• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

How to properly A/B compare speakers? Elac DBR62 vs Infinity R152 vs KEF R3 comparison.

maverickronin

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jul 19, 2018
Messages
2,527
Likes
3,308
Location
Midwest, USA
I guess because the uniq have a very good vertical and horizontal dispersion having the uniq below or above ear level doesn't affect too much, i have my uniq below my ears

Yeah. The vertical dispersion is so good that it matters much less than with a conventional design.

With my setup flipping them upside down is basically a free choice so I might as well.
 

regan

Active Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2022
Messages
196
Likes
83
Hey folks,

I'll be evaluating KEF R3 to replace Elac DBR62 for near-field desk setup, paired with two Infinity R12 subs in stereo with MiniDSP SHD.
Until it arrives though, I set up the A/B comparison with Infinity R152 which I have already to see how comparisons go.

Here's how the setup looks:
View attachment 178133

Listening position is approximately a 3ft equilateral triangle with tweeters at ear level. Switching between speakers with an A/B switch for speaker cables (from Amazon: link), feeding unprocessed digital going through RME ADI-2 Pro, MiniDSP SHD and March Audio P452 to the switch. Subwoofers are off and not part of this comparison.

First subjective impressions of DBR62 vs R152 (as untrained listener learning to listen to properly evaluate/rationalize his expensive purchases):
  • DBR62 sounds warmer, while R152 is very bright at top and also lacking body.
  • DBR62 has much lower bass extension, while R152's bass is lean and starts breaking up at lower volume.
  • DBR62 plays cleaner at higher volume, while R152 becomes harsh in the mids at some point and woofers hit bottom earlier.
  • DBR62 has very good imaging with precise phantom center and the speakers disappear, while with R152 the center and all "images" are fuzzy and imprecise in comparison.
  • DBR-62's soundstage seems deep and narrow while R152 feels shallow and wide. The width difference could be related to the imperfect setup btw as R152 are wider apart by about 2 inches.
My typical listening is with 2xR12 subwoofers crossed at 80Hz and calibrated with Dirac Live. I'm planning next to integrate the subs and calibrate with Dirac in two separate MiniDSP profiles and then switch speakers and profiles at the same time when comparing. Essentially I will be comparing how my preferred Dirac target curve and subs sound on different speakers :)

My only issue with the setup is that the AB AB configuration creates two rotated soundstages which are off-center in the room and combined with the additional speaker on both sides sounds "odd" to me. I definitely prefer the sound of DBR62 vs R152, but when I switch to the two closest to the monitor - R152 and DBR62 I almost prefer it to both DBR62 because it sounds more "right". I'm used to that layout and that's probably why, but I feel this makes my experiment less "valid".
Various designs for spinning platforms and sliding rails to enable comparison of speakers at the same position go through my head, but I feel this crosses the line of sanity. Your ideas and encouragement are needed to normalize it for me ;)

I'd appreciate any ideas and tips on how to best compare two pairs of speakers for desk setup!
Did you have the oportunity of listening to Elac UBR62 ?
I'm really curious how would say they compare to the R3s.
Can't find any comparison between the two online which is odd since they are a better competitor to the R3 than the DBR62
 
OP
F

f1shb0n3

Senior Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Aug 29, 2020
Messages
323
Likes
498
Location
Seattle Area
Did you have the oportunity of listening to Elac UBR62 ?
I'm really curious how would say they compare to the R3s.
Can't find any comparison between the two online which is odd since they are a better competitor to the R3 than the DBR62
I did compare them, but note that my impressions can't be relied upon as untrained listener.

Comparison setup:
  • Near-field besides my monitor on rotating Lazy Susans where both speaker sets are at the same location.
  • Both fully calibrated to the same target curve using Dirac Live which removes most of the tonality differences.
What's left are differences is in soundstage, imaging and bass:

Elac DBR62KEF R3
Soundstage widthWide, going beyond the bounds of the speakers.Narrower, within the bounds of the speakers.
Soundstage height
(*) possibly influenced by speaker height
Short.Tall.
Soundstage depthThere's a feeling of depth, but comparatively shallow.Deep (with the right material)
Soundstage shapeFeels "horseshoe" shaped - especially when sounds moving left to right and back, start from side goes forward towards center then moves back when going right.Flat - like a canvas in front of me spanning from bottom left side of left speaker to top right of right speaker. Sounds moving left to right and back travel on a straight line.
BassGood bass, but not sufficient to enjoy without subsPorts (when not plugged) add a nice bump in low bass that makes the speaker usable without a sub. A sub or two will still improve it, but I've been using it without a sub for the past months and happy with it.

Overall for me the KEF R3 was a good improvement over Elac DBR62, but not a night and day one, which is a testament how good DBR62 is for its price. If soundstage width is important for you for example, R3 might not be the right choice.
 

regan

Active Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2022
Messages
196
Likes
83
I did compare them, but note that my impressions can't be relied upon as untrained listener.

Comparison setup:
  • Near-field besides my monitor on rotating Lazy Susans where both speaker sets are at the same location.
  • Both fully calibrated to the same target curve using Dirac Live which removes most of the tonality differences.
What's left are differences is in soundstage, imaging and bass:

Elac DBR62KEF R3
Soundstage widthWide, going beyond the bounds of the speakers.Narrower, within the bounds of the speakers.
Soundstage height
(*) possibly influenced by speaker height
Short.Tall.
Soundstage depthThere's a feeling of depth, but comparatively shallow.Deep (with the right material)
Soundstage shapeFeels "horseshoe" shaped - especially when sounds moving left to right and back, start from side goes forward towards center then moves back when going right.Flat - like a canvas in front of me spanning from bottom left side of left speaker to top right of right speaker. Sounds moving left to right and back travel on a straight line.
BassGood bass, but not sufficient to enjoy without subsPorts (when not plugged) add a nice bump in low bass that makes the speaker usable without a sub. A sub or two will still improve it, but I've been using it without a sub for the past months and happy with it.

Overall for me the KEF R3 was a good improvement over Elac DBR62, but not a night and day one, which is a testament how good DBR62 is for its price. If soundstage width is important for you for example, R3 might not be the right choice.
Great comparison but i was asking about the UBR62 (Unifi reference) not DBR62 (debut reference) :)
Supposedly the Ubr is a great improvement over the Dbr. More expensive also.
 

Jim Shaw

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 16, 2021
Messages
616
Likes
1,159
Location
North central USA
I would be interested to know what stands the speakers are on? Or are they on top of a desk? So much depends on early reflections, and desktop placement is a tough situation.
I have a pair of the DBR62s, but I've never used them as near-field monitors. I'm pretty sure they weren't designed for that purpose. But hey, if the glove fits, slap someone with it.

Mine are on Pangea stands about 28" high, in a room with a 17' ceiling and carpeted floor. Early reflections aren't much of an issue.

1657840340711.jpeg
 

Ataraxia

Active Member
Joined
Sep 22, 2019
Messages
136
Likes
76
I had R3's on my desk about 3'10" apart, as well as in a few largeish to small apartment living rooms. R3's need I'd say about at least 6' equilateral to open up. I've had Q150's and LS50's on the same desk and they are great for that 3'10" triangle.
 
OP
F

f1shb0n3

Senior Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Aug 29, 2020
Messages
323
Likes
498
Location
Seattle Area
Great comparison but i was asking about the UBR62 (Unifi reference) not DBR62 (debut reference) :)
Supposedly the Ubr is a great improvement over the Dbr. More expensive also.
I'd be curious to hear UBR-62 too, considered it also as an upgrade from DBR-62, but chose R3 instead.
Seems that UBR-62 has a lot of the coaxial benefits of R3, but with wider soundstage (based on horizontal dispersion measurements). Erin's measurements here. Based on the data I'd infer R3 can play louder without distortion than UBR-62. It's kind of obvious from looking at them in terms of size - UBR is smaller with a tiny coaxial driver, while R3 is massive with a huge coaxial driver. That's important for me, I want my speakers to be able to play 96dB without stress.
 
OP
F

f1shb0n3

Senior Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Aug 29, 2020
Messages
323
Likes
498
Location
Seattle Area
I would be interested to know what stands the speakers are on? Or are they on top of a desk? So much depends on early reflections, and desktop placement is a tough situation.
I have a pair of the DBR62s, but I've never used them as near-field monitors. I'm pretty sure they weren't designed for that purpose. But hey, if the glove fits, slap someone with it.
I have R3 (and DBR-62 previously) on IsoAcoustics Iso-200 stands on both sides of a widescreen monitor as shown on the pic at my earlier post.

None of these speakers are ideal for near-field in theory, certainly some nice coaxial Genelecs would be better. Also any speaker in this position will have interference with the monitor in between, reflections from the desk and vibrations, etc. I suspect Dirac does some magic to tune out the effect of those, but could be just my wishful thinking. Definitely the imaging precision improvement with Dirac is astounding and clearly audible - sounds on the stage turn from large spheres/blobs to precise points after calibration. In the end, both speakers were great for my modest near-field listening while working needs.
 

regan

Active Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2022
Messages
196
Likes
83
I'd be curious to hear UBR-62 too, considered it also as an upgrade from DBR-62, but chose R3 instead.
Seems that UBR-62 has a lot of the coaxial benefits of R3, but with wider soundstage (based on horizontal dispersion measurements). Erin's measurements here. Based on the data I'd infer R3 can play louder without distortion than UBR-62. It's kind of obvious from looking at them in terms of size - UBR is smaller with a tiny coaxial driver, while R3 is massive with a huge coaxial driver. That's important for me, I want my speakers to be able to play 96dB without stress.
That's interesting.
Would you say the UBR-62 is somewhat "better" than the R3 at low and medium volume?

Also in the Kef R3 review Erin is really impressed by the level of detail and "3D sound feeling" (i'm a total noob, sorry) of the speakers, of how every instrument has its own very specific place in the room and stuff like that. Is there a measurement for this kind of effect? Would you say the UBR-62 has it as much as the R3? Really struggling to pick from the two and the UBR is quite tempting if the only downsides vs R3 are the distortions at loud volumes and the weaker bass. These 2 issues wouldn't be a problem for me since I'm planning to add a sub in the future.
 
OP
F

f1shb0n3

Senior Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Aug 29, 2020
Messages
323
Likes
498
Location
Seattle Area
That's interesting.
Would you say the UBR-62 is somewhat "better" than the R3 at low and medium volume?

Also in the Kef R3 review Erin is really impressed by the level of detail and "3D sound feeling" (i'm a total noob, sorry) of the speakers, of how every instrument has its own very specific place in the room and stuff like that. Is there a measurement for this kind of effect? Would you say the UBR-62 has it as much as the R3? Really struggling to pick from the two and the UBR is quite tempting if the only downsides vs R3 are the distortions at loud volumes and the weaker bass. These 2 issues wouldn't be a problem for me since I'm planning to add a sub in the future.
Can't really say anything about a speaker I haven't heard :) My feeling is you'd be happy with either one of them as both seem well designed and measuring well. Don't buy KEF R3 at full price though, the current $2200 seems expensive and they'll probably discount them again to $1700 soon as they did few months ago.
 

regan

Active Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2022
Messages
196
Likes
83
Can't really say anything about a speaker I haven't heard :) My feeling is you'd be happy with either one of them as both seem well designed and measuring well. Don't buy KEF R3 at full price though, the current $2200 seems expensive and they'll probably discount them again to $1700 soon as they did few months ago.
Thanks for your insights
Fortunately in my country the Kefs are 1000 and the UBR62s are 750. Also the evo 4.2 are priced at 550 (noticed you tested these too).
Out of all the speakers you tested which one do you prefer most?
 
OP
F

f1shb0n3

Senior Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Aug 29, 2020
Messages
323
Likes
498
Location
Seattle Area
Thanks for your insights
Fortunately in my country the Kefs are 1000 and the UBR62s are 750. Also the evo 4.2 are priced at 550 (noticed you tested these too).
Out of all the speakers you tested which one do you prefer most?
I’ve not heard evo 4.2. Only know for sure R3 are very good and seem to be universally liked. R3 at 30% more than UBR62 seem like a good deal. You get more speaker pounds per dollar - R3 are large, heavy, shiny and built like a tank :)
 

Ziroz

Member
Joined
Nov 12, 2022
Messages
52
Likes
121
Thanks for your insights
Fortunately in my country the Kefs are 1000 and the UBR62s are 750. Also the evo 4.2 are priced at 550 (noticed you tested these too).
Out of all the speakers you tested which one do you prefer most?
Which one did you get eventually?
 
Top Bottom