Wharfedale Aura 3. Impressions and disassembly

[Architectorus]

I was listening Evo 4.4 for some time, upgraded them a little. Then there was opportunity to get Aura 3 second hand, but new in fact. Even spikes were not unpacked. So, they are mine. Compared to Evo they have more articulated base, more involving and clearer mids. Just more powerful tweeter, harsh some times. Compared to Evo’s where highs are detailed but gentle. Aura's tweeter sometimes be like "Hey man, Look at me, I'm a big AMT!". It's good for my 20sq.m. room that I can place Auras just in front of the wall (manual says from 5cm!) and they are not becoming boomy compared to Evo 4.4. That's all that I can say for a week of listening. Don't have any measurement equipment so looking forward for someone to measure and review them.

But let's look inside!

First, removing rubber trims.

1. Cabinet.
- On a positive side is its weight - brochure says 23/25kg net/gross but in fact they are 28Kg! It's pretty solid but have a thin plastic port tube which I already covered with auto noise reduction material. Strange! One cabinet have a lacquer inside, other just opened mdf.

- Spikes are gorgeous! 2 kg of steel! But can't understand what are the holes for.

- Again a big plus(spoiler-not much sense) - all drivers attached with 6 bolts each to metal inserts on a cabinet.

- Unfortunately there is a fault and engineer mistake - drivers attached with bolts but thrue plastic chrome rings - so you can't tighten them properly before cracking this rings. And can't understand a fuss about rubber rings - they are just covering bolts:

- Damping material. Once again a mismatch from official pictures. It's some kind of synthetic felt instead of foam. Material the same as in Linton, Evo 4. Packed very tightly, 5 mats in total:

- Fire in the hole! Chamber for mids is made of carton and working as brace also. But hole for inserting wires for just punctured, not drilled. So big ugly hole with with pieces of peeling cardboard from other side, surrounded by some viscous substance. Changed it for sealant.

2. Drivers.

- Tweeter. AMT with metal frame and plastic chamber with damping mat in it. Everything looks OK. Just not happy with holes for wires. I've added a little sealant, just in case.

- Midrange section. Oops - plastic frame. Why? Manual and website states that it's metal. In a good side - motor is ventilated.

- Bass drivers don't have ventilated coils but have a aluminum frame.

3. Electronics.
- Wiring. Exactly the same wires as in EVO series (some Chinese OFC). For EVO they looks good, but for price of Aura... a bit thin at least. Wires are not attached to cabinet, not glued, so I redistributed them a little, puncturing damping mats.

- Terminal posts. Again, straight from Evo series. Plastic is really thin and arches when tightening screws.

- Crossovers. They are huge and separated for mids/highs and woofers. Thanks for polycaps, but cheesy resistors. Noted that crossovers located just behind woofers and can resonate. I've added some damping pads.

So what do you thing of them? What are their competitors on a market?

PS: sorry for my English, not my native language

 

[Beave]

Their smaller sibling, the AURA 2, was measured on a Klippel at Erin's Audio Corner: https://www.erinsaudiocorner.com/loudspeakers/wharfedale_aura2/

 

[Mart68]

Three grand in the UK, not sure I'm seeing a massive value in that when you consider that will buy some very serious speakers on the used market.

The smaller model measures pretty good though. Glossy finish looks tidy.

 

[RoA]

Thank you for your work taking them apart. I wrote a thread about perceived value (Driver chassis materials actually) so here is my view (without ever having heard them). I usually have great respect for IAG and what comes out of their factories. I had a pair of Quad S2 for a long time and really liked them. Build quality was top notch for what was a budget speaker in hifi terms.

I like the bolt/inserted threads. Too many speaker manufacturers don't bother with this and just thread screws in to wood. The drivers look decent quality. I'd rather have a stiff plastic frame than stamped steel but that's just me. The main woofer's frame is cast. I think they got that right. Wiring ... I can not comment, it looks ok. The carton division wall (as opposed to MDF) seems odd but probably does the job. It does detract from build quality and I would not be happy about it for $3k. On the other hand, the baffle looks reasonably thick which is good. The Xover is no better or worse than many at and even above the cost of these but clearly, more expensive is possible but would it sound better/different? The overall look of the speaker, whilst elegant, is too blingy for me, especially the chromed rings. Makes it look cheap. Why did they bother? I like the spikes I do not like the terminal plate and connectors.

Perceived value? Only you can answer that. As has been said, you can buy some very good speakers s/h for that amount (but you did not pay full price).

Personally I would probably look at a pair of Rega Aya's at around half the cost new or ATC's second hand.

 

[Architectorus]

Thank you for your work taking them apart. I wrote a thread about perceived value (Driver chassis materials actually) so here is my view (without ever having heard them). I usually have great respect for IAG and what comes out of their factories. I had a pair of Quad2 for a long time and really liked them. Build quality was top notch for what was a budget speaker in hifi terms.

I like the bolt/inserted threads. Too many speaker manufacturers don't bother with this and just thread screws in to wood. The drivers look decent quality. I'd rather have a stiff plastic frame than stamped steel but that's just me. The main woofer's frame is cast. I think they got that right. Wiring ... I can not comment, it looks ok. The carton division wall (as opposed to MDF) seems odd but probably does the job. It does detract from build quality and I would not be happy about it for $3k. On the other hand, the baffle looks reasonably thick which is good. The Xover is no better or worse than many at and even above the cost of these but clearly, more expensive is possible but would it sound better/different? The overall look of the speaker, whilst elegant, is too blingy for me, especially the chromed rings. Makes it look cheap. Why did they bother? I like the spikes I do not like the terminal plate and connectors.

Perceived value? Only you can answer that. As has been said, you can buy some very good speakers s/h for that amount (but you did not pay full price).

I got them for local currency. If converted it will be 1625 USD . Yeah, agree about chrome. I would prefer gloss cabinet with mat drivers. But chrome is a little tinted, so looks OK

 

[Mart68]

I got them for local currency. If converted it will be 1625 USD.

At that price I think you got a lot of speaker for the money.