[Sound Battle] Polk Audio Reserve R200 vs B&W 606 S2 Anniversary Edition Speakers w/Arcam SA10 Amp
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 3 ก.ค. 2024
- I always thank you for your support! and being with me.
Please share your thoughts with me.
thanks
Other sound comparison videos
Amps - • Amplifier Sound Demo
Speakers - • Hi Fi Speakers Sound Demo
Bluetooth Speakers - • Bluetooth Speaker
Timecodes
0:00 - intro
1:11 - All the way up / Electronic / by Hadar Sopher
1:51 - Bedroom / Soul & RnB, Pop / by Raquel Castro, The Wildcardz
2:34 - Boost Your Power / Rock / by CustomMelody
3:32 - Chemtrails / Cinematic / by Semo
4:23 - Get Ready / Cinematic, Rock, Pop / by Midnight Noise
5:13 - Higher Love / Electronic, Pop / by Ben Fox
6:29 - Is Leroy On It / Jazz, Acoustic, Retro / by Southside Aces
7:27 - Pull Me Closer / Electronic, Pop, Hip Hop / by WEARETHEGOOD,
8:40 - Punkd / Cinematic, Electronic / by Out of Flux
9:41 - Seasons / Cinematic, Classical / by ANBR
10:51 - Star Night / Acoustic, Rock, Pop / Wonderland
11:41 - Time Traveling / Soul & RnB / Sarah Kang feat. Anthony Lazaro
13:15 - Crash and burn / Death Metal / Kissing Candice
14:40 - Magic Show / Death Metal / Kissing Candice
15:37 - Fields / Acoustic Guitar / Livio Bartolo
![SOUND BATTLE - KEF Q350 vs Monitor Audio Bronze 100 [Sound Comparison] Marantz PM7000N](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/SC9Y2mGBgNg/mqdefault.jpg)
![SOUND BATTLE - KEF Q350 vs Monitor Audio Bronze 100 [Sound Comparison] Marantz PM7000N](/img/tr.png)
![[Sound Battle] DALI Oberon 1 vs B&W 607 S2 Anniversary Edition Bookshelf Speakers w/Arcam SA10 Amp](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/axgMPL66W98/mqdefault.jpg)
![[Sound Battle] Polk Audio Reserve R200 vs Elite ES20 Bookshelf Speakers w/Arcam SA10 Integrated Amp](/img/n.gif)
Buying the Polk R200's with stands just bc of your comparisons. Thank you so much for actually putting music out there for people new to hi-fi and the lack of brick and mortar stores!
Thanks for the videos!
So grateful for this comparison. B&W's sound is open and pronounced which suits my taste of volume (low to mid loudness) and style of music (Neo RnB/Jazz -Robert Glasper, Terrace Martin. I like distinctive detail of B&W. Keep up the good work 👌🏿👏🏿
Both sound great but I think th B&W might fatigue me out unless
matched with a dark Amp. It's amazing how good bookshelves sound today. Thanks for posting this🍻
Hi, I agree with you, I have had a couple of B&W for 1 year and it's a bit fatiguing, after 2+ hous I have to stop listening for a rest
@@jaimeceularcarranco340 yup, I understand completely
S2 love this sound.Polk good work
I had the B&W 606 and now have the Polk R600. While the B&W 606 are a bit more "exciting", I definitely prefer the Polk, they're much easier to listen to for longer sessions, more balanced.
The B&W's sound bright, brash and metallic, The Polk's are far more natural and musical.
Polk audio меня здесь поразили, отличное сбалансированное звучание.
Присоединяюсь к вашему мнению, не думал, что Polk будет по лучше, для моих ушей)) P.S. Крутой канал- хотелось бы👉 KEF Q350 vs Polk Au Reserver 200🙏
Кроме низов в полке ничего нет
B&W sounds brighter, sharper. The Polk sounds more balanced. So good to know when you matching an amp!
Polk,no doubt
Hi, you are doing a great job comparing amps and bookshelf speakers. I have been watching all your video comparisons of Polk audio R 200 with other speakers and different amps. I am in the process of upgrading my set up. I have old three year old dynaudio emit 10 driven by cambridge cxa60. Polk r200 have fascinated me no end. Will have a demo soon at a dealer I HV spoken to. Exploring neutral sound leaning towards slightly warmer tone for my next set of speakers. Wanted to request you if it would be possible for you to do a comparision of r200 with emit 10 with say cxa61 amp. Will love to watch such a video. Thanks in anticipation.
Thanks for your concern.
I love to do that. But I don't have a Emit 10 righr now. Please check it out later.
Thanks~
@@eprojectEllie I can understand. Thanks for the reply.
@@TheNewsBaaz How did you find your emit 10? I have been deciding between emit 10 and r200 and ended up ordering a set of r200, will pair it with a iotavx sa3 amp.
Sometimes Polk sounds better and sometimes B&W sounds better 😮
I'm curious to go and have a listen in the corner shop for this r200. This video demonstrates their superiority. Personally, I have a Jean-Marie Reynaud Bliss pair and I'm delighted! And I also acquired a Marantz pm7000n amp in June 2021 for my office and for an additional €1 they offered the 606s2. So I'm happy to have been able to acquire the 606 for a symbolic €1. I spent 200€ to upgrade the crossover by a fan of my region and frankly I get something that works not too badly for 201€.
Please can you tell me what you did to the crossover, and what was the audible effect.
Wow, apples and oranges. I think the B&W's are more " open " than the Polks, but too bright for me to listen to for longer periods. I like the Polks more natural sound, but that is just me. To each their own. Both sound good but very different.
Both sound terrific but I'd prob plump for B&W.
B&W may be more open but the sound is not as natural as the Polk due to the harsh upper mids/treble but that doesn’t mean that the Polk are good either, they just sound more cohesive
What do you think sounds better?
Hey guys! We have another video he just posted, comparing the Dali Oberon 1 and B&W 607S2. He's been a busy beaver today!
I suggest testing Wharfedale Diamond 12.2 vs B&W 607 S2 or B&W 606 S2
In my opinion the B&W 606 S2 sounds better
Polk has better mid and bass, but b&w has brighter high. I'll go with the best bang for the buck.
B&W ‘s vocal sound is nice and forward while R200 is a bit spread out when you are listening to Time Travelling. Both are great speakers .. just pick the one suit for your taste 🙂
short term b&w. but for long sessions of listening, Polk for sure.
Les BW ont plus d’ouverture dans le haut, donc une meilleure lisibilité. Mais les Polk sont de très bonnes enceintes… le choix de l’ampli sera important.
You will be able to listen at higher volume on Polk for longer as they sounds softer. B&W sounds a bit clear, but listening at higher volume may be problem. I like softer sound at higher volume. Besides, Polk appears to have deeper soundstage.
A lot to appreciate in the 606's, but they would definitely make me want to punch them after a while. For me, the Polk R200's are warmer and easier to live with for daily listening.
The S2 tries to impress with boosted lows and top-end (loudness permanent on). A matter of intentional design and perhaps taste (not my taste). However, far more serious is the fact that voices sound completely off (octaves off). Why...? They use good drivers and it sounds clean, but why on earth would someone design a speaker that deforms instruments and especially voices? This speaker is a joke, wth.
Perhaps not perfect, but it shows what speakers like Polk, Wharfedale 12.x, Elacs, etc, can do, and quite true to the source.
IMO, the older B&Ws, with the Kevlar woofers, still had sucked out mids and a hot tweeter, but neither were to the extremes they've taken it to now, which seems to increase with every new generation of B&Ws. Doug Schneider at Soundstage just did a very honest review of the new 805D4 on their TH-cam channel. They have always crossed over their tweeters at around 4khz, which is way too high for any woofer larger than 4" to prevent it becoming too beamy. Even if you sit in the sweet spot with the speakers pointed right at you, what you hear is still the overall room response, not just the on-axis response, so a speaker with poor horizontal dispersion will sound bad
Some stay true to the signal path, some lightly colour their sound, some strive to create their own signature by going overboard. This is the perfect example of the
last one.
@@-MarkWinston-
Overboard it is, mildly put 😄
It seems to work somehow, based on raving reviews, I'll give them that..
6 months ago the B&W were top of my list until I saw the Polk R 200s. I bought them immediately after they released on TH-cam. The design and how well built they looked . They are so clean ..
@@DougMen1 On the 606 s2 the crossover is crap! But they remain much faster than the dali and cleaner, more fluid.
On the 606 s2, you just have to upgrade the 5.1 µF capicitor for $ 2 .... by Mundorf, MCAP supreme or evo 8.2µF or 10µF max to with an increase towards 2000hz that changes everything! So you need $ 100 more and there you have a great speaker.
Polk's win overall, wish you had the Paradigm 200B.
Classic & jazz s2 👍,others R200 👍
Upgrade the 606 crossover with a crossed to around 2kz with Mundorf MCAP evo or supreme or JANTZEN AUDIO SUPERIOR Z-CAP !
I am very surprised that both sound almost the same! That being said, the B&W have a more open midrange by a little margin. If they are at the same price, and I think they are, I will go for the Brits!
B&W словно подробнее и открытие! У Polk одеяло буд-то одето, но звук плотный. У B&W атака хорошая и скорострельность, еще у них звук отвязан от колонок!
Hola.
Prefiero la 606 s2. Las Polk suena como las Bowers & Wilkins pero con una manta por encima.
Gracias.
Ótima comparação 🤣🥂
A pair of R600 are on their way to me, I have had the BW 606 S2 for 2 years now and I can' stand them, liestening fatigue is real with them, at least for me. They're kind of nice with music, but movies/TH-cam/Twitch etc. is terrible with them
Polk is better. As many write in other reviews, B&W sound way too bright. Good at the beginning but bad for the ears in the long run.
B&W !!! Polk Audio глухие и нет высоких
Female vocals are sweet and beautiful on R200. BW 606s2 are too shrill.
i am listening this battle on an apple lap top and from here, i can listening the B&W more detailed sound
Dali oberon 3!!! Please!!!
There's a pretty serious contrast between these two.The 606 S2 does take it to the R200's on some of their slight weak spots, with more upper midrange and treble presence, but in my opinion goes too far, to the point of being too overly sharp and defined to be really enjoyable. They have more energy and can seem to have more detail at times, but are not refined and sweet at all with this Arcam. The R200's lack a trace of "you are there'" presence, but generaly remain a fun and pleasant listen. The 606's get rowdy. Some things about them remind me of the cheaper KEF Q150's for example, wich also have a somewhat sharply defined charicter, but not nearly as much as the 606s, wich are unaturaly over-defined and too imbalanced to me.
Really? I hear incredibly distant, recessed, veiled, and non-existant midrange on all but Seasons, Time Traveler, and Fields. You don't hear that on all the other songs?
I hear more upper midrange or presence region, and less lower midrange, or body and warmth region than the Polks, wich are closer to balanced. The overall impresion the 606 leaves me with though, factoring in bright overly defined treble, is forwardness and harshness. Some recordings that need a warmer, fuller presentation in order to sound natural, sound vague and distant on them compared to the Polks yeah, but that is not the biggest issue with them to me.
Seems like you've been experiencing really big midrange issues on the most recent speakers.
@@DougMen1 By the way, did you read the comments I mistakenly left you under my comment for the Carina centers/ R200 video?
@@williammiebach1798 I may have a problem with some speakers that are balanced in the midrange, but that I feel are too honky or edgy in character there, but I don't criticize their balance. However, I expect every good and properly designed speaker to be balanced through the whole range of fundemental frequencies from all instruments- vocals, guitars, drums, horns, woodwinds, and all strings, which are all lower than 2khz, save for the very highest notes on a violin and a piano. All those fumdemental frequencies are between 80 and 2khz (the lowest note on a guitar is 80hz, and the lowest note on a bass viol or 4 string bass guitar is 40hz, except for a 5 string bass with a low B, which is then somewhere in the 30s. Some horns, like tubas, and baritone saxes, may go that low too). Everything above 2khz is the lower harmonics, not fundemental frequencies. I've always loved the presence region (2-4khz) from B&W's speakers, but I can't tolerate those distant and sucked out fundemental frequencies, where vocals and other lead instruments sound like they're coming from behind a curtain 50 feet behind the speakers, instead of just behind or at the plane of the speakers. That's what I don't like on the Klipsch RP600M and some other speakers too. Those frequencies make up 90% of all the music we hear, and if they aren't right, then no amount of good sound above or below that will satisfy me. Even the RB42s on that video with the Vandersteens sound very balanced, and I'd much rather have them than the B&Ws
@@DougMen1 To really enjoy a speaker, to own a speaker, or even to honestly consider it a good 'hifi speaker,' it has to be truly hifi in a literal sense, not just have a bunch of "audiophile qualities". I listen to many different genres of music, and with all of them, especialy classical music, correct or very near correct tonal ballance is the most neccesary thing for me. An ability to reproduce the natural textural quality is second, clarity, imaging all follow, but mainly accurate or lifelike tonality must be there. I played the Cello, and not too many hifi or audiophile speakers can reproduce one in convincingly lifelike way. One that does has always been the exception, and still is. I don't expect most to, although many people will still consider them good speakers, and I might be able to enjoy them with different music.
Using this Arcam amplifier to do the comparison test of the speakers is way much better than the Cambridge amp you used in your other video. The Arcam has better drive and control. The Cambridge in your other video makes the speakers sound thin and sharpish. And does not bring out the best out of the speakers
Coming back to this comparison both speakers sound awesome with the B&W being more tuneful. The B&W obviously has better bass.
Definitely the B&Ws resolve more but highs almost tizzy at times. Polks seem a bit warmer. Think personally I would switch between the two for choice depending what I was playing so picking one over the other is nigh impossible for me, do think they're both good
B&W
Polks sound muffled in the mids. B&Ws are bright but better in mids and bass.
The Polks sound good but the B&Ws quite better in my opinion.
B&W simply beating polk R200 , but price 😮, so the R200 is worth for price.
R200은 보컬이 선명하네요... 606은 좀 탁한 느낌
Man, I wish this was a review. 😒 Would be so much more valuable to hear your thoughts than to hear a recording of a recording.
This makes no sense to me , I have the polk reserve 600 and B&W 606 the polk way darker than then the 606 , here they sound very close .
With this demo I thought the B&W sounded poor with the Emo song but the Polks sounded much worse. Prefer the more detailed sound of the B&W on the other tracks, the Polks are too smooth.
Music? 😂
B&W are immediately fatiguing, Polk is much more neutral
BW me dá dor de cabeça 😢
The Polk sound more natural. Good comparison
🤔🎧🎶🎶🎶🎶🎶B&W ✌🏻👍👍👍👍✌🏻🙂🇵🇱
R200 = much better - check Crash & Burn track.
I simply don't understand why test channels like this one use "pop-ish classical" instead of real classical recordings... for someone who is looking for a pair of speakers for classical music this is close to useless.
B&W tired my ears and heard more detail in polks
BMW time travelling win 🏆
Bower x mucho
Arcam SA10 may be a good match for 606. SA10 has smooth, mellow sound with strong mid and soft treble. It may alleviate some of the issues 606 has.
Almost every B&W have that harsh tweeter. It reviels something, but in sssssssss side of sound.too much treble.
Bower and wilkins more refined cleaner.. Polk more ear friendly
B&W should be ashamed of themselves for the junk they turn out these days.They're a company which can do so much better but I think that selling audio gear is more to do with marketing than anything else these days. And lets face it most punters don't know what theyre listeining to or listening for.
There's a lot of people that love that boombox smiley face voicing, as evidenced by how well B&W and Klipsch/Jamo do in the marketplace, and how other companies that know better, like Monitor Audio, are following suit, to some extent, to get more market share. The people that should be really ashamed of themselves are the trusted professional reviewers that praise this B&W made garbage, because they should know better. Even if some of these reviewers and the B&W designers are old like me, and have the natural loss of the top octave that comes with age, I can't believe that their ears are that much worse than mine, so they think these speakers with shrill tweeters that are 5db or more louder than the woofer actually sound good to them. But, I think a lot of it is young people that listen to incredibly overprocessed pop and hip-hop, and they love that sound of pumped up bass and treble, like Beats headphones, and a lot of top selling wireless earbuds, and they want speakers that sound like that too
@@DougMen1 Too true. The reviewing industry is in symbiosis with the manufacturers and retailers and then there's the excuse for music itself which causes a whole raft of problems. For a great laugh check out Olu's Gadgets @How bad can a headphone sound ? where he visits a headphone shop and tries out several pairs of highly rated headphones. I've had similar experiences myself.
@@DougMen1
Yes, where Barry White sounds like Donald Duck. At least Andrew Robinson didn't like them 😄
@@34332 He was one of the few that were honest about it, Doug Schneider at Soundstage being another, although his video is about the much more costly 805D4
@@DougMen1 Robinson has always had an axe to grind w B&W
Too close to call, even tho l don't really LIKE B&W. They both have a bit of 'magic'
To me, the 606 is rubbish. Some might like it and its perfectly fine. I dont ask people to check their ears if their taste differs from mine.
Got the Wiis and they're superb for their size and even for their price. Technically, I doubt they can be touched at anywhere near their price. You're right again. It'll be hard to send them back, probably impossible.
@@davidcarr2216 you got a website containing the actual specs of the Wii?
I’ve only got the same sources of info as you. For me, DSP crossovers have got to be a winner anyway. It probably should be more common than it is, providing the basic speaker is good enough., which in many cases it probably isn’t.
@@davidcarr2216 any plans to add a sub later on?
Yeah, I might do but it’s not a must for me. Did you see Erin’s review of the Wiis ? That’s the only objective review I can think of.
Win B&W - pure excitement - Polk sounds hollow
B&W all day.
The Polk sounds too flat.
B&W winner 🏆
Very different presentation btw these two, but B&W is not a worse speaker. It's just lack of a little refinement. The backing instruments in the classical tune "seasons" is more impressive through 606. It's not an all-arounder but not really a terrible design as people always complained about.
607.s2 is way better than 606.s2 don't use a bright amp on 606, make your ears bleed.....
The B&Ws don't sound as bright on top as they have to me in other videos, but they have the dullest and most sucked out and distant midrange I've ever heard, much more than the MA Bronzes, and even more than the Klipsch RP600M and much more expensive B&W 700 and 800 series two ways. This is incredibly poor engineering on a speaker that costs $900, and the most disgusting part about it is that they do it intentionally, and design all their speakers like this, because it's their house sound. Anyone who would buy these over the Dali Oberon 3 at the same price, or the R200 and Q350 for $150 less, must be crazy. For about $100 more than the 606S2, you can get the Focal Chora 806, the Wharfedale Denton, the Carina BS243.4, the JBL L52 Classic, or any number of other better speakers. I'd even rather have the RP600Ms over these abominations, and I used to be a big B&W fan, but no longer. Even the Polk S20, which are now on sale for $239 (making them the best buy under $300, IMO, and one of the best under $400) sound much better than these do, as do almost every other speaker we've heard here, including some others that I didn't care that much for. It's sad what's become of B&W. Surprisingly, it doesn't sound as much that way on Seasons,Time Traveler, and Fields, which is why it's always very important to audition using a wide variety of music, and with music that you know very well . The midrange may fill out and open up at louder volume levels, because that's how my 601S3s were. But, any speaker that changes balance drastically depending on the recording played and the volume level is still a very poor design and wouldn't ever get my money
I'm prob going with the Paradigm 200B, they are at least made in Canada, tired of these companies passing off mediocre Chi fi speakers and selling them for 1K
@@thomasward00 Stop with your racist bullshit. There are plenty of great $1k speakers made in China. It's the engineering that counts, not where they are assembled. Do you never spend money on anything? These days everything, even products made in the US, Canada, Japan, Korea, and Europe, are full of Chinese made parts that aren't made anywhere else. We may not like it, but that's the world we live in, and we have to accept it
@@DougMen1
100% true, well said.
This reminds me of a quote:
"Having visited the Bowers & Wilkins Research Center and been impressed by the depth of the company's engineering expertise, I am always puzzled by the fact that B&W speakers don't measure as well as they could." - John Atkinson, Stereophile"
@@34332 I don't think they're overly concerned about measurments these days. They appear to be catering to a fan base with their 'brand sound'. There's no doubt in my mind they can engineer and build speakers that measure better and sound more natural when they choose to, but have chosen to keep some element of their juiced up 'brand sound' in everything they sell, these days.
B&W sounds much better, big difference between
The bowers def ,but you can’t listen to speakers like that
The B&W tweeter is crap. Artificial, sticks out, fatiguing. Fail.
No offense intended but the entire comparison sounded terrible. You need reference quality gear and mics to make a comparison like this worthwhile.
Polk sounds more distorted