AVS Forum banner

3061 - 3080 of 3088 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,382 Posts
So in the meanwhile I had ordered a pair of Elac Debut B6 to compare it to the F6.2.

and the results are in:
I A/B-ed the B6 vs F6.2(polyfilled) and the Bass is a match, with the F6.2 even better with more details in the bass. Unbelievable.
For the Treble, I had to attenuate the Treble Tone control by -6db on the F6.2 to match, and even then the clarity and soundstage and depth is even more better than the B6.

So there you go. If you want performance similar to the original debut, polyfill it, and reduce the treble by 6db.

Hope this helps you all out there.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,256 Posts
So wait...the F6.2's with your polyfill mod only "match" what the original B6 bookshelves did stock? Yikes. I was expecting much better given that it's a tower.

For the record though, the B6's are kinda "sloppy" when compared to the original B5's. The B5 has at least 90% of the bass the B6 does, but overall it's much clearer and less congested with a better soundstage.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,382 Posts
So wait...the F6.2's with your polyfill mod only "match" what the original B6 bookshelves did stock? Yikes. I was expecting much better given that it's a tower.

For the record though, the B6's are kinda "sloppy" when compared to the original B5's. The B5 has at least 90% of the bass the B6 does, but overall it's much clearer and less congested with a better soundstage.
The polyfilled F6.2 matches the low end thump that made the B6 famous, but the F6.2 also has more detail in the bass. These details are totally missing in the B6. So it is like a Reference Version of the B6. Of course the soundstage is larger given the taller F6.2.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,256 Posts
It's still 3 woofers vs one, with two of those being dedicated to only low-end frequencies. The extra "detail" is probably coming from the dedicated woofer that plays up to the tweeter xover. I would expect that as that tower is technically a 3-way.

But if a tower can only equal a bookshelf in terms of low bass output (and it needs to be modded to boot), it gets a hard pass from me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,382 Posts
It's still 3 woofers vs one, with two of those being dedicated to only low-end frequencies. The extra "detail" is probably coming from the dedicated woofer that plays up to the tweeter xover. I would expect that as that tower is technically a 3-way.

But if a tower can only equal a bookshelf in terms of low bass output (and it needs to be modded to boot), it gets a hard pass from me.
ha ha... that is so true. But then I don’t play over 70db. Maybe the dual woofer is better when you have more power to dish out. Apart from that, I am not sure what one should expect. Any louder & deeper on the bass and you are in a dedicated 200w 8/10” subwoofer territory.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,382 Posts
One more experiment today:
I have the Elac B6 as well as the F6.2.
I took one of the B6 woofer out and replaced it with a F6.2 woofer.
So now I have a pair of B6 with one having 6.2 woofer.
Playing it and switching the balance from left to right and surprise surprise- the B6 speaker with the 6.2 woofer plays better - better mid bass, better low bass than the original.

I will let you all to come to your own conclusions.
3069258
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,382 Posts
I can’t help but think you’re putting in way too much effort to get some very low priced gear to sound marginally better.
Ummm I am not. I am just having fun with the speakers I have with me. I don’t need anything to sound any better. All of my speakers are in different rooms serving their purpose as intended.

That said, Danny Ritchie built a new crossover for the Elac B6. He also lined them with NoRez. All to get a marginal better response.

In fact this was reviewed by New Record Day and was not loved.

Compared to this, my woofer switch has yielded a response that I would like to call it the Elac B6 Reference Model.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
578 Posts
Dude you butchered up some perfectly good speakers. And Danny needs to design, market, and sell HIS OWN creations,from top to bottom and not Frankenstein other designer's designs.
And no I am not buying that your creations sound that great.....you just like taking things apart to see how they work.
 
  • Like
Reactions: chikoo

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,382 Posts
Dude you butchered up some perfectly good speakers. And Danny needs to design, market, and sell HIS OWN creations,from top to bottom and not Frankenstein other designer's designs.
And no I am not buying that your creations sound that great.....you just like taking things apart to see how they work.
If you think the Debut B6 are perfectly good speakers, you need to listen to these pair of frankenstein. You will love them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,382 Posts
For the record though, the B6's are kinda "sloppy" when compared to the original B5's.
The Debut 6.2 has been criticized for the lack of bass and a very neutral and surgical sound. What would happen if that was changed to introduce some of the Original Debut sloppiness into the 6.2 design? I just did that and it is fun. A bit of sloppy low end bass with great clarity and articulation in the mid-bass and high end.

Presenting the Elac Debut Frankenstein Towers.

3070030
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,256 Posts
So which frankenstein actually sounds better?

Maybe you should go parts shopping for woofers that match the interior specs of the Elac tower. That way you could replace the two that just do bass frequencies and see what happens.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,382 Posts
So which frankenstein actually sounds better?

Maybe you should go parts shopping for woofers that match the interior specs of the Elac tower. That way you could replace the two that just do bass frequencies and see what happens.
The F6.2 frankenstein are bit more fun because of the sloppy bass.
The b6 bookshelves are definitely way better with the 6.2 Woofer. The original cabinet is soft and unbraced making it a live cabinet. That is what AJ addressed with the Debut 2.0 but people did not like the sterile sound.

That said, the original 6 also has so many frequencies missing due to their woofer cone being doped. You can hear those missing mid/low frequencies with the 6.2 woofer.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
34 Posts
I've only read the past few pages to catch up a little. When the original F5 and B5 were at RMAF back in '15 or '16 I was blown away by what the F5 did for $559/pr at the time. This spring, I bought a pair of B5.2s for $173 del'd brand new (before Elac put the kibosh on deep discounts). I put them on stands in my main audio systerm, blended with an R.E.L. B1 sub and loved it for the money. The Elac B5.2s had minor digital equalization, only making them sound better.

A few months later I paid more but bought two singles, F5.2s and set them up in the main audio system again for fun. With either F or B paired correctly with the B1 sub there wasn't such a big difference but there was still more body and I always enjoyed the F better. When you pull the sub out there is no match to my ears. The floor-standers have far more bass and body than the small B5.2s which are fine in their own way. Although they sat out 50" some bass equalization really made them shine.

I finally bought a center channel and all five Elac speakers displaced an older speaker system in the 13 x 18 TV room. With a small R.E.L. Storm III set up that small system will light up the room with clean decent sound. I always recommend Elacs to anyone starting out. For me they're great in a TV of HT system. Audio is my thing so I need more...

Interesting thread. I'll go back and read some of the more recent older stuff. Chikoo, good on you for experimenting. Do you feel the F5.2s might benefit from polyfill redistribution? I also enjoyed hearing about the mid/bass driver swap in the 6.0 vs 6.2. I've been lucky enough to meet Andrew at Elac demos, and having heard his higher end designs, I find it hard to believe he'd allow a second version of a speaker he designed to sound worse than his original. He has a reputation in the industry and is way too young to sell out (ha). Thanks, all.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,256 Posts
I've been lucky enough to meet Andrew at Elac demos, and having heard his higher end designs, I find it hard to believe he'd allow a second version of a speaker he designed to sound worse than his original. He has a reputation in the industry and is way too young to sell out (ha). Thanks, all.
It's both better and worse, depending upon what you're doing with them, preference in musical tastes, etc.

In a ~$300 speaker, there are compromises to be made. What was "fixed" in the .2's was fine, but something had to give and what gave is the lovely low bass the originals had.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,382 Posts
I've only read the past few pages to catch up a little. When the original F5 and B5 were at RMAF back in '15 or '16 I was blown away by what the F5 did for $559/pr at the time. This spring, I bought a pair of B5.2s for $173 del'd brand new (before Elac put the kibosh on deep discounts). I put them on stands in my main audio systerm, blended with an R.E.L. B1 sub and loved it for the money. The Elac B5.2s had minor digital equalization, only making them sound better.

A few months later I paid more but bought two singles, F5.2s and set them up in the main audio system again for fun. With either F or B paired correctly with the B1 sub there wasn't such a big difference but there was still more body and I always enjoyed the F better. When you pull the sub out there is no match to my ears. The floor-standers have far more bass and body than the small B5.2s which are fine in their own way. Although they sat out 50" some bass equalization really made them shine.

I finally bought a center channel and all five Elac speakers displaced an older speaker system in the 13 x 18 TV room. With a small R.E.L. Storm III set up that small system will light up the room with clean decent sound. I always recommend Elacs to anyone starting out. For me they're great in a TV of HT system. Audio is my thing so I need more...

Interesting thread. I'll go back and read some of the more recent older stuff. Chikoo, good on you for experimenting. Do you feel the F5.2s might benefit from polyfill redistribution? I also enjoyed hearing about the mid/bass driver swap in the 6.0 vs 6.2. I've been lucky enough to meet Andrew at Elac demos, and having heard his higher end designs, I find it hard to believe he'd allow a second version of a speaker he designed to sound worse than his original. He has a reputation in the industry and is way too young to sell out (ha). Thanks, all.
COMusic - Thanks for the feedback on my experiments :) Appreciated much!

If you have a REL sub integrated with the Elac Debut 2.0, Polyfill is useless. I say this with first hand experience.
The debut 2.0 integrates seamlessly with my REL Sub (HT/1205) beautifully - so much so that you forget that it is the sub playing the deep notes. I have set the crossover at 60hz for this though. Not the typical 80hz.
The original debut B6 or F5- not so much. The original Debut have so much character of their own that it makes it hard.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,382 Posts
I've been lucky enough to meet Andrew at Elac demos, and having heard his higher end designs, I find it hard to believe he'd allow a second version of a speaker he designed to sound worse than his original. He has a reputation in the industry and is way too young to sell out (ha). Thanks, all.
What is surprising is that the original debut was a very flawed design. The woofers had a lot of missing frequencies that you can hear if you A/B Debut and Debut 2.0. The top end was rolled off like crazy. The cabinet of the Debut was a live unbraced cabinet. But all these flaws made people love it even more. Why am I not surprised?
 
3061 - 3080 of 3088 Posts
Top