Focal Alpha Evo 65 & 80 - "Differences" ??

[WERNER1]

Hi all!!!

I have been reading all of the reviews and post here on the Focal Alpha EVO 65, and I'm pretty much decided on these as my next "Studio Monitor". I've searched around and I don't see any reviews of its bigger brother the Evo 80(?) .... Aside from their physical differences, do they pretty much spec out and sound the same as the 65's but maybe with more low end extension or something,.. or are they totally different in sound?

These will be used primarily for mixing/mastering reference, and critical listening in my small ( barely treated room ... planning on using software room correction here soon?)

For the past 15 years or so I've been using my Warfedale Diamond Pro 8.2a's ... which have served me well for the most part, but I find them a bit bloated on the bass side and having them in my not treated space doesn't help at all either.

I feel the Evo 65's would be a good fit for me, but I keep wondering about the Evo 80's - Bigger is always better right!?! But theyboth fall in my price range and sound like they are a much better option than the ZenPro modded HS8's I was originally looking at (??)

Any thoughts or suggestions are greatly appreciated,
Thanks!!!

 

[staticV3]

It's a trade-off.
An 8" woofer is better for far field, while the 6.5" woofer would do better for near field.

Though for the price of the Evo 65, I would rather buy a Kali IN-5 or IN-8v2

Horizontal radiation is not quite as wide as on the Focal, but the much improved vertical radiation due to 3-way design is a worthy trade-off IMO.

 

[AnalogSteph]

It's a trade-off.
An 8" woofer is better for far field, while the 6.5" woofer would do better for near field.

Yes and no. It is virtually impossible to match the dispersion of an 8" driver and a 1" tweeter with little to no waveguide as seen in the Alpha 80 Evo. These are presumably geared towards nearfield use as far as possible, given that driver distance is about as small as it can be... so they are likely to work OK in a well-treated studio, but at distance in a more lively room the response will be quite far from neutral (probably a ~2 kHz dip and mid-treble brightness).

The more lively the room is, the more you'll want to be after even dispersion, and in an 8" / 1" that's not going to happen without a sizeable waveguide. You can do a lot worse than some Behringer B2031As with a bit of EQ thrown on, for example (not really a surprise, they're basically a cheap clone of some old Genelecs):

Measurements for speaker Behringer B2031A

www.spinorama.org

 

[3125b]

I have a pair of 65 Evo's and have heard the first gen Alpha 65 and 80 in direct comparison, but never heard the 80 Evo, so take this with a grain of salt.

The 65 Evo are quite good, they can play loud enough to fill a room and the self-noise is very low. The 14kHz peak can be tuned down with EQ, but it's narrow in frequency and not very noticable without direct comparison.
For the Alpha 80 what @AnalogSteph describes is exactly right (as it is for many big 2-way monitors), there is often a dip around 2kHz that might be more or less noticable. Some people even prefer that.

But then there is the big issue for me and why I don't use my 65 Evo - the conventional 2-way design has terrible +vertical+ dispersion, for nearfield use you can barely move your head up and down without loosing all mids just below the crossover frequency. Want to recline back in your chair - have no mids then. Bothers me very much.
At my desktop I use coaxials and will never go back. Kali IN-series are probably your ideal choice then, preferably the 8" model, Kali usually limits the low frequency SPL quite aggressively.

 

[staticV3]

the conventional 2-way design has terrible horizontal dispersion

*vertical

 

[WERNER1]

It's a trade-off.
An 8" woofer is better for far field, while the 6.5" woofer would do better for near field.

Though for the price of the Evo 65, I would rather buy a Kali IN-5 or IN-8v2

Horizontal radiation is not quite as wide as on the Focal, but the much improved vertical radiation due to 3-way design is a worthy trade-off IMO.

Thanks for the info and input on this! I started doing some research on those other two you mentioned - Let me ask you this, do you do actual mixing/mastering of recorded projects, or use your set up for more regular and critical listening? Thanks, Rick

 

[staticV3]

Thanks for the info and input on this! I started doing some research on those other two you mentioned - Let me ask you this, do you do actual mixing/mastering of recorded projects, or use your set up for more regular and critical listening? Thanks, Rick

I use my speaker system almost exclusively for watching TV and movies. I do not mix or master recorded projects.

Most of my music I listen to via IEMs.

 

[WERNER1]

I have a pair of 65 Evo's and have heard the first gen Alpha 65 and 80 in direct comparison, but never heard the 80 Evo, so take this with a grain of salt.

The 65 Evo are quite good, they can play loud enough to fill a room and the self-noise is very low. The 14kHz peak can be tuned down with EQ, but it's narrow in frequency and not very noticable without direct comparison.
For the Alpha 80 what @AnalogSteph describes is exactly right (as it is for many big 2-way monitors), there is often a dip around 2kHz that might be more or less noticable. Some people even prefer that.

But then there is the big issue for me and why I don't use my 65 Evo - the conventional 2-way design has terrible +vertical+ dispersion, for nearfield use you can barely move your head up and down without loosing all mids just below the crossover frequency. Want to recline back in your chair - have no mids then. Bothers me very much.
At my desktop I use coaxials and will never go back. Kali IN-series are probably your ideal choice then, preferably the 8" model, Kali usually limits the low frequency SPL quite aggressively.

Thanks for your response and 1st hand info on the 65's! Do you use your 65's and "coaxials" (what model/brand? Kali IN?) for mixing and mastering, or more for general listening?

I've noticed that my current WarfeDale 8.2a's suffer from off axis radiation/dispersion,... I move just a little and I'm out of the sweet spot .... Probably something I would prefer to eliminate in this next set

 

[WERNER1]

I use my speaker system almost exclusively for watching TV and movies. I do not mix or master recorded projects.

Most of my music I listen to via IEMs.

Ok thanks for the clarification,.. while I want my speakers to sound good under normal listening conditions, it is more important for me at this stage of the game to focus on mixing side of things,... maybe they go hand in hand with these newer speakers like the 65's and the Kali's,.. .. I think people who mostly just listen to music through speakers look for ones that "Sound good", but in my experience, that isn't always the best scenario for mixing - I was originally thinking about going with a pair of ZenPro modded HS8's, .... the stock ones have been a decent staple on the mixing side of things while others feel they are horrible in terms of a general listening speaker ... so much info and reading between the lines that has to be done in making this decisions when you don't have the oppertunity to demo these speakers .... I love and hate this stuff haha!

 

[staticV3]

Ok thanks for the clarification,.. while I want my speakers to sound good under normal listening conditions, it is more important for me at this stage of the game to focus on mixing side of things,... maybe they go hand in hand with these newer speakers like the 65's and the Kali's,.. .. I think people who mostly just listen to music through speakers look for ones that "Sound good", but in my experience, that isn't always the best scenario for mixing - I was originally thinking about going with a pair of ZenPro modded HS8's, .... the stock ones have been a decent staple on the mixing side of things while others feel they are horrible in terms of a general listening speaker ... so much info and reading between the lines that has to be done in making this decisions when you don't have the oppertunity to demo these speakers .... I love and hate this stuff haha!

It's a common trope that studio monitors are supposed to sound unpleasant for some reason.

Super outdated group think IMO.

Studio monitors are supposed to be accurate and true to the recording.

A good monitor will make beautiful mixes sound beautiful and bad mixes sound bad.

It's not by chance that well designed monitors can be found in more and more living rooms and home offices, used for simple music enjoyment by well educated enthusiasts.

 

[3125b]

coaxials" (what model/brand?

KEF R5 (first gen) on small stands with a Monolith 12" THX Ultra driven by a SMSL DA-9. It's a bit of a weird desktop setup born out of my former living room setup, but it works quite well.
I use it for general listening.
If you are sitting closer than 2m or so in a variable position coaxials are a huge advantage imo.