WHARFEDALE DIAMOND 220 vs MONITOR AUDIO BRONZE BX2

[hybridauth_Google_112916266942568404509]

I am very new to what hifi forums (I joined yesterday!) but have already received some great advice.

Talking about my good experiences today at lunch I was asked a question by a friend who is new to hi fi like me and I thought that I would put it to the audiophiles of the web to give their honest opinions, "Which speakers would you recommend the Wharfedale Diamond 220s or the Monitor Audio Bronze BX2s?"

I know having browsed quickly through the What Hi Fi reviews that they have both received 5* reviews and awards and having had the pleasure of listening to a pair of BX2s I definitely agree with the review as far as they are concerned but I was wondering how they compared to the 220s.

I understand that like pretty much everything it is mostly down to personal preference but I would like to know everyone’s opinions.

Thanks and looking forward to your answer

Ollie

 

[matthewpiano]

Very few people will have heard the Diamond 220s as they are only just becoming available. However, going on previous Diamond incarnations I suspect they'll be quite superb for the price and probably more musical and involving than the BX2s. However, the MAs are beautifully made and really major on clarity. They can be a bit clinical but this depends on partnering equipment as well.

 

[Blackdawn]

Hi, I've heard the BX2 speakers but not the new Diamond 220's. They are quite different in the specs and price. For example, the MA speakers have a metal tweeter and much bigger main driver for lower bass (down to 42 Hz +-3db), whereas the Wharfedales have a soft dome tweeter and smaller main woofer (bass response down to 56Hz +-3db), with a less extended bass. I know the specs don't give all the info you need but they do help a lot in deciding what you would prefer (for room size etc). Personally I think if you listen to a lot of music like dance, drum & bass, hip-hop reggae and techno etc then I reckon the BX2's would suit better (with a wider frequency response and larger bass unit for deeper bass). However, if classical, jazz, folk, country or other styles are your taste then you might prefer the Wharfedales but best to audition.

I think I would rather have the Wharfedale due to the soft dome tweeter and sacrifice the extra bass extension the BX2s offer. Then again I would rather have a pair of Dali standmounts for similar money - oh hang on I do... yay! I also own the Boston Acousitcs A26 speakers which I think would have the best of the attributes of both the speakers you mention. I would be interested to hear the Wharfedale Diamond 230 or 240 speakers as well.

 

[robg1976]

Hi welcome to hi-fi and the forum,

Lets start by stating a 5 star review should only be taken as a guide to your choice.

There is no substitute to an audition of both speakers to make your own decision on the right product for you. In my humble opinion both speakers will be good performers at their price point, both manufactures have a history and talent for producing class leading speakers.

what may make a difference is your partnering amp and source gear (cd player ect) some will just sound better with different speakers.

i have owned both monitor audio and wharfdale in the past whardale first then monitor audio, i recently replace my M.A. br5 for M.A silver 1... iv found monitor audio to be very well made the build quality is outstanding right through the range, the wharfdale to be excellent performers, but for me the Monitor audio speakers just seem to deliver in all areas rather than be excellent in one area like detail or timing the monitor audio just shine in all areas, i have owned a set of br2 and found them to be for the money great in all aspect. Please try and audition before you buy if you cant im confident both will be pleasing to listen to and great value

Hope this help

Rob

 

[Pat Osborne]

There's much wrong with the bx2s. Speakers have 4 jobs in my opinion: fool me into thinking it's actually happening in front of me; 2ndly: make music; 3dly be fun and lastly, be accurate. THE most important engineering feat is to be phase coherent -PC. Once you hear great PC, you'll realize (astonishingly) how unimportant accuracy and completeness actually is to speakers. Rather than hearing a flat smeared sound, you'll hear (or see) a 3D image! All of us who've heard speakers from Ohm Acoustics, Apogee, Spica, Phase Tech, EPI 100s etc. (yes I've been listening since the early 70s) have heard greatness. I've been living where I can't interview quality (Evansville, In) for 25 years so I took a chance and got disapointed buying bx2s. The BIGGEST PROBLEM I found was the poor construction. Both drivers, the terminal plate and even the cabinet seams were probably leaking. Even after sealing them air tight, the incomplete resolution, the lack of being PC, the protrusion of saxophone voice area irritating my ears gave me pause for further trust of reviews! I saw a Russian language youtube review with response graph of the Wharedale 220s. They look promising. The only place I've found selling them in the U.S. agrees for the money, the're THE ones to have. PC isn't even mentioned in anyone's review so already I'm leary. - Pat

 

[Ketan Bharadia]

I think the Monitor Audios are better-made and finished to a higher standard. Their sound is nicely balanced, and in many ways they have the scale and authority of pricier alternatives. Compared to the Diamonds I think they sound a little clinical, though. The Diamonds 220s are more expressive, and in the end more entertaining too. Both are great speakers for the money, though, and much depends on your system and taste.

 

[Cypher]

What about the new Q Acoustics 3020 ?

 

[Ketan Bharadia]

We've got a pair of 3020s under test at the moment.

 

[JohnnyKid]

I've also been going through the surprisingly difficult speaker choice process at this price point. Home auditioned a pair of BX2s, and while they are seriously impressive in terms of looks, build and detail, they are far too clinical and actually left me with with ringing ears, even at low volume. Low volume also presented problems for the midrange, which seemed somewhat sparse. This is particularly noticable with acoustic and classical music. At volume, the sound quickly becomes very harsh (to my ears at least) and while I love the look of them, and the clarity is very impressive in a short store demo, I don't think I could live with them. Have since been auditioning Dali Zensor 3s and I find them a much more engaging listen. Initially the bass did seem a bit too much and I did find the treble a touch harsh to begin with, but they are really fun. They also retain impressive presence even at low volume, and the mids are detailed and warm. Having got used to the punchy bass and clear, detailed treble (My last speakers were very bland!), I'm really enjoying them and have decided to purchase. If your budget can stretch to it, I would recommend these over the BX2s and the 220s (which sounded nice in my demo, but a tad muddy).

 

[hybridauth_Facebook_478952048922564]

Both speakers conected to Yamaha RX-V473 in Pure Direct mode, one speaker (w'fdale) to the left channel and the other (qa) to the right.

- Q Acoustics 3020 sound cleaner and more natural
- QA3020 tend to generate sibilance (probably because of the bright Yamaha receiver)
- WD220 are laid back, very easy to listen and show no sibilance or harshness whatsoever
- QA3020 sound a bit bright (on Yamaha) and WD220 are dark
- WD220 have more bass although both lack proper bass
- WD220 cabinet had a tiny peeling issue while QA3020 cabinet was good

 

[DaanS]

I recently compared the BX2s and WD220s, and compared those to their floorstanding siblings as well, the BX6 and WD240. At one point I compared them to the Dali Zensor series as well, but it quickly became apparent that was not the sound for me. The Wharfedales are warmer than the Monitor Audios, but MA in turn are more clear, sound effortless in comparison and more balanced form low to high. MA has a more analytical sound to them (which some here have call clinical) and to me that creates a sound I can listen to all day long. Like I said Wharfedale is a bit warmer, I'd love me some WD240 (the floorstanders). They are a joy to listen to, watching over you like a magnificent father. But the Wharfedales also less precise and as such a bit more tiring to my ears in the long run. I decided on the the BX2s, because I have a small room with a lot of absorption. I'm very glad with that choice, and if you were wondering how they do in terms of bass I can tell you that, driven by a Rotel RA10, the BX2s make the room tremble with the volume just past 9 O'clock when performing this song: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JzeDek2T-zs&feature=youtu.be&t=40m36s Great game, great soundtrack. I love it for testing a speakers prowess. I lost interest in the Dalis because they are less analytical than either the Wharfedales or the Audios. Plenty of excitement for many, but to me it just sounds messy. That might be different for you though. What turned out to be pleasant with subtle layers of depth for me, might be boring and bland for you. I hope this helped. Like others have said though, there is no substitute for an audition. Make a day out of it, it's good fun.

 

[gasolin]

Mabye some Boston Acoustics A25 or A26 I have a denon mini reciwer which are more or less the same as the marantz mini recivers with the samme amp (correct me i am wrong).

With the same amp,cable i find dali zensor 1 to be a bit bright, lagging in the bass, but the boston, (i now have the small A23 since the A26 was to big with 4 monitors for my pc), they are very neutral in the top and dosn't in the same way get agressive at high levels as the zensor 1, nothing bad to say about the midrange and the bass is very good not that punchy but with in there limited the are good, good enough not to make deep voices like leonard cohen sound thin.

The bigger ones have more power,bass, the A26 are very good with a 50watt amp and edm

 

[robdmarsh]

Well, I hate to pour cold water on the Wharfedale fiesta, but as I've said in several other threads on this site I am just not impressed with them. They simply don't have the detail, musical engagement or the subtlety of my old Celestion 3 mkii speakers, which will even beat them for rhythmic delviery. (I'm using a Marantz m-cr603 which is considered to be a good match)

That being said, I've still got the Wharfedales which are immaculate with all original packaging and I would offer them to anyone interested for £160. They are on Gumtree as we speak!