Elac Debut Reference DBR-62 Speaker Review

[ErikHd]

My point is that I'm guessing your listening tests weren't blinded comparisons of before/after modification. You know which one you are listening to.

yes I know most of the time

 

[Sgt. Ear Ache]

The LCD3's probably don't reveal that many more details than the HE400i, maybe up to 20%, for 7x the price. But that's the way this hobby is, and I'm at the point that it's just not worth it for me to go higher anymore, I have other interests along with bills to pay.

20%!???? lol are you kidding me? lol...You are suggesting that the 400i's are losing 20% of the detail in a recording? I'm sorry, but that's just silly talk. I can assure you, the 400i's are losing nothing. What exactly would account for the loss of all these "micro details?" I mean the sound of a chair on a floor is a sound that occurs within a given set of frequencies (well within 20-20khz) that is picked up by a microphone and becomes part of the recording right? It's not like the audeze cans are creating a worm hole to the recording session and acquiring detail that wasn't heard by the mics. Those sounds are there just like the sounds of a brush on a snare drum. What would cause those details to disappear from a headphone that has a good, balanced response and good distortion and noise levels and that picks up all sorts of great detail? 20%?? Do you realize how much that is?? If you honestly think you're getting magic like that from those $2000 headphones, I have some $2000 usb cables I'd like you to have a listen to. lol

 

[Sgt. Ear Ache]

I did diy almost 20 years and test about 12 to 15 brands component each time I did modification, it did shows difference each of brand (at the same value). Try it you will be surprised

listening tests or measured differences? If they measured the same before and after modding, You would never hear a difference in a blind test. Imagination is a powerful deceiver.

 

[Sgt. Ear Ache]

I would describe clarity as being able to hear extra details in the whole frequency range, not just in peaked areas of the response. Boosted areas to me aren't clearer, usually just annoying or fatiguing, depending on where the peak is.
The DBR-62's and Kef Reference 1's both measure very well but I can hear more details in a recording with the Reference 1's. If you can't, you can save yourself lots of money by sticking with the DBR-62's.
But do I need the extra 10% or so of micro details for tv and movies that I use the DBR-62's for most of the time? No.
If I want to hear a mouse fart in the back corner of the recording studio, my RME dac and LCD-3F's give me that. And with some light EQ from the RME adi-2 dac, the LCD-3F's have about a 94% user preference rating, that may be higher than any other speaker or headphone ever measured. And oddly enough, I found that out after I picked out this combo by listening to many others. So I guess I really can trust my own ears.

I'd be willing to bet if you set the DBR's and the Kef up in the same room, and EQ'd them a bit for the room, and volume-matched them, and then did a blind listening session with a bunch of different music choosing which set sounded the best you'd end up picking them each about the same number of times.

 

[Livnmuskoka]

I'd be willing to bet if you set the DBR's and the Kef up in the same room, and EQ'd them a bit for the room, and volume-matched them, and then did a blind listening session with a bunch of different music choosing which set sounded the best you'd end up picking them each about the same number of times.

I can afford to buy the Reference 1's when we sell our second home, so maybe one day I'll pick up a good used pair to try it out. I've thought about it already. If it's a very clear and easy difference to pick one of them out I'll invite some interested people over to test for themselves.

 

[Livnmuskoka]

20%!???? lol are you kidding me? lol...You are suggesting that the 400i's are losing 20% of the detail in a recording? I'm sorry, but that's just silly talk. I can assure you, the 400i's are losing nothing. What exactly would account for the loss of all these "micro details?" I mean the sound of a chair on a floor is a sound that occurs within a given set of frequencies (well within 20-20khz) that is picked up by a microphone and becomes part of the recording right? It's not like the audeze cans are creating a worm hole to the recording session and acquiring detail that wasn't heard by the mics. Those sounds are there just like the sounds of a brush on a snare drum. What would cause those details to disappear from a headphone that has a good, balanced response and good distortion and noise levels and that picks up all sorts of great detail? 20%?? Do you realize how much that is?? If you honestly think you're getting magic like that from those $2000 headphones, I have some $2000 usb cables I'd like you to have a listen to. lol

There are user preference ratings for all kinds of headphones with EQ from the RME adi-2 dac FS. When I get some time I'll post the user preference ratings for both the LCD-3F's and the HE400i.

 

[Sgt. Ear Ache]

There are user preference ratings for all kinds of headphones with EQ from the RME adi-2 dac FS. When I get some time I'll post the user preference ratings for both the LCD-3F's and the HE400i.

wonderful. What do user preference ratings mean? What are they based on? People who have spent $2000 on a set of headphones have a pretty strong impetus for preferring those headphones to less expensive ones.

Here's 2 reviews of different headphones...

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...-x-over-ear-open-back-headphone-review.16777/

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...hifiman-he400i-review-planar-headphone.18544/

Read those two reviews, and explain to me what the mechanism might be that would account for the more expensive set being 20% more revealing than the less expensive set...other than the price lol.

 

[richard12511]

I did diy almost 20 years and test about 12 to 15 brands component each time I did modification, it did shows difference each of brand (at the same value). Try it you will be surprised

No doubt you "perceived" a real difference, but unless the components were broken/bad, it's unlikely you "heard" a real difference.

The human brain is tricky like that. If you consider the actual sound as the "input", then the human brain is not a "pure function".

 

[richard12511]

I would describe clarity as being able to hear extra details in the whole frequency range, not just in peaked areas of the response. Boosted areas to me aren't clearer, usually just annoying or fatiguing, depending on where the peak is.
The DBR-62's and Kef Reference 1's both measure very well but I can hear more details in a recording with the Reference 1's. If you can't, you can save yourself lots of money by sticking with the DBR-62's.
But do I need the extra 10% or so of micro details for tv and movies that I use the DBR-62's for most of the time? No.
If I want to hear a mouse fart in the back corner of the recording studio, my RME dac and LCD-3F's give me that. And with some light EQ from the RME adi-2 dac, the LCD-3F's have about a 94% user preference rating, that may be higher than any other speaker or headphone ever measured. And oddly enough, I found that out after I picked out this combo by listening to many others. So I guess I really can trust my own ears.

I mostly agree with your definition. IMO, the biggest driver of "heard clarity" is how narrow the speaker's dispersion pattern is. The Reference 1 has a narrower dispersion pattern than the DBR-62, so it makes sense that it's more clear. The details are being masked less by reflections.

I'm careful to specify "heard clarity". It's clarity based solely on the soundwaves entering your ear. "Heard clarity" is a subset of the more general "perceived clarity", which includes psychoacoustical influences. For "perceived clarity", speaker price is likely just as influential to "perceived clarity" as dispersion width. People think they can avoid price bias, aesthetic bias, etc., but they simply can't. These influences are subconscious, and as long as you know what you're listening to, you can't avoid them, which is why we need blind testing to really make any sort judgement.

 

[richard12511]

20%!???? lol are you kidding me? lol...You are suggesting that the 400i's are losing 20% of the detail in a recording? I'm sorry, but that's just silly talk. I can assure you, the 400i's are losing nothing. What exactly would account for the loss of all these "micro details?" I mean the sound of a chair on a floor is a sound that occurs within a given set of frequencies (well within 20-20khz) that is picked up by a microphone and becomes part of the recording right? It's not like the audeze cans are creating a worm hole to the recording session and acquiring detail that wasn't heard by the mics. Those sounds are there just like the sounds of a brush on a snare drum. What would cause those details to disappear from a headphone that has a good, balanced response and good distortion and noise levels and that picks up all sorts of great detail? 20%?? Do you realize how much that is?? If you honestly think you're getting magic like that from those $2000 headphones, I have some $2000 usb cables I'd like you to have a listen to. lol

I own/owned both, and imo the 400i is actually the better headphone in almost every way. At least to my ears. If I had to put a number to it, I'd say the 400i is ~10 - ~20% better. It's unfortunate, but price has almost 0 correlation to performance in the headphone world. Companies know that instead of actually employing actual good engineering, they can simply jack up the price, and people will "perceive" a more pleasant sound.

 

[richard12511]

I can afford to buy the Reference 1's when we sell our second home, so maybe one day I'll pick up a good used pair to try it out. I've thought about it already. If it's a very clear and easy difference to pick one of them out I'll invite some interested people over to test for themselves.

I think that's a great idea, just make sure it's done blind. Having hosted several myself, the most common sentiment is that of surprise. People are always surprised at just how similar well engineered speakers sound. As long as you equalize the bass(with subs and EQ), there are no 20%+ differences (imo), regardless of price.

 

[More Dynamics Please]

A voice in my head is speaking to me and I'm sorry you can't hear it.

 

[Livnmuskoka]

wonderful. What do user preference ratings mean? What are they based on? People who have spent $2000 on a set of headphones have a pretty strong impetus for preferring those headphones to less expensive ones.

Here's 2 reviews of different headphones...

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...-x-over-ear-open-back-headphone-review.16777/

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...hifiman-he400i-review-planar-headphone.18544/

Read those two reviews, and explain to me what the mechanism might be that would account for the more expensive set being 20% more revealing than the less expensive set...other than the price lol.

I don't let price sway my opinion, that's why I own the DBR-62's, even though I've had and could still buy much more expensive speakers. And that's not because no other more expensive speakers haven't sounded a little better, but because there wasn't enough of an improvement to justify the massive price difference for me. And it's the combo of the DBR-62's tone, clarity, and accuracy that I find them excellent. If they were subpar on any of these qualities I wouldn't own them.

 

[Livnmuskoka]

wonderful. What do user preference ratings mean? What are they based on? People who have spent $2000 on a set of headphones have a pretty strong impetus for preferring those headphones to less expensive ones.

Here's 2 reviews of different headphones...

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...-x-over-ear-open-back-headphone-review.16777/

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...hifiman-he400i-review-planar-headphone.18544/

Read those two reviews, and explain to me what the mechanism might be that would account for the more expensive set being 20% more revealing than the less expensive set...other than the price lol.

Agreed, I didn't like the LCD-X as much either or I would've bought them. Same with the LCD-4's, which I even preferred $300 Audio Technica's over those.

 

[richard12511]

I don't let price sway my opinion

Unfortunately, that's not something that's under your control to "let". Price sways your opinion subconsciously, no matter what, and it does that for everybody.

that's why I own the DBR-62's, even though I've had and could still buy much more expensive speakers. And that's not because no other more expensive speakers haven't sounded a little better, but because there wasn't enough of an improvement to justify the massive price difference for me. And it's the combo of the DBR-62's tone, clarity, and accuracy that I find them excellent. If they were subpar on any of these qualities I wouldn't own them.

I agree with most of this. I don't own these speakers, but I think they're at a really great point of the price/performance ladder. You can get get a little bit better for a lot more, but there are likely no huge gains to be had, no matter how much you spend.

 

[Livnmuskoka]

Unfortunately, that's not something that's under your control to "let". Price sways your opinion subconsciously, no matter what, and it does that for everybody.



I agree with most of this. I don't own these speakers, but I think they're at a really great point of the price/performance ladder. You can get get a little bit better for a lot more, but there are likely no huge gains to be had, no matter how much you spend.

Ok, price sways my opinion very little then, and not for sound quality so much as build quality.
I also had a Topping L30 before the RME dac, and I was extremely happy with it's performance, until it started malfunctioning 3 weeks later. That's why I went with the RME, is hopefully better build quality, along with EQ, pre-amp, and other options in an all in one unit.

 

[Hare Hare]

Hello,
First post here. Thanks for all the good work.
I bought Elac speakers after year or two of HiFi hiatus. Have been using headphones for a couple of years but realised it is nice to have music around you ... from time to time. I have a older Rega brio-r amp at the moment. I am thinking of upgrading to higher specs amp - hypex or similar. I am not entirely sure what is good practice with these power amps. What is reasonably priced preamp to go along? Is it good practice to feed power amp with dac/pre combo?
I would like to keep budget under a thousand. Thanks for reading.

Cheers

 

[liquidman101]

I realise this is not a recent forum topic but I've heard a lot of good things about these speakers in other places. I know a few of you have mixed feeling about Steve Guttenberg's reviews but he rates these highly as will. Can I ask if anyone owns these speakers - what would be a good amp to match? Many thanks.

 

[pio80]

...Can I ask if anyone owns these speakers - what would be a good amp to match? Many thanks.

Hi , I tried audiolab 6000a (8ohm 50W , 4ohm 75W) and I have no complains, enough power to drive these.. at this moment Elacs play with Magnat Mr-780 (8ohm 75W, 4ohm 100W) and it seems that its less power ? but it sounds so good! This is what I ment.
Regards

 

[Beershaun]

I realise this is not a recent forum topic but I've heard a lot of good things about these speakers in other places. I know a few of you have mixed feeling about Steve Guttenberg's reviews but he rates these highly as will. Can I ask if anyone owns these speakers - what would be a good amp to match? Many thanks.

Benchmark ahb2 would be a great match for these speakers.