• 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!

Triangle Borea BR03 Review (bookshelf speaker)

No, not all. I do think it is my favorite in that price category of $300 though.

For example, I like it better overall than the KEF Q150, which you are also considering.

I think the JBL Studio 530 is also a good choice in that price category, but for me I cannot get past how ugly they are :D
Yeah those JBLs are pretty unorthodox looking, let's put it that way.:)
 
Completely subjective, but I just demo'd the BR03 alongside the Dali Oberon 1 and Kef Q150. Took my little Loxjie A30 to Richer Sounds with me. They were probably my favourite of the three, the KEFs were my least favourite. However, none of them really won me over so I ordered some JBL A130s. I couldn't bring myself to go even higher with my budget. The BR03 did remind me what a cymbal or high hat could sound like though and were definitely more enagaging (had my foot tapping) by comparison to the other two.
 
Interesting I can’t find this product listed yet on the Triangle site but looks like powered versions are coming. I think they used BR02 pictures for all the listings
 
Interesting I can’t find this product listed yet on the Triangle site but looks like powered versions are coming. I think they used BR02 pictures for all the listings
On this website they have a BT version of the BRO2 or BRO3. There is a diagram with I/O.
https://www.lazada.sg/products/triangle-new-borea-bluetooth-speakers-i2224442099-s12775424661.html
c9d09e94c5e74cead8298707c14628c9.png_2200x2200q80.jpg_.webp


Incidentally, Triangle brand is now available through audiophonics.fr as well.
 
This is a review and detailed measurements of the Triangle Borea BR03 bookshelf speaker. It was kindly sent to me for testing by a member and costs US $499 on Amazon including Prime shipping.

I like the distinctive white face of the BR03 but don't care much for the imitation white oak enclosure:

View attachment 120205

The dual ports and distance above woofer, push up the tweeter higher than other speakers I have tested, landing it above my ear height. I had to sit up during my listening tests to compensate.

Binding posts on the back were comfortable to use since they were not recessed:
View attachment 120206

One online blogger raved about this speaker back in 2019 causing it to become quite popular. It will be interesting to see how it does in our testing.

Measurements that you are about to see were performed using the Klippel Near-field Scanner (NFS). This is a robotic measurement system that analyzes the speaker all around and is able (using advanced mathematics and dual scan) to subtract room reflections (so where I measure it doesn't matter). It also measures the speaker at close distance ("near-field") which sharply reduces the impact of room noise. Both of these factors enable testing in ordinary rooms yet results that can be more accurate than an anechoic chamber. In a nutshell, the measurements show the actual sound coming out of the speaker independent of the room.

I performed over 1000 measurement which resulted in error rate below 1% for most of the except around 2 kHz where it crept up to 2% error. Sound field got quite complex there suggesting multiple sources than just the two drivers (diffraction, etc.).

Testing temperature was around 59 degrees F. Speaker was kept indoor however at normal living room temperature (72 degrees).

Reference axis for measurements was the center of the tweeter. Grill was not used in either measurements or listening tests.

Measurements are compliant with latest speaker research into what can predict the speaker preference and is standardized in CEA/CTA-2034 ANSI specifications. Likewise listening tests are performed per research that shows mono listening is much more revealing of differences between speakers than stereo or multichannel.

Triangle Borea BR03 Measurements
Acoustic measurements can be grouped in a way that can be perceptually analyzed to determine how good a speaker is and how it can be used in a room. This so called spinorama shows us just about everything we need to know about the speaker with respect to tonality and some flaws:

View attachment 120207

That's an interesting frequency response. A bit boosted around 100 Hz, then down and then boosted again between 500 and 1000 Hz. Then a few more resonances, ending with some peaking from the tweeter. Some kind of discontinuity exists around 1190 Hz and then again near 20 kHz. Not worried about the latter but the rest needs investigation so let's look at the near-field response of the driver:

View attachment 120208

Focusing on woofer curve in red, it starts to slope down but then goes right back up??? The port is pushing it that way but I can't help but think that they are using a first order electrical filter for the woofer so letting it play for much longer than it should. That in turn hypes up the resonances from the port. Together they screw up the response in the mid-range and lower treble. The tweeter lacks even response by itself.

Early window response is not too bad:

View attachment 120209

Floor bounce seems to accentuate the highs (!) and the 600 to 900 Hz so best to use a thick carpet as indicated.

Predicted in-room response shows a mellowing of the aberrations we have seen:
View attachment 120211

Would the slightly boosted upper bass help offset the accentuated highs? Hard to say.

Distortion data points to woofer playing for longer than it should:

View attachment 120212

But overall, the levels are under control at 86 dBSPL:

View attachment 120213

Horizontal beamwidth is good:

View attachment 120214

Resonances make the contour more choppy however:
View attachment 120215

Typical of 2-way non-coaxial speakers, you need to keep the tweeter more or less at ear level:
View attachment 120216

As usual, actual impedance is lower than advertised:

View attachment 120217

Finally, here is the waterfall:

View attachment 120218

Triangle Borea BR03 Listening Tests
First impression was warm sound and "this is not bad." Whether influenced by measurements or actual sound, I just was not a fan of the midrange. It sounded more and more grungy as I listened. And the highs started to stand out. A bit of boominess was there as well. Equalization was not effective. In blind testing, I could not tell if I always liked the post EQ version.

In truth, I cannot tell you by listening that this speaker is bad or good. It really frustrated me. Usually I am pretty comfortable teasing out whether the fidelity of the speaker is good or not. But with EQ experiments failing, I just could not get there. I changed speakers to Revel M106 and as usual, that speaker delighted with a far more clean sound and balanced tonality. It had deeper, cleaner bass compared to the slightly boomy one on the Triangle.

I should point out that the BR03 was rather efficient and could play very loud without bottoming out.

Conclusions
I don't have any for you! This speaker busted my chops. I think it is a flawed design by it is broken in a way that creates a more pleasing sound than one would expect. Not sure if this is by design or what. Or whether it is my failing in characterizing it. You have the data. You chime in as to what you think.

Overall, I am not going to recommend the Triangle Borea BR03. It just didn't sound satisfying to me. But I could be wrong enough that other praise for it could very well be correct. Once in a while, this speaker reviewing business can get hard and this is one of those rare occasions!

------------
As always, questions, comments, recommendations, etc. are welcome.

Guess what? Gardening season is starting! Have to plant my peppers and tomatoes indoor so that by the time the weather is warm, the can be large and busy and ready to go. Otherwise, the season will be way too short. No, you don't need to fund the seeds. Already horded a bunch in the fall, worrying there would be a shortage! Have some planting soil left from last year as well. What you need to fund is me quitting my second job at McDonald's so that I have time to plant! At $15/hour, that is a big hit to my income! So please, please reach deep in your electronic wallet and dump as much money as you can into mine using: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/how-to-support-audio-science-review.8150/
Are you sure you gave these speakers time to break in? Your comments about the sound relate directly to what would be considered much needed burn in time
 
I have the BR02 and subjectively, I like them a lot. I have a small room and I feel like the sound is smooth/laid-back and not bright or shouty at all. I think they have very natural sounding tonality in the midrange and don't sound sterile/cold/clinical. Their strength is with vocals and imaging performance.

But yeah, if you want the most neutral sounding speaker, then there are better options in that price range.

I also disagree about the Q150 not being fussy about placement. If they are too close to the wall, the bass will be boomy and you will need to use the supplied port plugs to tame that IME.

For reference, I've also owned the KEF Q150, KEF LS50, ELAC Debut Reference DBR62, Polk R200, JBL Studio 530, Infinity R162, etc.

I've just put in an order for the Wharfedale Diamond 12.1 so I'll be able to compare those soon.

You could read reviews and measurements of different speakers all day, but personally, I prefer trying them in my own system/room to determine if I like them.

Right now Amazon (through Focus Camera) is selling the BR02 for $299:

Sometimes the price goes up but just refresh the page at different times during the day and at least one or two of the color choices will show $299. You can try them out and if you don't get along with them, return them if you keep them in new condition until January 31 2022.
I'm interested to hear what your take is since getting the 12.1's? I'm thinking about some of the ones you have mentioned... the 12.1, Encore B6, Bro2 and Polk R200.
 
Pref Score 4.2 which is not bad for a cheap 2 way.
With an EQ score jump to 6.1.

You can use as many filters as you want in order. I would keep the first 8.

Code:
EQ for Triangle Borea BR03 computed from ASR data
Preference Score 4.3 with EQ 6.1
Generated from http://github.com/pierreaubert/spinorama/generate_peqs.py v0.6
Dated: 2021-03-25-05:30:35

Preamp: -2.5 dB

Filter  1: ON PK Fc 12089 Hz Gain -3.55 dB Q 0.35
Filter  2: ON PK Fc   782 Hz Gain -2.84 dB Q 2.75
Filter  3: ON PK Fc  1200 Hz Gain +2.60 dB Q 12.00
Filter  4: ON PK Fc  1428 Hz Gain -2.19 dB Q 10.15
Filter  5: ON PK Fc 11690 Hz Gain -0.83 dB Q 4.82
Filter  6: ON PK Fc  7971 Hz Gain +1.30 dB Q 7.69
Filter  7: ON PK Fc  2046 Hz Gain -1.70 dB Q 9.78
Filter  8: ON PK Fc  3203 Hz Gain +1.12 dB Q 8.12
Filter  9: ON PK Fc  2489 Hz Gain -1.60 dB Q 12.00
Filter 10: ON PK Fc   995 Hz Gain -0.92 dB Q 12.00
Filter 11: ON PK Fc   378 Hz Gain +0.93 dB Q 2.64
Filter 12: ON PK Fc   645 Hz Gain -1.30 dB Q 12.00
Filter 13: ON PK Fc  2762 Hz Gain +0.96 dB Q 12.00
Filter 14: ON PK Fc  2523 Hz Gain -0.47 dB Q 12.00
Filter 15: ON PK Fc  2270 Hz Gain +0.88 dB Q 12.00
Filter 16: ON PK Fc  3736 Hz Gain -1.18 dB Q 12.00
Filter 17: ON PK Fc  4489 Hz Gain +1.03 dB Q 8.12
Filter 18: ON PK Fc  9621 Hz Gain -0.40 dB Q 6.08
Filter 19: ON PK Fc   769 Hz Gain +0.58 dB Q 12.00
Filter 20: ON PK Fc  1241 Hz Gain +0.77 dB Q 12.00

Hi

What software on Mac OS would allow me to apply such filters
the filter values look really confusing is there any manual to undersand what is going on ?
 
What software on Mac OS would allow me to apply such filters
the filter values look really confusing is there any manual to undersand what is going on ?
SoundSource can do it. It hink you can even load the file with the filters directly as a headphone correction, but it should work just fine for speakers as well.

Other options:

 
look at screen
there is nothing that aligns with the values respectively to the filters mentioend really confused
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot 2023-01-08 at 18.31.19.png
    Screenshot 2023-01-08 at 18.31.19.png
    907.8 KB · Views: 113
You'll need the "headphone EQ"

1673208055438.png


Then try adding the file as a new profile.

Alternatively, you can add a parametric EQ:
1673208230174.png

This will let you add the parameters by hand. You'll need to convert Q to Width, however. You can do that using this: http://www.sengpielaudio.com/calculator-bandwidth.htm

There is also AUParametricEQ. But it's only a visual tool, so you'll need to eyeball it...
 
Last edited:
Erins just uploaded his review video:


His spinorama looks as usually

View attachment 307785

similar to Amirs one but not identical

index.php
I think that's pretty reasonable, given gear to gear have deviation, and as good as Klippel's data calculation is, I do expect the high Q resonances or ripples in FR to be different
 
"...This speaker busted my chops. I think it is a flawed design by it is broken in a way that creates a more pleasing sound than one would expect. Not sure if this is by design or what. Or whether it is my failing in characterizing it. You have the data. You chime in as to what you think."

I've owned a pair for a few months now and bought a second pair for a different room. Whatever you're describing with "creates a more pleasing sound than one would expect" :) certainly has struck me because it's the most musically-pleasing speaker I've personally listened to.

I'm using an 8'' sub in both cases, same DAC, different amps - just incredibly pleasing to listen to, IMO.
 
400€ for a pair of ELAC DBR62 with much better measurements...

I compared these to both the Elac dbr62 and 5.2 and returned the Elacs. I compared a few others as well, but nothing outside of this general price range.

I sort of suspect that speakers are harder to map objective measurements with human response consistently than amps or DACs are - meaning, if a DAC or amp have stellar measurements and don't color the music in some way out the door they'll always sound good to pretty much everyone. But speakers can't follow that rule as tightly, because so much depends on room placement, or if you have an amp that emphasizes the same frequency range as the speakers, making that range sound harsh to you with that particular combo.
 
I compared these to both the Elac dbr62 and 5.2 and returned the Elacs. I compared a few others as well, but nothing outside of this general price range.

I sort of suspect that speakers are harder to map objective measurements with human response consistently than amps or DACs are - meaning, if a DAC or amp have stellar measurements and don't color the music in some way out the door they'll always sound good to pretty much everyone. But speakers can't follow that rule as tightly, because so much depends on room placement, or if you have an amp that emphasizes the same frequency range as the speakers, making that range sound harsh to you with that particular combo.

My experience with these aligns with yours. Demos and in-room tests against multiple other speakers (Focal Aria 906, Q Acoustics 5020, Monitor Audio Silver RX1 and Silver 50, Monoprice 365T, Klipsch RP-600M) and preferred the way these sound above all the others. The sound of drums and guitars just seems right with the correct level of excitement whereas some of the others sounded dull. At the other end of the scale were the Klipsch which were all boom-tizz and a missing midrange.

Using a 10" sub with them combined with my new WiiM amp and very happy with the sound.
 
I have had a pair for a while now. I cycle between a few speakers sets including: JBL L-52 Classic, SoundArtist SC6a, WHarfdale 80th Anniversary Denton and KEF Q150.

I am currently using the Triangles out in the living room in an auxiliary 2 channel stereo configuration along side my home theater setup. I frankly don't care to listen to music through the HT system as it is 100% setup for 7.2.1 Atmos 4K UHD HDR movie watching. But I had room so I have a Class AB amp (FOSI HD-A1) and A SMSL SU-8s DAC. I plug in my Pixel and listen to Quboz HiRes through the DAC....mostly Jazz, electronica, chill lounge, LoFi, modern vocal shoe gaze - Beach house, Tame Impala, Roosevelt, electronic...some Dad rock Wilco, War on Drugs, Millenial EDM stuff and modern indie rock - etc...

The Triangles are musical and pleasant and without a sub-woofer give me adequate bass presence. and instrument and note separation. The midrange deinition and sound stage are really suited to HiRes Quboz. Now my hearing is naturally rolled off in the upper frequency bands but I can still differentiate between clear, bright and brittle high frequency sound timbres.

I have auditioned The SoundArtist, and Denton recently and , all are excellent to my ears in different ways but t is really a pleasure listening to the Triangles though. (The JBLs are my favorite but I have those in my study with my vinyl system, FLuance RT85 Ortofon 2M-Blue, Schiit Gjallarhorns in mono, SMSL DO200 MrkII DAC and HO200 Headphone/Pre and a WiiM.)

I use the SoundArtists as fronts in the home theater and have to physically move them to use the Triangles. I am retired so doing shit like that keeps me busy.

All in all the Triangle BRO3 might be geared for my aging ears and long history with playing music, recording and vintage equipment because the sound settles around my head like a favorite pillow. I can lose myself in the music and memories, for me....that is what really matters. I still can hear certain stereo systems from my past and if the results fits in with those I am very satisfied.

If you can recognize a Hammond B3 from a B100 and M2, a real leslie speaker cabinet when you hear one, or visualize how far away a microphone is from a guitar amp and what kind of guitar and amp it is...if the bass is electric, is direct or through an amp if the mix is live or tracked and the reverb is room, plate or digital....or a combo, then the speakers are doing their job.
 
I bought a couple of these BR03 speakers three years ago (before reading any test here), at that time paid them 360 Euro (I live in Northern Italy), and I bought them in a shop where the (competent) dealer has a serious Hi-fi listening room with the possibility to switch them with other loudspeakers (and amplifiers too) and I compared them with few other similar-price competitors, I used them for one year in a living room of 32 m^2 with moderate acoustic treatment (bass traps in the 4 corners and "broadband" panels like 244 ones from GIKAcoustics and similar from Addictive Sound in the front and side walls, according to "LEDE" philosophy) and I must admit I was so happy of their performance that, when I upgraded my "basic" (but not trivial) Hi-Fi system to the Home-Theater one, I bought a couple of Borea BR08 (for 800 Euro!) as main speakers (to have same tonality on midrange and tweeter with the advantage of a deeper and fuller bass) and reused the BR03 for rear surround channels in a 5.0.2 setup (yes, no sub needed with the BR08 because in my living room of 90m^3 I go down to 27Hz - measured - due to lower room resonance), matching them with the BRC01 central channel and two BRA01 mounted on the ceiling as Atmos speakers. Very happy of this cheap and effective HT system, not esoteric but effective.
Yes, the Revel M106 have for sure lower distortion and a more linear frequency response but c'mon, they cost 5x, so IMHO cannot compare them with these cheap BR03!
For me at this price they still are in 2024 a valid couple of speakers for a budget system.
My 2 cents.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom