Elac debut reference vs unifi reference9/14/2023 Sonically, they provide a good level of detail, and they organise that information into a cohesive and musical whole. It could've done with a coax (digital) and maybe another analogue line-level input for completeness, but most bases are covered.īuild quality is pleasing, good and solid, and the speakers aren't overly fussy about placement, giving you plenty of options on where to put them. There's also a set of stereo RCAs for hooking up a turntable. However, unlike some rival systems, it lacks streaming smarts, so you'll need to Bluetooth tracks from your mobile device or plug in an external device via the USB, optical or HDMI ports. It comprises one powered speaker, and one more conventional passive unit, with the two linked by a speaker cable. are welcome.The Debut ConneX DCB41 is a slightly different beast to the other speakers here – it's a mini hi-fi setup in one. You get to decide which side of me you want to believe.Īs always, questions, comments, recommendations, etc. Subjectively, with some EQ it can be made to sound good. Either I was not playing loud enough or that the tone was getting added to other parts of the music and it was not as obvious as it was in Uni-fi 2.0.Īnyway, I think technically the ELAC Uni-fi Reference UCR52 is a failure and I can't recommend it. On the resonance, I could not get a clear case of it showing up. This is super important in home theater applications were the center speaker carries most of the burden as it has to show all that is seen on screen. Dual woofers give it high SPL playback ability which is an effective way to get on my good side. Thankfully or not, in a battle of subjectivity vs objectivity, with a bit of EQ it performs a lot better than it should. Do they only play at low and modest levels and don't hear such things? If so, what is up with the uneven frequency response? Is this all tuned by ear? Why is it so uneven anyway? Was this pushed out the door before being finished? Lot of questions. What were they thinking? How could they produce such a technically flawed speaker? When I can hear a resonance with hearing protection in a simple log sweep, surely they could too. I know the word "reference" has been bastardized in audio to almost mean nothing but still, I expected more, far more from Elac and Andrew Jones. Vocals came forward now which is what you want in a center speaker. Wow, so much muddier and a bit tubbier without EQ. This so called spinorama shows us just about everything we need to know about the speaker with respect to tonality and some flaws:Īt first, the difference was subtle but then I listened for 15 minutes and then turned off the EQ. Grill was not used.Īcoustic measurements can be grouped in a way that can be perceptually analyzed to determine how good a speaker is and how it can be used in a room. Reference axis is approximately the center of the tweeter. I performed over 1000 measurement which resulted in error rate of about 1%. Both of these factors enable testing in ordinary rooms yet results that can be more accurate than an anechoic chamber. Using computational acoustics, far-field response is computed and that is what I present. It also measures the speaker at close distance ("near-field") which sharply reduces the impact of room noise. This is a robotic measurement system that analyzes the speaker all around and is able (using advanced mathematics and dual scan) to subtract room reflections (so where I measure it doesn't matter). Measurements that you are about to see were performed using the Klippel Near-field Scanner (NFS).
0 Comments
Leave a Reply.AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |