Wharfedale EVO 4.1 Review (Speaker)

[beagleman]

I bought the 12.2 based on this site and other reviews. I also recently got the 9.1 for my home cinema.
The 12.2 are awful, they are full of distortion even at low volumes, they are just awful and annoying, I did a side by side comparison with the 9.1 and the 9,1 wins hands down.
Ok the 9.1 is lacking some bass, but overall is very enjoyable to listen to , the 12.2 is useless.

I was not thinking to get the EVO 4.1 but I saw this review out me off. So I can't understand, If it is worse than the 12.2 , how bad can it be?

You MUST have something wrong then, as I can not really see anyone agreeing with your statement.
I mean, give the steps you did to come to this conclusion?

The 12.2 is very highly regarded and no one mentions distortion at all.
What application are you using them in etc.....some details please?

 

[Head_Unit]

You MUST have something wrong then

Maybe it also had the tweeter disconnect like Amir's original sample...

 

[jackdanyal]

Just curious how someone could judge a speaker because of these kinds of measurements. We need to consider the room size, position, ability to hear, likings, microphone, etc. so many factors.

 

[Beave]

Just curious how someone could judge a speaker because of these kinds of measurements. We need to consider the room size, position, ability to hear, likings, microphone, etc. so many factors.

I don't know whether to laugh or to cry.

 

[Gray]

Hello, I found a partial disassembly video of the EVO4.2

Maybe somebody could shed a light and opinion on the used components?
They use plastic baskets for the woofer, which isn't necessarily a bad thing I guess.

 

[jtatknox]

A little different approach to this one, without a score, but a strong argument at the source.

I have read about every review and opinion before auditioning and getting the Evo 4.2 last year. Just because I was searching for something that would not need a replacement for a long while.

A strong signal is that the Evo 4.2 is based on a clear design philosophy. They apparently overcame a challenge with the AMT tweeter and the crossover by adding the midrange dome. The 4.2 got lyrical reviews and picked up prizes along the way. Worth a note is that this idea extends to the 4.3 and 4.4 floorstanders as well as they all have the midrange dome. So 3/4th of the current Evo range is based on the same philosophy.

Given this above, the 4.1 comes in as an odd duckling, as the woofer now also does the midrange handling throwing the whole idea behind the 4.2 to 4.4 range overboard. I get it that a bookshelf of a small format can't have a midrange dome. But at the same time it is a different kind of "thing" in the series.

Now don't get me wrong, I don't think the 4.1 is a lousy loudspeaker. Quite the contrary. It is a beautiful bookshelf loudspeaker and has its right to exist, might become a collectors item and I might even enjoy it. But I like ideas behind products and this headscratcher makes that I dropped the 4.1 as a choice for a second setup in the master bedroom. Here I went for the Denton 85th Anniversary edition.

It's a shame that the 4.1 is only speaker from this series that I can find spinorama data on and it's not representative of the rest of the series.

 

[tw 2022]

It's a shame that the 4.1 is only speaker from this series that I can find spinorama data on and it's not representative of the rest of the series.

agreed , the 4.2 needs to be measured considering how good the other 3 way books from wd measure...