Given the price differential between these 2, it’s remarkable that the Wharfedale 12.3s are clearly the more musical, deeper, more exciting and impactful speaker. Having said that, last week I sound tested the Q Acoustics 5040 in an audio showroom and was stunned by how disappointing they were as I’ve been a Q Acoustics guy for nearly 15 years now. The 5040s had good clarity but sounded so weedy, dull, un impactful and lacking any real magic. I picked up some 12.3s yesterday, have been spinning vinyl via my Technics SL-1500c, Ortofon Bronze, Project S2 Tube pre-amp and Cambridge CXA81 ever since and am blown away by how good these things sound - they’re the real deal and an utter steal for the price. This video helped make my mind up, so thanks for sharing folks!
I liked the clarity and detail of the 5040's and the full sound of the 12.3's. I'm sure the 5040's paired with a good sub (or two) would be the cat's meow for many people. I could live with both but if pressed I would probably go with the 12.3's as I really enjoyed their full-bodied delivery.
Here, of course, personal preference of the sound picture matters. For me personally, in this comparison, they are more comfortable in sound - Wharfedale
This reminds me of the time I tested the 3030's against my Wharfedale Denton 80's. Q's are more transparent and perhaps quicker. But the Wharfedale sound has more flesh on the bones. To each his own. (I kept the Wharfedales.)
l owned the QA Concept 40 , they are amazing speakers their tweeters impressed me with really good sparkle , all i can say is clarity , separation , mids-vocalist are all top notch performers even better than Polk R200 in all area except sound scale , because QA c-40 used only 5 inch woofers not 6 inch , so it's amazing listen in low and medium volume and they don't go super loud at all , this is the limit to 5 inch woofers-drivers .Thank You , nice recording , i have listened with my HiRes headphone , you can tell they are different speakers , the 5040 sure it is more articulate and better sound , i recommend Topping E70 Velvet DAC , a minimum requirement for audio system. Thank You .
I wanted to buy concept 40 but I have excellent concept 20 ,so dealer suggest to go for Q 3050i for little bolder sound. Waiting for their arrival. Concept 20 is superb for female vocal. Lush,lovely and sweet. Captivating sound.
On the jaz and funk records, the 5040s seemed to be punching through but the 12.3 where better on the other tracks. I think the Wharfedales are the better option for most of the time.
I have 3050 and 3050i's. Listened to this through them. Might be my ears but the warfedales sounded more detailed and musical. I really wanted it to be the 5040s but have to say the warfedales were better for me.
Not sure if youtube compression has any effect but q acoustics sound more detailed and wharfedale more of bassy lacking a few details or lacks a bit of clarity for music.
I have connected my new Qa 5040.s to my Denon PMA 1700 NE amp. Overwhelmed by the sound and clarity. What a smooth but detailed speaker it is. I used to have Wharfdales but the 5040s are better,more detailed. The only one coming close would be the Focal Aria 926.
Q A 5040 sounds great , beautiful clear sound , can't judge the base from youtube video but judging by the shaking of the camera most probably it has enough for most people , after much deliberation i went with the 5040's and ordered a pair , i'll be using them with Cambridge Audio Evo75 i hope they'll pair up nicely ...
Hello, thank you for the video. I had the 5040 paired with Audiolab 7000A , it was simply awful , I had before them Kef Q750 with Yamaha RN803D and the Q with Audiolab is no match for the Kef with Yamaha . Now I have Q Acoustics Concept 50 with Yamaha RN1000A And this is far above Kef and RN803 And much further above Q 5040 and Audiolab .
To me there’s no comparison… Whaferdale is pure clarity with beautiful complex overtones… one can tell from looking at the speaker. Wharfedale has a larger tweeter, which draws more definition and clarity in the mid-range
Mi opinion es que a mi oido el 5040 tiene un realse en los medios, pero el Wharfedale suena con mas bajo y reduce un poco los medios, a mi me gusta mas Whaferdale, aunque ambos suenan muy bien... My opinion is that to my ear the 5040 has a realse in the mids, but the Wharfedale sounds lower and reduces the mids a little, I like Whaferdale better, although both sound very good...
The Wharfedale's win...easily. Better bass overall. While the Q acoustics seem to be pretty smooth in the mids and highs, so is the Wharfedale. The midbass is thin on the Q acoustics and it lacks punch. Another reviewer had measured the Q Acoustic 5040 and found that the response is down about 6 db below 200 hz on down to cut off. Not good.
Los Q Acoustic tiene más detalle y claridad pero trasmiten menos emoción que los WHARFEDALE que tiene menos detalle sonoro pero suenan más impactante porque son más estridentes. Q Acoustic sonido más detallado, pero más planos. WHARFEDALE tienen un sonido más estridentes he impactante, pero con menos detalle.
For the same money you can get a pair of Vandersteen Model 1's. Set them up properly and match them with good electronics, and you're in a completely different league. I've heard both of these speakers, and compared to the Model1's they sound defective. That's my personal opinion. Not everyone will agree with me, and there's nothing wrong with that. I'm only suggesting that if you're shopping for speakers in this price range, listen to the Vandersteen's before you make a decision. No offense to anyone else, but if you're one of those people that get their listening experience from reading a spec sheet, don't waste your time trying to argue with me. You can't have an opinion on a pair of speakers you never heard.
wharfedales are a bit more "muffled" in the mid-lows and have more mids. q acoustics are definitely clearer and leaner. for jazz and classical music, the Q acoustics by a long shot... for rock, pop and more compressed music, the wharfedales...
Both are exceptional but like I the Wharfdale better. The separation for most of what you played is more pronounced and the sound overall less unveiled.
The Q Acoustics are MILES better even with this squeeky clean, surgical, dry sound of Audiolab. Forget the TH-cam recording upload and hear these in person. One of these duos sounds like a muted facsimile of music the other captures textures, harmonics, spaciality and more FAR better.
The 5040 are more tangible and instruments sound more rounded, bass is just right. Detail better to. Whaferdale sound ok if you like a more subdued sound and more bass ,wasn’t to my taste though.
The 5040 was just measured by Erin, we now know why it sounds so clear, detailed and thin; no upper bass/lower mids and a tipped up treble. Horrible objectively.
Was sceptical about Erin's review, but this video showed he was right. Bass frequencies seems very low volume on 5040. The Whaferdale seems to give a better overall sound.
@@Sid1798 thats because the wharfedales are much more balanced. An imbalanced speaker will show itself next to flat one. All the Diamond 12s basically are neutral speakers with a built in 'BBC Dip', which can sound more pleasing to the human ears.
How can you say that from a TH-cam video? With this BS music? And on what gear do you listen to TH-cam..On a tv? I have the 5040s and i think they are way better. You have to listen to them at a hifi specialist.Not on TH-cam,ridiculous. And every opinion differs.
@@miquel440measurements back everything OP said and what is heard in this video, meaning subjective AND objective opinions corelated. What do you have to back yours?
You are comparing apples to oranges. Q 5040 cost double in my country. I have Diamonds 12.2 and if I will change to floorstanders I would go for 12.4. I also had before the 12.1 wich share de same minuscule mid/bass driver as 12.3 In person they are a joke. I like so much the Wharfedale sound. I have them paired with Marantz pm6007. Couldn't go wrong with Marantz.
The Wharfedales by a country mile. The Q Acoustics give a false impression of detail by being bright, harsh and thin, and they were a car crash with the classical piece. I’m pretty sure the cheaper QA 3000 series is better.
@@feafajic6392 I'm not sure what went wrong here, maybe it is that mic or maybe compression? But I know the Q Acoustics sound better than this. Whatever the cause, listening on quality DAC and headphones, the sound here for both speakers is rolled off at the top and bottom, no real bass, gritty and harsh. It's not TH-cam either. Here's admittedly the best example I've heard th-cam.com/video/TN8aKBgzkzw/w-d-xo.html Unfair, but it shows what TH-cam is capable of.
@@feafajic6392 I'm definitely not trying to be mean here, just pointing out there's a problem that could be solved. Here's Q Acoustics, down market but sounding way better. th-cam.com/video/6yYhWpEeJ3k/w-d-xo.html
![[UNCUT] บอสพอล แผลงฤทธิ์ บอสพระ-นักร้อง ก. โดนแฉยับ! I คนดังนั่งเคลียร์ I 21 ต.ค. 67](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/XKf6HeftoPI/mqdefault.jpg)
![CAMPปลิ้น | EP.83[1/2] เปิดแคมป์หลอนต้อนรับ 2 ตัวพ่อแห่งวงการผี!](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/2uPuHYHgwiI/mqdefault.jpg)
Given the price differential between these 2, it’s remarkable that the Wharfedale 12.3s are clearly the more musical, deeper, more exciting and impactful speaker. Having said that, last week I sound tested the Q Acoustics 5040 in an audio showroom and was stunned by how disappointing they were as I’ve been a Q Acoustics guy for nearly 15 years now. The 5040s had good clarity but sounded so weedy, dull, un impactful and lacking any real magic. I picked up some 12.3s yesterday, have been spinning vinyl via my Technics SL-1500c, Ortofon Bronze, Project S2 Tube pre-amp and Cambridge CXA81 ever since and am blown away by how good these things sound - they’re the real deal and an utter steal for the price. This video helped make my mind up, so thanks for sharing folks!
100%
Q acoustic open and transparent, wharfedale as always a veiled sound.
I liked the clarity and detail of the 5040's and the full sound of the 12.3's. I'm sure the 5040's paired with a good sub (or two) would be the cat's meow for many people. I could live with both but if pressed I would probably go with the 12.3's as I really enjoyed their full-bodied delivery.
Q acoustic is too excitable . Will wear on your ears in a hurry
The laid back experience of Wharfedale any day - reduces fatigue.
Reduces enjoyment. They just cant convey musicality or dynamics. They have a lifeless signature.
Here, of course, personal preference of the sound picture matters. For me personally, in this comparison, they are more comfortable in sound - Wharfedale
For me the Wharfedale is a bit more laid back at times, which I prefer. Both excellent speakers and I like the Audiolab with both.
Mid bass is definitely sounding like it's hitting harder with the 12.3's....(actually, there's not much doubt about it)
This reminds me of the time I tested the 3030's against my Wharfedale Denton 80's.
Q's are more transparent and perhaps quicker. But the Wharfedale sound has more flesh on the bones. To each his own. (I kept the Wharfedales.)
l owned the QA Concept 40 , they are amazing speakers their tweeters impressed me with really good sparkle , all i can say is clarity , separation , mids-vocalist are all top notch performers even better than Polk R200 in all area except sound scale , because QA c-40 used only 5 inch woofers not 6 inch , so it's amazing listen in low and medium volume and they don't go super loud at all , this is the limit to 5 inch woofers-drivers .Thank You , nice recording , i have listened with my HiRes headphone , you can tell they are different speakers , the 5040 sure it is more articulate and better sound , i recommend Topping E70 Velvet DAC , a minimum requirement for audio system. Thank You .
I wanted to buy concept 40 but I have excellent concept 20 ,so dealer suggest to go for Q 3050i for little bolder sound. Waiting for their arrival. Concept 20 is superb for female vocal. Lush,lovely and sweet. Captivating sound.
On the jaz and funk records, the 5040s seemed to be punching through but the 12.3 where better on the other tracks. I think the Wharfedales are the better option for most of the time.
I have 3050 and 3050i's. Listened to this through them. Might be my ears but the warfedales sounded more detailed and musical. I really wanted it to be the 5040s but have to say the warfedales were better for me.
Listening Q acoustics on my Denon and 3050i was wonderfull experience 🥰
Not sure if youtube compression has any effect but q acoustics sound more detailed and wharfedale more of bassy lacking a few details or lacks a bit of clarity for music.
I have connected my new Qa 5040.s to my Denon PMA 1700 NE amp. Overwhelmed by the sound and clarity. What a smooth but detailed speaker it is. I used to have Wharfdales but the 5040s are better,more detailed. The only one coming close would be the Focal Aria 926.
Q A 5040 sounds great , beautiful clear sound , can't judge the base from youtube video but judging by the shaking of the camera most probably it has enough for most people , after much deliberation i went with the 5040's and ordered a pair , i'll be using them with Cambridge Audio Evo75 i hope they'll pair up nicely ...
I liked the 5040 more, until any vocals or low notes came in. The 5040 sounds awfully thin, the 12.3 sounds full bodied.
Hello, thank you for the video. I had the 5040 paired with Audiolab 7000A , it was simply awful , I had before them Kef Q750 with Yamaha RN803D and the Q with Audiolab is no match for the Kef with Yamaha . Now I have Q Acoustics Concept 50 with Yamaha RN1000A
And this is far above Kef and RN803
And much further above Q 5040 and Audiolab .
Hi, I am planning to buy tge Yamaha RN1000A.. any advice or comment.? It will be my entrance to the HiFi world? thanks
Hi,
Buy it only on sale .
Request a price offer at the store .
The RN1000A is pretty good .
To me there’s no comparison… Whaferdale is pure clarity with beautiful complex overtones… one can tell from looking at the speaker. Wharfedale has a larger tweeter, which draws more definition and clarity in the mid-range
The tweeters look about the same size... unless you mean magnet sizes which also vary based on material.
Mi opinion es que a mi oido el 5040 tiene un realse en los medios, pero el Wharfedale suena con mas bajo y reduce un poco los medios, a mi me gusta mas Whaferdale, aunque ambos suenan muy bien...
My opinion is that to my ear the 5040 has a realse in the mids, but the Wharfedale sounds lower and reduces the mids a little, I like Whaferdale better, although both sound very good...
The Wharfedales, at least for me, sounded like they put me live, and at the concert.
I have no dog in the fight. Just shopping.
Which one do you like better?
@@freds4262 not sure really.
The Wharfedale's win...easily. Better bass overall. While the Q acoustics seem to be pretty smooth in the mids and highs, so is the Wharfedale. The midbass is thin on the Q acoustics and it lacks punch. Another reviewer had measured the Q Acoustic 5040 and found that the response is down about 6 db below 200 hz on down to cut off. Not good.
Yeah, the midbass on the QA's is pretty anemic.
Los Q Acoustic tiene más detalle y claridad pero trasmiten menos emoción que los WHARFEDALE que tiene menos detalle sonoro pero suenan más impactante porque son más estridentes.
Q Acoustic sonido más detallado, pero más planos.
WHARFEDALE tienen un sonido más estridentes he impactante, pero con menos detalle.
I've not heard classic rock and roll but the Wharfdales sound great for me.
The Warfedales are a third of the price of the 5040s That is quite amazing
Excellent comparison, I like 12.3's price.
For the same money you can get a pair of Vandersteen Model 1's. Set them up properly and match them with good electronics, and you're in a completely different league. I've heard both of these speakers, and compared to the Model1's they sound defective. That's my personal opinion. Not everyone will agree with me, and there's nothing wrong with that. I'm only suggesting that if you're shopping for speakers in this price range, listen to the Vandersteen's before you make a decision.
No offense to anyone else, but if you're one of those people that get their listening experience from reading a spec sheet, don't waste your time trying to argue with me. You can't have an opinion on a pair of speakers you never heard.
wharfedales are a bit more "muffled" in the mid-lows and have more mids. q acoustics are definitely clearer and leaner. for jazz and classical music, the Q acoustics by a long shot... for rock, pop and more compressed music, the wharfedales...
Both are exceptional but like I the Wharfdale better. The separation for most of what you played is more pronounced and the sound overall less unveiled.
The 5040 any day of the week.
The Q Acoustics are MILES better even with this squeeky clean, surgical, dry sound of Audiolab. Forget the TH-cam recording upload and hear these in person. One of these duos sounds like a muted facsimile of music the other captures textures, harmonics, spaciality and more FAR better.
The 5040 are more tangible and instruments sound more rounded, bass is just right. Detail better to. Whaferdale sound ok if you like a more subdued sound and more bass ,wasn’t to my taste though.
I have Q Acoustics 2050i and they sound similar with 5040i. Absolutely not good for music, i use them for HT.
I think its QA signature sound.
The 5040 was just measured by Erin, we now know why it sounds so clear, detailed and thin; no upper bass/lower mids and a tipped up treble. Horrible objectively.
Was sceptical about Erin's review, but this video showed he was right. Bass frequencies seems very low volume on 5040. The Whaferdale seems to give a better overall sound.
@@Sid1798 thats because the wharfedales are much more balanced. An imbalanced speaker will show itself next to flat one. All the Diamond 12s basically are neutral speakers with a built in 'BBC Dip', which can sound more pleasing to the human ears.
The Wharfedale Diamond 12.3 are better sounding speakers.
Yes, the Wharfedale has heft to the lower frequencies Q Acoustic cannot dig up
How can you say that from a TH-cam video? With this BS music? And on what gear do you listen to TH-cam..On a tv? I have the 5040s and i think they are way better. You have to listen to them at a hifi specialist.Not on TH-cam,ridiculous. And every opinion differs.
@@miquel440measurements back everything OP said and what is heard in this video, meaning subjective AND objective opinions corelated. What do you have to back yours?
Wharfedale and is not even close. The Q Acoustics sounds way too thin.
5040😊
Q Acoustic sounds much better.
You are comparing apples to oranges. Q 5040 cost double in my country. I have Diamonds 12.2 and if I will change to floorstanders I would go for 12.4. I also had before the 12.1 wich share de same minuscule mid/bass driver as 12.3 In person they are a joke.
I like so much the Wharfedale sound. I have them paired with Marantz pm6007. Couldn't go wrong with Marantz.
The Wharfedales by a country mile. The Q Acoustics give a false impression of detail by being bright, harsh and thin, and they were a car crash with the classical piece. I’m pretty sure the cheaper QA 3000 series is better.
LOL @ carcrash 😂😂😂
Q acoustics 5040 😊
They both sound thinner than my wallet.
It's definitely the w 12.3 for me
With subs Q will sound better without sub go for 12.3 or 4
Q acustic sound aggressive and tiny. 12.3 is much more pleasant to listen.
I think q acoustics 3030i has secret sauce i them at $500.
Same speaker cables for both? Then no, speakers need their best matched cables before being compared.
Lol ..... Yeah defiantly a cable completely changed their sound ahaha
I don't think that the Audio lab is right for the Q Acoustics. Needs warmer amp
Sounds like this was recorded on a phone, instead of decent quality mics. No use for comparison.
Recorded with Shure MV88+ microphone.
@@feafajic6392 I'm not sure what went wrong here, maybe it is that mic or maybe compression? But I know the Q Acoustics sound better than this. Whatever the cause, listening on quality DAC and headphones, the sound here for both speakers is rolled off at the top and bottom, no real bass, gritty and harsh. It's not TH-cam either. Here's admittedly the best example I've heard th-cam.com/video/TN8aKBgzkzw/w-d-xo.html Unfair, but it shows what TH-cam is capable of.
@@feafajic6392 I'm definitely not trying to be mean here, just pointing out there's a problem that could be solved. Here's Q Acoustics, down market but sounding way better. th-cam.com/video/6yYhWpEeJ3k/w-d-xo.html