Am I the only one thinking all these Chinese bling mass-produced speakers are terrible.? Investors buy a brand to put on front of a box made as cheap as possible, also called profit make. Wharfedale Quad Tannoy You name them..
These are UK designed by Peter Comeau (ex heybrook and Mission) but made at the IAG china manufacturing facility. Finish and build on all models fantastic in relation to price. Plus they sound great. Not to be compared with no name brands doing LS3/5A clones.
I agree with most. I bought a floor model off a local dealer for a good deal (along with his floor model MoFi Ultradeck) and I don't know if I can justify the cost it would take to beat these out. Currently paired with with a Schiit Ragnarok 2 and Schiit Gugnir Multibit. I haven't played anything that didn't sound phenomenal on them over that past 6 months I've owned them.
I think it's fine for the entry level speakers for the brand. But for the price of the Elysian, it's really very hard to accept.
The Elysians are very large speakers and sound and finish is supposed to be competitive with models in the £10-20K price range. I would agree there should be a mid range between Evo and Elysian as the price difference is too large. The Evo 4.4 is competitive with speakers in the £2-3K range and maybe more.
@Classicrock how do these sound cranked up? I like to listen pretty loud at times, and am looking for something that can handle high volumes without getting harsh.
They will go as loud as you or more importantly the neighbours can stand. (Providing you have an amp that doesn't clip). I've measure them at around 90 Db and they play clean (too loud for normal safe listening )
Excellent. Thanks man. My amp is the Benchmark AHB2, so no worries about clean amplification. And no neighbors either!!
I love the Wharfedale sound and am debating between the 4.2 and 4.4 (I haven't read or heard smuch about the 4.3). I'm curious what size rooms folks here have successfully uses the 4.4s's in?
I've been listening to the 4.4 in my finished basement I measured it at 425 square feet not including a walkway and such. I use a 60 watt per channel amp and easily push these to about high 60 db's for regular listening with mid 70's peak. I sit about 10 feet from them, the speakers are 10 feet from each other and about a foot off the back wall. (no side walls near by). I have no complaints whatsoever, the value of these speakers cannot be beat in my opinion.
Would you say that the evo4.4 is a good combination with audiolab 6000a play? Its 50-75watt per channel
How is the vertical dispersion axis on these? Does your head need to be locked into a very specific place in relation to the tweeter height or can you just sit normally and have it sound right?
At the show the system sounded good to me, given a crowded room at the time. More expensive amps will likely give better results.
You don't need to be at tweeter height which would be difficult. Normal sitting position is below tweeters given their height. They sound fine to me in this position.
Reason I ask is that Zero Fidelity's review of the 4.2 (?) bookshelves said that if your head wasn't locked right along the tweeter position, it mucked up the sound.
I had the 4.2s in my house for just over 2 months and very much enjoyed them thoroughly. I parted with them because they didn't provide the upper-bass "shove" that I prefer (often from larger cones) and that resulted in a good bit of lost impact in some rock recordings. Other than that I really couldn't fault them (except for a tiny bit of chuffing at very high volumes on extremely bass heavy tracks - but given their size, it's not fair to expect more).... I loved everything else they did. Honestly they're the first set of speakers I've sent back in a long time that I actually missed (and somewhat continue to miss) since they've gone. I think if I'd given them more power that deficiency may have vanished; I only provided 35wpc (albeit vintage watts) from a Marantz 2235B. For jazz, acoustic, classical they were stupendous for their size, truly. But at present I am not looking to leave the Marantz behind; I want speakers to work with my room and current gear, not urge me onto an upgrade road. The 4.2s are 8 ohms nominal but they liste 4.2ohm minimum.... I have to wonder if that's conservative. They seem to want power. The 4.4s are a bit much for my room I reckon and I've actually been close to pulling the trigger on the 4.3 to give a whirl. Wondering if the smaller drivers combined with the same ohm rating but a tick higher sensitivity (along with much larger cabinet volume) might be just what I'm after. But so far I haven't ordered pair; I'm waiting on delivery of a pair of Zu Dirty Weekends to take for a spin.
Did you notice any vertical field issues with the 4.2? I'm not always a sit still and listen person, so I try to choose speakers accordingly. I'd love to hear your thoughts on the DWs once you've had some time with them.
Yes. But for their size it's better than most, certainly. And honestly, that never bothers me as much as it does quite a few folks it seems. I actually preferred them with the tweets a bit up from level. I had them on average sized 24in stands; many have said 22in is better. But it didn't bother me. The AMT disperses better than I thought it would.... but it's by no means a walk-around-the-room speaker. I don't suspect anyone would think so though.
Hard to say really because that depends what you want. A few 70s era hifi speakers. Even the ever poo'd-upon Bose 501s or 901s (Sonab speakers are magic, like OA-5 & OA12 and similar, but for some are an acquired taste.) But today.... Ohm Walsh, I'd say would be my first choice. Everything else is either very consumer oriented (I fill rooms with Sonos speakers personally because I don't care when I'm walking around). But generally, as to my experience for more traditional loudspeakers, the bigger the better and the more dispersion the better. Klipsh come to mind. But filling a room is a very different requirement than most hifi folks want with accurate imaging etc. A bit at odds with one another. I just accept that, for the prices I can stomach and the sound that I want when I'm seated and listening... they aren't going to really hold together when I'm moving about. But when I'm moving about, again, I usually don't really care cuz I'm not really listening. edit: I'm sure there are others around these parts that can give a better, more specific answer to that question than I can.
I just picked up the 4.4s a couple of weeks ago. The room I have the in is about 20' x 40' . My system is a bit offset in the room and is more suited to sitting on the couch in front of them, just because they aren't pointed in a way that projects across the entirety of the room. That said, they have no problem filling the room with sound. I am powering them with a Peachtree Nova 150, but I also had a sprout100 connected to them for a few days. If I was to say anything against them it would just be that in a room this size , the woofers don't push enough to "fill" the space. But that would be the case with many speakers unless I was to move to a much larger woofer. The 8" woofers on my Monitor Silver 100s were equally lost within the room.
That's a big room indeed. May I ask, how did the Sprout100 fare with them? I have a much smaller space and could probably get by with the 4.2s, but I really like a tower.
The Sprout100 did much better than I thought it would. If you don't connect a subwoofer to the sprout also has a bass boost function that would certainly help with the low end. I think it would certainly pair well in a smaller space. The sprout is 50 watts at 8 ohms and 100 at 4 ohms it is definitely within the recommended range for the 4.4s
