New Roth OLi RA2 speakers, tuned by Richard Allen

SpursGator

Well-known member
Jan 12, 2012
58
47
18,570
Visit site
A few weeks before Christmas, I got my hands on a brand-new pair of Roth OLi RA2 speakers. I am planning to write a more detailed review of these when I have had a chance to do more testing on a wider range of my equipment. But here is a little preview.

You may recall that Roth’s previous range of speakers received very mixed reviews – WHF tested several of the models and liked some, disliked others. Then we saw a news item that Richard Allen of EB Acoustics had been contracted by Roth to tune their latest speakers. Richard has got quite a reputation and so when I was offered a pair of these new speakers to play with, I could not resist. (Richard has been busy – maybe this means he finally found someone willing to wind his coils, LOL).

Since these speakers cost £149 brand spanking new, how good could they possibly be? Keep in mind that at those prices, the budget for the woofer and tweeter alone can’t be much more than twenty quid or so, and probably a lot less. As a speaker builder, I recognize that real genius in speaker design is getting amazing sound out of cheap materials – this is what Richard has done with modest HiVi drivers at EB. But his most affordable speakers cost four times as much as the Roths. Would it be possible to impress someone like me, who has a house full of higher-end kit, with speakers this cheap?

Keep in mind that I am also a big fan of the Boston A25 speakers – I own a pair and think they are quite a bargain. I saw them recently on sale for £99 a pair. Boston Acoustics is a huge company, relatively speaking, with a huge presence in the US and volumes that a company the size of Roth Audio probably can only dream about. My thought going in was that even equaling the A25s would be impossible, and what sort of fool would even try? Who can make money at those prices, unless they are selling rubbish?

Well, as you might guess from the long lead-in, these Roth speakers are spectacular value for the money and at £149 (or maybe even twice that) you are going to have a hard time doing much better. I have to say, it was extremely surprising. I have them sitting on my desk right now, on heavy steel stands from Item Audio which lift the speakers about 22cm off of the desk. This puts the tweeters just above ear level. They are connected to a Naim Nait 5 amp, purchased in 2002, and an original Cambridge DACMagic, connected to a Windows PC via optical.

The speakers themselves are about the same size as the Bostons. They are solid black, built in a very smooth, contemporary style. The fit and finish is excellent, with no visible seams or joints (it’s a very Apple-esque industrial design). The tweeter is a shiny soft dome, and the woofer is made of a woven fibreglass material – sort of a lightweight, poor-man’s version of the woven polypropylene seen on the ProAc Response D18 or the Seas Curv drivers. The speakers come with magnetic grills that have no visible attachment points.

Like most small speakers, the sensitivity is rather poor – Roth says that it’s 84dB but does not elaborate on the units (I suspect the actual sensitivity is around 81 or 82 dB/2.8V/1m, but I can’t really measure it properly). But what makes these speakers special, I think, is that both drivers are mounted inside waveguides. This is typical for tweeters, but the RA2s’ tweeters’ waveguides are quite deep, little horns that curve all the way to the outside of the plate. The midbass units, more unusually, are mounted inside little rings as well. They extend about half an inch from the outside of the drivers’ rubber surrounds, and the driver is recessed a similar amount.

I believe, based on my initial listening, that these waveguides are a big part of the reason these speakers sound so good. The adjective that best describes these speakers is ‘clear.’ Comparing these to the Bostons, I have the impression that I am listening to the Roths through the audio equivalent of a magnifying glass. There is a vivid, detailed, and clean presentation that is quite remarkable for speakers of this price. I’m not sure they quite have the ease of the Bostons, the relaxed presentation, but their startling clarity is in another league.

I am sure that the bass response is helped by the waveguides as well. Listening to a bassy track such as Kanye West’s ‘Heartless,’ the necessary oomph is there in spades. On a slightly more challenging track, such as the Wood Brothers’ ‘Luckiest Man,’ the vocals and guitar strumming are coming from the exact centre of my computer’s monitor, and when the acoustic bass comes in, there is enough bass to not just follow the line, but to actually feel a bit of the attack. Sure, there aren’t the dynamics that you get from a bigger speaker, and it isn’t quite as loud as I get from my PMC DB1s, but it isn’t the popgun joke that you get from most speakers at this size – the bass has a bit of texture, there are some dynamics, and most importantly, there is no boominess from the port – a near-miracle if you ask me. I measure an F3 of around 73Hz with my crude equipment – not bad at all for the size.

The comparison with the DB1s is quite interesting, in fact. The PMCs have exemplary imaging and are well known for having excellent (as in, refined and realistic, as opposed to copious) bass. It is a little bit scary how close the RA2s come to equaling the PMCs, which cost six times as much. The Roths’ imaging is very close, and the bass only another step behind. But in the all-important midrange, the Roths really shine – they give up very little to the PMCs and piano, female vocals, and acoustic guitar on the Roths is just outstanding, right there in front of you.
I have not seen any reviews of this speaker yet – our old friend Andrew Everard reviewed their little brothers, the RA1s, in Gramophone magazine (and loved them) but I have not seen a review yet of the RA2s. I still have not brought them into the living room and put them on full stands, which I will do, and maybe some of their qualities will be diminished in the bigger room, we shall see. I also will try them with a lower-end amp – I have a NAD 326Bee I can try, though I would not describe that as low-end, and a friend with an old Yamaha home cinema receiver that we’ve had some good times playing with. I will follow up.

So it’s hardly a full review but considering how good they are for the price, and how many people come to this forum asking about low-end recommendations, I thought it worthwhile to share my experience. At £149 quid they are shockingly good, and a testament to how new driver materials – and a talented tuner – can shake up the market.
 

drummerman

New member
Jan 18, 2008
540
5
0
Visit site
Love it. Doesn't it feel good when something cheap exceeds expectations? Much better than the other way round ...

Now we just need someone which will open one of the boxes so we can have a look at the innards/driver and crossover.

Out of interest, were you (OP) part of the 'home testers' Roth was advertising some time ago?

regards
 

matthewpiano

Well-known member
Interesting stuff. I had a pair of the earlier Roth Oli 2s for a while and enjoyed them in many ways, but just found them a bit bass light in the end. Had lots of potential though and I'd think Mr Allen was probably the man to build on that.
 

SpursGator

Well-known member
Jan 12, 2012
58
47
18,570
Visit site
drummerman said:
Love it. Doesn't it feel good when something cheap exceeds expectations? Much better than the other way round ...

Absolutely. The usual thing to say is that not everyone is a complete freak about this like I am, and they all deserve great sound too. And that's true, but what I was really thinking was that my first pair of new speakers, bought when I was 17, cost a similar amount of money, and I was IN LOVE with them for several YEARS. I talked about 150 quid being cheap, but it is certainly not negligible...in 1989 I thought my 'cheap' speakers cost a f---ing fortune, if you know what I mean. Unquestionably one of my most satisfying hifi purchases ever. I feel like an addict talking about my first time...been trying to replicate it since.

My point is that this kind of product is how audiophiles are born. Maybe Roth Audio makes its bread and butter on people who just want decent cheap speakers, but people don't just plonk down the plastic for Wilson Audio unless they already got the bug from somewhere. I keep reminding myself of that every time WHF reviews yet another Japanese amp that I am way past. You want to get younger people and the not-yet-rich into this world, there have to be some exciting products for them to buy or when they can afford it, they will do other things instead. You know, ecotourism or whatever.

drummerman said:
Now we just need someone which will open one of the boxes so we can have a look at the innards/driver and crossover.

Out of interest, were you (OP) part of the 'home testers' Roth was advertising some time ago?

regards

I replied to that message and got a reply saying that they were a week or two behind schedule, and they would get back to me. I never heard another word and then the speakers came out in September. I figured that was the end of it. Then I got an email about a month ago asking if I wanted to hear them and they sent me a pair. All they asked was about the fit and finish - they just wanted to verify the production quality. And that was it.

I think, perhaps, the company are feeling a bit smug - their new are hugely better than the old ones and they damn well know it. But I am getting no compensation from them, I certainly have no need for the speakers (my wife just started groaning and shaking her head when the box came - just in the room in which I am typing this there are four pairs of speakers), and they didn't ask me to write about it. To tell you the truth I am toying with the idea of starting an audio blog and figured I would practice a little. The review is all me.
 

SpursGator

Well-known member
Jan 12, 2012
58
47
18,570
Visit site
davedotco said:
Building budget loudspeakers with a sensitivity of 81-82 dB seems odd in the extreme.... :O

Well, Roth's own rating is 84dB, which if they are like every other manufacturer, is exaggerated and expressed as dB/1W/1m. So 82 does not seem too much of a stretch. Maybe they are doing 84 but if so don't forget the waveguides - driver sensitivity is probably about 82 if the overall speaker is 84.

Very few ported loudspeakers of this size do much more than that, actually. Ones with any bass, anyway.
 

davedotco

New member
Apr 24, 2013
20
1
0
Visit site
SpursGator said:
davedotco said:
Building budget loudspeakers with a sensitivity of 81-82 dB seems odd in the extreme.... :O

Well, Roth's own rating is 84dB, which if they are like every other manufacturer, is exaggerated and expressed as dB/1W/1m. So 82 does not seem too much of a stretch. Maybe they are doing 84 but if so don't forget the waveguides - driver sensitivity is probably about 82 if the overall speaker is 84.

Very few ported loudspeakers of this size do much more than that, actually. Ones with any bass, anyway.

My favourite cheap speakers are the 2020i and the Zensor 1. I find both struggle with anything under 50-60 watts on recordings with a bit of dynamic range.

The Roths are somewhere around 3 to 5dB less sensitive, so twice the power needed as a minimum. Not impossible by any means but not really suited to someone on a budget, which is where these speakers are pitched.
 

ROTH AV

New member
Mar 4, 2011
9
0
0
Visit site
We have provided a pair of RA2 and a pair of the RA3 to WHFS&V for review (sent in just before Christmas).

We have no idea when these might appear, not least because it seems most of the editorial staff are in Vegas having their minds boggled by £ 125,000 amplifiers :silenced: and 'wearable tech' (if someone uses this already cliched phrase in our offices they are fined and made to sit on the naughty step).

Other reviews will appear in the next couple of weeks in the usual HiFi publications that perhaps focus more on 2 channel.

We are pleased with the performance / value-for-money across the range - including the KH30 subwoofer and the C30 centre channel speaker.

Happy New Year.
 

Richard Allen

New member
Jan 9, 2010
12
0
0
Visit site
ROTH AV said:
It seems most of the editorial staff are in Vegas having their minds boggled by £ 125,000 amplifiers :silenced: and 'wearable tech' (if someone uses this already cliched phrase in our offices they are fined and made to sit on the naughty step)

What's the 'naughty step'??. Must've missed it when I came down your place James. ;)
 

SpursGator

Well-known member
Jan 12, 2012
58
47
18,570
Visit site
ROTH AV said:
'wearable tech' (if someone uses this already cliched phrase in our offices they are fined and made to sit on the naughty step).

Good for you! I ask the consumers of the world: Was your dream to one day be surrounded by the latest and coolest technology, or was your dream to have it stuck all over your body? I ask you, did you dream of being Captain of the Enterprise, or of being one of the Borg?

I meant that to be funny, but it's actually chilling, because I think it's pretty clear down which path we are headed.
 

SpursGator

Well-known member
Jan 12, 2012
58
47
18,570
Visit site
davedotco said:
My favourite cheap speakers are the 2020i and the Zensor 1. I find both struggle with anything under 50-60 watts on recordings with a bit of dynamic range.

The Roths are somewhere around 3 to 5dB less sensitive, so twice the power needed as a minimum. Not impossible by any means but not really suited to someone on a budget, which is where these speakers are pitched.

I have never heard, measured, demoed, or been anywhere near a pair of 2020i's. So feel free to ignore the following since if you really want to fight about it, I will have to back down due to that simple fact.

But that isn't going to stop me from saying this: Their sensitivity rating of '88 dB' has as much chance of being true as I have of becoming the next CEO of Virgin Galactic.

Why? Well it's worth its own thread. There is no way - NO WAY - a speaker of this size can be that small, and have what reviewers would describe as 'decent bass,' and have a sensitivity that high. Q Acoustics seems to be on a hot streak and I would be very interested in hearing some of their speakers. But their recent awards do not enable them to alter the laws of physics.

The best evidence for this was provided by you - that they require 50-60 watts. Any '88dB' speaker would be just fine with much less.

And before their lawyers start sending me letters, let me point out that they do not give any kind of units. Just '88dB,' which means nothing. And every manufacturer does this. Sensitivity numbers are pure fiction across the industry.

If you put a Fostex 125mm full range driver in the 2020i cabinets, you would be hard pressed to squeeze much more than 88dB out of it at 2.8 volts/1 metre. And it would have no bass. I mean, please.
 

SpursGator

Well-known member
Jan 12, 2012
58
47
18,570
Visit site
Macspur said:
An interesting read as ever Spursgator.

I think an audio blog would be a splendid idea, you do certainly possess the passion and none too little knowledge for it.

Mac

www.macsmusic.blogbubble.net

Thanks Mac, you're a nice guy. I really like your blog. It's about discovering music, which we all love...better to read, for me, than whatever ranting techie site I would put up.
 

Richard Allen

New member
Jan 9, 2010
12
0
0
Visit site
SpursGator said:
And before their lawyers start sending me letters, let me point out that they do not give any kind of units. Just '88dB,' which means nothing. And every manufacturer does this. Sensitivity numbers are pure fiction across the industry.

Not all manufacturers Gator. I don't. When I measure a loudspeaker it is set @ 2.8 volts and the measuring mic is placed at 1 metre on axis and the measuring format is CLIO using MLS 3rd octave filtered but ungated noise. Impedance is measured in the same way and each loudspeaker made is impedance checked against the initial prototype ( overlayed ).

Another reason I wind my own coils and point-to-point wire the crossovers is that I'm not happy unless the impedance traces of the two loudspeakers are identical. A true pair in other words. I'm sure you're the same when you build speakers.
 

davedotco

New member
Apr 24, 2013
20
1
0
Visit site
SpursGator said:
davedotco said:
My favourite cheap speakers are the 2020i and the Zensor 1. I find both struggle with anything under 50-60 watts on recordings with a bit of dynamic range.

The Roths are somewhere around 3 to 5dB less sensitive, so twice the power needed as a minimum. Not impossible by any means but not really suited to someone on a budget, which is where these speakers are pitched.

I have never heard, measured, demoed, or been anywhere near a pair of 2020i's. So feel free to ignore the following since if you really want to fight about it, I will have to back down due to that simple fact.

But that isn't going to stop me from saying this: Their sensitivity rating of '88 dB' has as much chance of being true as I have of becoming the next CEO of Virgin Galactic.

Why? Well it's worth its own thread. There is no way - NO WAY - a speaker of this size can be that small, and have what reviewers would describe as 'decent bass,' and have a sensitivity that high. Q Acoustics seems to be on a hot streak and I would be very interested in hearing some of their speakers. But their recent awards do not enable them to alter the laws of physics.

The best evidence for this was provided by you - that they require 50-60 watts. Any '88dB' speaker would be just fine with much less.

And before their lawyers start sending me letters, let me point out that they do not give any kind of units. Just '88dB,' which means nothing. And every manufacturer does this. Sensitivity numbers are pure fiction across the industry.

If you put a Fostex 125mm full range driver in the 2020i cabinets, you would be hard pressed to squeeze much more than 88dB out of it at 2.8 volts/1 metre. And it would have no bass. I mean, please.

Hi Spursgator, no fight, just the way I see things.

The relationship between driver, enclosure and bass extension is well known and understood, to a degree at least, but building inexpensive, small loudspeakers is very much a balancing act.

The speakers that I mention clearly have limited bass extension, that is understood and necessary to maintain even a reasonable sensitivity. They are, in my view, just about the cheapest small speakers that I find listenable, the 2020i have a mildly 'hyped' mid bass, which gives them the appearance of reasonable bass and for a lot of music that is fair enough. The Zensor 1 does not do that and often gets criticised as 'bass light' because of it, I do not agree in the slightest, much preferring it to the competition at this price point.

My 'issue' is this, I find that with either of the speakers mentioned I need a fair amount of power to get them to sound decent. Sure you can use less and I am sure many people do, but in order for them to perform well with material that has a bit of dynamic range I find the power is really needed. It's not just level or volume either, it is the solidity that the extra control brings and the dynamic 'shading' that I find disappears with less power.

Now I have no doubt that the Roth speakers can sound very decent, but irrespective of the precise numbers it is clear that they are significantly less sensitive than the 2020i and the Zensor 1, so to match the kind of performance I describe above they are going to need rather more power.

Given the price range that they are aimed at, i doubt that is going to happen and a lot of buyers could well be disapointed with the lack of presence that is the trademark of so many underpowered systems.

This is why I think it is pointless producing low sensitivity speakers at this sort of price range, they may be excellent speakers when properly driven but sadly many owners (and prospective owners) are never going to hear that.
 

SpursGator

Well-known member
Jan 12, 2012
58
47
18,570
Visit site
davedotco said:
Now I have no doubt that the Roth speakers can sound very decent, but irrespective of the precise numbers it is clear that they are significantly less sensitive than the 2020i and the Zensor 1, so to match the kind of performance I describe above they are going to need rather more power.

Given the price range that they are aimed at, i doubt that is going to happen and a lot of buyers could well be disapointed with the lack of presence that is the trademark of so many underpowered systems.

This is why I think it is pointless producing low sensitivity speakers at this sort of price range, they may be excellent speakers when properly driven but sadly many owners (and prospective owners) are never going to hear that.

I guess I don't see the specific connection between power and budget. Most of the people I know that are really concerned about having enough power to drive loudspeakers are using expensive SET amps, whereas most of the people buying speakers like the Roths are probably using Japanese receivers. There are 7 home cinema receivers in the WHF reviews for £250 or less (actually they are all £250). They do 70, 85, 105, 130, 100, 105, and 130 watts per channel respectively.

It's a little harder in the hifi world since low-end 2 channel receivers have largely disappeared from the UK market - Curry's, for example, does not even sell one! (I had no idea it had gotten to that point). So OK, the Onkyo A-9030 'only' does 65W per channel, and the NAD C316Bee is even less at 40W.

In the US market, at a big-box chain such as Best Buy, there are still lots of 2 channel receivers out there at around $200 each - nearly all have got plenty of power (e.g., one of their bestsellers, the Onkyo TX-8020, retails for $199 and does 100Wx2). There is even a range of power amps from 'Technical Pro' that cost $171 and do an absurd 1000W per channel - nothing I'm buying, obviously, but the point is that low-end amps have rarely been want for watts.

I see your point, though, which is that someone trying to assemble a budget system of good quality is more likely to choose something with better hifi credentials such as the Marantz PM6004 at around £300, or the Rotel RA-10 at fifty quid more. Each of those amps does 40W per channel.

Maybe you are right, but I was testing the Roths with a Nait 5, which does 50WPC. Obviously not all watts are the same (as the saying goes) and the Naim can do double the power at 4 ohms and double again at 2 ohms - hardly a typical 50W amp. But the Nait 5 can play the Roths REALLY loud. The truth is that an amp's ability to drive a pair of speakers is not just a function of watts and sensitivity (as you know Dave) - the impedence profile of the speaker makes a bigger difference. I tested a pair of the new Scan-Speak 2" full range drivers recently - their sensitivity is rated at 80dB. But thanks to their small size and benign impedence across the audible band, they could be driven quite loud by my Tripath amp, which barely does 5W per channel.

So I don't think its fair to just look at the published sensitivity of a speaker and judge which amps would work based on that - and in the world of the amps that the average Roth customer is likely to buy, extra watts come pretty cheap anyway. As usual, we must use our ears, not our math skills.

To that end, I plan to test the Roths with lower-powered amplification - a test the Boston A25s struggled with - and I will report back.
 

SpursGator

Well-known member
Jan 12, 2012
58
47
18,570
Visit site
Richard Allen said:
Another reason I wind my own coils and point-to-point wire the crossovers is that I'm not happy unless the impedance traces of the two loudspeakers are identical. A true pair in other words. I'm sure you're the same when you build speakers.

Well, I am a beginner...I am using published crossover designs and buying coils, so I'm a long way from mastering this art. I do measure the coils before building (and have been pleasantly surprised by the consistency of the inductors - only got one that was very far off) but my equipment is crude. But yeah, a matched pair is hugely important and a lot of manufacturers don't bother.
 

davedotco

New member
Apr 24, 2013
20
1
0
Visit site
All very fair comment 'Gator.

I guess what I am really getting at two separate things here.

Firstly, the shear viability of producing a budget priced loudspeaker that is significantly less sensitive than the norm, when it will, in most cases simply be powered by a fairly low power 'hi-fi' amplifier chosen to fit price wise. I very much see the point in using a decent amplifier such as the Nait, (personally I would try the Creek 50a,) but these are not the kind of amplifiers the Roths are going to see very often.

The Creek has a power supply in excess of 300va, the Naim even more I believe, compare that to the 150-185va available to budget amplifiers such as the MA6005 or the PMA-520 let alone the 50-55va available to some of the all in ones so highly regarded is some quarters. This is really part of my second point, which is that I find so many modern systems to be cronically underpowered. This is not simply a 'watts or loudness issue' as you say, but an inability of the system to portray any degree of dynamic contrast and shading in the music. I find this results in a kind of bland 'greyness' that I find so pervasive in the budget area and may well be the result of the current trend of favouring the loudspeaker above all else.
 
Can someone help, iv just brought myself a new amp (Yamaha as301) in using the amp for a turntable, I play soul/funk, reggae and 90s hip hop I'm trying to decided between the two speakers, any advice would be helpful

thanks

im new to what hifi so don't no if iv posted this right.
 

Andrewjvt

New member
Jun 18, 2014
99
4
0
Visit site
Michael Dunn said:
Can someone help, iv just brought myself a new amp (Yamaha as301) in using the amp for a turntable, I play soul/funk, reggae and 90s hip hop I'm trying to decided between the two speakers, any advice would be helpful?

thanks

?

im new to what hifi so don't no if iv posted this right. 

Start your own new thread but my advice is to audition them both and decide which ones you like the best.

Id go for q acoustics myself but that should not matter to you
 

TRENDING THREADS