Elac Debut Reference DBR-62 Speaker Review

[renaudrenaud]

@daftcombo has a pair of Focal and he is listening my pair of Elac frequently. Maybe he can help you.

 

[nathan]

ELAC makes an on-wall speaker in the debut series, as well as Dolby Atmos modules.

Focal also makes Aria surround speakers (dipole, I think).

That's a win for the ELAC. I slightly prefer in wall but on wall works and these appear to be very similar to the rest of the series. I totally failed to notice them, since I had in my head "in wall" is required. But really, on wall could work. And knowing Elac / AJ, they make use of the proximity of the wall in their tuning and output.

(It's cool they make "Atmos Speakers" but I don't plan to make use of the bouncing ATMOS feature.....but the option is nice to have.)

Dipole speakers are.... not interesting to me. Been there, done that, with some excellent Triad speakers, but they just don't make sense with the way surround sound is mixed these days. (They were great back in the 4 channel Dolby Stereo world where the surround speakers got a mono signal!) So that's a strike against the Focal.

 

[Chromatischism]

ELAC makes an on-wall speaker in the debut series, as well as Dolby Atmos modules.

Focal also makes Aria surround speakers (dipole, I think).

Bipole.

https://www.crutchfield.com/S-l04Ze2YwcK5/p_091A900SBS/Focal-Aria-SR-900.html

 

[nathan]

Bipole.

https://www.crutchfield.com/S-l04Ze2YwcK5/p_091A900SBS/Focal-Aria-SR-900.html

Thanks for pointing that out. Bipole is far more palatable.

Interesting that they go for 1k each, whereas the Elac go for 200 a pair. I guess in the Elac case, it is not a part of the reference series, so it's probably a notable step down in accuracy.....but maybe for surround duties that is less important. Not ideal from the perspective of a center channel, however. But I see Elac has a reference series center. Sure wish they had the option to simply buy a third/single DBR-62 for use as a center.

 

[Chromatischism]

That's why I picked up the Polk LSiM 702 F/X speakers for side surrounds when they were blown out for $400/pair. I don't want to spend that much but I also don't want dinky speakers, either. I can't do in-walls but I need something rather slim and they have height and width, but not depth, so they work well. They're a ported 3-way with a 6.5" woofer so pretty serious and sound really good. I would see if they are still available.

Otherwise ELAC has in-walls but from the Debut series. I wish they would update them with Debut 2.0 and Reference. Their on-wall options are better, with what looks like speakers from the Vela line. Would be nice to see a full Reference line though.

 

[nathan]

Yep. Maybe by the time I need the surrounds they will have an upgraded version.

 

[pbc]

Newb at reading the distortion graphs. Deciding between the JBL 308's I have now and these, which I would power with a basic AVR like a Denon 3600 or say an Anthem MRX 520. I would assume the JBL's can go louder with less distortion given the 8" woofer, tweeter and size of box. But the graphs are completely different and not sure how to compare the two?

 

[nathan]

Ironic, I have the JBL 306 and these would replace those for me. With the 306 I definitely get close to maxing them out in my room. I don't care about going lower, since I've got a sub. I think the JBL have built in limiting so that even when at max they don't break up. My goal however isn't more output but more nuance and the ability to use an AVR and eventually add more than just L and R to my system.

 

[weasels]

Newb at reading the distortion graphs. Deciding between the JBL 308's I have now and these, which I would power with a basic AVR like a Denon 3600 or say an Anthem MRX 520. I would assume the JBL's can go louder with less distortion given the 8" woofer, tweeter and size of box. But the graphs are completely different and not sure how to compare the two?

Consider how much distortion you can actually hear when listening as well. Minimal distortion is an admirable goal, but should only be one factor when making a purchasing decision.

There is a thread in here somewhere with links to listening tests from Harman (i think?) to see when you actually can reliably detect distortion, and in general the % is much higher than what you see in the graphs here.

 

[Chromatischism]

These are sounding very good

 

[weasels]

Did those feet come with them or are those 3rd party?

 

[Chromatischism]

Did those feet come with them or are those 3rd party?

They are included.

 

[Newman]

Thanks for pointing that out. Bipole is far more palatable.

15 years ago Toole made an analysis and concluded that bipolar surround speakers were an idea that made sense for early, matrixed-stereo surround mixing, but not appropriate for the modern era of discrete multi-channel sound. He says to use normal speakers instead. [Correction: I was thinking of dipole surround models, and Toole’s analysis was about dipole surround speakers.]

I have been assuming that their continued presence in the sales listings has been a triumph of marketing over engineering, where they can be marketed as ‘specialised’ surround speakers.

cheers

 

[thewas]

15 years ago Toole made an analysis and concluded that bipolar surround speakers were an idea that made sense for early, matrixed-stereo surround mixing, but not appropriate for the modern era of discrete multi-channel sound. He says to use normal speakers instead.

He was saying that mainly about the back then still popular surround dipoles, see the chapter 18.4.3 Multidirectional Surround Loudspeakers in his previous edition of the book.

 

[Chromatischism]

15 years ago Toole made an analysis and concluded that bipolar surround speakers were an idea that made sense for early, matrixed-stereo surround mixing, but not appropriate for the modern era of discrete multi-channel sound. He says to use normal speakers instead.

I have been assuming that their continued presence in the sales listings has been a triumph of marketing over engineering, where they can be marketed as ‘specialised’ surround speakers.

They are still recommended for small rooms where seats will be close to the speakers.

 

[Newman]

@thewas quite right, I was thinking of dipole. I have corrected my post.

cheers

 

[Beershaun]

Excited to see the floorstanding 3-way and the center channel now up for sale. I have been really enjoying my standmount/bookshelf speakers alongside my SVS SB-2000!

 

[Vyacheslav]

Today in St. Petersburg (Russia) I visited a store to listen to acoustics.
The seller offered to listen to: ELAC Debut Reference DBR62, DALI Oberon 3 and Monitor Audio Bronze 100 6G.
I didn't spend a lot of time choosing tracks for comparing acoustics, and the list of the following compositions seemed to me more than enough:
Arnett Cobb - Blue Me.
From the album Touch Yello - Till Tomorrow and Friday Smile.
Compilation by Robbie Williams - Sin Sin Sin, Advertising Space, Angels, Lazy Days.
Eagles - Hotel California.
Each person hears individually, so I will describe what I heard.
DALI Oberon 3 vs ELAC Debut Reference DBR62
Oberon 3 Well built stage, everything in its place. When switching the amplifier to Debut Reference DBR62, the effect of a concave lens was obtained, as if the vocals were pushed far back, the feeling that the sound picture was not complete.
DALI Oberon 3 vs Monitor Audio Bronze 100 6G comparison
The sound of the Bronze 100 6G is flat and somewhat rough.

 

[nathan]

Thanks for sharing. Dali is a good choice.

Off axis I would guess the Dali would easily win this comparison due to their extra treble which is a totally fair approach.

 

[weasels]

FWIW in the US the Dali pair is $300 (about 40%) more expensive than the ELACs.