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...

 

[Musicofchance]

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?

Review Wharfedale Diamond 12.2 - Bright like a diamond?

The competition in this field is cut-throat. And that means that a product just has to be right. And this diamond does not...

www.alpha-audio.net

This chap did find distortion. And he used measuring equipment.

Ive been dissapointed with these too, i really wanted to like them with theyre look and build, although the design to me is flawed with the port being the same size as the 12.1's. They sound so restricted at louder volumes, boxy with a bloated bass.
However like someone has mentioned, ill try blocking the ports but failing that i cant see a reason to keep them.

Has anyone elses opinions changed on these since posting on this thread?

My set up is an audiolab 6000A with the IOTAX PA3 using CD's mainly with the CDT6000

Cheers

 

[uh2]

Review Wharfedale Diamond 12.2 - Bright like a diamond?

The competition in this field is cut-throat. And that means that a product just has to be right. And this diamond does not...

www.alpha-audio.net

This chap did find distortion. And he used measuring equipment.

Ive been dissapointed with these too, i really wanted to like them with theyre look and build, although the design to me is flawed with the port being the same size as the 12.1's. They sound so restricted at louder volumes, boxy with a bloated bass.
However like someone has mentioned, ill try blocking the ports but failing that i cant see a reason to keep them.

Has anyone elses opinions changed on these since posting on this thread?

My set up is an audiolab 6000A with the IOTAX PA3 using CD's mainly with the CDT6000

Cheers

Extrememly disappointed, especially after hearing a pair of GoldenEars for the first time a couple of months ago. Before then I thought, maybe it's me.

No, these speakers LOOK the part, but they're mediocre at best, am I'm no expert. I choose poorly.

 

[beagleman]

Review Wharfedale Diamond 12.2 - Bright like a diamond?

The competition in this field is cut-throat. And that means that a product just has to be right. And this diamond does not...

www.alpha-audio.net

This chap did find distortion. And he used measuring equipment.

Ive been dissapointed with these too, i really wanted to like them with theyre look and build, although the design to me is flawed with the port being the same size as the 12.1's. They sound so restricted at louder volumes, boxy with a bloated bass.
However like someone has mentioned, ill try blocking the ports but failing that i cant see a reason to keep them.

Has anyone elses opinions changed on these since posting on this thread?

My set up is an audiolab 6000A with the IOTAX PA3 using CD's mainly with the CDT6000

Cheers

I will of course not challenge your subjective opinion, as I have not heard them in person. But mainly was basing it on my 12.1s sounding close to "great" overall, of course within the limits of their size etc....(A 5" small woofer etc)

Just I guess fail to see how they could hit a homerun with one model, and the next larger model (12.2) would be close to horrible, when they use the same exact tweeter, same designer and voicing and so on.

My "Smaller" version of the 12.1 will play moderately loud without distortion, but at quite loud volumes of course they are somewhat limited overall, as all speakers that size tend to be.

The guy in the review you linked to also said, this:

"even Wharfedale itself with the EVO 4.1 – who, for a little more money, have an option that really performs better.

And that’s a shame, because we have the feeling that this speaker can play much better with minimal modifications. More about that in the next section with the measurements."

Honestly have to call into question their "review", as The EVO 4.1 measured quite a bit worse than the similar sized Diamond 12.1 which Erin and Amir reviewed and found quite decent sounding.

IF anything my 12.1s do NOT sound bright at all. I mean they were ALL voiced by Karl Heinz Fink, so I would assume quite "Similar sounding" overall.
Not trying to sound like a Wharfedale fanboy, but just confused how 2 very similar models could sound drastically different??

Have you read the 12.1 reviews by Erin and Amir?

 

[thewas]

IF anything my 12.1s do NOT sound bright at all.

It seems that depends a lot also on personal preference, habituation and listening room, as I find mine quite bright so I am not surprised if he and that Dutch reviewers found the 12.2 bright (which can be seen also in their measurements).
Here I did a quick analysis on mine:

Wharfedale Diamond 12.1 Review (Speaker)

As some might remember in my recent review of them I liked them a lot but also criticised mainly their elevated treble for my room and taste which I could easily correct with EQ though. Looking at them and my measurements I thought this might be a rare case were the usually audiophoolian...

www.audiosciencereview.com

 

[beagleman]

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

Danny over at G-R measured the Evo 4.4 and it was quite decent response wise.

 

[beagleman]

It seems that depends a lot also on personal preference, habituation and listening room, as I find mine quite bright so I am not surprised if he and that Dutch reviewers found the 12.2 bright (which can be seen also in their measurements).
Here I did a quick analysis on mine:

Wharfedale Diamond 12.1 Review (Speaker)

As some might remember in my recent review of them I liked them a lot but also criticised mainly their elevated treble for my room and taste which I could easily correct with EQ though. Looking at them and my measurements I thought this might be a rare case were the usually audiophoolian...

www.audiosciencereview.com

I can agree with personal preference to some degree and also room, so maybe what some are hearing.

I have a carpeted floor and no walls in close proximity to mine, and they have a very "Neutral" not bright nor dull sound overall.

 

[AJM1981]

Just a little notification. If I remember well; The Diamond 11 series was on the market when the Denton 85th anniversary edition came out. 'Then' the Diamond 12 series followed after. The 12.2 would have corrected some of the 11.2 attention points. Now I have never see any shootout between the Denton 85th and the Diamond 12.2 and I really wonder how they are toe to toe as comparable formats.

Little background
For a second setup I havw owned the Diamond 11.2 (sold it) and the Diamond 12.0 (my dad uses them now) almost at the same time. Both replaced by the Denton 85th.

The 11.2 was a fine model, great optical design, similar to the Evo series. Always a little pitying about the fact that I sold them. I think the bass got a minor negative notification in a review, but it never drew my attention. The later owned Diamond 12.0 was a star of the series along with the 12.2 according to another review. Always wondered about the fact if they had actually created a Denton “clone” with the 12.2 But I have never been really in an opportunity to compare them.