• 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!

Wharfedale Diamond 12 Owner's Thread

I went full biwire with the 12.2 and haven’t looked back.
If you want to confirm there is no benefit from bi-wiring or that the original jumpers are not optimal etc.. Just ask someone to use a piece of wire to make the same connection as the original jumpers while you listen. Just tapping the terminals with the wire should then make audible distortions as something magically changes.
 
Those jumpers sound very similar to what I am using in two different systems. The build quality of what I bought from China was surprisingly good. In addition to the flat ribbons shown in the image I shared, I tried some thick round cables built from similar materials and my daughter is using with some Whafedale Dentons. Both designs sound good.

There is much discussion on audio forums that rhodium connectors take a while to settle down and sound their best. I think I noticed that with the jumpers I bought, so give them some time before critically evaluating versus the stock plates.

kn
Jumpers have no sound..............The are a conductor/metal.

They either pass the signal 100% intact, or have a tiny insignificant increase in resistance etc.
This forum tends to value, science and facts and so on.
 
I did not say the upgraded jumper solution sounds better than bi-amping the tweeter and mid-woofer, which is allowed by the standard Wharfedale arrangement of four binding posts per speaker. Your suggestion would preclude the bi-amping option which seems to be an important part of Wharfedale’s design philosophy. The metal bars are an inexpensive and unobtrusive stock work around for the company to allow both single and bi-amping options. My experience indicates the stock bars can be improved upon for a very modest amount of effort and investment.

kn
You sound like you are on a crusade to convince people that jumper wires/plates/bars "matter"

Have you done actual A/B listening tests to come to this conclusion or using biased sighted tests.

Not sure I really care, but sounds more like a separate thread you should start such as "Do jumper wires really matter" etc.
 
You sound like you are on a crusade to convince people that jumper wires/plates/bars "matter"

Have you done actual A/B listening tests to come to this conclusion or using biased sighted tests.

Not sure I really care, but sounds more like a separate thread you should start such as "Do jumper wires really matter" etc.

Yeah pretty lmao when far more expensive speakers uses mundane electrical components inside them.
 
There is much discussion on audio forums that rhodium connectors take a while to settle down and sound their best. I think I noticed that with the jumpers I bought, so give them some time before critically evaluating versus the stock plates.

:facepalm:

One of us saved $11 at least.

And no one wasted any of that valuable time we all wish we had more of.
 
The jumpers are working out very well indeed and I am having no issues at all with weak frequencies, clarity or distortion. Very well constructed, will last years and a lot easier to not misplace or lose compared to the original jumpers which are now kept as a spare pair in the draw.
Let’s just say I don’t lose any sleep over arguments against materials used in cables of any kind now. I may have when I first started getting into HiFi due to lack of hands on experience but after more than 10 years of testing everything from cables to amps to speakers I simply ignore those whom mock and scoff at advancements in structure where cables are concerned. My system is around 20-25% improved via better, more expensive cables and while I aim to retain my patience over any upgrade path or argument against such, I endeavour to keep my own soul primarily.
Thanks for the sharing your experience (knownothing) with these jumpers, what you have said is proving to be true after a few weeks in owning them but again I think that is the case with more things in life than just electronics. God bless you all!
 
Last edited:
The jumpers are working out very well indeed and I am having no issues at all with weak frequencies, clarity or distortion. Very well constructed, will last years and a lot easier to not misplace or lose compared to the original jumpers which are now kept as a spare pair in the draw.
Let’s just say I don’t lose any sleep over arguments against materials used in cables of any kind now. I may have when I first started getting into HiFi due to lack of hands on experience but after more than 10 years of testing everything from cables to amps to speakers I simply ignore those whom mock and scoff at advancements in structure where cables are concerned. My system is around 20-25% improved via better, more expensive cables and while I aim to retain my patience over any upgrade path or argument against such, I endeavour to keep my own soul primarily.
Thanks for the sharing your experience (knownothing) with these jumpers, what you have said is proving to be true after a few weeks in owing them but again I think that is the case with more things in life than just electronics. God bless you all!

who, not whom. When you're being condescending, it's best to use correct grammar.
 
who, not whom. When you're being condescending, it's best to use correct grammar.
I may keep that in mind, thankyou an educational upgrade in grammar is more than welcome. I love the English language but had a troublesome youth so couldn’t, wouldn’t maintain the path of education many possibly would have benefited from today.
 
Last edited:
I simply ignore those whom mock and scoff at advancements in structure where cables are concerned. My system is around 20-25% improved via better, more expensive cables and while I aim to retain my patience over any upgrade path or argument against such, I endeavour to keep my own soul primarily.

Uh huh.
 
I am considering buying the 12.0 for my home office desk, used 90% of the time for background music listening while working and the rest 10% for YouTube/podcasts/gaming.
The office is small 3.30x3.50m, the desk 160x80cm with a huge 49 inch monitor in the middle.
The distance between the speakers will be around 130cm, distance from wall behind around 20cm, siting position around 100cm and the max inward angle can be 10 degrees.
Are the speakers suitable for my use case and considering the placement restrictions I have?
Thanks!
 
Last edited:
I am considering buying the 12.0 for my home office desk, used 90% of the time for background music listening while working and the rest 10% for YouTube/podcasts/gaming.
The office is small 3.30x3.50m, the desk 160x80cm with a huge 49 inch monitor in the middle.
The distance between the speakers will be around 130cm, distance from wall behind around 20cm, siting position around 100cm and the max inward angle can be max 10 degrees.
Are the speakers suitable for my use case and considering the placement restrictions I have?
Thanks!
I would think yes. I once had a pair of Diamond 9.0s and liked them for what they were at their size and price. The only relevant downside was that I felt the drivers were not that well integrated for nearfield use. At a greater distance integration was fine. Of course, that is several generations and designers back, so not at all relevant. The Diamond 220s that I now also have in a secundary system integrate well.
 
Today I tried the Wharfedale Diamond 12.0, unfortunately I sent them back. In my room of 16 m2, the speaker did not have much resolution, which I think is due to the plastic cone, and I was quite surprised by such strange aggressive highs. Overall, the speaker does not have a large sound stage.
 
Today I tried the Wharfedale Diamond 12.0, unfortunately I sent them back. In my room of 16 m2, the speaker did not have much resolution, which I think is due to the plastic cone, and I was quite surprised by such strange aggressive highs. Overall, the speaker does not have a large sound stage.
I am guessing you used the "Stock" jumper plates, tell me have you heard about........ :facepalm:
 
Between @knownothing and @Schlippwhip68 it's like we've landed in an alternate reality where ASR is a full on subjectivist forum...
Since this thread is totally derailed as is.............

Many years ago, I was gullible enough/and or had the "Feelings" that stuff like this mattered.

I found out the "parts" and "upgrades" were NOT causing the better sound I heard, but it was ME, and my emotions. I realized I was the huge variable, and when not aware of a stock/upgraded part lost my "abilities" to tell which was which.

Yes, maybe there is some tiny, small amount of change still, but its not even remotely close to the subjectivists comments.
 
Has anyone properly frequency plotted the Diamond 12.3? Would someone looking for a not so big footprint tower instead of books on stands, Would the 12.3 best the 12.2s in overall balance? I know the 12.3 has smaller drivers, but in a much larger cabinet. Mainly interested to see on paper the 12.3's midrange performance and tweeter overlap.
 
Has anyone properly frequency plotted the Diamond 12.3? Would someone looking for a not so big footprint tower instead of books on stands, Would the 12.3 best the 12.2s in overall balance? I know the 12.3 has smaller drivers, but in a much larger cabinet. Mainly interested to see on paper the 12.3's midrange performance and tweeter overlap.


Deep bass wise the 12.3 have a small advantage for sure at 5hz lower, and output wise they enjoy a quite good 6db higher maximum output according to Wharfedale, 102db versus only 96db with the 12.2s.

Using a sub, I would think the higher output of the 12.3 would be by far the biggest improvement, along with the resultant lower distortion at more reasonable levels.

as far as balance and so on, I would "Imagine" they are quite similar as Karl Heinz Fink voiced them to all sound similar. He did mention, I think in this thread in response to a question asked of him, he preferred the 12.1 overall, but again doubt anything more than a minor difference between any in the diamond line.
 
Last edited:
Of previous versions, it was sometimes argued that the predecessors of the 12.1 with 13 cm woofers also sounded better and more balanced/coherent than the models like the 12.2 with the larger woofers. I am afraid I know of no comparisons between models in the modern range.
 
Has anyone properly frequency plotted the Diamond 12.3? Would someone looking for a not so big footprint tower instead of books on stands, Would the 12.3 best the 12.2s in overall balance? I know the 12.3 has smaller drivers, but in a much larger cabinet. Mainly interested to see on paper the 12.3's midrange performance and tweeter overlap.
I own both 12.1 and 12.3 and I cannot tell them apart in blind a/b test at moderate levels. I would assume the only real difference to 12.1 graph might be at the sub 60hz region, which should not matter if using a sub. I have not tested them together at very high volume, so cannot comment how they differ when played loud.
 
Back
Top Bottom