The 201/2s measure better than any other speaker I’ve had in room. They replaced the R3 which have caused so much consternation here due to a fabulous preference score and debatable sound.
Personally, I thought the R3s sounded as good as their measurements, but the 201/2s measure even better and sound somewhat better due to their lack of the 1khz dip that all R series speakers seem to have.
On the other hand, I am not a fan of the Harman curve often posited here as the the reference speakers should strive for.
The Harman curve is the opposite of a reference, being an estimation of preference. Yes, most people prefer a speaker with a sloping response. But many people also like Adam Sandler movies.
If you are a real objectivist, the site I linked to above also has measurements for the 201/2 replacement (KEF Reference 1) that are astonishingly good. Easily the best I’ve seen from any speaker (aside from an easily fixed bass boost).
For a wee bit more than I paid for the Davones, I could have bought a pair of the Reference Ones. The sound would probably be a wee bit better. But I have my DIY open baffles for my preference in ultimate sound quality. The Davones (and the KEFs before them) are for very good sound in the family part of the house.
And, as was noted, the Solos measure better than 98% of their competition. Davone are coy about the exact drivers, but internet sleuthing reveals they are the same SB Acoustics drivers Revel uses in the F208, with the same crossover points and crossover order.
You pay for the looks, but there is no way I would be allowed a Revel or any other ‘speakerish’ box in our lounge. My wife is still grumpy that I switched the pretty LS50 for the R3s, and she re-grumped when I switched the discrete R3s for the macho 201/2s.
