Why I did not like Wharfdale? some queries..

[Sub#]

Hi all,

Some days back, I auditioned KEF, Wharfedale, Onkyo, Sonus Faber etc. I liked Sonus Faber very much (But cost too much). Onkyo was average. For remaining two, I have got some queries.
For WharfedaleI auditioned both 9 & 10 series. I had read very good review of WharfedaleBut AlasI did not like the sound that I heard It was kind of muddled It was lacking clarity. I tried to like it but could not.
On contrary, when I heard KEF C series, I liked the soundIt was clearIt was little bit sharp which can be annoying in long term. But still I liked the sound. Later I read reviews which were not very favorable for KEF C series.

So I was wondering what was my problem with Wharfedale?
Also, did you all guys find KEF C not upto the mark?

 

[soundofmusic]

Reviews should be just a guideline for you to decide your Purchase. There are lot of Average reviews for good products and vise versa. Just listen to the system and buy the speakers which you like.

I too do not like the Wharf sound, its a kind of muddy and no clear mids and Hi freq. But the reviews say something different from my observation. May be its time to have my ears checked by an ent.

 

[avidyarthy]

Like me, you take a liking to bright speakers instead of 'laid back' ones.

Wharf bookshelves are known to be 'slight' laid-back. One can go on 'hearing' them for hours at a stretch and not feel the ears getting tired. Can't say the same for the bright speakers here .... have to encounter fatigue for that extra piercing crystal clarity.

Hope I got my words right .........

 

[Sub#]

But again...whats difference between laid back sound & muddy sound? I was expecting some 'warm' sound from wharf due to reviews ..But Only found it as muddy...

 

[Kittu]

But again...whats difference between laid back sound & muddy sound? I was expecting some 'warm' sound from wharf due to reviews ..But Only found it as muddy...

What other components are used during the audition?

 

[longshanks]

Hi all,
Some days back, I auditioned KEF, Wharfedale,
For WharfedaleI auditioned both 9 & 10 series.
On contrary, when I heard KEF C series, I liked the soundIt was clearIt was little bit sharp which can be annoying in long term.

What is the amplifier and source you used with wharfedale?

I like wharfedale's sound, specially the 9 series and they sound warm and laid back . The 10 series is little on the brighter side so did not like it as much as the 9 series.Amp used was CA650A and NAD pre power.


Ive listed to Kef iq series floor stander and a reference 205/2 floor stander, the former was very bright with no bass and later was bright with bass, hence did not like the kef sound, Amplifier used was denon and chord.


You should give paradigm monitor series a try.

 

[anuragn]

When I auditioned Diamond 10.1's, they were paired with CA CD player and Yamaha 867 AVR. And the speakers sounded crystal clear, no mudiness at all. And also to mention, the speakers were kept on stands, a couple of feet away from the rear wall.
And I finally went for the 10.1's.

 

[gobble]

But again...whats difference between laid back sound & muddy sound? I was expecting some 'warm' sound from wharf due to reviews ..But Only found it as muddy...

None if you lie back in the mud like a lazy boy. hyeah:
I suppose your consternation is due to the reason that a major budget player is knocked off the list. Don't fret or sweat over it. There are other brands and models to consider. At the end of the day, a budget setup is only going to satisfy you for a couple of years at most before you want to upgrade

Did the source, cables and amp change when you heard the Wharfies? Maybe the culprit was one of them.

cheers

 

[metalmickey]

Diamond 9 series cant beat the new 10series on the mids.that was the main reason why i sold my 9.5 and bought an 10.1!to pair with my marantz pm5003 and cd6002.

 

[doors666]

dont worry, you are not alone. I too find wharfdale muddy.

 

[Sub#]

Did the source, cables and amp change when you heard the Wharfies? Maybe the culprit was one of them.

What other components are used during the audition?

When I was auditioning Wharfedale, they were coupled with marantz. I auditioned them at 2 shops & found them sounding same. so I dont think that it was due to Amplifier or cables. My friend also had same opinion. So I think there are some people who dont like this kind of sound & I am one of them. Btw did anybody audition KEF C series & how was it?

 

[entsurgeon]

Wharfes typically are low sensitivity(86dB) speakers. Kevlar drivers mean they need a longer break in. Plus they sound best with slight toe in.
If u haven t made a purchase yet, go to someone owning it for home audition. And still.... Try 8.4 diamonds

 

[S.P.KRISHNA]

Yes . Wharefedales are quite muddy i.e a mix of high frequencies. I myself use wharefedales including 9.5 as fronts. Try 9.6 / 10.6 and above as they are 3 way. But at the given price wharfedales are best in those price bands. Please note that they are power hungry speakers and can be exploded by powerful Amps only.

Regards

 

[sonosphere]

Hi Sub#,
I believe the muddy sound of Wharfe you are referring to is related to the subdued sound of instrumental details, such that you can't differentiate one from another. I have noticed that my Wharfe 9.2 was quite good at reproducing the instruments that are loud in the mix (mostly the ones that represent melody and counter-melody in a composition, eg. drum kit, vocals, lead guitar, lead instruments, rhythm guitar, string /brass sections). These loud ones were sufficiently detailed and made the music enjoyable.

Whereas the softer background instruments were subdued (such instruments are mostly in midrange to treble). These were many times subdued to the extent that one couldn't decipher where the soft strumming of rhythm guitar got lost in low end of synth wash.

However its this character that gives the Wharfe its smooth, laid-back character, that many like. I heard Paradigm Titan giving me more details at top end (at the cost of low-end)... however I can't listen to them for 1-2 hrs extended listening without turning the treble down.

Regds,

 

[Sub#]

entsurgeon, S.P.KRISHNA, sonosphere,

I think, maybe Wharfedales are not my type of speakers. Or at least, I need to give it a try with some receiver other than Marantz.

Hi Sub#,
I believe the muddy sound of Wharfe you are referring to is related to the subdued sound of instrumental details, such that you can't differentiate one from another.

Yes, this might be the case. when I listened Hotel California on KEF 'C' series, I was able to hear Guitar & all other instruments clearly. I could feel them playing around. But on Wharfedale this wasn't quite the case. They lacked clarity.

 

[Sub#]

Thanks for your response guys.

Btw, I am going to get possession of my flat after 6 months. But I want to do concealed wiring for all speakers now. For the same purpose, I need to convey all speaker/electricity points to builder/Engineer.
From below diagram can you guys please tell me where should I place front left speaker - at location A or Location B?

 

[Sub#]

Hi All,

Can you guys please answer my above query. It seems trivial but I need to inform my builder about same. 2 spots are not far apart, but from convenience & sonic perspective, which is better of two?

 

[soundofmusic]

I suggest the point B to keep the left speakers. I have read somewhere that the front speakers should be in a line to give you a good soundstage.

 

[gobble]

Thanks for your response guys.

Btw, I am going to get possession of my flat after 6 months. But I want to do concealed wiring for all speakers now. For the same purpose, I need to convey all speaker/electricity points to builder/Engineer.
From below diagram can you guys please tell me where should I place front left speaker - at location A or Location B?

The diagonal distance is not much (without constaining your free movement about the house). It needs to be at least 6 to 7 ft equidistant to your ears. If you form an equilateral triangle you can only enjoy the sound sitting in right side corner.

My sincere advice - I owned WF 9.2s in a 10ftx10ft room before. Anything their size will need 18" ft space at back and side walls to sound decent. Else the money spent on them is not worth it, with reflections and standing waves destroying their capabilities. Otherwise you spend another few 1000 buck on room acoustics to improve the SQ.

So I recommend you consider something like a wall mountable satellite + sub 2.1 setup like Lithos Noa-1 (the best sounding 2.1 there is for the price of 18k).


In a 160sq.ft room, you will be more than happy to save some 40sqft of otherwise unusable space with wall mounted satellites. Just calculate the per sq.ft cost of your flat then decide the real cost of your Hifi gear.

HTH

 

[spirovious]

I can also say that Wharfedale 9 with cambridge audio sounded soft,less opened with less high frequencies.But 9.2 sounded good with Yamaha amps.