• 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!

Elac Debut Reference DBR-62 Speaker Review

GimeDsp

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 30, 2020
Messages
418
Likes
362
Location
Earth
I've had the DBR62's for LCR for about a month now and really like them. Using them with a Dynamo 1100X sealed subwoofer and calibrated up to 900hz with an Anthem receiver.
From all the speakers I remember, they remind me most of Dynaudio Special 40's.
Here's how I'd rate them out of 10 against other speakers I've owned or have heard several times:

Clarity:
B&W 685S2 - 6
Debut Reference - 7.5
Paradigm Prestige 15B's - 8
Elac Adante AS-61 - 8.5
Bryston Mini T's - 8.5
Kef Reference 1's - 9
B&W 804D3 or Kharma Elegance S7's - 10

Tonality:
Paradigm Prestige - 7.5
Elac Adante AS-61 - 8
Debut Reference - 8.5
Bryston Mini T's - 9
B&W 804D3 - 9
Kharma Elegance S7's - 10

Soundstage and imaging:
B&W 804D3 - 6
Debut Reference - 7.5
Bryston Mini T - 7.5
Elac Adante AS-61 - 8.5
Paradigm Prestige 15B's - 8.5
Kef Reference 1's - 9
JBL DD66000 - 10
Seems like they stack up pretty well.
I may have to pick up a pair if they ever go on sale
 

Livnmuskoka

Member
Joined
Sep 12, 2020
Messages
70
Likes
62
Seems like they stack up pretty well.
I may have to pick up a pair if they ever go on sale
The regular price in Canada is $699 plus tax.
I got the first pair as a display model from a store for $599 because nobody else had any in stock. I liked them and wanted a 3rd speaker for center, so I got the 2nd pair from Elac Canada for $699 but no tax. Not much of a deal, saved about $200, but don't really care as I've already enjoyed them for over a month. They should come on sale eventually though.
 

renaudrenaud

Major Contributor
Joined
Apr 20, 2019
Messages
1,299
Likes
2,860
Location
Tianjin
The proof they are better than Klipsh Heresy:

IMG_20201127_115217.jpg
 

Chromatischism

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 5, 2020
Messages
4,767
Likes
3,703
Powering the DFR52's with my NCore, I sought to see how much bass they could put out at up to -10 on the AVR which corresponds to about 95 dB. I am using Audyssey's Dynamic EQ and I think these speakers need it. Corrections up to 350 Hz.

I'm here to report that while they aren't bass monsters, there is some serious air coming out of all of the vents! I would like to see a cutaway, but I believe the bottom slot vent services the two bottom drivers as well as the lower port at the back, and the upper port serves the midwoofer.

Interestingly, the midwoofer has the greatest excursion. That puppy moves a lot more than the lower bass drivers. Is this typical for a 3-way design? I wouldn't think so. Clearly the bottom bass drivers have a lot more vent area to improve their efficiency but I didn't expect a "midrange" to be moving so much. The air velocity from its dedicated port on the upper backside of the speaker is also noticeably higher.
 

Benedium

Senior Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Aug 1, 2020
Messages
343
Likes
255
Powering the DFR52's with my NCore, I sought to see how much bass they could put out at up to -10 on the AVR which corresponds to about 95 dB. I am using Audyssey's Dynamic EQ and I think these speakers need it. Corrections up to 350 Hz.

I'm here to report that while they aren't bass monsters, there is some serious air coming out of all of the vents! I would like to see a cutaway, but I believe the bottom slot vent services the two bottom drivers as well as the lower port at the back, and the upper port serves the midwoofer.

Interestingly, the midwoofer has the greatest excursion. That puppy moves a lot more than the lower bass drivers. Is this typical for a 3-way design? I wouldn't think so. Clearly the bottom bass drivers have a lot more vent area to improve their efficiency but I didn't expect a "midrange" to be moving so much. The air velocity from its dedicated port on the upper backside of the speaker is also noticeably higher.

Previously for months I thought I needed Dynamic EQ with 10 or 15db reference level offset. But now I think sound quality is really much better with Dyn EQ off.

Maybe also because I don't fully understand how to confidently EQ and integrate front, centre and surround speakers ... so I've decided to just let audyssey xt32 + multiEQ app do the full range auto calibration for all speakers.

Now the result is very clean and natural sounding. No excess bass bloat or over extended highs. At lower volumes, there is much less bass but vocals and highs are more audible. As i increase volume, the bass fills in proportionately and predictably.

Most of the time sounds seem to only come directionally from each speaker or like I don't have a subwoofer at all, but sometimes with explosions and rumbling effects the bass becomes all encompassing and fully surrounding. I believe this is what the real recording is supposed to sound like.

With Dyn EQ off, I also feel I can hear it or predict when I am approaching the intended level of the recording. I think the unpredictable problems with Dyn EQ far outweigh its benefits, so never again will I turn on Dyn EQ.
 

Chromatischism

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 5, 2020
Messages
4,767
Likes
3,703
Previously for months I thought I needed Dynamic EQ with 10 or 15db reference level offset. But now I think sound quality is really much better with Dyn EQ off.

Maybe also because I don't fully understand how to confidently EQ and integrate front, centre and surround speakers ... so I've decided to just let audyssey xt32 + multiEQ app do the full range auto calibration for all speakers.

Now the result is very clean and natural sounding. No excess bass bloat or over extended highs. At lower volumes, there is much less bass but vocals and highs are more audible. As i increase volume, the bass fills in proportionately and predictably.

Most of the time sounds seem to only come directionally from each speaker or like I don't have a subwoofer at all, but sometimes with explosions and rumbling effects the bass becomes all encompassing and fully surrounding. I believe this is what the real recording is supposed to sound like.

With Dyn EQ off, I also feel I can hear it or predict when I am approaching the intended level of the recording. I think the unpredictable problems with Dyn EQ far outweigh its benefits, so never again will I turn on Dyn EQ.
The problem may be that you are equalizing full-range. I only use Audyssey up to around 350 Hz. Therefore the combination of fixing the room-caused frequency response issues then lifting the bass evenly with Dynamic EQ fills in what's missing from many speakers without encroaching on clarity.
 

Chromatischism

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 5, 2020
Messages
4,767
Likes
3,703
I know this is the DBR62 thread but there isn't a DFR52 thread, so since these are closely related I think discussion of them should be fine.

All this venting going on with the DFR52 tower yet the sensitivity is only rated to 87 dB. I find that to be very low for the design. Wouldn't that suggest that without the parallel woofer, sensitivity would be only 84 dB?
 

Benedium

Senior Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Aug 1, 2020
Messages
343
Likes
255
The problem may be that you are equalizing full-range. I only use Audyssey up to around 350 Hz. Therefore the combination of fixing the room-caused frequency response issues then lifting the bass evenly with Dynamic EQ fills in what's missing from many speakers without encroaching on clarity.
Another problem with limiting EQ for different speakers is they end up at different levels and the curves look scary irregular. I have br62 front and center, b6.2 for surrounds and ow4.2 for heights. So surround and heights have to be limited differently and quite high like around 3Khz to get the curves matching in appearance. After much trial and error I decided it's easier and sounds good to just EQ the full range and turn off Dyn EQ.
 

Chromatischism

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 5, 2020
Messages
4,767
Likes
3,703
It's true that EQ can be used to make dissimilar speakers more similar, but I'm not understanding what that has to do with turning off Dynamic EQ. How are you adjusting for the loss of bass and treble at lower volumes? Low volume listening is a dull experience without the self-adjusting curve.
 

Benedium

Senior Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Aug 1, 2020
Messages
343
Likes
255
It's true that EQ can be used to make dissimilar speakers more similar, but I'm not understanding what that has to do with turning off Dynamic EQ. How are you adjusting for the loss of bass and treble at lower volumes? Low volume listening is a dull experience without the self-adjusting curve.
I guess I'm saying I tried what u said but it still sounded worse in some ways so i went back to full range EQ. Anyway ignore me haha.
 
Last edited:

Chromatischism

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 5, 2020
Messages
4,767
Likes
3,703
Regarding these ceiling reflections, has anyone considered putting a shade at the top of the speaker, like DCM?

index.php


Since many of us can't put absorbers on the ceiling, why not block it at its source? Attached:
 

Attachments

  • DCM.jpg
    DCM.jpg
    133.8 KB · Views: 352

Livnmuskoka

Member
Joined
Sep 12, 2020
Messages
70
Likes
62
Regarding these ceiling reflections, has anyone considered putting a shade at the top of the speaker, like DCM?

index.php


Since many of us can't put absorbers on the ceiling, why not block it at its source? Attached:

I have previously tried a long piece of Roxul safe n' sound wrapped in material, and had it overhanging the top edge of my Paradigm LCR speakers about 3" as an experiment. It made the speakers have a much smaller sound, it wasn't good.
Having other rectangle pieces wrapped in fabric right beside the left and right speakers knocked down the high frequencies, but not evenly according to the anthem room correction graph.
Having DBR-62's now for LCR, the anthem room correction showed they have a 3dB dip in the fatiguing 1khz to 4khz range in my room, and it is near perfect for my sensitive ears. From 5khz and up they are near flat again.
 

Proflig8tor

New Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2020
Messages
1
Likes
0
Cyber Monday Sale for Retail Priced Items at ListenUp.com. Got the $599 DBR62 White/Oak for $510. Best I've seen since these don't seem to be on sale anywhere else.

Plan on replacing some JBL 2080's and powering them with a Denon X4500H. Also using a Klipsch R-12SW. Open to comments & suggestions as to whether this is a good idea for my < $1,500 mostly home theater application. So far the X4500H is cleaner, but less powerful and less punchy than the Pioneer DX912 it replaced.
 

Livnmuskoka

Member
Joined
Sep 12, 2020
Messages
70
Likes
62
Cyber Monday Sale for Retail Priced Items at ListenUp.com. Got the $599 DBR62 White/Oak for $510. Best I've seen since these don't seem to be on sale anywhere else.

Plan on replacing some JBL 2080's and powering them with a Denon X4500H. Also using a Klipsch R-12SW. Open to comments & suggestions as to whether this is a good idea for my < $1,500 mostly home theater application. So far the X4500H is cleaner, but less powerful and less punchy than the Pioneer DX912 it replaced.

I haven't heard JBL 2080's, but I downgraded from Paradigm Prestige 15B's, and I find the DBR-62's sound at least 90% as good as the 15B's for clarity and imaging. And the DBR-62's aren't as bright in my room, and I find they have a more natural and realistic tone.
 

Maiky76

Senior Member
Joined
May 28, 2020
Messages
440
Likes
3,706
Location
French, living in China
Here is my take on the EQ.

The reviews are rather positive and I am not quite sure if the EQ will actually yield an improvement but that an interesting test to perform nonetheless. I am somewhat skeptical about it but it seems that some good people might be able to test it.
@renaudrenaud, @daftcombo

The raw data with corrected ER and PIR:
Score no EQ: 5.68
With Sub: 7.76
Spinorama with no EQ:
  • Generally flat response except around 4k, which is definitively something related to the off axis behavior of the speaker. It looks to me as a typical case of deliberate voicing i.e. deviation from flatness to smooth out the PIR.
    the Horizontal normalized network of curve is quite telling.
  • The directivity is decent, good candidate for EQ
  • Decent LF for the size with mild boost in the 100-300Hz range
  • 500-1000Hz range quite jaggy, not sure why
Elac DBR62 No EQ Spinorama.png

Directivity:
Better stay at tweeter height.
Horizontally, better toe-in the speakers by 10/20deg and have the axis crossing in front of the listening location, might help dosing the upper range.
Elac DBR62 LW better data.png

Elac DBR62 2D surface Directivity Contour Only Data.png

Normalized data:
Elac DBR62 Normalized Directivity data.png

EQ design:
The APO config file is attached.
  • The loudness between the EQ and bare version is rather different so careful set up of the preamp gains is required for ABX listening tests
  • The EQ does not try to fatten the response ON around 4kHz as it would have negative impact on the PIR. This is not a target that I set but the result of the evolutionary optimization. In fact the flat LW original population seed has a significantly lower score (6.04). The designer seems to have been correct when designing the Xover, well done.
Score EQ: 6.44, quite respectable!
with sub: 8.52
Code:
Elac DBR62 APO EQ 96000Hz
December022020-121023

Preamp: -1.3 dB

Filter 1: ON HPQ Fc 31.6 Hz Gain 0 dB Q 0.85
Filter 2: ON PK Fc 169.5 Hz Gain -2.33 dB Q 0.67
Filter 3: ON PK Fc 573 Hz Gain 0.81 dB Q 3
Filter 4: ON PK Fc 630 Hz Gain -2.2 dB Q 11.4
Filter 5: ON PK Fc 843 Hz Gain -2.69 dB Q 2.55
Filter 6: ON PK Fc 1769 Hz Gain 1.51 dB Q 2.22
Filter 7: ON PK Fc 5813 Hz Gain -0.67 dB Q 1.11
Elac DBR62 EQ Design.png

Spinorama EQ
Elac DBR62 EQed Spinorama.png

Zoom PIR-LW-ON
Elac DBR62 Zoom-PIR-LW.png

Regression - Tonal
The PIR regression suggests that the speaker sounds larger than its size.
The slope is about 8dB from 100 to 16000Hz compared to the more common 6dB of the EQ version.
Howe ever the ON regression is now flat.
Elac DBR62 Regression - Tonal.png

Radar no EQ vs EQ score
Some improvements
Elac DBR62 Radar.png

The rest of the plots are attached.
 

Attachments

  • Elac DBR62 Vertical 3D Directivity data.png
    Elac DBR62 Vertical 3D Directivity data.png
    576.9 KB · Views: 121
  • Elac DBR62 Horizontal 3D Directivity data.png
    Elac DBR62 Horizontal 3D Directivity data.png
    567 KB · Views: 123
  • Elac DBR62 Raw Directivity data.png
    Elac DBR62 Raw Directivity data.png
    727.6 KB · Views: 116
  • Elac DBR62 Reflexion data.png
    Elac DBR62 Reflexion data.png
    236.5 KB · Views: 117
  • Elac DBR62 LW data.png
    Elac DBR62 LW data.png
    242 KB · Views: 137
  • Elac DBR62 2D surface Directivity Contour Data.png
    Elac DBR62 2D surface Directivity Contour Data.png
    269.8 KB · Views: 149
  • Elac DBR62 3D surface Vertical Directivity Data.png
    Elac DBR62 3D surface Vertical Directivity Data.png
    492.1 KB · Views: 120
  • Elac DBR62 3D surface Horizontal Directivity Data.png
    Elac DBR62 3D surface Horizontal Directivity Data.png
    492.6 KB · Views: 115
  • Elac DBR62 APO EQ 96000Hz.txt
    391 bytes · Views: 196

Chromatischism

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 5, 2020
Messages
4,767
Likes
3,703
I see there is not much room to move on EQ, similar finding to Amir's Roon fiddling. That means these are plug and play for most people; good for those who don't know about making filters.

The tweeter looks a little bright but I'm listening to the DFR52 towers and they don't sound bright, even in this completely hard room. They are energetic, about as much as I'd want, but I have yet to be annoyed by anything I'm hearing. They are more "right" sounding than many speakers out of the box, that's for sure.
 

renaudrenaud

Major Contributor
Joined
Apr 20, 2019
Messages
1,299
Likes
2,860
Location
Tianjin
Here is my take on the EQ.

The reviews are rather positive and I am not quite sure if the EQ will actually yield an improvement but that an interesting test to perform nonetheless. I am somewhat skeptical about it but it seems that some good people might be able to test it.
@renaudrenaud, @daftcombo

The raw data with corrected ER and PIR:
Score no EQ: 5.68
With Sub: 7.76
Spinorama with no EQ:
  • Generally flat response except around 4k, which is definitively something related to the off axis behavior of the speaker. It looks to me as a typical case of deliberate voicing i.e. deviation from flatness to smooth out the PIR.
    the Horizontal normalized network of curve is quite telling.
  • The directivity is decent, good candidate for EQ
  • Decent LF for the size with mild boost in the 100-300Hz range
  • 500-1000Hz range quite jaggy, not sure why
View attachment 96881
Directivity:
Better stay at tweeter height.
Horizontally, better toe-in the speakers by 10/20deg and have the axis crossing in front of the listening location, might help dosing the upper range.
View attachment 96853
View attachment 96861
Normalized data:
View attachment 96856
EQ design:
The APO config file is attached.
  • The loudness between the EQ and bare version is rather different so careful set up of the preamp gains is required for ABX listening tests
  • The EQ does not try to fatten the response ON around 4kHz as it would have negative impact on the PIR. This is not a target that I set but the result of the evolutionary optimization. In fact the flat LW original population seed has a significantly lower score (6.04). The designer seems to have been correct when designing the Xover, well done.
Score EQ: 6.44, quite respectable!
with sub: 8.52
Code:
Elac DBR62 APO EQ 96000Hz
December022020-121023

Preamp: -1.3 dB

Filter 1: ON HPQ Fc 31.6 Hz Gain 0 dB Q 0.85
Filter 2: ON PK Fc 169.5 Hz Gain -2.33 dB Q 0.67
Filter 3: ON PK Fc 573 Hz Gain 0.81 dB Q 3
Filter 4: ON PK Fc 630 Hz Gain -2.2 dB Q 11.4
Filter 5: ON PK Fc 843 Hz Gain -2.69 dB Q 2.55
Filter 6: ON PK Fc 1769 Hz Gain 1.51 dB Q 2.22
Filter 7: ON PK Fc 5813 Hz Gain -0.67 dB Q 1.11
View attachment 96875
Spinorama EQ
View attachment 96879
Zoom PIR-LW-ON
View attachment 96877
Regression - Tonal
The PIR regression suggests that the speaker sounds larger than its size.
The slope is about 8dB from 100 to 16000Hz compared to the more common 6dB of the EQ version.
Howe ever the ON regression is now flat.
View attachment 96876
Radar no EQ vs EQ score
Some improvements
View attachment 96878
The rest of the plots are attached.

Thanks a lot for this! Brilliant!
 

Chromatischism

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 5, 2020
Messages
4,767
Likes
3,703
Since the crossover for the tower is the same at 2200 Hz, I wonder if this EQ would still work for it. The only differences would be the front baffle width and the mid woofer, which are both narrower and would affect things slightly.
 

desutruction

Member
Joined
Dec 3, 2020
Messages
13
Likes
7
Hi! I'm planning on getting these speakers to pair with a Rega Planar 3.
I'm having trouble picking an amplifier and I only have these options (local price converted to USD):

  • SMSL DA-8S ($150) - This is my main choice at the moment as it seems nicely priced and I can get it easily, plus it doesn't get as warm(?). Will probably pair with a Rega Fono Mini A2D MK2 ($100)
  • NAD C 316 BEE V2 ($435) - I'm considering this but it's almost triple the price of the DA-8S :(
  • Marantz PM5005 ($375)
  • Cambridge Audio AXA35 ($400)

Would the SMSL be able to bring out enough from the ELACs?
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom