Wow! Thanks for the comparison review. I feel a lot better that I chose the 606 over the evo 4.2 for my Nova 300. I don't have an opportunity to listen and compare before buying in my country. I just followed my gut feeling. But I was bothered if I did the right thing. Now your review has cleared my doubt. Thank you very very very much.
Yes! The bass punch of the 606 s2 is way better. It excites you and the dynamics is miles ahead. The 4.2s advantage is that is tonally better, detail retrieval is on a different class. Main selling point of the evos are its midrange. The voice is just so real to me. In my experience, the soundstage depth is more defined on the 606 while the 4.2 comes at you. Off axis is the weakness of the evos and you have to play them at a higher volume to enjoy music. With the 606 s2, you can play softer volumes and still enjoy the music. Overall ill say the better all around speaker is the 606 s2 BUT if your a sucker for tonality and detail retrieval, go for the evos.
The Wharfedale is a good margin better at certain aspects. Some might favor the slightly more forward nature of the B&W, but this is just something you can gain with EQing. However, the specific advantages of the Wharfedale are not elements you can tune into the B&W. So what does the Wharfedale do better? Two major elements stand out. 1) There's less sense of the source of the sound. The sound is just "there" and you don't perceive the speaker emitting that sound. This is pretty difficult to achieve. The drivers and the enclosure need to be acoustically invisible, aka doesn't do anything to bring your attention to them, no noise, distortion, rattle, nothing. I find it necessary to have a pretty high level of sound quality to achieve this. 2) The Wharfedale has better dynamics and a capacity for subtlety. It has the ability to articulate more subtle modulations in intensity. It also portrays silence. Now this might sound goofy, but most products don't have the dynamic breadth, the transparency, clarity, and articulation to really pull it off. But, really, really good stuff has this behavior. Only the very best hardware I've found can actually do this. It can portray silence. It has the ability for subtlety and delicacy, and the ability to highlight the silence in between sound. It takes a very good level of clarity of note, control, quick decay without being too lean in note, high dynamic breadth and linear dynamic breadth. You'll also note that the Wharfedale has more raw energy of note, attack, edge. But it's not just pow it's the whisper too. It's what good dynamics actually sound like. In comparison, the B&W is more forward, sure, but it's more dynamically dull. It's energy comes from being more shouty, not being more dynamic. It's a "noisier" and tonally brighter experience versus the dynamic experience and warmer experience of the Wharfedale. The B&W is nice and not much behind the Wharfedale, and if the B&W was a few hundred dollars cheaper, this would be a tough battle.
Hello there. We got Evo 4.2. what you said is true. However it feels like sound repressed sometimes, other times very forward almost like sound shooting at you. Would you advise something to make it better ??
Excellent side by side comparison, thanks. I love reviews like this. Could you tell any differences with how the digital big power PeachTree handled the speakers from the A/B Denon? Am asking as I am looking for an amp to power my 705-signatures and have been curious about the way to go as far as class amp to buy. Your test seemed like a great chance to sort that out a bit, you have a 500 wpc digital vs a 100ish wpc (i think) big a/b amp and I would think there could be some differences.
Good power with neutral sound but it lacks the midrange refinement and musicality of Class A bias amp, power,control and definition is much better on SX-11, I have not found Class D amp that I can live with, I would suggest you to try Marantz model 30 if you like D design, probably that is the one of the best quality in sound and build, thanks
I actually have a test that I do with my own speakers for all the speakers I’ve ever owned and that’s what the ET soundtrack The main credits you have the piano theme which is not really recorded in the best of recording Quality if you have headphones on that are pretty good you will be able to pick up the faintest pedal presses of the person playing the piano it is such a small detail only better equipment can really pick it up most speakers that I’ve had usually cannot my 705s pick it up pretty well it is a rare thing I just thought I’d throw it out there
I agree on system matching is very important. I have a 606s2 with audiolab 6000a and the sound is not bright. after listening I feel like im in a concert with the b&w. the evo sounds too warm for me specially the cymbals…
I've come across some Taiwanese made bookshelf speakers from USHER and they sound really good. Would appreciate if you can make a comparo with one of these.
I would like to see you give a shot to the 705S2 or 705S2 signature I think you would be very much impressed by the performance of the Twitter as opposed to the 706 because it’s on the outside and it’s on enclosure isolated I wasn’t sure at first it was more visual than functional but after opening them for quite a while you can tell a huge difference
The Wherfedale is off point timing wise....music sounds a little confused.... bass mid and treble dont align. The smaller BW is alot more musical and alive but maybe pushes the treble to the edge. Somewhere in the middle of these two would seem ideal! A pair of Focals should do it and give much better holography at the same time!
As much as I like your reviews, I'm a bit disappointed this time. It's simply because you focused mainly on bass and kick in modern electronic music that B&W delivers and completely skipped other sound characteristics. IMHO based on live comparison of B&Ws and Wharfedales, Evos offer much more balanced and linear sound reproduction. Bass and trebles are not boosted as in 606s what results in more natural, consistent and realistic sound. B&Ws are simply more entertaining speakers.
I am confidently agree with you Mr. Rychwalski as I have auditioned these speakers. B&W 606 S2 is a fun speaker. it's not really neutral in response and not really natural in tonality.
I also have these Evo 4.2 loudspeakers and I read that the cabinets are damped with sponges as in no other loudspeakers. Indeed, each of these columns is crammed with 3 sponges. First, I took all of them out of one and I was happy with the quality of the treble. But after a while I put one smallest sponge back on. The same in the second column and it stays like that for me. The head no longer hurts from this terrible suppression.
From some time I began to think that Q Acoustic would be the best choice. They are great for under $300 (with a good amplifier). Neither with B&W nor with WF you won't get "an ideal sound" anyway. So, with a bit of compromise, save some money for a really good loudspeakers start from $4k.
Even much cheaper just get Magnepan LRS. Then a Rogue integrated if you HV budget or a Crown 1002 to start, get another one for bridge and a pre / DAC. This will compete with speakers in the USD 4k range.
My Q Acoustics are demoted to the loft space since I purchased the B & W's. I couldn't believe the difference is like night & day. I wish I has listened to them before as I also had another set of 3020i's that I have also given to my granddaughter to start her off into hifi along with a Sony turntable & Onkyo amp. 4000 dollars for speakers is not for Mr or Mrs average because you need to spend another 4 times that much for the compatable gear to match them. A great sound can be had for less unless its an obsession. Not saying that if I came into money I wouldn't consider high end but anything more than 3 months wages for a system is o.t.t. & an expensive obsession.
I just finished building my new biamp speaker cables from your June 12, 2019 video. These cables make the sound amazing compared to my old Monster biamp cables. Now any suggestions for my turntable ground wire? I'm looking at making the RCA cables (July 3, 2019 video) to go along with ground wire. Thanks for the great channel.!
Listen to the bass and drum samples of each switching back and forth the B&W has more forward bumped mid which gives the "impression" of tighter or more bass and it`s relevant to what you hear but the tradeoff is it`s not as smooth and open sounding. I choose the Wharfedale. Nothing beats the more well balanced smoother through the frequency response speaker. I`d also like to add the EVO 4.2 is not my favorite Wharfedale speaker by a long shot.
Just for the contrast. In reviews earlier the Wharfedale Evo was preferred above the Kef Ls50 Meta and the bass was classified as having presence and weight, the Evo 4.2 were his favorite. A kind of speaker that was allround and could be fed any music. In this review a punchier signature is suddenly at preference and the bass of the evo is being described as average by the same reviewer. I sense a change of subjective preference here.
That’s the truth, B&W simply have better bass quality and driver itself. Yes Evo can feed all kinds of music but not 606 and Evo was once one of the favorite in the price range, never had a single absolute favorite. All speakers have weaknesses and strengths don’t matter who makes them.
Thank you for the comparison. I would like to ask, have you compared the 606 S2 against 707 S2? I would like to know your thoughts if you have done any comparison in the past. Thank you and have a great day.
@@tianshiwang3572 To you B&W sounds better. To other it is the opposite. You can refer to people who prefer Wharfedale in the comments. So we can also say B&W overprice it's speakers which deter those who want to try it not to buy. On the other hand, the Wharfedale is make good speakers affordable to more people.
@@tianshiwang3572 I got my Wharfedale Evo 4.4 for only 100$ more than the normal retail price of B&W 606 S2 anniversary in my country. I would say Wharfedale gives a lot more for the money here.
It's hard to believe the B&W can produce more bass. I would imagine I would prefer the Evo due to warmness. I don't care for super resolving speakers, they don't sound real to me. Also, a speaker that is forgiving is a plus for me.
Musical themes are generally not suitable for assessing the sound of acoustics. Pot clinking in the kitchen with old pans. There is no full spectrum of frequencies and depth of low sounding. Jazz should be listened to at home if it's high.
I have always found that B&W speakers sound great on first listen but become tiring after a while. Only when comparing b&w speakers to a more neutral sounding speaker side by side you realise b&w does not have a natural sound, its as if an EQ boost is active on the amp / dac. Bass and treble frequencies are over pronounced slightly and seems artificial and not like real life music. From your review it appears the 606 S2 have these same characteristics?
I fully agree. After side by side comparison of both florstanding and bookshelf versions of Evos vs B&W 6 series I can only confirm what you said. Although being fast and high resolution speakers B&Ws definitely doesn't sound linear, consistent and natural as they have very pronounced low and highest registers. Combining a slight boost inbetween 80-120Hz plus very pronounced high treble frequencies ("sparkles") is the oldest trick that results in entertaining sound signature. I agree that 4.2s sound a bit flat in comparison to 606s2s. However it's no longer a case with 4.4s vs 603s2s. Evos 4.4 can go as low as 31Hz (which is even lower than 603s2) but because the mid-bass is not pronounced they will only make the floor shake when low bass is present in the recording. Also highest trebles in Evos, although extremely transparent, are slightly rolled off to avoid fatiguing your ears. B&Ws will sound better in popular modern repertoire based on electronics but to hear the real timbre of voices and instrument you should definitely go for Evos. I also don't agree that Evos has lesser soundstage. They just don't produce this artificial type of air or glow around everything they play. But at the same time they are much more realistic in reproducing the parameters of the stage and environment in which music was recorded. You can easily tell how big the room was while on B&Ws it seems as it is always bigger than in reality.
@@alekrychwalski Evo or most of Wharfedale speakers Bass quality is average at best, manufacturer specs can't compare them from one company to another due to different rating idea, room and amp will make them sound drastically. So each of own opinion.
Thank you for your response,@@Tharbamar . I agree that Wharfedale is one of those brands that are completely inconsistent with their approaches to bass. In most of the cases it is hit or miss. Rarely they hit the sweet spot though. It's either too lean nor bloated or muddy. They expect their customers to fall in love with their "lovely for the price" mid-range. The rest is decent at best. It is the principle unless you invest your time and money in proper amp pairing. Sometimes even that is not worth it. I tried it many times, owning several generations of Diamonds, Crystals and even old EVOS, both floor-standers and bookshelves. Why? Because no matter how bad they were, their mid-range was always way better than it supposed to be for the price (it was often the case of Missions from the same producer as well). Diamonds 220 and 225s are the perfect example of what I have on my mind. Both either under- or overdelivered. And, yes, it always depends on the room size (being treated or not) and acoustics. All things mentioned above applies to every Wharfedale's affordable lines of products except current Evos 4.2 and 4.4. They are very dependant on amplification but paired well they deliver amazing sound for their price range. I went through 6 power and integrated amps + 5 external DACs with my Evos 4.4 to eventually find the synergy across the system. Many times I hit the wall and almost decided to replace Evos with Monitor Audios, Paradigms or B&Ws but none of them could reproduce the same level of engaging, emotional and naturally-sounding mid-range (while they always delivered better bass, rythm and a lot sparkling trebles). What's the conclusion? Probably it was a waste of my time and money 😂 But You just the same as I did invested a lot of energy to get the best out of Diamonds 225s. There is something very tempting and promising in Wharfedale speakers that makes you persue for something unattainable. I can only say that it is possible to finally get satisfaction with Evos. Although probably it would also be easier with different set of speakers. But probably none of them would ever satisfy you with the same quality of mid-range. PS: Wharfedales never pair well with japanese amps, Denon and Onkyo in particular.
Thank you so much Tharbamar! I really like your honest review. I am currently having a pair of 606s2. They reveal emotion and sparkles in music. That's also why I sold my KEF r3 (a relaxed sound but not enough details nor sparkle.)
the wharfedale is more neutral i think it will be for those who like a more acurate sound with a tight bass i feel that the bass is also better in extension and deepness but the B&W is just more fun to hear with vivid mids, more precense in highs and an almost loose bass that lacks precision in exchange of a funier experience with more "punch" so trhe EVO is a real HI-Fi while the B&W is more Mid-Fi with an almost "V- curve sound"
Heureux possesseurs des wharfedale evo 4.2 je les préfère par rapport aux b&w car celle ci ont un aigu beaucoup trop envahissant se qui nuit à certain styles de musique 🎵 alors que les wharfedale evo 4.2 son magnifique sur tous styles de musique 🎵
Hi. I like very much your insightful videos. Thank you very much for that. I have a question and I hope you can help me. Recently I bought a set of Evo 4.2 speakers, and combine it with a Cambridge CXA81 amplifier. They work really well together, but I need a little bit more trebles from that speakers and unfortunately the CXA81 has no separate trable control. So my question is: how can I improve the trebles from that speakers? Is there any tricks or some solution I can use to solve this issue? Like using some specific type of cable or some special way of cable connection, or even using some external equalizer? Thank you very much. P.S. At the moment I'm using silver plated oxygen free 4mm copper cable in bi-wire and bi-amp way.
Cxa60/cxa80 has treble contol but all of the cx series are not a good match with evo and or ls50. They sound shouty when paired because they all have forward and full bodied midrange. Based on my experience.
@@haroldbriones7041 Hi Harold. CXA81 has a treble control? I didn't know about that 🧐. Where can I find that? On configuration menu? Thanks in advance.
@@robertyeghiyan2727 no, sorry for confusing you. I mean the previous version which is cxa60 and cxa80. They both have treble control but the cxa81 and cxa61 dont have any.
I really appreciate this review. I've had this version of the 606's for a couple of months now, pairing it with the new Powernode 2i. I only stream music and I'm a total novice. I am fine with the 606's but since I tend to keep my music at a low volume, I wonder if B & W was the best choice for me.
@@Tharbamar I have the 4.3 and they definitely need the right power. I initially powered them with a Cambridge cxa60 but they sounded very wooly. A 150W emotiva A/B A300 rectified this. Also my SVS subwoofer compliments them. Very happy.
I give the nod to the Wharfedale. Sounds more natural to me compared to the B&W. Great video as usual. Thanks!
They both will certainly be great choices for the people whom may preferred, as always hifi audio is personal, thanks
I believe the B&W 606 S2 are the clear winner as the bass as you said is much better, seems quicker and more controlled.
And then you pair them with a Rel T9I and freak out
Older guys who cut thier teeth on 12” paper cones don’t like the modern “tight” bass sound much, it sounds constipated 💪🏻
@@hamiltonmackenzie3340 🤯
The treble are better too with the 606 S2.
We can listen to cymbals
Wow! Thanks for the comparison review. I feel a lot better that I chose the 606 over the evo 4.2 for my Nova 300. I don't have an opportunity to listen and compare before buying in my country. I just followed my gut feeling. But I was bothered if I did the right thing. Now your review has cleared my doubt. Thank you very very very much.
you'll be able to listen to the Wharfedale longer!!!!!!! Remember that folks!!!
Yes! The bass punch of the 606 s2 is way better. It excites you and the dynamics is miles ahead. The 4.2s advantage is that is tonally better, detail retrieval is on a different class. Main selling point of the evos are its midrange. The voice is just so real to me.
In my experience, the soundstage depth is more defined on the 606 while the 4.2 comes at you. Off axis is the weakness of the evos and you have to play them at a higher volume to enjoy music. With the 606 s2, you can play softer volumes and still enjoy the music. Overall ill say the better all around speaker is the 606 s2 BUT if your a sucker for tonality and detail retrieval, go for the evos.
Great mini review 👏🏻
Great music for test. Please use this music with other speakers.
Yes for sure. Thanks
I have had both these speakers. I still have the B&W, but not the Wharfedale's. Nuff said!
Great choice.
The Wharfedale is a good margin better at certain aspects. Some might favor the slightly more forward nature of the B&W, but this is just something you can gain with EQing. However, the specific advantages of the Wharfedale are not elements you can tune into the B&W.
So what does the Wharfedale do better?
Two major elements stand out.
1) There's less sense of the source of the sound. The sound is just "there" and you don't perceive the speaker emitting that sound. This is pretty difficult to achieve. The drivers and the enclosure need to be acoustically invisible, aka doesn't do anything to bring your attention to them, no noise, distortion, rattle, nothing. I find it necessary to have a pretty high level of sound quality to achieve this.
2) The Wharfedale has better dynamics and a capacity for subtlety. It has the ability to articulate more subtle modulations in intensity. It also portrays silence. Now this might sound goofy, but most products don't have the dynamic breadth, the transparency, clarity, and articulation to really pull it off. But, really, really good stuff has this behavior. Only the very best hardware I've found can actually do this. It can portray silence. It has the ability for subtlety and delicacy, and the ability to highlight the silence in between sound. It takes a very good level of clarity of note, control, quick decay without being too lean in note, high dynamic breadth and linear dynamic breadth. You'll also note that the Wharfedale has more raw energy of note, attack, edge. But it's not just pow it's the whisper too. It's what good dynamics actually sound like. In comparison, the B&W is more forward, sure, but it's more dynamically dull. It's energy comes from being more shouty, not being more dynamic. It's a "noisier" and tonally brighter experience versus the dynamic experience and warmer experience of the Wharfedale. The B&W is nice and not much behind the Wharfedale, and if the B&W was a few hundred dollars cheaper, this would be a tough battle.
Hello there. We got Evo 4.2. what you said is true. However it feels like sound repressed sometimes, other times very forward almost like sound shooting at you. Would you advise something to make it better ??
Great video! I like the warmth of the Evo's. I have been looking at the Dynaudio Evoke 30's and will have to try to find someplace to compare.
Evo’s all the way - if you prefer seductive and finely detailed, 606’s if your not irritated by music that demands constant attention
I like the way wharfedale performed, more detail and soundstage.
Great choice.
Excellent side by side comparison, thanks. I love reviews like this.
Could you tell any differences with how the digital big power PeachTree handled the speakers from the A/B Denon? Am asking as I am looking for an amp to power my 705-signatures and have been curious about the way to go as far as class amp to buy. Your test seemed like a great chance to sort that out a bit, you have a 500 wpc digital vs a 100ish wpc (i think) big a/b amp and I would think there could be some differences.
Good power with neutral sound but it lacks the midrange refinement and musicality of Class A bias amp, power,control and definition is much better on SX-11, I have not found Class D amp that I can live with, I would suggest you to try Marantz model 30 if you like D design, probably that is the one of the best quality in sound and build, thanks
@@Tharbamar Thanks so much for your response!
I actually have a test that I do with my own speakers for all the speakers I’ve ever owned and that’s what the ET soundtrack The main credits you have the piano theme which is not really recorded in the best of recording Quality if you have headphones on that are pretty good you will be able to pick up the faintest pedal presses of the person playing the piano it is such a small detail only better equipment can really pick it up most speakers that I’ve had usually cannot my 705s pick it up pretty well it is a rare thing I just thought I’d throw it out there
Thanks for sharing.
I agree on system matching is very important. I have a 606s2 with audiolab 6000a and the sound is not bright.
after listening I feel like im in a concert with the b&w. the evo sounds too warm for me specially the cymbals…
I've come across some Taiwanese made bookshelf speakers from USHER and they sound really good. Would appreciate if you can make a comparo with one of these.
Do the 606s play louder than the 1TDX? I play my music loud so I need a bookshelf speaker with the better/best power handling.
1TDX can play a bit louder.
I would like to see you give a shot to the 705S2 or 705S2 signature I think you would be very much impressed by the performance of the Twitter as opposed to the 706 because it’s on the outside and it’s on enclosure isolated I wasn’t sure at first it was more visual than functional but after opening them for quite a while you can tell a huge difference
I had 705 S2 a few years back, it was a good speaker.
Thanks great review! It's definitely 606S2 for me since it seems to do well with a variety of music. BTW, what happened to your turntable?
I just need to use the space, thanks
The Wherfedale is off point timing wise....music sounds a little confused.... bass mid and treble dont align. The smaller BW is alot more musical and alive but maybe pushes the treble to the edge. Somewhere in the middle of these two would seem ideal! A pair of Focals should do it and give much better holography at the same time!
What was the song in the intro?
Nice comparison. Keep it up 👍
peachtree or denon pm200 IV?
Where does the Quad S-2 fit in the comparison??
If you are after great midrange and highs, Quad S2 is easy choice, thanks
di dove sei?
The most review on TH-cam for the 606 tell are not good. The hay frequenze are bead
They just don’t have right paring.
@@Tharbamar i have rotel a12 can work?
As much as I like your reviews, I'm a bit disappointed this time. It's simply because you focused mainly on bass and kick in modern electronic music that B&W delivers and completely skipped other sound characteristics. IMHO based on live comparison of B&Ws and Wharfedales, Evos offer much more balanced and linear sound reproduction. Bass and trebles are not boosted as in 606s what results in more natural, consistent and realistic sound. B&Ws are simply more entertaining speakers.
I am confidently agree with you Mr. Rychwalski as I have auditioned these speakers. B&W 606 S2 is a fun speaker. it's not really neutral in response and not really natural in tonality.
9:41 13:46
I also have these Evo 4.2 loudspeakers and I read that the cabinets are damped with sponges as in no other loudspeakers. Indeed, each of these columns is crammed with 3 sponges. First, I took all of them out of one and I was happy with the quality of the treble. But after a while I put one smallest sponge back on. The same in the second column and it stays like that for me. The head no longer hurts from this terrible suppression.
From some time I began to think that Q Acoustic would be the best choice. They are great for under $300 (with a good amplifier). Neither with B&W nor with WF you won't get "an ideal sound" anyway. So, with a bit of compromise, save some money for a really good loudspeakers start from $4k.
Even much cheaper just get Magnepan LRS. Then a Rogue integrated if you HV budget or a Crown 1002 to start, get another one for bridge and a pre / DAC. This will compete with speakers in the USD 4k range.
My Q Acoustics are demoted to the loft space since I purchased the B & W's. I couldn't believe the difference is like night & day. I wish I has listened to them before as I also had another set of 3020i's that I have also given to my granddaughter to start her off into hifi along with a Sony turntable & Onkyo amp. 4000 dollars for speakers is not for Mr or Mrs average because you need to spend another 4 times that much for the compatable gear to match them. A great sound can be had for less unless its an obsession. Not saying that if I came into money I wouldn't consider high end but anything more than 3 months wages for a system is o.t.t. & an expensive obsession.
Evo 4.2 .. more live
I just finished building my new biamp speaker cables from your June 12, 2019 video. These cables make the sound amazing compared to my old Monster biamp cables. Now any suggestions for my turntable ground wire? I'm looking at making the RCA cables (July 3, 2019 video) to go along with ground wire. Thanks for the great channel.!
Listen to the bass and drum samples of each switching back and forth the B&W has more forward bumped mid which gives the "impression" of tighter or more bass and it`s relevant to what you hear but the tradeoff is it`s not as smooth and open sounding. I choose the Wharfedale. Nothing beats the more well balanced smoother through the frequency response speaker. I`d also like to add the EVO 4.2 is not my favorite Wharfedale speaker by a long shot.
Wharfedale более натуральный звук особенно в середине и верхах, тарелочки более естественно отрабатываются.
Bonjour.
Pour moi les B&W 606 sont nettement meilleures dans ce test musical. On entend très bien les cymbales sur les 606
Just for the contrast. In reviews earlier the Wharfedale Evo was preferred above the Kef Ls50 Meta and the bass was classified as having presence and weight, the Evo 4.2 were his favorite. A kind of speaker that was allround and could be fed any music. In this review a punchier signature is suddenly at preference and the bass of the evo is being described as average by the same reviewer. I sense a change of subjective preference here.
That’s the truth, B&W simply have better bass quality and driver itself.
Yes Evo can feed all kinds of music but not 606 and Evo was once one of the favorite in the price range, never had a single absolute favorite. All speakers have weaknesses and strengths don’t matter who makes them.
Playing both together would probably sound best. One has what the other lacks.
B&W has a tighter more controlled bass and it’s amazing!
Tharbamar more power to your channel 👍👍👍👍👍
Thank you.
I was happy when the shrill 606 turned off. Somewhere between these two speakers is the sweet spot.
Agreed. Seems the modern trend is for screechy treble with a loss of warmth and 'body'
You were going to compare 606 S2 and the 706 S2 right? Would love that!
Yes I will, thanks
It's like the ride cymbal is mixed too loud on the 606. That treble is way over the top.
Thank you for the comparison. I would like to ask, have you compared the 606 S2 against 707 S2? I would like to know your thoughts if you have done any comparison in the past. Thank you and have a great day.
I would still go for the Evo 4.2's simply because I can get them for much cheaper than the 606's in my country.
hmm, because they are not as good as 606s..... they should be sold cheaper.
@@tianshiwang3572 agreed
@@tianshiwang3572 To you B&W sounds better. To other it is the opposite. You can refer to people who prefer Wharfedale in the comments. So we can also say B&W overprice it's speakers which deter those who want to try it not to buy. On the other hand, the Wharfedale is make good speakers affordable to more people.
@@charlieliu007 check the price again in two years. We will see.
@@tianshiwang3572 I got my Wharfedale Evo 4.4 for only 100$ more than the normal retail price of B&W 606 S2 anniversary in my country.
I would say Wharfedale gives a lot more for the money here.
Evos for better separation
Great choice.
Great choice of music!
I think wharfedale better balance
Would both perform well for movie purposes also? I need something that is flexible. Used for both movie and music.
Yes their will, both great for music or movie.
The EVOs sound like you're inside the club.
I like all your reviews
Thanks for the comment.
My brother had speaker with folded tweeter. It sounded fine but burned out after a year. I prefer any speaker w/ a dome tweeter.
Yes, ribbons longevity is always been in question for me.
B&W 🎼🎼🎼🎼🎼🎵🎵🎵🎵🎶🎶🎶🎶💃🏻👌🏻
3way all the way.
Tharbamar more power on your channel 👍👍👍👍👍👍
Thank you.
It's hard to believe the B&W can produce more bass. I would imagine I would prefer the Evo due to warmness. I don't care for super resolving speakers, they don't sound real to me. Also, a speaker that is forgiving is a plus for me.
Yes with right pairing they are great, thanks
Both are still colored in the midrange, wouldn't you get the Rubicon 6 instead?
Musical themes are generally not suitable for assessing the sound of acoustics. Pot clinking in the kitchen with old pans. There is no full spectrum of frequencies and depth of low sounding. Jazz should be listened to at home if it's high.
Who suggested you to assess the sound of acoustics on youtube?
Wharfedale Evo 4.2 supérieur selon moi et mes écouteur
i am in love with my evo 4.2!
The 606 S2 are better nevertheless, listen to cymbals in this musical test and you understand
@@manugrandest1683 The 606 have no depth
How much power soud in watts rms have those speakers? Gretting from Perú.
Please see on manufacturer website, thanks
I have always found that B&W speakers sound great on first listen but become tiring after a while. Only when comparing b&w speakers to a more neutral sounding speaker side by side you realise b&w does not have a natural sound, its as if an EQ boost is active on the amp / dac. Bass and treble frequencies are over pronounced slightly and seems artificial and not like real life music. From your review it appears the 606 S2 have these same characteristics?
Please see in room response measurements that I’ve included, otherwise I’ve already discussed how they sound in my video.
I fully agree. After side by side comparison of both florstanding and bookshelf versions of Evos vs B&W 6 series I can only confirm what you said. Although being fast and high resolution speakers B&Ws definitely doesn't sound linear, consistent and natural as they have very pronounced low and highest registers. Combining a slight boost inbetween 80-120Hz plus very pronounced high treble frequencies ("sparkles") is the oldest trick that results in entertaining sound signature. I agree that 4.2s sound a bit flat in comparison to 606s2s. However it's no longer a case with 4.4s vs 603s2s. Evos 4.4 can go as low as 31Hz (which is even lower than 603s2) but because the mid-bass is not pronounced they will only make the floor shake when low bass is present in the recording. Also highest trebles in Evos, although extremely transparent, are slightly rolled off to avoid fatiguing your ears. B&Ws will sound better in popular modern repertoire based on electronics but to hear the real timbre of voices and instrument you should definitely go for Evos. I also don't agree that Evos has lesser soundstage. They just don't produce this artificial type of air or glow around everything they play. But at the same time they are much more realistic in reproducing the parameters of the stage and environment in which music was recorded. You can easily tell how big the room was while on B&Ws it seems as it is always bigger than in reality.
@@alekrychwalski I couldn’t agree with you more. 👍
@@alekrychwalski Evo or most of Wharfedale speakers Bass quality is average at best, manufacturer specs can't compare them from one company to another due to different rating idea, room and amp will make them sound drastically. So each of own opinion.
Thank you for your response,@@Tharbamar . I agree that Wharfedale is one of those brands that are completely inconsistent with their approaches to bass. In most of the cases it is hit or miss. Rarely they hit the sweet spot though. It's either too lean nor bloated or muddy. They expect their customers to fall in love with their "lovely for the price" mid-range. The rest is decent at best. It is the principle unless you invest your time and money in proper amp pairing. Sometimes even that is not worth it. I tried it many times, owning several generations of Diamonds, Crystals and even old EVOS, both floor-standers and bookshelves. Why? Because no matter how bad they were, their mid-range was always way better than it supposed to be for the price (it was often the case of Missions from the same producer as well). Diamonds 220 and 225s are the perfect example of what I have on my mind. Both either under- or overdelivered. And, yes, it always depends on the room size (being treated or not) and acoustics. All things mentioned above applies to every Wharfedale's affordable lines of products except current Evos 4.2 and 4.4. They are very dependant on amplification but paired well they deliver amazing sound for their price range. I went through 6 power and integrated amps + 5 external DACs with my Evos 4.4 to eventually find the synergy across the system. Many times I hit the wall and almost decided to replace Evos with Monitor Audios, Paradigms or B&Ws but none of them could reproduce the same level of engaging, emotional and naturally-sounding mid-range (while they always delivered better bass, rythm and a lot sparkling trebles). What's the conclusion? Probably it was a waste of my time and money 😂 But You just the same as I did invested a lot of energy to get the best out of Diamonds 225s. There is something very tempting and promising in Wharfedale speakers that makes you persue for something unattainable. I can only say that it is possible to finally get satisfaction with Evos. Although probably it would also be easier with different set of speakers. But probably none of them would ever satisfy you with the same quality of mid-range. PS: Wharfedales never pair well with japanese amps, Denon and Onkyo in particular.
Wharferdale suenan muy opacas, me gustan más las b&w
Thank you so much Tharbamar! I really like your honest review. I am currently having a pair of 606s2. They reveal emotion and sparkles in music. That's also why I sold my KEF r3 (a relaxed sound but not enough details nor sparkle.)
Have tou ever heard of tone controls? Jeez!
the wharfedale is more neutral i think it will be for those who like a more acurate sound with a tight bass i feel that the bass is also better in extension and deepness
but the B&W is just more fun to hear with vivid mids, more precense in highs and an almost loose bass that lacks precision in exchange of a funier experience with more "punch"
so trhe EVO is a real HI-Fi while the B&W is more Mid-Fi with an almost "V- curve sound"
Heureux possesseurs des wharfedale evo 4.2 je les préfère par rapport aux b&w car celle ci ont un aigu beaucoup trop envahissant se qui nuit à certain styles de musique 🎵 alors que les wharfedale evo 4.2 son magnifique sur tous styles de musique 🎵
J'ai également les Wharfedale evo4.2,Ils sont beaucoup moins fatiguant auditivement à l'usage ,qu'utilisez vous comme amplification?
Moi ravi de mes Bw 706s2❤️
Un marantz pm 15s1
@@roccco64 C'était un marrantz pm15s1
Hi. I like very much your insightful videos. Thank you very much for that. I have a question and I hope you can help me.
Recently I bought a set of Evo 4.2 speakers, and combine it with a Cambridge CXA81 amplifier. They work really well together, but I need a little bit more trebles from that speakers and unfortunately the CXA81 has no separate trable control.
So my question is: how can I improve the trebles from that speakers? Is there any tricks or some solution I can use to solve this issue? Like using some specific type of cable or some special way of cable connection, or even using some external equalizer? Thank you very much.
P.S. At the moment I'm using silver plated oxygen free 4mm copper cable in bi-wire and bi-amp way.
I had the same problem with my Evos,I changed my speaker cable with QED XT 40 i ,big improvement
Another way to solve your treble issue is to add an equalizer a relatively small cost to enhance music.
Cxa60/cxa80 has treble contol but all of the cx series are not a good match with evo and or ls50. They sound shouty when paired because they all have forward and full bodied midrange. Based on my experience.
@@haroldbriones7041 Hi Harold. CXA81 has a treble control? I didn't know about that 🧐. Where can I find that? On configuration menu? Thanks in advance.
@@robertyeghiyan2727 no, sorry for confusing you. I mean the previous version which is cxa60 and cxa80. They both have treble control but the cxa81 and cxa61 dont have any.
I really appreciate this review. I've had this version of the 606's for a couple of months now, pairing it with the new Powernode 2i. I only stream music and I'm a total novice. I am fine with the 606's but since I tend to keep my music at a low volume, I wonder if B & W was the best choice for me.
Yes, they are pretty good at low volume level as well in my system, which I forget to discuss in my comparison, thanks
If you can change your amp from 2i to a better warm sounding class ab you’ll get much better sound
@@GB-up6nl My main amp is Denon PMA-SX11.
@@Tharbamar would love to get your amp. I was eyeing on pma 1600ne but they have gone up in price.
Thought the 606 sounded a bit chaotic and the 4.2 had more bass/mid to my ears
Evo sounds fuller and easier on ears for sure.
@@Tharbamar I have the 4.3 and they definitely need the right power. I initially powered them with a Cambridge cxa60 but they sounded very wooly. A 150W emotiva A/B A300 rectified this. Also my SVS subwoofer compliments them. Very happy.
@@pddymcd I have 4.2’s on the way as well as a Basx a300. I’m hoping they pair well together and very glad to read your comment
@@glennelliott4989 they do very well
@@glennelliott4989 How do you like them?