzen und die Einstellungen über die App überprüft?

Auf der rechten Seite befinden sich zwei Akustikpaneele und ein Bett oder eine Couch, auf der linken Seite jedoch nur ein Paneel – zusammen mit Regalen und einem Schrank, die starke Reflexionen verursachen.
Der Stuhl scheint außerdem etwas linksseitig, also nicht mittig, positioniert zu sein.
Auf den ersten Blick sieht es nach einer stark asymmetrischen Raumdämpfung (die die rechte Seite bevorzugt) in Kombination mit zusätzlichen frühen Reflexionen auf der linken Seite aus.
Haben Sie jemals Messungen vorgenommen?

I performed room measurements with YPAO, but I'm not using it. I can't decide if it's really better with YPAO. The distance to the wall is the same for both DBR62s – about 50cm to the sides, and about 1 meter to the back wall. The measurement shows pretty much the same distance from the listening position. With YPAO, perhaps the treble would be more present, and the midrange too. But I'm still listening without YPAO. I thought something better wouldn't hurt. I'm normally satisfied with the DBR62s and RS500 subwoofer. I don't know if I need anything better than my Yamaha RN800A. I'm asking you if anything better would be suitable in my case?

 

[djdragon66]

Here are a few more pictures.

 

[Roland68]

I performed room measurements with YPAO, but I'm not using it. I can't decide if it's really better with YPAO. The distance to the wall is the same for both DBR62s – about 50cm to the sides, and about 1 meter to the back wall. The measurement shows pretty much the same distance from the listening position. With YPAO, perhaps the treble would be more present, and the midrange too. But I'm still listening without YPAO. I thought something better wouldn't hurt. I'm normally satisfied with the DBR62s and RS500 subwoofer. I don't know if I need anything better than my Yamaha RN800A. I'm asking you if anything better would be suitable in my case?

YPAO likely struggles to cope with the many acoustic elements and the massive over-damping of the small room—especially on the right side (where the bed is).

Regardless of whether you use YPAO, it makes absolutely no sense to run your main speakers—the DBR62s—without a high-pass filter. Doing so severely limits the performance of both the DBR62s and the subwoofer, leaving you far short of your system's true potential. Given this, I don't think switching to different main speakers would make any sense.

On top of that, the room acoustics seem—in my opinion—to be highly asymmetrical.

The greatest potential lies in getting a measurement microphone, learning how to use REW (there are several threads about this on ASR), measuring and correcting the room acoustics, and then setting up properly tuned high-pass and low-pass filters.
You probably couldn't buy speakers good enough to compensate for that.

 

[djdragon66]

Regardless of whether you use YPAO, it makes absolutely no sense to run your main speakers—the DBR62s—without a high-pass filter.

On top of that, the room acoustics seem—in my opinion—to be highly asymmetrical.

Without a high-pass filter? Most high-quality stereo amplifiers only have one subwoofer output and you can never adjust it for small bookshelf speakers anyway. I'm just surprised that such a cheaper amplifier like the RN800A has something like that. That's why I'm asking how it performs with, for example, a Cambridge Audio EXA100 or a Yamaha A-S1200? I'm happy if someone says their opinion and I'm listening, but I don't understand this problem.

Besides, would it be better if I didn't install these homemade acoustic panels at all? I can't believe that. Then, no matter what system I have here, it won't sound any better than the DBR62? I just don't believe it.
I'm open to opinions and happy to listen, but I don't understand the problem. As far as I know, there shouldn't be any reverberation or echo, and since my speakers are 1 meter away from the back wall, there is no reverberation or echo in that spot, and besides, it's crammed full of carpets, curtains, and bookshelves – that's all that speaks against it.

 

[Chromatischism]

Hello everyone, I'm using a Yamaha RN800A with Elac DBR62 speakers and an Elac RS500 subwoofer. I also bought a Cambridge Audio CXN100 external streamer for my Yamaha (I'm not satisfied with MusicCast). Since I want to utilize the full potential of the CXN100, I'm thinking of buying different speakers. I'm asking you, how much money do I need to spend to notice a significant improvement in sound? Perhaps I also need to replace the Yamaha RN800A? I'm using a 14 m² room.

A few examples:

1- Triangle Theta
2- Kef R3 Meta
3- Q Acoustics Concept 50 floorstanding speakers (but not too big)
4- Kef Q Concerto Meta
5-wharfedale evo 4.2
6-Monitor Audio Gold 50

Going from DBR62 to the R3 Meta will be an upgrade, but once there, you are hitting the point of diminishing returns.

 

[pdfield34]

Hello everyone, I'm using a Yamaha RN800A with Elac DBR62 speakers and an Elac RS500 subwoofer. I also bought a Cambridge Audio CXN100 external streamer for my Yamaha (I'm not satisfied with MusicCast). Since I want to utilize the full potential of the CXN100, I'm thinking of buying different speakers. I'm asking you, how much money do I need to spend to notice a significant improvement in sound? Perhaps I also need to replace the Yamaha RN800A? I'm using a 14 m² room.

A few examples:

1- Triangle Theta
2- Kef R3 Meta
3- Q Acoustics Concept 50 floorstanding speakers (but not too big)
4- Kef Q Concerto Meta
5-wharfedale evo 4.2
6-Monitor Audio Gold 50

Opinion - for a significant improvement in sound:

Equalization / room correction. I don't know anything about YPAO but you could make sure you are using it to the full advantage.

If the tool is not the best or limited, I would for sure invest in minidsp with dirac live.

Once this is implemented, there won't be significant differences between the Elac and say the Kef R3 meta. Sure there will be be differences such as dispersion pattern but these will just relate more to taste, as opposed to technical quality (my reference point: I have the the dbr62 and the kef LS50 meta, I enjoy both equally with dirac live. Subjective - the Kefs seem to have better imaging where the Elacs seem to be more enveloping with no chance of harshness).

Also I would make sure the implementation of a subwoofer is not actually hindering sound quality. With dirac, in a similar sized room I can implement a harman curve down to 35Hz with the dbr's. Having used subs before, I don't think I'm missing much, if anything.

 

[djdragon66]

Going from DBR62 to the R3 Meta will be an upgrade, but once there, you are hitting the point of diminishing returns.

The R3 Meta costs €2000 per pair, four times as much as the DBR62. And perhaps there's no audible difference at all? Is the Elac DBR62 really that good? I can't compare it to any other speakers; I only had the Teufel Ultima 40 with a cheap Denon AV receiver, whose powerful (but boomy) sound I enjoyed for years. And of course, the sound was significantly more pleasant after switching to the DBR62. As for subwoofers, I've tested several and can say that the sealed Elac RS 500 subwoofer is very good. A sealed enclosure is significantly more precise.

I've always assumed that something that costs considerably more must also be better.

Why shouldn't I replace my Yamaha RN800A with something better, like the Cambridge EXA100? Assuming I buy an R3 Meta, wouldn't a better amplifier then also justify a KEF?

Or does room acoustics actually play a much bigger role? Should I get an amplifier with room acoustics analysis, or is the upgrade not worth it?

I performed the measurements myself on my Yamaha YPAO, but honestly, I didn't want to get used to it (even though it produces a slightly different sound, more treble and midrange, but less bass). It might be better, but I figured if I replaced it with the Cambridge EXA100, I wouldn't need the room acoustics analysis anyway. A somewhat naive thought, but that's how I came up with it.

I also have a 30-square-meter room where I watch TV. Would it be better to set up my Elac DBR62 speakers and the RS500 subwoofer there? Would upgrading to better speakers and an amplifier without room acoustics analysis make sense?

Or would it be better to stick with the Yamaha RN800A and use its room measurement function instead of using a more powerful, better amplifier without room acoustics analysis?

 

[djdragon66]

Once this is implemented, there won't be significant differences between the Elac and say the Kef R3 meta. Sure there will be be differences such as dispersion pattern but these will just relate more to taste, as opposed to technical quality (my reference point: I have the the dbr62 and the kef LS50 meta, I enjoy both equally with dirac live. Subjective - the Kefs seem to have better imaging where the Elacs seem to be more enveloping with no chance of harshness).

These are really interesting opinions I'm hearing here. Thank you so much! I'm grateful and happy to be able to learn from all of you. I watch a lot of YouTube videos, these tests of all sorts of things, and now I have the opportunity to spend a bit more money on hi-fi because I simply want a better system. But I also have a limit: about €2000 for speakers and €2000 for an amplifier. Is it worth it? That's the question I'm asking myself!

 

[Marc v E]

First and foremost you need to measure with a umik microphone and rew to know what's going on.

Then you can apply improvements.

But, what some others are saying is that they way you have set up your room and the size of it limits the possibilities for an upgrade. For great sound you need an equalatrial triangle between you and the speakers. Even distance from the side walls. The furnishings to the sides and the large distance to your speakers gives you the reflected sound from the side walls, the ceiling and floor overwhelming the direct sound from the speakers.

Imo and ime the dbr62 are really good and do not need to be replaced.

Where great gains can be had is in speaker placement, seating position, equalisation and a crossover to 1 or 2 subs.

 

[MarkS]

I've always assumed that something that costs considerably more must also be better.

No. There are plenty of very bad, very expensive speakers out there. But Elac and KEF are both good companies making good products. Your ELACs measure very well for their price. The KEF R3s measures somewhat better. But (and this is a huge but!) that does not mean it will necessarily sound better to you in your room. Most likely, it will sound slightly different.

Why shouldn't I replace my Yamaha RN800A with something better, like the Cambridge EXA100?

Because all modern, competently designed solid-state electronics operated within design limits (that is, not insanely loud) sound exactly the same. Not similar, not very hard to distinguish: exactly the same.

Assuming I buy an R3 Meta, wouldn't a better amplifier then also justify a KEF?

No. See above.

Or does room acoustics actually play a much bigger role? Should I get an amplifier with room acoustics analysis, or is the upgrade not worth it?

Room acoustics is hugely important, comparable to having good speakers. Room correction of some sort is an absolute must for best-quality sound, and far more important than incremental improvements in speaker performance.

Or would it be better to stick with the Yamaha RN800A and use its room measurement function instead of using a more powerful, better amplifier without room acoustics analysis?

Maximize the capabilities of what you have before buying anything new.

 

[NanoGuidingStar]

Both the Elac DBR62 and the R3 Meta are speakers with excellent measured performance. In terms of sound quality, I don’t think you would notice a significant difference. However, there is one point worth mentioning: coaxial/concentric speakers like those from KEF may achieve outstanding imaging performance. Not sure why, but maybe due to their consistent horizontal and vertical dispersion characteristics.

Currently, my mains are Elac BS243.4, with a listening distance of about 170 cm, toe-in(on axis). I once tried placing a pair of XTZ Atmosphere S2 speakers on top of them—these are coaxial speakers designed for Atmos speaker. Out of curiosity, I used them for stereo listening, and I found that their imaging was stronger and clearer than the Elac BS243.4. The singer positioned at the center appeared more well-defined, which has made me consider switching my mains to coaxial speakers like the R3 Meta.


However, there’s something you need to pay attention to: the KEF Q Concerto and R3 Meta both use an extended bass shelf design. In other words, the bass of these speakers roll off quite early, but the roll-off is very gradual. This means that the perceived bass output of these speakers will be heavily influenced by their distance from the back wall.

Based on the position of your DBR62 shown in the picture, it’s placed quite far from the back wall. I believe that if you switch to the R3 Meta, you will clearly feel that its bass is less substantial than that of the DBR62. You should try to place the R3 Meta closer to the back wall.

 

[Marc v E]

The R3 Meta costs €2000 per pair, four times as much as the DBR62. And perhaps there's no audible difference at all? Is the Elac DBR62 really that good? I can't compare it to any other speakers; I only had the Teufel Ultima 40 with a cheap Denon AV receiver, whose powerful (but boomy) sound I enjoyed for years. And of course, the sound was significantly more pleasant after switching to the DBR62. As for subwoofers, I've tested several and can say that the sealed Elac RS 500 subwoofer is very good. A sealed enclosure is significantly more precise.

I've always assumed that something that costs considerably more must also be better.

Why shouldn't I replace my Yamaha RN800A with something better, like the Cambridge EXA100? Assuming I buy an R3 Meta, wouldn't a better amplifier then also justify a KEF?

Or does room acoustics actually play a much bigger role? Should I get an amplifier with room acoustics analysis, or is the upgrade not worth it?

I performed the measurements myself on my Yamaha YPAO, but honestly, I didn't want to get used to it (even though it produces a slightly different sound, more treble and midrange, but less bass). It might be better, but I figured if I replaced it with the Cambridge EXA100, I wouldn't need the room acoustics analysis anyway. A somewhat naive thought, but that's how I came up with it.

I also have a 30-square-meter room where I watch TV. Would it be better to set up my Elac DBR62 speakers and the RS500 subwoofer there? Would upgrading to better speakers and an amplifier without room acoustics analysis make sense?

Or would it be better to stick with the Yamaha RN800A and use its room measurement function instead of using a more powerful, better amplifier without room acoustics analysis?

If you still have the measurement microphone of the Denon x2400h I spotted,I would suggest to use that with the dbr62 and sub to test the dbrs in the smaller room, in the bigger room and at different positions.

It will give you the right crossover, eq and the ability to tinker with the sound and explore what differences there are.