The B6.2s midrange sounded more present and immediate, while the B6's sound was a little more laid back. The two speakers' differing character also held when we compared acoustic music. Whether quiet or loud, the B6 felt right, especially for a speaker at its price level. Stoned has a more melodic Ramones-ish or Pixies-like vibe, and the original B6 sounded big and bold. To get started with this review, we set up the B6 and B6.2 on tall metal floor stands in the CNET listening room, hooked them up to aĪV receiver and an Oppo UDP-205 Blu-ray player, and listened to Jesus and Mary Chain's Stoned & Dethroned album - turned up loud. Obviously designer Andrew Jones wasn't content to rest on his laurels. The original B6's sound feels comfortable and easy to listen to, and right away we noted the B6.2 has a livelier, clearer sound. We know its sound well, and a lot has changed with the new Debut 6.2: the cabinet, bass port, crossover, woofer and tweeter for starters!Īnd yes, the sound is different, too. When we reviewed it in October 2015, and it was our go-to budget bookshelf speaker for several years. Out of interest, have you tried correcting with EQ?We were mightily impressed by the original But they measure how they measure, so you could make a future purchase decision based on a correlation of the measured data and what you hear. Doesn't make them bad, doesn't make them good. Of course we can't compare in room responses, so there's a big unknown, but it would appear from the different reactions that there is a difference in different people's sensitivity to the FR profile. Bit laid back in the upper mids, but fine for rock, EDM any genre really. Lots of buyers (me included) find them to be dynamic, hard hitting, punchy etc etc. They're rarely that significant, but serves to highlight how meaningless a subjective review is when attempting to share data. I'm always sceptical of the subjective evaluation that uses phrases like night and day, huge change etc etc. If you want this kind of sound, you could save half your money and pick up a pair of the Elac Debut 2.0 B6.2s.Įither this is an interesting observation of the different subjective response to a measurable characteristic, or another overblown hyperbole storm! I actually found the original Elac B6 to have more drive and energy. They simply do not have the bite, buzz, bark, crispness, snap, attack and growl that is necessary for pop/rock recordings to 'pop' out of the speakers for an engaging listen. They are an exceptionally smooth, rounded sound that would be great for elevator music, smooth jazz, a capella. Bass was also one-note and indistinct at times, with much too early roll-off. But the instruments around and behind the singer are too muddy, not well outlined. With typical studio recordings where a singer is front in center, I can hear the vocals more present above the rest of the mix. Drum hits don't have the power they should so drum kits sound like they are caked in mud but you can clearly hear the hi-hats. I do hear quite a bit of a muffled sound. This confirms the laid-back and undynamic character of the sound I was hearing. I went back to the measurements Amir took to see if I could identify the problem and I see it's scooped in the 2.5khz-4.2khz region: Then the lack of treble energy which overall made these speakers sound extremely dull. My immediate impressions were the lack of rhythmic drive, dynamic punch and attack. I was driving them with the Benchmark AHB2. I listened to them on-axis only, as I do all my speakers, and without the tweeter grills. They were disappointing to say the least. I'm waiting for my custom speakers to be assembled (2 month lead time), so I needed a budget speaker option decent enough til I receive them.

Purchased these recently based on Amir's speaker listening tests.

Elac db62