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

TAD Evolution 2 Speaker Review

Rate this speaker:

  • 1. Poor (headless panther)

    Votes: 66 15.1%
  • 2. Not terrible (postman panther)

    Votes: 207 47.5%
  • 3. Fine (happy panther

    Votes: 149 34.2%
  • 4. Great (golfing panther)

    Votes: 14 3.2%

  • Total voters
    436

BrokenEnglishGuy

Major Contributor
Joined
Jul 19, 2020
Messages
1,874
Likes
1,118
To me this, looks like more 50° to 40°...
index.php
 

Pearljam5000

Major Contributor
Joined
Oct 12, 2020
Messages
4,956
Likes
5,126
They have to...

But what i don't like about this company is their Price/performance ratio

This tower is fine for 2000 USD segment... I don't know how they come with that 20,000 price for this very simple tower...
You're also paying for the brand name and exclusivity...
 

Robbo99999

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 23, 2020
Messages
6,799
Likes
6,611
Location
UK
Scoreout of the boxw/EQ
out of the box6.06.8
w/ perfect subwoofer7.38.0

I will not comment on the price. I didn't read the thread yet but clearly they know what they are doing: DI is outstanding. And linear DI means great opportunity to EQ.
Let's do a simple EQ to flatten the listening window (orange curve):

View attachment 242037

Code:
EQ for TAD Evolution 2 computed from ASR data
Preference Score 6.0 with EQ 6.8
Generated from http://github.com/pierreaubert/spinorama/generate_peqs.py v0.16
Dated: 2022-11-08-21:00:14

Preamp: -4.4 dB

Filter  1: ON PK Fc  8925 Hz Gain -2.27 dB Q 1.93
Filter  2: ON PK Fc  2540 Hz Gain +1.86 dB Q 2.85
Filter  3: ON PK Fc   601 Hz Gain -3.59 dB Q 1.64
Filter  4: ON PK Fc  6638 Hz Gain -0.51 dB Q 1.55
Filter  5: ON PK Fc    34 Hz Gain +4.24 dB Q 0.81
Filter  6: ON PK Fc   120 Hz Gain -0.99 dB Q 2.92
Filter  7: ON PK Fc    43 Hz Gain -0.55 dB Q 2.96
Filter  8: ON PK Fc    55 Hz Gain +0.55 dB Q 0.61
Filter  9: ON PK Fc    45 Hz Gain -0.62 dB Q 2.97
Nice, my intuition had told me these would be real easy to EQ!
 

juliangst

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Dec 11, 2021
Messages
942
Likes
952
Location
Germany
1667947831497.png



70K € is a bit much for 'bookshelf' speakers IMHO but at least you get one of the most beautifully finished speakers on the market
 

amarsicola

Active Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Dec 6, 2019
Messages
118
Likes
338
Location
Rome, Italy
At least if they sell 4 or 5 pairs they can get the money for a Klippel for their next shoot. Their audience is tipically not reading this forum, so they have a hope.
 

BillH

Active Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 10, 2018
Messages
128
Likes
258
Location
Bedford, MA
I almost posted yesterday when I first saw this review. The directivity curve is pretty unique. Not only are there no dips but the slope is nearly constant throughout the frequency band. I think if one peruses the top tier speakers this one looks good looking only at this metric. My recollection is that a lot of “good” directivity speakers omit the dip but show a change in slope along the way
 

jae

Major Contributor
Joined
Dec 2, 2019
Messages
1,208
Likes
1,502
Have been seeing a lot of TAD speakers in more than one of those youtuber "audiophile" "reference" systems. With 10-40k worth of equipment running into them.
 

Maiky76

Senior Member
Joined
May 28, 2020
Messages
435
Likes
3,659
Location
French, living in China
Scoreout of the boxw/EQ
out of the box6.06.8
w/ perfect subwoofer7.38.0

I will not comment on the price. I didn't read the thread yet but clearly they know what they are doing: DI is outstanding. And linear DI means great opportunity to EQ.
Let's do a simple EQ to flatten the listening window (orange curve):

View attachment 242037

Code:
EQ for TAD Evolution 2 computed from ASR data
Preference Score 6.0 with EQ 6.8
Generated from http://github.com/pierreaubert/spinorama/generate_peqs.py v0.16
Dated: 2022-11-08-21:00:14

Preamp: -4.4 dB

Filter  1: ON PK Fc  8925 Hz Gain -2.27 dB Q 1.93
Filter  2: ON PK Fc  2540 Hz Gain +1.86 dB Q 2.85
Filter  3: ON PK Fc   601 Hz Gain -3.59 dB Q 1.64
Filter  4: ON PK Fc  6638 Hz Gain -0.51 dB Q 1.55
Filter  5: ON PK Fc    34 Hz Gain +4.24 dB Q 0.81
Filter  6: ON PK Fc   120 Hz Gain -0.99 dB Q 2.92
Filter  7: ON PK Fc    43 Hz Gain -0.55 dB Q 2.96
Filter  8: ON PK Fc    55 Hz Gain +0.55 dB Q 0.61
Filter  9: ON PK Fc    45 Hz Gain -0.62 dB Q 2.97

Hi,

Here is my take on the EQ.

Please report your findings, positive or negative!

The following EQs are “anechoic” EQs to get the speaker right before room integration. If you able to implement these EQs you must add EQ at LF for room integration, that is usually not optional… see hints there: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...helf-speaker-review.11144/page-26#post-800725

The raw data with corrected ER and PIR:

Score no EQ: 5.8
With Sub: 7.2


Spinorama with no EQ:
  • Not as Flat as i would expect for the price.
  • Good Directivity good for EQ
TAD Evolution 2 No EQ Spinorama.png

Directivity:

Better stay at tweeter height
Horizontally, better toe-in the speakers by 10/20deg and have the axis crossing in front of the listening location, might help dosing the upper range.
TAD Evolution 2 2D surface Directivity Contour Only Data.png

TAD Evolution 2 LW Better data.png

EQ design:

I have generated two EQs. The APO config files are attached.
  • The first one, labelled, LW is targeted at making the LW flat
  • The second, labelled Score, starts with the first one and adds the score as an optimization variable.
  • The EQs are designed in the context of regular stereo use i.e. domestic environment, no warranty is provided for a near field use in a studio environment although the LW might be better suited for this purpose.

Score EQ LW: 6.7
with sub: 8.1

Score EQ Score: 6.8
with sub: 8.2

Code:
TAD Evolution 2 APO EQ LW 96000Hz
November092022-105607

Preamp: -2.6 dB

Filter 1: ON HPQ Fc 33.39,    0.00,    1.21
Filter 2: ON PK Fc 122.42,    -1.55,    3.09
Filter 3: ON PK Fc 198.12,    -1.03,    3.06
Filter 4: ON PK Fc 593.24,    -3.30,    1.28
Filter 5: ON PK Fc 2721.87,    3.43,    1.98
Filter 6: ON PK Fc 3256.36,    -1.61,    1.98
Filter 7: ON PK Fc 8892.96,    -1.81,    2.44
Filter 8: ON PK Fc 15901.87,    2.67,    2.76

TAD Evolution 2 APO EQ Score 96000Hz
November092022-105614

Preamp: -2.6 dB

Filter 1: ON HPQ Fc 33.68,    0.00,    1.24
Filter 2: ON PK Fc 122.92,    -1.66,    3.05
Filter 3: ON PK Fc 200.12,    -1.10,    3.18
Filter 4: ON PK Fc 587.95,    -3.70,    1.17
Filter 5: ON PK Fc 2674.74,    3.06,    1.58
Filter 6: ON PK Fc 2972.74,    -1.35,    0.50
Filter 7: ON PK Fc 3515.04,    -1.25,    2.91
Filter 8: ON PK Fc 9086.60,    -2.45,    1.94
Filter 9: ON PK Fc 16076.73,    1.77,    4.76
TAD Evolution 2 EQ Design.png



Spinorama EQ LW
TAD Evolution 2 LW EQ Spinorama.png


Spinorama EQ Score
TAD Evolution 2 Score EQ Spinorama.png


Zoom PIR-LW-ON
TAD Evolution 2 Zoom.png


Regression - Tonal
TAD Evolution 2 Regression Tonal.png


Radar no EQ vs EQ score
Small improvements
TAD Evolution 2 Radar.png


The rest of the plots is attached.

Comparison with Pierre's EQ
Slightly different scores compared to his calculation.
EQ Pierre: 6.7
with sub: 8.0

TAD Evolution 2 Pierre EQ Spinorama.png


TAD Evolution 2 Zoom Score vs Pierre.png

TAD Evolution 2 Regression Tonal Score vs Pierre.png
TAD Evolution 2 EQ Design Score vs Pierre.png
TAD Evolution 2 Radar Score vs Pierre.png
 

Attachments

  • TAD Evolution 2 Raw Directivity data.png
    TAD Evolution 2 Raw Directivity data.png
    515.2 KB · Views: 36
  • TAD Evolution 2 Reflexion data.png
    TAD Evolution 2 Reflexion data.png
    144.4 KB · Views: 39
  • TAD Evolution 2 LW data.png
    TAD Evolution 2 LW data.png
    158.8 KB · Views: 29
  • TAD Evolution 2 2D surface Directivity Contour Data.png
    TAD Evolution 2 2D surface Directivity Contour Data.png
    357.7 KB · Views: 35
  • TAD Evolution 2 3D surface Vertical Directivity Data.png
    TAD Evolution 2 3D surface Vertical Directivity Data.png
    464.7 KB · Views: 31
  • TAD Evolution 2 3D surface Horizontal Directivity Data.png
    TAD Evolution 2 3D surface Horizontal Directivity Data.png
    459.3 KB · Views: 36
  • TAD Evolution 2 Normalized Directivity data.png
    TAD Evolution 2 Normalized Directivity data.png
    332.1 KB · Views: 33
  • TAD Evolution 2 Horizontal 3D Directivity data.png
    TAD Evolution 2 Horizontal 3D Directivity data.png
    412.4 KB · Views: 34
  • TAD Evolution 2 APO EQ Score 96000Hz.txt
    485 bytes · Views: 23
  • TAD Evolution 2 APO EQ LW 96000Hz.txt
    436 bytes · Views: 29
  • TAD Evolution 2 Vertical 3D Directivity data.png
    TAD Evolution 2 Vertical 3D Directivity data.png
    423.1 KB · Views: 31
Last edited:

kemmler3D

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Aug 25, 2022
Messages
2,743
Likes
5,134
Location
San Francisco
Measurements look bad, but the unevenness in the FR will probably sound "expensive" in that it has a warm midrange (mids boosted, upper mids recesssed), a 'refined' (lacking) but extended bass section, and otherwise okay treble. With the low distortion and credible directivity, I could imagine people really liking this speaker despite imperfect measurements.

Personally I would probably find the mids a little honky (boosting 400hz is pushing it with me, better keep it to 600 or higher if you're going to do that IMO) but it's probably not horrible.

Now for $20K I voted 'not terrible', but I imagine this wouldn't sound bad in person at all. Not flat, but not bad. Probably really works for classical, you know?
 

onslash

Member
Joined
Nov 23, 2018
Messages
61
Likes
58
I have a TAD micro evolution one and i've been quite a fan of its co-axial tweeter/midrage, build quality, frequency response and measurement are pretty good too. Well, this was dissapointing... To begin with it doesn't even look that nice unlike the me-1.
 

Spocko

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Sep 27, 2019
Messages
1,619
Likes
2,994
Location
Southern California
For those wondering why it's $20K, much of that is because it's "Made in Japan". Engineering aside, you're paying for the workmanship and effort of craftsman/workers who truly take pride in their work as part of their culture - it may be worth it to some and absolutely nothing to others, but it does go into the price.
 

pma

Major Contributor
Joined
Feb 23, 2019
Messages
4,514
Likes
10,535
Location
Prague
Would be nice to have some listening impressions. It is necessary for speakers, measurements do not tell the whole story if they are at the level as those shown. I like the built quality, finally we can see something else than the “cost effective” low cost mass production product.
 
Top Bottom