Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Golds vs Elevates
#1
I bought on trial (45 days shipping both ways - how smart is Devialet for doing that in USA?) a Duo set of Elevates in December and was duly impressed (with reservations). So I wanted to see what the Golds could do. Again, Devialet (being just as smart) offers a holiday pkg of Golds on same 45 day (overlapping) trial. Am I dumb? Of course I did it.

My findings:

I still have multiple reservations not the least of which have to do with establishing network and connectivity, next with wishing I could EQ more easily, but these are truly revolutionary if we can as early adopters tolerate the shortcomings... I just wanted an all in one digital/active/streaming speaker with no other boxes, cables, variables. Just my home network and high quality streaming controlled by my iOS device. That’s it.

So... my impressions of the Elevate vs the Gold and what one gains:

It should come as no surprise that the bottom end is obviously lower/better controlled on the Gold. The Gold is more forward (one of my complaints with Elevate), but more significantly MUCH more volume at the same “number”. For a similar sound level, one must set the Elevates at least 10 points higher. 55 on the Golds requires at least 65 on Elevates. Which seems curious to me... why should that be? So I am concerned about mixing and matching the two should I choose to keep both for an immersive setup.

Aside from that, there appears to be a more forward midrange (again could simply be DSP processing) and the high end does have more detail. Keep in mind that the Elevates are more broken in by now and the Golds are only 2 hours in...
Reply
#2
    My comparison. Meridian DSP5000’s being used as stands for the Golds. Even 25 years old and only 18 bits, the Meridians still hold up well against the Phantoms. Phantoms have deeper more controlled bottom end, but both disappear when you close your eyes... the DSP crossovers/active nature??
Reply
#3
(14-Jan-2018, 00:01)snbeall Wrote: My comparison

A question that was intensively discussed in the forum and you should be able to answer easily with yuor setup is reg the ADH vs. ADH2 in the Silver/Elevate Phantoms. See this post:
https://devialetchat.com/showthread.php?...0#pid68380
Could you check if the Gold and Elevates have the same floor noise when you play a track at volume 2? In comparisons in my system the difference is huge (much more floor noise in my old Phantoms (ADH) compared to my Golds (ADH2).

Thanks
Streamy.
Reply
#4
Both equally and completely inaudible at a setting of 2. I am still a bit baffled at the difference in volume between the two at 50 setting however... the Elevates require 60 to come alive. Why such a difference?
Reply
#5
(14-Jan-2018, 19:54)snbeall Wrote: Both equally and completely inaudible at a setting of 2. I am still a bit baffled at the difference in volume between the two at 50 setting however... the Elevates require 60 to come alive. Why such a difference?

Thanks for checking this. So, as concluded in the indicated thread Devialet has replaced most of the circuit of the Elevates and according to their new and modified specs also in the Silvers with the parts introduced first with the Golds. So, except of the power stages and the titanium tweeters of the Golds all should be the same in all three versions.

There is no obvious reason why the mids should be sounding different (they are much better in the Golds (DSP??) than in the others). The difference in bass is clearly a result of the more powerful amps. The difference in the overall loudness is a SW decision. I do not think it would be economic for Devialet to implement less power in the amps that drive the mids and the tweeters. I would expect the same performance could be expected from all three Phantoms at volumes up to 45-50 and only then the additional power of Silver and finally the Golds would make the difference when listening really loud. Apparently, the SQ difference between the three models is designed such to make more clear differentiations. These are normal design decisions the industry takes. Not clear if the cheapest model is offered prizewise cheaper to attract more buyers of the brand with the entry model than the ingredients cost or the other way round. But in the end there is a clear upgrade path to go for Silvers or Golds with clear SQ improvements.
Reply
#6
@snbeall
I'm interested in your assessment of the tonal quality of the mids and treble, either in comparison or contrast. I understood that the Golds have a 'softer' or 'sweeter' mid and treble tone. I understand that all four are very new, but when things have some time on them, I'd like your thoughts. The bass is more than competent enough on any of them, I'd wager.

I ask because I was thinking of changing my office system and have been considering a used D120 with a conventional speaker, but then started to wonder if a pair of phantoms would be a better choice. Maximum dance volume is not really a concern, but the tonal character would be of interest. I have not seen a local dealer with whites and golds in the shop at the same time, otherwise I would do this listening test myself.

No rush, thanks.
Damon
Powernode, NAD M32, Cambridge CD transport, Analysis Plus, Nordost, iFi Nova, CSS Criton 1TDX, KEF C62
Vancouver, Canada
Reply
#7
I believe that volume 70 is 0dB attenuation, leading a 0dBFS signal drive the phantom to its full volume SPL wise.

There is roughly 3dB difference between each model, so it is not surprising that to reach a given loudness, necessary for a comparison, you need to crank the non gold higher.

As for the difference in terms of mids, I think we shall not forget that the quality of basses and highs are also affecting how we perceive mids.
I also don’t know exactly what is the transition frequency between the mid range driver and the tweeter, but I would suspect that what is perceive as mids is served by the combination of those two drivers, giving an other explanation why we perceive a difference in that register.

Jean-Marie
MacBook Air M2 -> RAAT/Air -> WiFi -> PLC -> Ethernet -> Devialet 220pro with Core Infinity (upgraded from 120) -> AperturA Armonia
France
Reply
#8
Volume differences are generally perceived as being better. My perceptions may be “colored” by difficulty in volume matching during the comparison. I have both pairs on the same Dialogue - I just tricked it by configuring them as stereo pairs in different rooms. Unfortunately when I transfer the source to the “other room” the volume is not matched and I must adjust it. This takes time and attention and distracts, making the comparison difficult. It’s also possible that what I’m perceiving as a more forward midrange is actually the tweeter.

Interesting that 70 translates to O dB. I had actually noticed with the Elevates that in trying to push the upper limits, I noticed very little additional volume beyond 70. In fact, the dynamic range seemed to compress as if the ceiling remained fixed.

I’ll try to log some more time with them this week and report back.
Reply
#9
And streamy, just to be clear, there is a significant difference at 45-50 between the Gold and the Elevate. In fact it is a dramatic difference. So much so, that the Gold at 50 makes the Elevate sound anemic until you raise the Elevates to the upper 50’s or 60.
Reply
#10
(16-Jan-2018, 03:39)snbeall Wrote: And streamy, just to be clear, there is a significant difference at 45-50 between the Gold and the Elevate. In fact it is a dramatic difference. So much so, that the Gold at 50 makes the Elevate sound anemic until you raise the Elevates to the upper 50’s or 60.

I did the same testing you are doing with a pair of old generation Silvers and the Golds when they came out. My observations in blind testing as well as I could (as you described using two rooms and adjusting the volume subjectively to the same loudness, also measured by a dB meter with pink noise). The difference was very clear and confirmed in blind testing by non ‘audio geeks’ as my wife and my parents (both over 70 years old and untrained music listeners). I attributed the main difference to the new ADH2 circuits and the new tweeter of the Golds. So, with your test results that exactly describe the same tonal differences I experienced there is no better SQ from the Elevates compared to the early genration Whites and Silvers, they had the exact same tonality, but less floor noise. The lows can be better controllered by a better amp stage and my Silvers have in the hights a measurable fade out starting at around 6kHz whereas the Golds are much more linear in the hights up to 20k. But the much higher presence in the mids in my opinion is a DSP tuning or again a difference in the power amp design when the ADH2 Asic is the same as in the Gold. The mid and bass drivers are the same in all three models.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)