• 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). There are daily reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

Focal Aria 906 Speaker Review

TheBatsEar

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 16, 2020
Messages
1,751
Likes
2,663
Location
Germany
What KEF? R3 annihilates Focal Aria 906 totally.
He was talking about availability and pricing in different regions, not which speaker beats which.
 

mightycicadalord

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Nov 10, 2021
Messages
542
Likes
496
Boy I really tried to give Danny a pass but dude is just so off base.

"Mod improves space between notes". What does that even mean?! Why would there be more space between the notes? Does the performance of the song change with his mods? Do the intervals of notes played change? More empty audiophile words.
 

Streamc

Active Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2020
Messages
156
Likes
23
That's definitely not the word I would use. I know the Focal sound enough to say it is not guaranteed that most people would prefer the R3.
The devil in details. Big details. Sometimes it sounds same but R3 is in its own league.
 

Streamc

Active Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2020
Messages
156
Likes
23
Didn't compare both side by side and I got A500s many months after...

The main difference is that I enjoy listening to music with A500s for the last 18 months, while I gave up with R3s after one week or so.
What amp did you use with R3? I like bass, mids, but not highs, they sometimes sounds muffled. Even on YouTube. Maybe it is not HF but I do not know. I enjoy them but I think it can be different.
 

Chromatischism

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 5, 2020
Messages
3,415
Likes
2,530
Weird, the highs on the R3 shouldn't sound muffled. If anything they are more forward and analytical than Buchardts which are neutral.
 

Streamc

Active Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2020
Messages
156
Likes
23
Weird, the highs on the R3 shouldn't sound muffled. If anything they are more forward and analytical than Buchardts which are neutral.
I do not know. Maybe not HF. But when listening Metallica 1984 I feel that I listen some hard/heavy and not thrash. They are vey analytical and I like it.
Maybe need some aggressivity.
 
Last edited:

Chromatischism

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 5, 2020
Messages
3,415
Likes
2,530
Heh, to each their own. I wouldn't like an analytical speaker for old metal recordings. That's one area where the S400 MK1 really excels.
 

Streamc

Active Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2020
Messages
156
Likes
23
Heh, to each their own. I wouldn't like an analytical speaker for old metal recordings. That's one area where the S400 MK1 really excels.
But I listened Yes 1971 and it was not dividing analytycal. It was music combined. Also Genesis 1976. It was great. I did not listen A500 but R3 sounds great. Ok. it is all specific question in specifis records. Old metal? Iron Maiden sounds superb. I have question to R3 but it is not about details. I would repeat. In Metallica 1984 I need agression. I can listen Faith Warning 2016 and have pleasure with them but I need Metallica thrash not heavy.
 

delta76

Member
Joined
Nov 27, 2021
Messages
93
Likes
72
In previous posts we mentioned about EQ which can significantly improve the reference score of this speaker. How "applicable" is that?
 

ROOSKIE

Major Contributor
Joined
Feb 27, 2020
Messages
1,237
Likes
2,173
Location
Minneapolis
Weird, the highs on the R3 shouldn't sound muffled. If anything they are more forward and analytical than Buchardts which are neutral.
I found the R3 on the analytical side indeed, though not particularly forward.
Very refinded, with a clean sound. Close to being - but not quite actually becoming - an engaging speaker.
Often people speak of the R3 being forward but it has no elevated areas in the mids and even a bit of an in room dip in the energy of the upper mids.
I my room, with my pair it was never a forward speaker. Very neutral in that regard.
The PIR shows some elevated trebble, in my room it was not present in the actual IR nor in my subjective assessment.

I had seen many measurements and anticipated a brighter speaker, with obvious "treble" but that was not what I heard.
I was quite impressed with how smooth they were.

I did not keep them. They did not quite win me over though it was fun to try them and compare. They are obviously extremely well engineered and exactly the product KEF intended. Personal preference, or lack of personal preference, will be the determining factor.
 

TheBatsEar

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 16, 2020
Messages
1,751
Likes
2,663
Location
Germany
In previous posts we mentioned about EQ which can significantly improve the reference score of this speaker. How "applicable" is that?
I'll allow it, so it's acceptable.
1641543257263.gif

If someone looks at you funny, send them my way, i'll sort them out.


Seriously, it's very acceptable. You may be able to squeeze a bit more performance out of what you have paid for dearly. Also you may be able to fix some of your room modes.

I recommend to buy a calibrated microphone first, then measure and fix your speaker/room in software. If you like it, buy some hardware like a MiniDSP Flex or SHD.
 
Top Bottom