Wharfedale EVO 4.1 Review (Speaker)

[Head_Unit]

diamond 11.3

Those are probably quite good. In addition to my 11.4, I spent some time listening to the bookshelf 11.2 which is 2-way like the 11.3 model. Those also had a pleasant sound from any spot or angle. Power...I doubt they need an unusual amount of power. Sensitivity is above average:
https://www.stereophile.com/content/wharfedale-diamond-112-loudspeaker-measurements
There are not many amps with significantly more power in stereo than my AVR-2312Ci (it's only running two channel right now). You'd need an amp with like 300+ watts at FOUR ohms due to the logarithmic nature of hearing and the complex nature of loudspeaker impedance. We swapped out that -2312 for currently a ATI 525NC (300W @ 4 ohms) but it seems the -2312 had enough power even though the Focal 936/CC900/SR900 setup represent difficult loads.

 

[AntGom]

Those also had a pleasant sound from any spot or angle.

About that...do they need toe in?

 

[Head_Unit]

About that...do they need toe in?

At Audio Element the 11.2 were not toed in. For me that depends more perhaps on your listening space-we have Focal 936 toed in a lot not because they "need it" but because the right hand speaker is against a wall, so they are toed in extremely to reduce reflection.

 

[djsolidsnake86]

12.2 or evo 4.1? which is better?

 

[MrOtto]

Too bad the 3-way 2x8" is discontinued in the Diamond series

 

[XDM]

With such a narrow directivity I would normally say "stay at tweeter axis" but in this case, I probed to see if any other response is better with respect to resonance and there is:

[minus 10 degrees]

Can anyone help me understand what is meant with the minus 10 degrees? Does that mean the listener sitting below tweeter height?

 

[regan]

With an EQ optimizing the LW, the score goes up to 6.2 (w/sub 8.1).

Wow these are some great numbers.
Surprised this speaker gets so much hate given that EQ improves the measurements by A LOT

 

[AJM1981]

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.

 

[regan]

I have read about every review and opinion before auditioning and getting the Evo 4.2 last year

How do you like the 4.2 overall? What about in comparison to the lintons?

 

[AJM1981]

Howyou like the 4.2 overall? What about in comparison to the lintons?

The Evo 4.2 is one of the best choices I made.

The Lintons were at a shared number 1 spot on my list, but they are slightly on the large side for my living. They need dedicated stands and my music collection is digital, so the record compartment of the stands would remain unused.

I don't know how to say this best,so a cliche here. Having to choose between the Evo and the Linton is probably like a choice between two completely different cars which one both loves for its characteristics. Let's say a classic Ferrari and a Rolls. It might be possible to hybrid their designs, but it would lose the edge of both. So having to choose one always results in regret of not having chosen the other model. A heavy luxury problem.

The Evo's have been described as being semi-open baffle with their almost drop shaped cabinets, articulating the mids as where most vocals are. A bit analytical perhaps. They are almost literally scaled down versions of the Elysians. The Evo 4.2 might still need a sub. The Linton doesn't need one.

The Lintons profit from their cabinet dimensions, creating a sensation of depth in imaging. Its basic design is one of the reasons the Dentons eventually became the choice for my 2nd setup in a smaller room.

If you are interested in the Linton, it might be worth waiting for the new Dovedale. They are slightly larger. I only wonder about their position in the current product line. My best guess is that they eventually 'could' replace the Lintons.

 

[regan]

I was really thinking about getting the evo 4.2 but I was put off by some reviewers saying these speakers are extremely sensitive regarding placement. And they can sound bad if you don't fit them to that perfect spot.

Also another criticism that struck me was that after you find that perfect spot (big if actually) and set back to listen you need to stay stiff in that "sweet spot position" and if you move your head like 5cm to the left or right everything is ruined. Big turn off since I was hoping to buy them and enjoy them while moving around the room.

Whats was your experience regarding to these two issues? I've heard others saying that the placement is not that sensitive as they claim for the evos.

If you are interested in the Linton, it might be worth waiting for the new Dovedale. They are slightly larger. I only wonder about their position in the current product line. My best guess is that they eventually 'could' replace the Lintons.

Well the Dovedales have their price set at $7k while the Lintons are at $1k. Don't think it would be a fair comparison. Way over my budget. I'm looking at kef r3, lintons and maybe evo 4.2 (although really hesitant on these ones).

 

[tw 2022]

ell the Dovedales have their price set at $7k while the Lintons are at $1k. Don't think it would be a fair comparison. Way over my budget. I'm looking at kef r3, lintons and maybe evo 4.2 (although really hesitant on these ones).

add the philharmonic bmr monitors to your list...

 

[regan]

add the philharmonic bmr monitors to your list...

They're difficult to find in Europe unfortunately...

 

[tw 2022]

They're difficult to find in Europe unfortunately...

Sorry, i should have asked your location...

 

[AJM1981]

Also another criticism that struck me was that after you find that perfect spot (big if actually) and set back to listen you need to stay stiff in that "sweet spot position" and if you move your head like 5cm to the left or right everything is ruined. Big turn off since I was hoping to buy them and enjoy them while moving around the room.

Whats was your experience regarding to these two issues? I've heard others saying that the placement is not that sensitive as they claim for the evos.



Well the Dovedales have their price set at $7k while the Lintons are at $1k. Don't think it would be a fair comparison. Way over my budget. I'm looking at kef r3, lintons and maybe evo 4.2 (although really hesitant on these ones).

I don't share their opinion and if this would have been the case I would not have chosen them.

One can open up any random user guide for any brand of loudspeakers and they picture the ideal position for stereo listening as someone sitting in the middle with the speakers toed in. The AMT tweeters might be a little more directional, but it is still a reasonable 'field' and not laser-like narrow.

If the Evo 4.2s or the Elysian 2 (same concept) were 'that' quirky and those reviewers were absolutely spot on, it would mean other respected reviewers who do not mention that, would be totally wrong and no awards would ever be granted in the consumer division as they would have trouble getting anywhere near 5 star reviews around.

The only thing I can think off is that 'bookshelf speakers' is a misnomer for the Evo 4.2 and Elysian 2 (also count in the Elysian 1 here). There is no reasonable sense in putting them on a shelf or desk next to a computer. When you sit too near, your ears will be either alligned with the woofer, midrange or treble. It needs a fraction more reasonable space for blending things well. But this also applies to the linton or any other large kind of speaker .

 

[amicusterrae]

Since this thread has been resurrected (and it wasn't me this time, I'll simply add that my experience with the Evo 4.4 has been very positive. I haven't experienced what I'd call an overly narrow or restrictive sweet spot. And I haven't experienced a bright tonal balance. To the contrary, these speakers have worked well in both my dedicated theater room and my living room.

My theater room is set up for me to sit just to the right of the center sweet spot, but the room has a lot of inherent problems; its long and narrow like a shoe box with lots of hard wall surfaces and a low ceiling. I tried the Revel F36 in there, and the highs were ear splitting. I appreciate that humans evolved in caves, but that room is just too small and reflective for a lot of tower speakers. The Evo 4.4s sound great in there with no broad EQ (bass only via Anthem's room correction) and have no fatigue. To be fair, I have a 7.2.4 setup in there and almost always listen to music in spatial/surround. Many times in the upper 80dBs, too.

My living room has its own challenges as a semi open space that flows into the kitchen and dining room. It's not set up for perfect stereo sound, with even my chair a bit off center. Evos sounded great in there, too with no EQ ( I did cross them over and use a dedicated sub since it's a large space). Since I moved the Evos downstairs, I use the F36s in the living room, and they also sound really good. However, even in that room, the F36s are a touch bright to my ears. I occasionally feel the need to attenuate the treble with tone controls, and I can't tolerate them at 85dB or so for very long.

I can only guess that the smaller bookshelf Evos that Amir measured have that hot treble that seems common in that product market, while the towers don't peak as much and/or have a more prominent midrange that changes the perception.

 

[Palladium]

Never heard the 4.2s, but I found my 12.2s + Aiyima A07 non-EQ combo superior on desktop duty than the Kali LP-6 v2 on any of its built in DIP EQ. 0.5m listening @ 70-75dB.

 

[amicusterrae]

I can only guess that the smaller bookshelf Evos that Amir measured have that hot treble that seems common in that product market, while the towers don't peak as much and/or have a more prominent midrange that changes the perception.

One other thought, Amir's spin shows a significant drop in directivity above 4kHz, particularly on the vertical plane. I am aware of research indicating that listeners do not perceive floor reflections as a problem but don't recall reading much about ceiling reflections (anyone?). In a small room (including, for me, one with a low ceiling), it makes some sense that the Evo would sound less bright than another, similarly sized cone and dome speaker with more high band off-axis output. The tradeoff is probably less sense of envelopment in a stereo setup, but irrelevant in a multichannel one. Of course, it's possible I am just searching for validation of my own experience with the 4.4s and the F36s in two different rooms!

 

[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...