B&W 684, Dali Ikon 6, MA RX6, MA RS8
Today afternoon took sometime off and went on auditioning the above speakers. Showrooms were literally empty and had ample time for the audtion without disturbance.
Below are MY take the speakers on areas 'I' looked for. So don't get judgemental. You need to audition yourself to get your perspective.
All setups with my musichall CDP.
B&W and Dali Ikon 6 were connected to rotel pre/power combo 70 w/ch.
MA RX6/RS8 were connected to Musical fidelity Integrated amp 75 w/ch. (M3i)
BASS
684 > Ikon 6 > RS8 > RX6
The B&W 684 ate the Dali and MA for breakfast. Very beautiful and very smooth. The bass is produced with authority gave a good definition to overall sound.
Dali came the close second. Does not go as deep as the 684 but still produces bass with athority.
Between the RX6 and RS8, I did the mistake of hearing the RS8 first. It had lesser bass than the above but a rich sound otherwise. When replaced with RX6, it had even lesser bass than the RS8.
At this point, the RX6 had to be set aside. No use auditioning them anymore.
The RS8 has the bass, the trancients are awesome and mid bass is OK but the LOW end is nowhere to be seen. The BASS cutoff is at a much higher frequency. This is single good reason to skip them. ALL other characteristics are at par or a notch or two above the rest.
Hi-Frequency
RS8 >> Dali Ikon 6 > B&W 684
RS8 has great high frequency extension with pin point precission. This might NOT be a good thing. You can get listening fatigue very soon is my guess. (Interestingly I dint get even after extended audition though the piercing sibilance hurt in a couple of places.) Preamp with bass/treble control is necessary is my guess.
Dali Ikon 6 has lesser high frequency extension than the RS8. This combined with tight and pronounced bass gave a great overall sound. Though the hf extension is lesser, dali is more enjoyable in long term is my guess.
B&W 684 - Almost a FAIL in A-B comparison. Bass overpowers the HF. Well rounded and enjoyable HF if listened in isolation. No trace of harshness anywhere. Can go up to very high volumes and still can listen without fatigue.
Vocals
Dali Ikon 6 > MA RS8 >> B&W 684
B&W when played initially did not show any obvious defeciencies in the vocals. But when Dali Ikon 6 was played in A-B comparison, it was soon evident that the 684s are a tad lower in depicting the sharpness and finessie of the voice. Both male and female vocals felt wanting more. The 'not so extended' HF is something we can live with but I think this vocals part is not something that we can live with.
In a single sentence, Dali Ikon 6 triumped the 684 by leaps and bounds in this department. Every new vocal track I played confirmed this.
The voice was well seperated from the music even in the 684s. But it did not take the 'front seat', neither was it 'present'. Emotional quotient was missing.
To put it in simple words, the dali projected the voice with +1 volume from rest of the instruments/music and made it sound sharp and lifelike. I heard this kind of projection with Jamos before. B&W comparatively produced a well seperated voice with same volume and also a bit not so well defined/sharp.
Otherwise the B&W's produced a perfectly smooth presentation. I assume a degree of smoothness creeps into the vocals making them not so sharp. This was the only but major complaint against B&W 684.
The MA RS8 (connected to musical fidelity) produced 95% of the Dali's vocals but without the +1 volume. Still very good. It produced much more details than the dali though. Maybe thats the reason the vocals are not pronounced. Still very good with vocals.
Instrumentals
B&W 684 > MA RS8 > Dali Ikon 6
When pure/complex instrumentals (Corr's "Toss the feathers") were played, the B&W seperated each and every instrument beautifully and presented a perfectly listenable music. Bass was so fast. Everything sounded the way it should. Not a bit of fatigue. Pure bliss.
The Dali Ikon 6 unfortunately FAILED in reproducing the inticacies of this song. Bass was not fast enough, Instrument seperation not as good, the song was not listenable - FAIL. (Adding to that this is one of the only areas the Dali failed, My current Jamo C405 also failed in this area (during audition) but there is no speaker in that price range which produced even acceptable performance of this music.).
MA RS8 produced a great show too. But the bass was rolled behind other instruments. The dealer attributed this to the speaker being just out of box. He is supposed to burn-in the speakers for 2 days and Iam to take another demo by weekend. If the bass was right, these speakers would surpass the 684s by quite a margin. But at the moment they are behind. Others like seperation, soundstage, instrument placement etc are well ahead of the B&Ws already. Just that the bass is supressed.
Details
RS8 > Dali Ikon 6 > B&W
The RS8 allows to pickup a needle dropped at the corner of a room. Enough said. Oodles and oodles of details with less pronounced bass and extended hf. COULD very well give you a headache with extended listening. Din't give me any though. It can possibly be harsh and give you a 'details' overload. Clarity is very very good.
Dali Ikon 6 exposes lesser details than the RS8 but much more than the 684. Perfectly enjoyable sound.
B&W smooths out the sound with outstanding precision. You may call it less details or smooth. Both are same. This combined with strong extended low end. You can listen to them for hours together.
Sound Stage
RS8 >> Dali Ikon 6 > B&W
The RS8 allows to pickup a needle dropped at the corner of a room. Enough said. This combined with the details gives a very enjoyable presentation. (But there is no bass presence.. Break-in required.. yada yada..)
The Dali Ikon 6 had a wider soundstage than the B&W with lesser bass extension. Convincing soundstage but not as good as the RS8.
The 684, though enjoyable at isolation, an A-B with the others exposes its rather narrower soundstage. Won't miss a thing if heard in isolation. Sound is enjoyable even with narrow soundstage. Bollywood/Indian songs with not so great vocals are actually more enjoyable in B&W with narrower soundstage.
Low volume
RS8 >> Ikon 6 = B&W
Well I tried this because, my current speakers will not produce much details in low volumes. RS8 does produce loads of details in low volumes. Interestingly, in low volumes the songs are more enjoyable. Maybe the musical fidelity has to do with it - I dont know. Basically with RS8, You can listen peacefully at very low volumes without the need to pump up the volumes to get the details. But there is problem of harshness when volume is increased.
Ikon6 and B&W 684 does not show this trait. Almost same as my current speakers. Maybe rotel is the culprit - I dont know.
At the end of it, RS8 and Ikon6 are major contenders.
B&W is run with 70w rotel power amp hence would expect it to improve with amplification. With same volume levels, the B&W sang quite low on volume than the dalis. But Iam sceptical that vocals get any better with amplification. Iam sure soundstage and possible HF extension has a scope of improvement with more power.
In comparison, my jamo C405 'seem' to have better vocals.
Will be testing these again this weekend with NAD 100w power amp and same CDP (along with other hyderabad members) that would give conclusive justice.
Today afternoon took sometime off and went on auditioning the above speakers. Showrooms were literally empty and had ample time for the audtion without disturbance.
Below are MY take the speakers on areas 'I' looked for. So don't get judgemental. You need to audition yourself to get your perspective.
All setups with my musichall CDP.
B&W and Dali Ikon 6 were connected to rotel pre/power combo 70 w/ch.
MA RX6/RS8 were connected to Musical fidelity Integrated amp 75 w/ch. (M3i)
BASS
684 > Ikon 6 > RS8 > RX6
The B&W 684 ate the Dali and MA for breakfast. Very beautiful and very smooth. The bass is produced with authority gave a good definition to overall sound.
Dali came the close second. Does not go as deep as the 684 but still produces bass with athority.
Between the RX6 and RS8, I did the mistake of hearing the RS8 first. It had lesser bass than the above but a rich sound otherwise. When replaced with RX6, it had even lesser bass than the RS8.
At this point, the RX6 had to be set aside. No use auditioning them anymore.
The RS8 has the bass, the trancients are awesome and mid bass is OK but the LOW end is nowhere to be seen. The BASS cutoff is at a much higher frequency. This is single good reason to skip them. ALL other characteristics are at par or a notch or two above the rest.
Hi-Frequency
RS8 >> Dali Ikon 6 > B&W 684
RS8 has great high frequency extension with pin point precission. This might NOT be a good thing. You can get listening fatigue very soon is my guess. (Interestingly I dint get even after extended audition though the piercing sibilance hurt in a couple of places.) Preamp with bass/treble control is necessary is my guess.
Dali Ikon 6 has lesser high frequency extension than the RS8. This combined with tight and pronounced bass gave a great overall sound. Though the hf extension is lesser, dali is more enjoyable in long term is my guess.
B&W 684 - Almost a FAIL in A-B comparison. Bass overpowers the HF. Well rounded and enjoyable HF if listened in isolation. No trace of harshness anywhere. Can go up to very high volumes and still can listen without fatigue.
Vocals
Dali Ikon 6 > MA RS8 >> B&W 684
B&W when played initially did not show any obvious defeciencies in the vocals. But when Dali Ikon 6 was played in A-B comparison, it was soon evident that the 684s are a tad lower in depicting the sharpness and finessie of the voice. Both male and female vocals felt wanting more. The 'not so extended' HF is something we can live with but I think this vocals part is not something that we can live with.
In a single sentence, Dali Ikon 6 triumped the 684 by leaps and bounds in this department. Every new vocal track I played confirmed this.
The voice was well seperated from the music even in the 684s. But it did not take the 'front seat', neither was it 'present'. Emotional quotient was missing.
To put it in simple words, the dali projected the voice with +1 volume from rest of the instruments/music and made it sound sharp and lifelike. I heard this kind of projection with Jamos before. B&W comparatively produced a well seperated voice with same volume and also a bit not so well defined/sharp.
Otherwise the B&W's produced a perfectly smooth presentation. I assume a degree of smoothness creeps into the vocals making them not so sharp. This was the only but major complaint against B&W 684.
The MA RS8 (connected to musical fidelity) produced 95% of the Dali's vocals but without the +1 volume. Still very good. It produced much more details than the dali though. Maybe thats the reason the vocals are not pronounced. Still very good with vocals.
Instrumentals
B&W 684 > MA RS8 > Dali Ikon 6
When pure/complex instrumentals (Corr's "Toss the feathers") were played, the B&W seperated each and every instrument beautifully and presented a perfectly listenable music. Bass was so fast. Everything sounded the way it should. Not a bit of fatigue. Pure bliss.
The Dali Ikon 6 unfortunately FAILED in reproducing the inticacies of this song. Bass was not fast enough, Instrument seperation not as good, the song was not listenable - FAIL. (Adding to that this is one of the only areas the Dali failed, My current Jamo C405 also failed in this area (during audition) but there is no speaker in that price range which produced even acceptable performance of this music.).
MA RS8 produced a great show too. But the bass was rolled behind other instruments. The dealer attributed this to the speaker being just out of box. He is supposed to burn-in the speakers for 2 days and Iam to take another demo by weekend. If the bass was right, these speakers would surpass the 684s by quite a margin. But at the moment they are behind. Others like seperation, soundstage, instrument placement etc are well ahead of the B&Ws already. Just that the bass is supressed.
Details
RS8 > Dali Ikon 6 > B&W
The RS8 allows to pickup a needle dropped at the corner of a room. Enough said. Oodles and oodles of details with less pronounced bass and extended hf. COULD very well give you a headache with extended listening. Din't give me any though. It can possibly be harsh and give you a 'details' overload. Clarity is very very good.
Dali Ikon 6 exposes lesser details than the RS8 but much more than the 684. Perfectly enjoyable sound.
B&W smooths out the sound with outstanding precision. You may call it less details or smooth. Both are same. This combined with strong extended low end. You can listen to them for hours together.
Sound Stage
RS8 >> Dali Ikon 6 > B&W
The RS8 allows to pickup a needle dropped at the corner of a room. Enough said. This combined with the details gives a very enjoyable presentation. (But there is no bass presence.. Break-in required.. yada yada..)
The Dali Ikon 6 had a wider soundstage than the B&W with lesser bass extension. Convincing soundstage but not as good as the RS8.
The 684, though enjoyable at isolation, an A-B with the others exposes its rather narrower soundstage. Won't miss a thing if heard in isolation. Sound is enjoyable even with narrow soundstage. Bollywood/Indian songs with not so great vocals are actually more enjoyable in B&W with narrower soundstage.
Low volume
RS8 >> Ikon 6 = B&W
Well I tried this because, my current speakers will not produce much details in low volumes. RS8 does produce loads of details in low volumes. Interestingly, in low volumes the songs are more enjoyable. Maybe the musical fidelity has to do with it - I dont know. Basically with RS8, You can listen peacefully at very low volumes without the need to pump up the volumes to get the details. But there is problem of harshness when volume is increased.
Ikon6 and B&W 684 does not show this trait. Almost same as my current speakers. Maybe rotel is the culprit - I dont know.
At the end of it, RS8 and Ikon6 are major contenders.
B&W is run with 70w rotel power amp hence would expect it to improve with amplification. With same volume levels, the B&W sang quite low on volume than the dalis. But Iam sceptical that vocals get any better with amplification. Iam sure soundstage and possible HF extension has a scope of improvement with more power.
In comparison, my jamo C405 'seem' to have better vocals.
Will be testing these again this weekend with NAD 100w power amp and same CDP (along with other hyderabad members) that would give conclusive justice.
Last edited:
