ELAC DF63 Floor standing Speaker Review

[Robbo99999]

Two different approaches to answer a question, and the results are not far apart of each other ... isn't science a wonderful playground ... ??

(Probably Nope)

 

[beagleman]

But Amir emphatically stated that the issue in question is quite easily audible.
I mentioned "audiophiles" because I'm referring to someone who is a trained listener.

To confirm what Amir is saying, all we need is another trained listener; Not another Klippel measurement.
No?

But, not for sure, I think many are assuming something is "Wrong" with Amir's Sample., or at least some variance in his sample.
At least that seems a possibility, due mainly to moderately different measurement from the Klippel system.

The 1khz dip and the 200hz distortion are more than just a tad different.
I am very looking forward to any conclusions about all of this, as to me, repeating measurements is quite important.

 

[Henryk]

But, not for sure, I think many are assuming something is "Wrong" with Amir's Sample., or at least some variance in his sample.
At least that seems a possibility, due mainly to moderately different measurement from the Klippel system.

The 1khz dip and the 200hz distortion are more than just a tad different.
I am very looking forward to any conclusions about all of this, as to me, repeating measurements is quite important.

Right, I hear ya!

But if Amir's sample is faulty - and the fault is audible - then another trained listener with a different set would confirm that.

 

[Wg1]

Good morning @amirm ,

Erin H sent you an email on Sunday re: the possibility of him measuring this sample. He was unsure whether you had received it or whether he might have sent it to the wrong email address. Screenshots of the email he sent to you are below (shared with his permission of course).

Thank you!

 

[Salt]

Good morning @amirm ,

Erin H sent you an email on Sunday re: the possibility of him measuring this sample. He was unsure whether you had received it or whether he might have sent it to the wrong email address. Screenshots of the email he sent to you are below (shared with his permission of course).

Thank you!

Respect, Sir, things going on.

 

[MAB]

Right, I hear ya!

But if Amir's sample is faulty - and the fault is audible - then another trained listener with a different set would confirm that.

Apologies but how would another listener, trained or otherwise, be able to confirm the status of a speaker with an alleged problem like this?
What would the comparison of listening impressions be able to tell?
Would we believe one listener vs. another?
Would we be able to make a quantitative comparison?
Or would it be a battle of anecdotes?
Or would this listening be done in controlled circumstances, like on a speaker switcher, comparing the alleged defective unit to a known good unit?
What would happen if ELAC said they listened and didn't hear a problem, but didn't bother to measure the allegedly defective unit?
I find people's impressions, trained or otherwise, are poor diagnostic tools.

 

[Salt]

Before competence and confidence (of manufacturer and/or reviewer) will take over the discussion, let Erin test this single one sample, probably faulty, speaker.

(It will give the same results, though, and determine that there is some bad driver and/or xover in play).

 

[Henryk]

Apologies but how would another listener, trained or otherwise, be able to confirm the status of a speaker with an alleged problem like this?
What would the comparison of listening impressions be able to tell?
Would we believe one listener vs. another?
Would we be able to make a quantitative comparison?
Or would it be a battle of anecdotes?
Or would this listening be done in controlled circumstances, like on a speaker switcher, comparing the alleged defective unit to a known good unit?
What would happen if ELAC said they listened and didn't hear a problem, but didn't bother to measure the allegedly defective unit?
I find people's impressions, trained or otherwise, are poor diagnostic tools.

But by the same token, we know that Klippel measurements do NOT convey how a speaker sounds in person.
On this forum people are constantly warned not to rely on objective data when evaluating speakers.

 

[Henryk]

Good morning @amirm ,

Erin H sent you an email on Sunday re: the possibility of him measuring this sample. He was unsure whether you had received it or whether he might have sent it to the wrong email address. Screenshots of the email he sent to you are below (shared with his permission of course).

Thank you!

What a legend!

 

[kyuu]

On this forum people are constantly warned not to rely on objective data when evaluating speakers.

Er, are you sure you're on the right forum?

 

[Henryk]

Er, are you sure you're on the right forum?

Haha! Yep!
I've been told by several people here - on different occasions - not to rely on Klippel measurements when comparing speakers.

Do people honestly believe that all the nuances of a speaker can be captured and communicated by graphs and charts?

What I think happens is that cerebral personalities prefer data/measurements and say THAT is the most important.
Then intuitive, sensory personalities say the real-life experience of a speaker is the most important.
...and on this forum, there are both kinds of people.

 

[MAB]

But by the same token, we know that Klippel measurements do NOT convey how a speaker sounds in person.
On this forum people are constantly warned not to rely on objective data when evaluating speakers.

No, people are not constantly warned here to ignore the measurements. Many people are not comfortable intepreting how a speaker will sound based on measuremnts. Some people have odd enough rooms that the measurements are difficult to extrapolate to the room. But you are wrong about measurements not conveying the sound, and the alleged constant warnings.

And, the problem is measured. So there is that.

 

[MAB]

Haha! Yep!
I've been told by several people here - on different occasions - not to rely on Klippel measurements when comparing speakers.

Do people honestly believe that all the nuances of a speaker can be captured and communicated by graphs and charts?

What I think happens is that cerebral personalities prefer data/measurements and say THAT is the most important.
Then intuitive, sensory personalities say the real-life experience of a speaker is the most important.
...and on this forum, there are both kinds of people.

Even an inexpensive mic is many orders of magnitude more sensitive, accurate, and precise than the ear. It's not about being cerebral or not, it's about the extreme limitations human hearing, and the inability to meaningfully use ears as measurement devices.

You got bad advice.
Or don't understand the measurements.
Or both.
It's not about the type of person. Fortunately, mics don't care what type of person you are.

 

[beagleman]

Even an inexpensive mic is many orders of magnitude more sensitive, accurate, and precise than the ear. It's not about being cerebral or not, it's about the extreme limitations human hearing, and the inability to meaningfully use ears as measurement devices.

You got bad advice.
Or don't understand the measurements.
Or both.
It's not about the type of person. Fortunately, mics don't care what type of person you are.

I think some (not saying guy you are replying to for certain) have a hard time, realizing what all the measurements mean or combining them to realize what final sound will be like.

I have heard a handful of the ones Erin and Amir tested and feel confident to a great degree I can just "visually" look at measurements and have a great idea if its worth hearing or about how it will sound now.

 

[tw 2022]

I think some (not saying guy you are replying to for certain) have a hard time, realizing what all the measurements mean or combining them to realize what final sound will be like.

I have heard a handful of the ones Erin and Amir tested and feel confident to a great degree I can just "visually" look at measurements and have a great idea if its worth hearing or about how it will sound now.

Ditto.....to further summarize, objective data can't tell you * everything * about a speaker, but it sure can keep you from wasted time trying crappie speakers...

 

[Henryk]

No, people are not constantly warned here to ignore the measurements. Many people are not comfortable intepreting how a speaker will sound based on measuremnts. Some people have odd enough rooms that the measurements are difficult to extrapolate to the room. But you are wrong about measurements not conveying the sound, and the alleged constant warnings.

And, the problem is measured. So there is that.

Who said anything about "ignoring measurements"?
I said I was warned not to rely on them - big difference.

Ditto.....to further summarize, objective data can't tell you * everything * about a speaker, but it sure can keep you from wasted time trying crappie speakers...

Couldn't agree more

 

[Henryk]

Even an inexpensive mic is many orders of magnitude more sensitive, accurate, and precise than the ear. It's not about being cerebral or not, it's about the extreme limitations human hearing, and the inability to meaningfully use ears as measurement devices.

You got bad advice.
Or don't understand the measurements.
Or both.
It's not about the type of person. Fortunately, mics don't care what type of person you are.

I dunno, you sound angry.
I apologize for whatever I said that triggered you.

 

[MAB]

I dunno, you sound angry.

No, I am making direct comments. If I was angry, I would likely just ignore. After all, it's a hobby and there are tons of ASR members posting all sorts of stuff...

I apologize for whatever I said that triggered you.

No need to apologize to me, perhaps to the microphones of the world deserve an apology. But then the mic doesn't care about any of this, which is the point.
I'm not triggered, please don't take direct comments personally. My comments stand, even if they are uncomfortable, or don't make sense to you.

 

[Mnyb]

Detailed and good measurements (spin pir etc ) of speakers don't predict the whole performance my guess is about 70% i think others used that ballpark figure ? I cant cite the source of that. But's its pretty good .
There is a scale factor here there are good small speakers and good large speakers with similar points ,use case and room size and listening distance can be very different, keep the use case in mind when using the data for prediction ! A small speaker is still a small speakers . In a large room i would still prefer some horrid large modern B&W to Neuman's best mini monitor

Several persons have done in room measurements that fits remarkably well to the predicted curves (PIR) except for the bass , but the bass needs fixing beyond what speakers can do alone possibly a cardioid can do that , but most need room EQ to fix this .

My takeaway is that make your shortlist from well measured speakers and then listen to them . its too random given how rooms and human hearing works and how music works to just go out and listen to any and all speakers , it's really not reliable at all, you can bring home anything that often sounded good on those demo tracks but gives you " listening fatigue" 6 months later .

Well made speakers with predicable behavior can take EQ and you can adjust to taste . Speakers with jarring lobes and dispersion problems don't take EQ well and are "sensitive to placement" and you must "sit in the right position" .
I finally recognized another thing as you usually only have one pair of speakers for a long term use you actually get used to them quickly so you loose your internal reference .
If you pick of speakers started with a bunch of fairly neutral speakers you adjust to that and have a better internal reference in your head .

It's realy hard for a lay person to actually know how something should sound, aka HiFi per definition . You do know what sound good to you I try to not confuse these .

Sometimes it seems to align and I enjoy a great record and like both the sound and the music .

Another perk of using speakers designed to the latest science and not the whimsy of guru designers is that they align pretty well between brands even if that ideal is somewhat imperfect and more research is certainly needed* The are still similar enough so that your speakers and the studios speakers shares enough characteristics that your making headways in solving the circle of confusion problem .

* half of ASR seems to not see the forest for the trees and nitpick the research to death ( see the single speaker eval tread ) more research is certainly needed but the broad picture it paints is very likely correct ? Why is this so triggering for some people .

 

[CoyoteDave]

1st, Amirm, thank you for all your continued contributions to this community! I greatly enjoy (and value) reading your tests. OK, so I read through all this and decided to test my newly purchased DF63s using this track in FLAC on Qobuz. THIS IS NOT SCIENTIFIC. I played the 1st 2 minutes of the track 10 times each on the DF63s, another system with 705 S2s, another with Evo 4.2s and finally my office system with R200AEs. All were played at considerably higher volumes than I normally listen at. I could not replicate the resonance/distortion observation. In fact, to my ears (subjective) the DF63s sounded the most spacious and textural. As a result of my highly non-scientific and subject impressions, I'm going to propose Amir received a faulty/defective speaker. (I am NOT employed in or professionally affiliated with the home audio industry) I would encourage ELAC to facilitate a replacement for re-testing if Amir is so inclined.