• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required as is 20 years of participation in forums (not all true). Come here to have fun, be ready to be teased and not take online life too seriously. We now measure and review equipment for free! Click here for details.

ELAC UBR62 Speaker Review

More Dynamics Please

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2020
Messages
378
Likes
481
Location
USA
But designed for Nearfield use ...

Kali rates the IN-8 v2 as ideal for mid-field use with spec of 85 dB continuous with 20 dB headroom for 105 dB peaks at up to 3.5 meters (11.5 feet). In other words the IN-8 v2 can meet THX studio reference level at up to 11.5 feet. From this perspective it doesn't appear to be at any disadvantage to the UBR62.
 

McFly

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Mar 12, 2019
Messages
627
Likes
994
Location
NZ
Kali rates the IN-8 v2 as ideal for mid-field use with spec of 85 dB continuous with 20 dB headroom for 105 dB peaks at up to 3.5 meters (11.5 feet). In other words the IN-8 v2 can meet THX studio reference level at up to 11.5 feet. From this perspective it doesn't appear to be at any disadvantage to the UBR62.
I eat my hat then. Thats quite impressive
 

abdo123

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Nov 15, 2020
Messages
4,147
Likes
3,690
Location
Brussels, Belgium
Kali rates the IN-8 v2 as ideal for mid-field use with spec of 85 dB continuous with 20 dB headroom for 105 dB peaks at up to 3.5 meters (11.5 feet). In other words the IN-8 v2 can meet THX studio reference level at up to 11.5 feet. From this perspective it doesn't appear to be at any disadvantage to the UBR62.

it starts compressing at 100 dBSPL @ 1 meter. While the Kalis are miles better in that regard than the ELACs, I wouldn’t call them THX reference capable just yet ;)
 

More Dynamics Please

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2020
Messages
378
Likes
481
Location
USA
it starts compressing at 100 dBSPL @ 1 meter. While the Kalis are miles better in that regard than the ELACs, I wouldn’t call them THX reference capable just yet ;)

You can ask @hardisj, but my understanding from his description in the IN-8 v2 thread is that two of them in a typical room will be able to produce 85 dB continuous with 20 dB headroom at 3.5 meters without compressing. That would meet THX reference standards in a modest-size listening area.
 

Haint

Active Member
Joined
Jan 26, 2020
Messages
259
Likes
304
Erin states "MSRP for a pair of the UBR62 speakers is currently $999 USD." It doesn't look like a $2,000/pair speaker.

I would argue it doesn't really look like a $1000 speaker either given what appears to be those awful faux-veneer stickers, only in a walnut color rather than the black you typically see on $30 furniture and $100 speakers.

DSC02061.JPG
 

abdo123

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Nov 15, 2020
Messages
4,147
Likes
3,690
Location
Brussels, Belgium
I don't know anything about the THX standard; namely, how it is measured. My tests aren't meant to emulate anyone else's test in this regard.

pink noise with a C-weighted mic should measure 85 dBSPL at the listening position at -20 dBFS and the the amp and the speakers should be capable of 105 dBSPL at 0 dBFS.

it’s one of the reasons why i’m advocating for slightly louder distortion and compression measurements.
 
OP
hardisj

hardisj

Major Contributor
Reviewer
Joined
Jul 18, 2019
Messages
2,613
Likes
12,096
Location
North Alabama

richard12511

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 23, 2020
Messages
4,231
Likes
6,203
pink noise with a C-weighted mic should measure 85 dBSPL at the listening position at -20 dBFS and the the amp and the speakers should be capable of 105 dBSPL at 0 dBFS.

it’s one of the reasons why i’m advocating for slightly louder distortion and compression measurements.

Well considering he already blew a tweeter, I think he's testing loud enough ;). Maybe with actives(that can protect themselves) or other situations(big speakers) it makes some sense.

Reference standard at the listening position is louder than the vast majority of speakers can handle. You don't get to add 6dB for speaker doubling, as I believe that for reference standard, each speaker needs to be capable of reproducing 105dB at the MLP on its own. That's just to hit reference. To actually sound good(not painful) at reference (ime) usually takes quite a bit of headroom above that. I think Erin's tests show that these speakers aren't reference capable speakers, but that's not really a surprise, and I do think they show great dynamic performance considering the size and price.

The upcoming SH50 is a real reference level capable speaker.
 

Livnmuskoka

Member
Joined
Sep 12, 2020
Messages
58
Likes
36
So these speakers would work very well crossed over at 80hz and never used beyond 90dB peaks at a sitting distance of 8' away?
I have no desire to listen at reference level. Just trying to listen to movies and music loud enough to clearly hear the quietest parts while eating popcorn and trying to preserve my hearing.
 
Last edited:

wric01

Member
Joined
May 24, 2020
Messages
17
Likes
3
If only they can keep their QA in order, nowadays it's just a factory order out the door and you be the QA. Love the concentric driver when it works, but just my luck 2 lemons. It's as if some dirt particle go into the concentric driver rubbing noise. First i had one of the UB52 tweeter distort and now UBR62 has the same tweeter problem (Any loud piano passages gives it away, not smooth but noise at tweeter on all music louder passages). No it's definitely not my amp as i swap it to verify. The other speaker works just fine switching both channels and speakers vice versa. Return she goes.
 

grizzog

New Member
Joined
Jul 23, 2021
Messages
4
Likes
2
Very interested in trying these. I've been intrigued with Elac for a while, but never tried any of their speakers. I like the idea of a small-ish 3-way for desktop use. I currently have ATC SCM7 V3 as my desktop setup with a JL audio D110 sub. The ATCs have incredible clarity and detail, but I am curious what the 3-way may do with a bit more "full" sound. I had KEF R300s, but they could get a bit sharp, and that series was a tad boomy. Wondering if these might be good to try.
 

grizzog

New Member
Joined
Jul 23, 2021
Messages
4
Likes
2
Purchased a pair of these to give them a try. They'll be here next week. Never had an Elac/Andrew Jones speaker, so I'm looking forward to hearing them.
 

grizzog

New Member
Joined
Jul 23, 2021
Messages
4
Likes
2
Got these and listened for a few hours today. Did a side by side with my ATC SCM7 V3. Both on my desk ~3.5 ft away, and in my living room about ~6 feet away, the ATCs were better.

The Elacs sound a bit thin, perhaps due to that dip in the 100-200hz region when listening in my larger room, but sound more full in my small office. That's ATCs sounded more full at a distance, and about even in my office even though they are a 4" sealed design. I also hear the resonance @hardisj mentioned in his review, and is present on a number of female vocals. The ATC have no resonance, and yet sound more full at a distance. The Elac's imaging is fantastic and they can disappear as a source, but the ATC were able to pull that off as well. In my office, the Elacs were able to integrate with my JL Audio D110 seamlessly, and better than the ATC. I will have to spend more time with the sub to see if I can get the same level of integration with the ATC.

I then did a very unfair comparison vs. my JBL S3900. The JBLs definitely sound the biggest, most dynamic, and most full. I was surprised, though, that the ATC's tone was quite close. The Elacs sound thin and bright in comparison.

They're not bad speakers for sure, but at $1,000 retail, they have a lot of competition. They also will not be replacing my ATC for desk duty.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom