Ok so i just got back from audio t and richersounds, this is what happened;
Both audio t and richersounds recommended that i give the speakers a
further run in (only about 10 hours so far) becuase all speakers need to have that done, this is understandable but will i really notice much of a difference?? Richersounds say the harshness will wear off and the bass will tighten up on the 902i's (not that bass was a problem anyway).
I demoed both the q acoustics and wharfedale 10.1's in audio t along with denon dm37, i demoed 2 cd's which sounded a bit strange or very different and harsh on my 902i's these were muse-absolution and kasabian - west ryder pauper lunatic asylum. I also brang pink floyd - dark side of the moon.
Ok so the q acoustic 2020's intially sounded much warmer and pleasing on the ear compared to my 902i's however the detail was not as good by a fair bit. The bass and vocals sounded very good and overall they had a good musical sound, just lacked that extra punch, i was pretty happy with them for the price. Pink floyd sounded warm and nice on them with no real problems. The harshness and brightness was not a problem with the heavier muse tracks i played which is promising, detail wasn't as good as my 902i's but wasn't far off. I do like them and the fact i can mount them with tilt and multi positioning, all without having to screw into the cabinet, but this is more of a convenience thing and i dont think its really worth sacrficing performance over convenience and i should just work with what i can do. however these q acoustics may sound even better in my room....
Then i demoed the wharfedale diamond 10.1's which sounded brilliant, they had a bigger soundstage and the detail and depth was better then the q acoustic's, then i put pink floyd cd in and this is where i noticed why the wharfedales are so popular and are highly regarded, the vocals sounded so clear and amazing, it was like david gilmour was in the room! (no kidding!)
The clarity wasn't as good as the 902i's but wasn't far off at all and is defintley much better then what i had beforehand with my budget philips system, anyway surely maybe upping the treble on the denon dm37dab may help them along a bit right with detail if it sounds a bit muddy, right???
I don't really like the finishes of the 9.1 as they don't match anything in my room becuase the colours are different, suppose i could get the black ones... (this isn't too much of a problem though) main problem is the moutning of them on a wall becuase i don't want to be screwing into the cabinet and becuase the 9.1's are curved it makes it a bit of problem as the mounts i have are side clamps and have straight edges, the brackets i have however are very strong and sturdy (they are the b tech bt77's)
Now my question is are the diamond 9.1's similar to these 10.1's? becuase i heard alot people saying there isn't much difference or none at all, and considering the 9.1's were £199 originally it seems like a good idea to get some.
I listened to both speakers on shelfs (at head level) in audio t so they weren't in ideal or their best positions, they were also both fairly close to the wall, a little bit further then the gap i have.
Cheers.
Both audio t and richersounds recommended that i give the speakers a
further run in (only about 10 hours so far) becuase all speakers need to have that done, this is understandable but will i really notice much of a difference?? Richersounds say the harshness will wear off and the bass will tighten up on the 902i's (not that bass was a problem anyway).
I demoed both the q acoustics and wharfedale 10.1's in audio t along with denon dm37, i demoed 2 cd's which sounded a bit strange or very different and harsh on my 902i's these were muse-absolution and kasabian - west ryder pauper lunatic asylum. I also brang pink floyd - dark side of the moon.
Ok so the q acoustic 2020's intially sounded much warmer and pleasing on the ear compared to my 902i's however the detail was not as good by a fair bit. The bass and vocals sounded very good and overall they had a good musical sound, just lacked that extra punch, i was pretty happy with them for the price. Pink floyd sounded warm and nice on them with no real problems. The harshness and brightness was not a problem with the heavier muse tracks i played which is promising, detail wasn't as good as my 902i's but wasn't far off. I do like them and the fact i can mount them with tilt and multi positioning, all without having to screw into the cabinet, but this is more of a convenience thing and i dont think its really worth sacrficing performance over convenience and i should just work with what i can do. however these q acoustics may sound even better in my room....
Then i demoed the wharfedale diamond 10.1's which sounded brilliant, they had a bigger soundstage and the detail and depth was better then the q acoustic's, then i put pink floyd cd in and this is where i noticed why the wharfedales are so popular and are highly regarded, the vocals sounded so clear and amazing, it was like david gilmour was in the room! (no kidding!)
I don't really like the finishes of the 9.1 as they don't match anything in my room becuase the colours are different, suppose i could get the black ones... (this isn't too much of a problem though) main problem is the moutning of them on a wall becuase i don't want to be screwing into the cabinet and becuase the 9.1's are curved it makes it a bit of problem as the mounts i have are side clamps and have straight edges, the brackets i have however are very strong and sturdy (they are the b tech bt77's)
Now my question is are the diamond 9.1's similar to these 10.1's? becuase i heard alot people saying there isn't much difference or none at all, and considering the 9.1's were £199 originally it seems like a good idea to get some.
I listened to both speakers on shelfs (at head level) in audio t so they weren't in ideal or their best positions, they were also both fairly close to the wall, a little bit further then the gap i have.
Cheers.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram