Wharfedale Denton 80th Anniversary Speaker Review

[napilopez]

Adding my two cents as a former reviewer who is happily no longer reviewing:

• This is an old model, and while I'm totally okay with it being measured -- it's still on sale, and people still buy used, after all -- I don't think one should assume what applies to a current model will apply to an older one. The LS50 measures totally different from the LS50 meta, and those look nearly identical. In this case, the 80 and 85th are completely different speakers with different drivers, driver placements, and driver sizes.
  
  
• I strongly believe it's not the reviewer's job to find the "optimal" way to listen to a speaker (or the buyer's for that matter). The manufacturer should tell the you that, and they should do so very explicitly. If the manufacturer fails to do that, than any reasonable way of measuring or listening to the speaker is fair game. On the other hand, if they do make an explicit recommendation, that should be your primary way of testing the speakers.
  
  (I don't think the designer mentioning that the speaker is better with the grille in interviews and other contexts really counts; included documentation is part of the product.)
  
  To that point, the Denton 80's manual makes no mention that the speaker sounds best with the grille on (neither does the 85's for that matter). It's not a reasonable thing for users to expect either, as it's almost unheard of among modern speakers. At best, one expects grilles to be transparent, not to actually make a dramatic sonic improvement.
  
  
• Notably, however, the Linton's manual does tell you to keep the grilles on. That right there is the difference with the Denton, as the difference is so clearly spelled out with the Linton's manual, including the fact it improves directivity not just the on-axis FR: "Additionally the drive unit dispersion is aided by the front grilles which should be left on for optimum listening performance. Removing the grilles will produce a brighter but less smooth sound."
  
  
• Keep in mind that if a speaker sounds and measures dramatically better with the grille off, that's also a bit of a design flaw. I know you'll always have to compromise on one or the other, but it's a bit of a problem if one method is so much better than the other if you expect buyers to use a product both ways. One could argue Wharfdale should have made the grilles permanent on the Linton, given how much better it measures and seemingly sounds.
  
  It's also bit annoying as a consumer: I way prefer how the Linton looks with the grill off, and that's the photo you see in ads and on the website. I'd be pretty disappointed to buy one expecting to use it with the grille off only to find it is officially and measurably better with the grilles on when I received it.

All that being said, I think the listening window on the Denton 80 is actually quite solid as measured, so I think this discussion is kind of moot. The grille does improve directivity with the Linton, but it would take quite an improvement to fix the directivity issues with this particular model.

I wouldn't be surprised if the 85th edition measured a lot better.

 

[Spocko]

If they sound good to you they sound good to you. Doing unnecessary shopping because of a review after you already bought something you like sounds like shopping addiction. The purpose of reviews is to find products that sound good to you. Reviews are there for people to preview products before they buy them. The research shows most people choose flat speakers. That same research shows a minority don't. You could be in that minority.

Research also shows people will not buy ugly or over complicated things, so the Venn diagram of good looking, simple minded and flat leads to today's winner - hello Sonos Five Smart Speaker https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/sonos-five-smart-speaker-review.51409/

 

[warpdrive]

Adding my two cents as a former reviewer who is happily no longer reviewing:

• This is an old model, and while I'm totally okay with it being measured -- it's still on sale, and people still buy used, after all -- I don't think one should assume what applies to a current model will apply to an older one. The LS50 measures totally different from the LS50 meta, and those look nearly identical. In this case, the 80 and 85th are completely different speakers with different drivers, driver placements, and driver sizes.
  
  
• I strongly believe it's not the reviewer's job to find the "optimal" way to listen to a speaker (or the buyer's for that matter). The manufacturer should tell the you that, and they should do so very explicitly. If the manufacturer fails to do that, than any reasonable way of measuring or listening to the speaker is fair game. On the other hand, if they do make an explicit recommendation, that should be your primary way of testing the speakers.
  
  (I don't think the designer mentioning that the speaker is better with the grille in interviews and other contexts really counts; included documentation is part of the product.)
  
  To that point, the Denton 80's manual makes no mention that the speaker sounds best with the grille on (neither does the 85's for that matter). It's not a reasonable thing for users to expect either, as it's almost unheard of among modern speakers. At best, one expects grilles to be transparent, not to actually make a dramatic sonic improvement.
  
  
• Notably, however, the Linton's manual does tell you to keep the grilles on. That right there is the difference with the Denton, as the difference is so clearly spelled out with the Linton's manual, including the fact it improves directivity not just the on-axis FR: "Additionally the drive unit dispersion is aided by the front grilles which should be left on for optimum listening performance. Removing the grilles will produce a brighter but less smooth sound."
  
  
• Keep in mind that if a speaker sounds and measures dramatically better with the grille off, that's also a bit of a design flaw. I know you'll always have to compromise on one or the other, but it's a bit of a problem if one method is so much better than the other if you expect buyers to use a product both ways. One could argue Wharfdale should have made the grilles permanent on the Linton, given how much better it measures and seemingly sounds.
  
  It's also bit annoying as a consumer: I way prefer how the Linton looks with the grill off, and that's the photo you see in ads and on the website. I'd be pretty disappointed to buy one expecting to use it with the grille off only to find it is officially and measurably better with the grilles on when I received it.

All that being said, I think the listening window on the Denton 80 is actually quite solid as measured, so I think this discussion is kind of moot. The grille does improve directivity with the Linton, but it would take quite an improvement to fix the directivity issues with this particular model.

I wouldn't be surprised if the 85th edition measured a lot better.

It seems like a miss that it wasn't mentioned in the manual to leave the grilles on.
Normally if you bought them at a dealer, the dealer should pass on this information if they are knowledgeable about the products they are selling.

I feel a reviewer should at least know how to configure the product for optimal performance. If you buy a car and it comes out of the factory with two user adjustable settings....a default "normal" and "sport" Do you leave the car in normal mode and perform a full battery of performance tests, and leave it at that? Most readers of the review would be unsatisfied I think. I don't expect reviewers to spend hours/days trying to configure the product, but there is some basic due diligence to make sure the product is represented properly.

When I saw that this speaker was reviewed....the first thought in my head before I clicked on the link was...."I hope they didn't leave the grilles off the spinorama".

 

[audioholic63]

This has been an interesting thread for me. It is the first speaker reviewed I actually own and use.

I come here because I do believe that audio is engineering. Measurements matter. But…most of the electronics measured here, unless they don’t work at all, have deficiencies that I expect most of us would never be able to actually hear in normal use. Transducers on the other hand, whether speakers or headphones, can be, regardless of measurements, a much more subjective thing in actual application.

I bought my Denton 80’s to upgrade my office system at the beginning of covid and my transition to 100% remote work. My choices were limited by the complete lack of audio retailers other than BestBuy. There is no retail audition in this town. I based my purchase on subjective reviews and the design aesthetic of the speaker and my previous positive interactions with Wharfedale products. Not the best way to do things but this is the situation for many of us these days.

This is a very nearfield setup. Each speaker is on my desk at approx. 25 deg toed in to me and 30” distance. Distance to wall is less than 10”. Each is sitting on a 3” block of medium density cellulose foam (from a packing crate) both for height and isolation. I have experimented with stuffing the rear ports and running them open, I prefer open although it can be boomy when cranked (which is seldom). The driving electronics are nothing special. An Adcom GFA 535-II (60wpc/8Ohm, 100wpc/4Ohm), B&K Components PT3 series II preamp/tuner. Source is the analog output from my desktop pc, playing locally stored flac and mp3 files mostly from my own cd’s, some amount of internet streaming.

In this application I find these speakers generally…wonderful. I have applied a small amount of eq via AutoEQ/Peace, by ear, to compensate for LF perceptions at low volume. My ersatz loudness contour (as opposed to the loudness contour on the preamp which just turns everything to mud).

I am generally listening at a fairly low level and music is mostly acoustic jazz and chamber but a reasonable amount of more modern “pop” ranging from classic 60’s/70’s rock and blues and prog, and also a fair amount of bluegrass and other acoustic pleasantry.

I have also run these in my main listening room, on bars stools, on the foam blocks. About a 4500 cu ft space with vaulted ceilings and one side open to a kitchen. Driven with Cary SLM100 (EL34, 100wpc), full range, no eq, with and without a B&W ASW1000 @45hz. With chamber music they did all the good things small two speakers do, with more complex music with more percussive LF results varied. When really pushed they definitely fell apart in coherency, but they are not appropriate to a space that size or volumes that high.

My point is that speakers are very application dependent and we all have differences in hearing, both organic capability and psycho acoustic processing and perception. You may like these speakers upon hearing or you may be utterly unimpressed. I don’t think they are as flawed as the measurements would indicate. Hell, some people actually like the sound of Bose “lifestyle” speakers. YMMV.

 

[Rick Sykora]

Adding my two cents as a former reviewer who is happily no longer reviewing:

• This is an old model, and while I'm totally okay with it being measured -- it's still on sale, and people still buy used, after all -- I don't think one should assume what applies to a current model will apply to an older one. The LS50 measures totally different from the LS50 meta, and those look nearly identical. In this case, the 80 and 85th are completely different speakers with different drivers, driver placements, and driver sizes.
  
  
• I strongly believe it's not the reviewer's job to find the "optimal" way to listen to a speaker (or the buyer's for that matter). The manufacturer should tell the you that, and they should do so very explicitly. If the manufacturer fails to do that, than any reasonable way of measuring or listening to the speaker is fair game. On the other hand, if they do make an explicit recommendation, that should be your primary way of testing the speakers.
  
  (I don't think the designer mentioning that the speaker is better with the grille in interviews and other contexts really counts; included documentation is part of the product.)
  
  To that point, the Denton 80's manual makes no mention that the speaker sounds best with the grille on (neither does the 85's for that matter). It's not a reasonable thing for users to expect either, as it's almost unheard of among modern speakers. At best, one expects grilles to be transparent, not to actually make a dramatic sonic improvement.
  
  
• Notably, however, the Linton's manual does tell you to keep the grilles on. That right there is the difference with the Denton, as the difference is so clearly spelled out with the Linton's manual, including the fact it improves directivity not just the on-axis FR: "Additionally the drive unit dispersion is aided by the front grilles which should be left on for optimum listening performance. Removing the grilles will produce a brighter but less smooth sound."
  
  
• Keep in mind that if a speaker sounds and measures dramatically better with the grille off, that's also a bit of a design flaw. I know you'll always have to compromise on one or the other, but it's a bit of a problem if one method is so much better than the other if you expect buyers to use a product both ways. One could argue Wharfdale should have made the grilles permanent on the Linton, given how much better it measures and seemingly sounds.
  
  It's also bit annoying as a consumer: I way prefer how the Linton looks with the grill off, and that's the photo you see in ads and on the website. I'd be pretty disappointed to buy one expecting to use it with the grille off only to find it is officially and measurably better with the grilles on when I received it.

All that being said, I think the listening window on the Denton 80 is actually quite solid as measured, so I think this discussion is kind of moot. I did notice that the Lintons even had improved directivity with the grilles on, but it would take quite an improvement to fix the directivity issues with this particular model.

I wouldn't be surprised if the 85th edition measured a lot better.

Thanks for sharing what the product documentation states about the grille. Will add that the owner asked Amir for the measurements to be done with the grille off. Amir is then in the position of sharing the review as requested, not sharing it at all or having to do twice the work for questionable return on his time.

I think he respects most ASR members enough to take the review conditions under consideration. This Denton is an older version tested as requested by the owner. I think it is fair for him to question the value of testing it further just to satisfy a few folk’s curiosity when he has a large equipment review backlog. Even so, he supplied a quick test to help illustrate and, despite some mislabeling, explained his position.

If there were the potential for some loss of business or major change, and the company or the designer complained, could see Amir potentially reconsidering. However, even actual owner responses have also indicated this speaker is more style appeal than performance oriented. Yes, the designer gets credit for integrating the grille into the design. I can applaud his effort while still conceding that he likely did so to somewhat compensate for a style decision that was made decades ago.

I fully support Amir’s decision regarding this speaker. I want to see other more current equipment reviewed. This is only one obsolete speaker in a vast market, let’s move on to (hopefully) something better.

 

[beagleman]

It seems like a miss that it wasn't mentioned in the manual to leave the grilles on.
Normally if you bought them at a dealer, the dealer should pass on this information if they are knowledgeable about the products they are selling.

I feel a reviewer should at least know how to configure the product for optimal performance. If you buy a car and it comes out of the factory with two user adjustable settings....a default "normal" and "sport" Do you leave the car in normal mode and perform a full battery of performance tests, and leave it at that? Most readers of the review would be unsatisfied I think. I don't expect reviewers to spend hours/days trying to configure the product, but there is some basic due diligence to make sure the product is represented properly.

When I saw that this speaker was reviewed....the first thought in my head before I clicked on the link was...."I hope they didn't leave the grilles on for the spinorama".

Do you truly mean "ON" or did you mean to say "OFF"?

To me, it was common knowledge that all the Wharfedale vingtage look speakers were optimized to sound best WITH grill. I read stuff and so on and saw peter talking about that.

 

[warpdrive]

Do you truly mean "ON" or did you mean to say "OFF"?

To me, it was common knowledge that all the Wharfedale vingtage look speakers were optimized to sound best WITH grill. I read stuff and so on and saw peter talking about that.

haha, I meant off. Fixed.

 

[napilopez]

It seems like a miss that it wasn't mentioned in the manual to leave the grilles on.
Normally if you bought them at a dealer, the dealer should pass on this information if they are knowledgeable about the products they are selling.

I feel a reviewer should at least know how to configure the product for optimal performance. If you buy a car and it comes out of the factory with two user adjustable settings....a default "normal" and "sport" Do you leave the car in normal mode and perform a full battery of performance tests, and leave it at that? Most readers of the review would be unsatisfied I think. I don't expect reviewers to spend hours/days trying to configure the product, but there is some basic due diligence to make sure the product is represented properly.

When I saw that this speaker was reviewed....the first thought in my head before I clicked on the link was...."I hope they didn't leave the grilles on for the spinorama".

I hear where you're coming from, but I do disagree. I think good reviews often bring extra value with potential optimizations but that's a bonus, and not the core part of the review.

Perhaps a difference in philosophy but one I abide buy because we're ultimately reviewing products as presented to the average consumer. If it weren't for Erin's review, I wouldn't have known about the grill thing, even though I was familiar with the brand. It's actually one of the things that knocked the Linton down a notch in my current speaker search, because I prefer the look without.

In the context of speakers, you could argue that a speaker with excellent directivity but poor direct sound should earn top marks over a speaker that sounds better with worse directivity because it can be EQd into something great (all else being equal). Similar arguments for whether we're including optimal subwoofers in the configuration.

In any case, per Amir's most recent comments it currently seems like the Denton 80 measures worse with the grill on, unless there is a label mistake. Granted, theres a chance the directivity might change enough to an overall better product. But I do think it would be a going the extra mile -- or perhaps a little silly -- to spend the effort remeasuring a speaker trying to find optimal performance, when the manufacturer doesn't even specify this preference.

 

[ROOSKIE]

It seems like a miss that it wasn't mentioned in the manual to leave the grilles on.
Normally if you bought them at a dealer, the dealer should pass on this information if they are knowledgeable about the products they are selling.

I feel a reviewer should at least know how to configure the product for optimal performance. If you buy a car and it comes out of the factory with two user adjustable settings....a default "normal" and "sport" Do you leave the car in normal mode and perform a full battery of performance tests, and leave it at that? Most readers of the review would be unsatisfied I think. I don't expect reviewers to spend hours/days trying to configure the product, but there is some basic due diligence to make sure the product is represented properly.

When I saw that this speaker was reviewed....the first thought in my head before I clicked on the link was...."I hope they didn't leave the grilles off the spinorama".

FWIIW There are literally zero places to buy these and interact in person with a dealer. Yes you can sorta go into the back of the Music Direct warehouse when it is open and maybe talk with someone. Plus even if there were physical dealers for this model most buyer simply order online and never talk with a soul.

The thing about 'sport' and 'normal' is they are literally labeled as such. Seems like your example is a self fulfilling prophecy about why the manual should state which is 'hifi' and which is 'less hifi' ----> and I think nearly every hifi speaker manual is shyte and needs more useful info for buyers, not just this pair.

Looks like Wharfedale realized this eventually and did something more for at least the Linton.

Would it be cool if the review had more testing, of course why not? Do I think it might have been possible maybe even easy to identify this speaker as an outlier in grill-dom, sure. Other products have been measured twice including a different Wharfedale speaker so that might have been something to do here. But IMHO ultimately if there is indeed a prefered method that the manufacturer has designed for that ought to be clearly spelled out in the manual. I realize Erin is doing a lot of deep dives but I feel that can't be the expectation it should only be considered extra. That is a lot of time that most folks just do not have.

If you already have them enjoy them, certainly they still sound decent and lets face it it in many applications hifi isn't even really a factor. If anyone doesn't need the very nice real wood, non-glossy finish and classic looks just move on. New buyers, in 2024 these are not really worth $600 from a performance standpoint even if they measure a bit better with the grill.

What is there to argue?

I mean if you love Wharfedale and want to flex some love for them rest assured the oddly measuring 220 received a golfing panther here(with grills off, poor performing with them) and can be found during sales for under $200. I actually grabbed a set awhile back for $125. They sound very decent, a bit 'grungy' but somehow still very pleasing. I did not have the 80th and the 220 at the same time but I suspect there is actually very slightly better sound in the 220.

 

[ROOSKIE]

In the context of speakers, you could argue that a speaker with excellent directivity but poor direct sound should earn top marks over a speaker that sounds better with worse directivity because it can be EQd into something great (all else being equal). Similar arguments for whether we're including optimal subwoofers in the configuration.

This is something I really experienced while testing several Klipsch contemporary speakers that have great directivity and uneven raw frequency response. PEQ absolutely fixed them, actually into some really fine speakers.

The Harman system was developed way before miniDSP and the like. Sure many don't use speaker based corrections but man do they work well for some models. I get though that it is not an easy thing to implement or factor in for a typical person buying a pair every few years.

I do enjoy 2.0 for fun tests but because I usually use subs, I'd rather have a speaker that is optimzed above the crossover frequency vs one that gets high marks due to a little extra bass extension.

This is something I'm glad you brought up as it could be the better way of shopping for many who want to get deeper into messing with hifi.

 

[beagleman]

What are you talking about? The text in the graph (in orange) is correct. It is just the graph label on top that is incorrect. Response got worse in some respects, and slightly better in other. No way you can draw the conclusion you are stating:

Explain to me why the orange line is better.

@amirm I think you have it backwards STILL.

The orange response, on 2nd Non anechoic test, matches up with the NO GRILL of your first Spin.

Yet you are saying the orange curve is the Without grill and the green is with grill.

Why then does the orange look QUITE similar to the "NO GRILL", ...??

Please look over this again............

 

[DSJR]

How do you think these miniatures are going to be used by the average purchaser? Flat to a wall and not toed in, so maybe more mid-bass for a nice tone? The mid kHz sparkle may be tamed 20 or so degrees off axis and who cares about over 12kHz if they're not fussy audiophiles?

 

[Thomas_A]

No, the label is wrong. It is with grill.

Either way the curves are different. Green line looks like listening window to me. Not like on-axis of the spin.

 

[thewas]

Thanks for sharing what the product documentation states about the grille. Will add that the owner asked Amir for the measurements to be done with the grille off. Amir is then in the position of sharing the review as requested, not sharing it at all or having to do twice the work for questionable return on his time.

The owner could have asked him also to do them at turned to the side, but ASR is thankfully mainly a review and science site and not a personal wish list, otherwise any loudspeaker can be sent to Klippel for around $1000 for a spin.
Also measuring it with the grille on is by far not double the effort for Amir as thanks to the beauty of the NFS he doesn't need to anything than add them still mounted and restart the automatic scan and from the frequency of the ASR loudspeaker measurements it is not the case that the NFS is running 247 and such would delay another review significantly.

 

[warpdrive]

In the end, I think a product should be judged in its optimal configuration, and that is, with the grille on in this case. I guess I'm too used to TV reviews, where they try out the various preset picture modes, and then also manually calibrate the TV using a colorimeter, and adjust using the user controls and/or service menu to see how good they can get the picture. That's a lot of manual work. The TV is rated according to how good it CAN look once adjusted properly.

Yes, the product manual should have stated that the grille is meant to stay on, and they clearly fixed that with the Linton. Knowing that, that's the first thing I would have tested out...the effect of the grille knowing the cabinet has sharp edges but the grill does not. It is just common sense

 

[amirm]

I just realised that for headphone reviews often there's a part of the review that speaks about EQ, but in speaker reviews there is no such section.
is there a reason for this? is it due to room sound affecting frequency response? I personally don't use EQ so it's not obvious for me.

Developing an EQ is part of almost every review I do for headphones and speakers. The exception is when the response is already accurate enough where an EQ is not needed, or, as is in this case, I am not convinced the EQ fixed what needed fixing. In other words, this review is an exception.

 

[amirm]

That’s a strawman argument. No one said without measurements

They did. They were implying listening test prior and hence without measurements is better.

What you say is what I do. I measure, analyzer, listen, develop EQ to confirm and post my verdict. Everything is taken into account and no listening test result is thrown at you as a wet thumb in the air.

 

[amirm]

I think there is confusion about this for some of us, as the orange measurement has some peaks and dips that seem to more closely resemble your initial measurements, while the green measurement seems much smoother than your initial measurement, leading us to believe that would have been the “grille on” measurement.

BTW, thanks for the site, and all the hard work that goes into it.

Ah, I see now. I will correct....

 

[amirm]

The point will always remain that we mock people when the salesman tells them what they are about to hear and then they 'hear' it, yet you are doing the exact same thing.

What a salesman tells you is not remotely what measurements tell me. The former is some made up impression, the latter, hard data backed by decades of research into audibility/preference for speakers. When measurements tell you there is a 5 dB peak with low Q at 1000 Hz, you better pay attention and well. When a salesman says "this speakers images well," you can ignore that with total confidence that it is random comment.

And how can the phrase 'blind if need be' even be used when people are literally shouted down on here that state they heard a difference in a non-double blind test?

EQ effects are quite strong in most cases, obviating the need for blind confirmation that we ask for in electronic products where even a difference is in doubt. Sometimes, but not often, filter effects are either too subtle or variable based on content. In these cases, I resort to double blind testing by randomizing selection of filter on/and off, and comparing. I abandon the filter if i don't get reliable outcome instead of blindly offering it to you because measurements said so.

Admittedly, the above is not a super rigorous protocol so I give you that but is heck of a lot better scheme than someone pontificating "there is a problem around 500 Hz" while claiming to not have seen the measurements first. Importantly, there is no good alternative. Single speaker sighted tests simple have no value as research has proven conclusively. This is a point in Dr. Toole's research that is often not understood. From his book:

"A simple A versus B comparison is a start. Several
of them randomized would be even better. A multiple comparison with three
or four products available for comparison is arguably best. The problem with
a solitary paired comparison is that problems shared by both products are not
likely to be noticed."

See, even a pair comparison of two speakers is not ideal let alone just listening to a single speaker and opining on its fidelity. With no idea of how something is supposed to sound (no reference), multi-way comparisons need to be performed which is not practical outside of what Harman is doing.

In that sense, I am not giving you any kind of pure subjective assessment of a speaker or headphone. This is why you also don't see absolute ranking of speakers from me. That is so hard to do. Instead, I have developed a protocol to sanity check the measurements and while at it, produce equalization. That equalization can be blind tested by any of you as well as what I do. No subjective single speaker assessment enjoys that. Nor is there anything here equiv. to testing electronics.

 

[amirm]

Getting the basic measurements at the doctor is the equivalent of the sommelier telling you it is a red wine from a specific winery in Napa.

What??? If you have fever, you think that means nothing to your doctor? What if your blood pressure is sky high? Still nothing? How about you having lost 20 pounds since the last visit? Still nothing? These are very important clues to diagnose what is wrong with you or they would not waste their time performing them. They are baseline measurements that they like to have before even talking to you. Like a detective, the doctor is trying to gather as much evidence as possible before passing on a diagnostic.

Getting the full suite of measurements on a speaker first is the equivalent of them telling you that you exactly what you will taste first.

And looking at the brand, size, cost, reputation, other reviewers who commented on the speaker, who designed it, in fully sighted listening tests is not??? Why don't you go and scuff at their protocol using the same reasoning?

And no, I wish I could look at the measurements are instantly tell all of that in all cases. I listen precisely because I want to verify audibility of frequency response errors. If I ran with them as gospel, then there would be no reason to listen. Or saying a speaker is great when measurements don't fully back this.

Bottom line, the only fully reliable listening tests are those in double blind, multi-way comparisons which no reviewer performs. Lacking that, I suggest you trust reviewers that listen with knowledge of what they are testing, than literally being blind and thinking they have super human ability.