Wharfedale Aura 2 review by ErinsAudioCorner

[napilopez]

I’m not sure I agree there. I go back to the OG THX speakers, when narrow verticals was a big part of the spec so most of them had a line of domes. All of them that I heard (ok, KEF and Snell) sounded off in the treble IMO.

Also, I wonder if the NFS and fixed distance measurements correctly capture vertical directivity of long tweeters. The points captured don’t vary much in distance from the speaker. I’ve always subjectively found long tweeters to fare worse in the “sit-stand test” than calculated verticals would suggest. At a 10’ listening distance the theoretical vertical listening window of a point source with 20 degree directivity is about 3.5’ if my math is right. Yet I’ve subjectively found - never measured, admittedly - treble disappears with long tweeters when you move up much less than that. But narrow horns aren’t as bad in that respect (though I’ve never used one that narrow).

Interesting! I haven't properly tested anything with a ribbon\long tweeter, so I can't speak too much about the effect on the sweet spot. I suppose even if the direct sound isn't too far off, the whole thing gets "shifted" so maybe the overall impact is higher than I assumed. For horns and deep waveguides, it's harder to separate the vertical from the horizontal narrowness.

With regards to the overall sound though, for me it mainly comes from the idea that I've read attenuating vertical reflections (I think the ceiling mostly, and as opposed to other wall reflections) probably has the biggest positive impact on the sound. And in my own experience, a high ceiling does wonders for acoustics. When I moved apartments, the change in sound quality from having 14 foot ceilings to 8 foot ceilings was dramatic, despite having a wider room in my new place...

Overall, like most things in audio, I've gathered both positive and negative impressions of narrow vertical directivity. Usually though, when I do see people complain about it it's about the sweet-spot (as you mentioned) rather than overall sound quality. The BMRs are still quite loved, after all.

 

[beagleman]

QUITE Decent in many ways, but was a "Bit" surprised to see the 500-2 kHz range being a tad forward, rather than a tad recessed as is common with Wharfedale speakers. Not sure it matters, but did not expect that.

 

[geox]

so while looking for vertical directivity information, came across this chart by @jitli
Seems to me like having speaker / tweeter slightly angled up would make up for the narrow vertical directivity :/

Bookshelves with better below-axis vertical directivity than KEF's around $2000?

I'm looking for a pair of bookshelf speakers with good vertical directivity. The offerings from KEF (first the LS50 Meta, and also the KEF R3) are at the top of my list, and are well-covered in other threads like the 22-pager here...

audiosciencereview.com

 

[Krillin]

Wharfedale Aura 2: 103db Max SPL
Wharfedale Elysian 2: 109db Max SPL
KEF R3 Meta: 110db Max SPL

Are the Wharfedale Aura's really that limited? Or is this just add a subwoofer and the Max SPL goes up significantly? Not that I intend to listen that loud however I am thinking of dynamic peaks in home theater.

Also, I am curious to see how the Aura C center channel measures as it appears to be a 2-way and not a 2.5 way. It seems to be well built at 60 lbs however another Aura 2 would probably be better.

 

[thewas]

You can ignore those manufacturers max SPL specs as they are not standardized and thus not really comparable.
Also for example the Aura 2 is tuned for a deeper and louder lower bass than the R3 Meta, so if both are equalised/corrected to the same room response it will gain some dB margin in comparison.

 

[Krillin]

I see conflicting information regarding the Aura C center channel. Is it a 2-way or 3-way? I assume 2-way as that's what most online literature says.

https://www.wharfedale.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/EVO-4-AURA-and-ELYSIAN-Comparison-231013_R1.pdf

https://www.wharfedale.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/AURA-Series-Product-Info-Doc-231011_R1_Rain.pdf

 

[Robert-Hifi]

I really like the look of the Aura series and the measurements are good, but the narrow horizontal and vertical directivity is not great (but to be expected with an AMT).
Curious if there would be any improvement in the sweetspot (horizontally) compared to the Wharfedale Evo series.
Having auditioned the Evo 4.4 in my room the sweetspot was so small I felt that I had to put my head in a vice.

This is from the Spinorama data of the Evo 4.1 vs. Aura 2.

The horizontal dispersion of the Aura AMT is more evenly up to 7kHz, but after that it also starts to beam pretty rapidly.
From what I understand it is preferred to have a wider dispersion up until 10Khz before it starts to narrow up.