Edifier R2000DB review (WIP)

[wwenze]

In Singapore its currently SGD $259 vs $639; both currently 10% off, but in USA it is USD $249 vs $399

So already we are paying too much for Audioengine here...

That aside,

The closest I had to an Audioengine A5+ is a passive Audioengine A5... and people on the internet say they sound the same, so if we can take their word...

Each's weakness is the other's strong point - A5 is weak in bass (and both sides of frequency extension actually) while R2000DB is strong, but A5's mid and overall sound is very good. Some have commented it is slightly mid-heavy and I may have to agree, but that is nothing wrong because I own both warm speakers and dry speakers and they both have people who think they are "neutral".

With the A5, I couldn't find anything wrong with the sound. Yea, if you compare it against other $500 speakers (It wasn't priced at $700 back then) you will find other speakers do things that are expected of speakers of this price range better. But if you upgraded from cheaper products to A5, it is hard to find anything where A5 is inferior. Yea if you went from 2.1 to A5 you will find the lack of bass very obvious, but you can still live with it; it's the kind of sound that can be accepted very easily.

Overall I would consider A5 (and by induction, A5+) as a better speaker; first impressions it wins, if both are given EQ A5 is likely to win, the only loss is probably the bass because it is hard to increase bass without causing lots of things to screw up.

But, they are very close, especially if you consider how good R2000DB's bass is. Close enough to let personal preference decide.

If you came from dry or bright speakers (*cough*Soundsticks*cough*), you may prefer R2000DB's sound. If you came from 2.1, you will appreciate R2000DB's bass. If you came from 2.0, well 2.0 has dry and warm ones too, then A5 is good. (I think it is more neutral than warm, but my neutral seems to be warm to other people so...)

 

[finclk82]

I went with the r2000db. Will see how it goes. It is sold for 259 currently on lazada.

 

[wwenze]

If you don't like the dry/bright/screechy sound of R2000DB, here is the EQ to make it into a warmer speaker. Specifically, I EQ-ed it to follow Usher S-520.

Difference between R2000DB and S-520 (Close-mic of woofer)

Since this is close-mic of woofer, anything above 2kHz can be ignored.

It is clear that we have a shortage below 500Hz. (So my ears weren't lying.)

So, applying this:

Post-EQ result: Difference between R2000DB and S-520 (Close-mic of woofer)

Not bad for a first iteration.

Note that S-520 has bass boost enabled.

Additionally, if the sound becomes too muffled after the bass boost, increase the higher frequencies according to taste.

Spoiler

If R2000DB and S-520 both don't have their own bass boost enabled, the result of the difference is this:

 

[YouHeypiCanLiao]

How come didn’t review Luna hd

Posted with my chat bot HardwareZone Forums app

 

[wwenze]

Post-EQ subjective listening
10dB with a Q of 0.7 is a big EQ. But this also fixed a big problem with the sonic signature. Now this is something I can comfortably recommend without reservation, even if you prefer warmer speakers.

That said, it is still clear that this a class below the ~$500 price range speakers. The bass boost, feels more like trying to drown out the dryness instead of fixing it. The sock-in-the-mouth-ness is still there. I mean, I have had M200MKII and A5+ in this room now, and even with the EQ, the R2000DB is clearly a class lower. But very close. Probably stepping on the toes of A5+ sound-wise, post-EQ.

I didn't bother with tuning the bass since close-mic wouldn't work, so please apply appropriate fixes on your own. Visit this thread to do it by ear.

And, because I didn't fix the bass, the bass is all peaky and uncontrolled since R2000DB has a lot of it. I mean, there is a 68Hz peak in my room but I didn't bother with S-520 since it works well with the natural roll-off, but since R2000DB still has lots of bass, it will come and bite you if your room's resonance isn't taken care of. Not exactly a problem of the speaker, and I'm too lazy to fix the bass.

With the sound signature fixed, now I don't mind having to use it if I have to. I mean, previously I would still use it if I have to since there aren't alternatives, but now I will be able to use it without complaining about the sound signature.

No change to the score tho, still a 4.5-star, because I gave that score while avoiding subtracting score due to personal preference for sound signature / room effects. Just that I'm more happy with that 4.5-star now. Even with the sock-in-the-mouthness, I am hard-pressed to remember any speaker that has this good sound at this price range - primarily the 5" bookshelf form factor allows it to handily beat other solutions (which is a trait shared with the opposition, unsurprisingly); 2.1 can have better sound on the whole, but once the subwoofer crossover frequency and directionality show themselves, you will want bigger bookshelves instead. So it still boils down to Edifier vs Swans, lots of digital inputs vs just analog input (and an amplifier that likes to kill itself), and so we arrive at the conclusion which is also the definition of the score - Worth every $, lacking in alternatives.

 

[GreenArrow2002]

Nice writeup on the R2000DB. Recently just purchased this and is rather happy with the performance. Like to seek your advice on the use of an external DAC with this speaker. Do you think it's necessary to have one since this speaker comes with its own DAC.

 

[wwenze]

From the technical standpoint, no. It doesn't just has its own DAC; the input to the amp chip itself is digital. The digital input signal is then used to generate a PWM output.

 

[GreenArrow2002]

From the technical standpoint, no. It doesn't just has its own DAC; the input to the amp chip itself is digital. The digital input signal is then used to generate a PWM output.

Sorry bro, that's chim for me to understand In simple layman term, a external DAC is good or bad. Will this improve on the performance of the R2000DB?

 

[wwenze]

Most speakers:
Digital data --> DAC --> analog data --> amp --> speaker

R2000DB:
Digital data --> amp --> speaker

If you add a DAC it becomes
Digital data --> DAC --> analog data --> ADC --> digital data --> amp --> speaker

 

[benedium]

For noob like me it looks like no need to add external DAC haha

 

[OOJ]

The R2000DB only in black?

 

[regular]

Thank you for your comprehensive review! Wondering what your thoughts are on R1850DB vs R2000DB? Would the mids and vocals be better on R1850DB? Very torn between these two, and it seems like R2000DB is bassier but lacks details according to the recording by Digital Stereophony YouTube

 

[meandyou]

The R2000DB only in black?

Black And Brown

 

[wwenze]

Thank you for your comprehensive review! Wondering what your thoughts are on R1850DB vs R2000DB? Would the mids and vocals be better on R1850DB? Very torn between these two, and it seems like R2000DB is bassier but lacks details according to the recording by Digital Stereophony YouTube

I always recommend bigger woofer if possible (up to 5"), it is needed for the overall sound signature. The bigger tweeter on the R2000DB also helps performance in general.

If anything I've learnt from my own recording of speakers (and subsequently stopped doing that for reviews and archival purposes), is that the recording setup (mic, plus room and positioning) can affect the sound so much that the recorded sound can be opposite of real life i.e. Speaker A sounds brighter than B in recording yet Speaker B sounds brighter than A in real life.

Most of the perceived differences of "detail" can be attributed to different frequency response, which can be adjusted or even just affected by positioning. Do your own experiment: Get a speaker, use your player EQ or download an EQ (EqualizerAPO recommended for system-level). Remove ALL bass below 200Hz. And suddenly the mud is gone. Or add 6dB to everything over 8000Hz and hear the "detail".
So "detail" usually coincides with "too much treble" "not enough bass". There is also the concept of objectively more detail i.e. not due to frequency response, but when the sound has passed through the mic, that detail isn't there anymore. Meanwhile imperfect FR will definitely be there.
So don't think too much into how the sound subjectively sounds via recording. Even if the relative sounds between them are recorded correctly (which I am grateful for recordings of), you won't know which is better for your room unless you already own one of them.

Bass (and treble) extension and volume however, these are objective performance, if you don't have them you can't squeeze them out. And they play a huge role in the overall sound, even if they make the sound more muddy or less-detailed in comparison. Ultimately, the overall sound is most important.

 

[regular]

Thank you for the detailed explanation and writeup! It really helped to clarify my decision to get the R2000DB. Wondering if you can advise on purchasing from Taobao or local Qoo10/Lazada/Shopee. Taobao price is 800 RMB which works out to 160 SGD and is significantly cheaper than local price at 289 SGD, 219 SGD during sale. Any advice with regards to purchasing from Taobao? Warranty will definitely be affected as it is restricted to China. Also, an adapter has to be used for the power cable (China plug) which makes it slightly inconvenient. But the price is significantly lower which makes it a great steal if I'm willing to take the chance that the unit I get is not defective (1% chance).

 

[abelfonseca]

Look ma, no DAC

At the heart of R2000DB's amplification system is a TAS5508C 8-Channel Digital Audio PWM Processor that takes in serial audio data (For convenience let's just call it I2S) and outputs PWM which is used to drive a digital amplifier power stage (hidden underneath a heatsink).

Many speakers with DSP and/or digital crossover just use the DSP/digital crossover for what they are. Convert the incoming audio to digital, do the processing, convert back to analog to feed the amp. There are multiple reasons for this, cost is one, but there are valid performance reasons too. Like for example if the amp stage is a class AB so you would need to convert it back to analog.

I am perfectly okay if the DSP-ed data is eventually fed to a DAC and converted back to analog before feeding an analog-input amp. There are legit technical reasons, and is evident by the many speakers that do use this configuration. (So yea, miniDSP users, you're good.)

What I find not perfectly okay, is if your DSP is digital-input (Like, if you're going to put an ADC between the analog input and the DSP), and you do not provide a digital-input, hence forcing the user to perform an unnecessary digital --DAC--> analog --ADC--> digital conversion, then what the 7th planet of the solar system?

However, I also understand that digital connections are more expensive than analog connections. And analog inputs are still needed since most products don't have digital outputs. So if the speaker is cheaper, I can accept it not having digital inputs even if it uses DSP. Although it still makes me sad. Bose speakers, iLoud, and LSR305 are examples of such. And in the case of studio monitors, many equipment may not have digital out, so a digital in may not be useful for those.

Either way, if you can connect a digital connection to a speaker using DSP, then it is akin to having a perfect DAC feeding a perfect ADC, so why not. It's like saving $15,000 on the perfect DAC, and that is still useless anyway because the ADC inside the speaker is far from perfect.

And R2000DB allows you to do that, and it goes one step further by using a digital-input amp so you can avoid the final DAC too. But this approach has its pros and cons, and the fact that digital-input amplifiers are rare and only started being popular recently shows that it is not easy to implement too. The technical talk of this topic will be long, so maybe later.

tl;dr - You save a DAC by using R2000DB.

wwenze, thanks a lot for this great review on the r2000db man. You have described and dissected these speakers like no one else on the internet, and trust me, I have read a lot about these.

Even though a lot of the tech stuff you mention goes somewhat over my head, I was really intrigued by the DAC section, or lack of it. If I may, I would like to ask you about the analog rca inputs. How do these get processed by the r2000db? Do they remain analog all through out the audio chain inside the speaker, or is the RCA input converted to digital (pcm?) along the way?

Even though I mostly listen to digital music, I want to connect the analog inputs on these to my turntable through a phono preamp, and well, I would prefer if the signal would remain analog all the way to the speakers.

Thanks again for taking you time to write such a detailed and awesome review.

Cheers,
Abel

 

[wwenze]

Analog inputs are converted to digital signal by PCM9211

It can't remain analog forever because this speaker has DSP... and DSP can only be done on digital data.

That said, many good speakers do the same thing. LSR305 for example, only has analog inputs, which is converted to digital by CS5341.

 

[benedium]

I also wanna say kudos and thanks to wwenze for sharing so kindly and generously all this time. Even though I'm such a lazy and slow learner, I still really appreciate his posts.

 

[abelfonseca]

Analog inputs are converted to digital signal by PCM9211

It can't remain analog forever because this speaker has DSP... and DSP can only be done on digital data.

That said, many good speakers do the same thing. LSR305 for example, only has analog inputs, which is converted to digital by CS5341.

Thanks for your reply!

I see my suspicion is true then. I have a friend that owns this pair of speakers and they sound great. I was greatly considering buying them from him as he wants to move to something bigger. He has them connected to a hifiberry dac on a raspberry pi via the rca inputs and I always suspected hes was double DACing (as bad as double dipping?). I see I was partially wrong in a way, although the digital amp is somewhat of a dac from what I understand from your posts.

I wouldnt consider myself a purist but the idea of that the analog signal of my turntable will be converted to digital at some point of the chain makes me uneasy. Like it defeats the purpose somewhat of analog audio. Maybe this is really just philosophical and has no basis in reality? But many things in audio are, and our brain makes them matter, justified or not.

I personally really believe analog audio is more pleasing and less fatiguing to listen to than digital, even though it not might actually sound better. Will this eliminate that pleasing aspect of vinyl records by converting the signal to digital? I really dont know, it is so subjective and so prone to brain trickery that it is very difficult to prove something like this factually.

I am on the fence about buying these, but I do think they sound great. Decisions decisions!!!!

 

[lxXXxl]

Ouch for the treble. Can normal user who don't wanna tinker with EQ use the treble knob to achieve good enough result?

And did you have the unedited FR of the r2000db? I only see the post EQ results posted?