Wharfedale Denton 80th Anniversary Speaker Review

[MAB]

Then they need to revisit their communication skills because that is precisely how they came across.

Apologies if I was rude or nitpicky. I recognize there is always post-review grandstanding, and pontificating. And it can likely rub wrong at times.

 

[beagleman]

Well this for sure brings it out of the Poor category to a somewhat "not terrible/almost maybe fine", but for sure not great at all.

But it has other issues, among them being distortion.

I am interested in hearing it for sure, but I think will stay happy with my Wharfedale 12.1s for now!

 

[Rick Sykora]

Thanks Amir!

Now that the corrected grille measurements align with expectations, think we can move on. I checked with the owner and he agrees, so we are no longer planning to do additional measurements. It is good to see that the grille cleans up the ugliest of the response deviations.

Am more fond of a nice finish than retro styling and yet more fond of better drivers than nice wood. Newer Wharfedale designs do not have recessed baffles for a good reason. So, it is not SOTA, but looks higher quality than most. We have seen worse and, as posted earlier, there is a newer model. Enough said on this one.

 

[thewas]

I checked with the owner and he agrees, so we are no longer planning to do additional measurements. It is good to see that the grille cleans up the ugliest of the response deviations.

It would have been nice to see with some measurements under angles if its directivity also improves like it did for the Linton 85.

 

[Thomas_A]

Messy image but on-axis vs the Revel M105

 

[thewas]

Messy image but on-axis vs the Revel M105

View attachment 347932

Doesn't make much sense though to compare anechoic with in-room measurements (with 100 ms gate time).

 

[Thomas_A]

Doesn't make much sense though to compare anechoic with in-room measurements (with 100 ms gate time).

Not below 1 kHz but at 1 meter distance in a large room you will see correlation > 1 kHz. Amir could confirm by gating 10 ms.

 

[thewas]

Not below 1 kHz but at 1 meter distance in a large room you will see correlation > 1 kHz. Amir could confirm by gating 10 ms.

Correlation yes, but without smoothing the gated one will still look "noisier", I personally prefer 1/12 to 1/24 octave smoothing for such.

 

[Thomas_A]

Correlation yes, but without smoothing the gated one will still look "noisier", I personally prefer 1/12 to 1/24 octave smoothing for such.

Agree with that. My point is that on-axis, both speakers are quite similar when grille is used for the Denton. Yet they are given final verdicts that are in the absolute top and bottom of the scale, respectively. Part of it may be that grille is not used, that dispersion is different, distortion differences, and bias. We don’t know.

 

[thewas]

Agree with that. My point is that on-axis, both speakers are quite similar when grille is used for the Denton. Yet they are given final verdicts that are in the absolute top and bottom of the scale, respectively. Part of it may be that grille is not used, that dispersion is different, distortion differences, and bias. We don’t know.

Also agree then

 

[Blamb512]

I bought a pair of these speakers locally used for $200 a few weeks back. I think they sound pretty good other than some bass bloom on the lower end. Just because I was curious after seeing these measurements and the resonances I decided to take them apart and see how they were made. Thought I'd share the pictures here for others to enjoy.

First, there is quite a lot of batting material in the box and it sounds pretty inert when knocking on it. Also there's a cross brace in the middle of the speaker.
Second, the basket of the woofer is plastic, I've never seen this before and it surprised me. I went ahead and added some dynamat material to the basket in case it's causing some of the resonances.
Third The tweeter is very heavy, magnet structure is rather large from what I've seen.

 

[mhardy6647]

Plastic loudspeaker baskets have become ever more popular in the last, oh, I don't know, 15 to 20 years. If well done, they should (or at least could) be less ringy than stamped baskets -- and certainly cheaper than cast metal baskets.

 

[amirm]

Messy image but on-axis vs the Revel M105

I don't know why you would remotely compare those two. Here is the Denton again:

Bass starts to roll off at 100 Hz and by 2 kHz, it already has had two resonances with one major one around 700 Hz. It also has severe directivity error around 2 to 3 kHz. Here is the M105:

See how it has ruler flat bass response down to 70 Hz. That flat response sports almost no resonances or deviations up to 2.5 kHz. While it also has a bit of directivity error, it is much less severe due to deployment of waveguide.

Everything we know about science of speaker preference says the M105 is superior to Denon 80 and by a mile. I mean look at the predicted in-room response:

Here is the Denton 80:

No way, no how you are going to get the M105 PIR out of Denton by putting a grill on it. The response has the wrong slope on top of pronounced resonances.

You want to tell me that I should have had a bad experience given this data and made it up that the M105 sounded great and Denton didn't??? If so, you should stop reading my reviews there since you are throwing out every core idea behind the predictive power of measurements.

 

[Blamb512]

I wonder what's causing the resonances especially in the 200-800hz range, maybe the port? Any suggestions for how to tame it? I've seen a few people comment that the ports are smaller than expected, I wonder if cutting a slot port (connecting the two small ones) would have a beneficial effect. The cabinet seems well built and has a lot of batting in it so those easy fixes of bracing/stuffing don't seem like they'll make a difference.

 

[Thomas_A]

I don't know why you would remotely compare those two. Here is the Denton again:

Bass starts to roll off at 100 Hz and by 2 kHz, it already has had two resonances with one major one around 700 Hz. It also has severe directivity error around 2 to 3 kHz. Here is the M105:

See how it has ruler flat bass response down to 70 Hz. That flat response sports almost no resonances or deviations up to 2.5 kHz. While it also has a bit of directivity error, it is much less severe due to deployment of waveguide.

Everything we know about science of speaker preference says the M105 is superior to Denon 80 and by a mile. I mean look at the predicted in-room response:

Here is the Denton 80:

No way, no how you are going to get the M105 PIR out of Denton by putting a grill on it. The response has the wrong slope on top of pronounced resonances.

You want to tell me that I should have had a bad experience given this data and made it up that the M105 sounded great and Denton didn't??? If so, you should stop reading my reviews there since you are throwing out every core idea behind the predictive power of measurements.

I am not disputing the spins per se. They are excellent as always. However the Denton clearly shows less on-axis variation with the grille and its on-axis above 1 kHz with grille is quite similar to the Revel. Since the manual says to remove grille ”occasionalIy for cleaning purposes” I would be careful to interpret the current spin results as representative for actual use (with grille). I see nothing wrong with that statement.

 

[DSJR]

Any speaker I hear that all but cuts off below 100Hz sounds 'odd' to me, irrespective of what's going on further up. For the music I play the most, I need some extension at least to 60hz or so ideally.

 

[amirm]

Since the manual says to remove grille ”occasionalIy for cleaning purposes” I would be careful to interpret the current spin results as representative for actual use (with grille).

Once more: the grill is not remotely going to fix the sins of this speaker. I explained it all in my post. None of the issues below the super important range of < 2 kHz are impacted by the grill due to frequencies involved.

 

[Thomas_A]

Once more: the grill is not remotely going to fix the sins of this speaker. I explained it all in my post. None of the issues below the super important range of < 2 kHz are impacted by the grill due to frequencies involved.

This was not what I said either. What is obvious is that the retro cabinet design gives quite large diffraction errors that the grille is supposed to reduce. The retro edges are also protruding and chamfered in a way that may worsen the reflections. The grille is also chamfered to fit these edges. It is clear from your measurements, both the spin where listening window curve is significantly more linear (+/- 2 dB) than the on-axis (+/- 4 dB) and the gated measurement with (+/- 2.5 dB) or without grille (+/- 5 dB). The gated measurements also show even more fine variations without the grille (+/- 5 dB) compared to the spin (+/-4 dB) which most likely is due to measurement errors of the gating (100 ms) method.

 

[beagleman]

@amirm

I think forum member @Thomas_A is trying to say, I could be wrong of course......

Is that this curve,,,(Greenish colored line) is what many of us believe to be the ideal "In use curve and closer to the Revel than the original curve or spin showed.
I do not completely agree with him, and have not heard either speaker, so not judging your subjective on this or his assessment totally, but I think he is just trying to say, they appear somewhat closer in appearance when factoring in the "With Grill" measurement, and he finds it hard to UNDERSTAND how they can measure not truly FAR apart yet have subjective impressions that are quite opposite.

I agree about distortion and dispersion to some extent, and lack of bass making the Denton less desirable, but again not having heard either.....means we are going only by FR curves for the most part.

 

[Rick Sykora]

This was not what I said either. What is obvious is that the retro cabinet design gives quite large diffraction errors that the grille is supposed to reduce. The retro edges are also protruding and chamfered in a way that may worsen the reflections. The grille is also chamfered to fit these edges. It is clear from your measurements, both the spin where listening window curve is significantly more linear (+/- 2 dB) than the on-axis (+/- 4 dB) and the gated measurement with (+/- 2.5 dB) or without grille (+/- 5 dB). The gated measurements also show even more fine variations without the grille (+/- 5 dB) compared to the spin (+/-4 dB) which most likely is due to measurement errors of the gating (100 ms) method.

Hi Thomas,

Aside from stating what we have all can observe, not sure what your goal is here? I suggest Amir is simply stating his overall assessment of the Denton (and with corrections, now makes more sense). Is there something more you are expecting? If so, will help if I can.