|
Today's car audiophile never had it so good. In any system, speakers
establish the basis for quality of sound. There are so many speakers in our
local market, and with such a wide choice, how do we choose the correct
speaker? However, there are difficulties when choosing the right speaker.
Go to any of the installation shops around the island and you'd most
probably be more confused by the varied recommendations of each shop. Here,
we test speaker drive units (a loudspeaker usually consists of drive units:
a Tweeter and a woofer or more, the enclosure and a crossover-Ed.) from
three different brands available locally. The comparison
criteria-price range of between $300.00 to $400.00 and a 6.5-inch
midrange-Tweeter combination.
The chosen three are:
1) CDT Cambria CA-60
2) MBQuart DKC116
3) Boston Rally RC620
All three makes use butyl rubber surrounds for their woofers to fight the
damaging effect of both ultraviolet rays from the sun and high humidity.
Butyl rubber will not break down under our strenuous climate unlike
conventional foam rubber surrounds. MB Quart and Cambria woofer cones are
made of polypropylene while Boston Rally uses a material known as
non-hygroscopic copolymer, which is claimed to be water proof.
For the Tweeter section, all three makers use different technologies. CDTAudio which makes the Cambria speakers, has a 1" silk dome design with
a neodymium magnet and a Ferro fluid filled voice coil gap to give a higher
power handling capability in a compact driver.
MBQuart's 0.5" Tweeter is mounted centrally of the woofer, making it the only coaxial in this
threesome. Its dome is made of pure titanium with neodymium magnets. As for
Boston Rally, they employ their proprietary Kortec dome Tweeter, also with
neodymium magnets with Ferro fluid cooled voice coil.
MBQuart has the lowest power handling capability of the three. The DKC116is rated with a power range of 50-120W)rms) while the Boston Rally has a
whooping power range of 20-275W (rms) with the Cambria lying somewhere in
between.
Each of the three speakers' boasts some technological differences that is
stated in their own technical jargon. However, at the end of the day, to
the audiophile, the result of al this technological hype is-how does it all
sound. Onward to the comparison.
The speakers were hooked up through a switchboard and powered directly by
Alpine's single disc head unit's amplifier. In order to keep the signals
clean, there were no other power amplifiers present. It is no doubt that
with good amplifiers, the speakers would shine further. The speakers were
mounted in similar boxes.
Different types of music were used to test the speakers. They
included instrumental tracks from saxophonist Kenny G, pianist Richard
Clayderman, violinist Vanessa Mae and the Cincinnato Pops Orchestra. Pop music was
taken care by the likes of Britney Spears' Crazy track and Michael
Jackson's Thriller.
Playing the tracks from Kenney G through the Cambria CA-60, the most
immediate realization was that the speakers had a wonderfully flat
response, with accurate reproduction of the music and a lot of detail.
Kanny's breath running through the valves of the soprano saxophone could be
distinguished clearly. The saxophone sound had a real presence and oomph.
Switching to the DKC116, clearly the emphasis on the higher frequencies.
There was slight harshness and it rose when the volume was turned up.
However, I could feel the music being very close to me, very upfront. TheRC620, on the other hand, had a softer and tighter bass. But, it too
succumbed to some harshness and the notes were too shrill,
The tracks from Vanessa Mae's violent Storm proved too much for the DKC116,with the strings sounding muddled when it got too fast. Boston's speakers
were pretty accurate but never matching the real-like sounds emitted from
Cambria's The harmonics of the strings were crystalline and the bass, real.
All three sets produced good imaging. But the imaging and depth were even
better with Cambria's Contoured Dispersion Technology, putting them one
step ahead of the competition. This was made all the more apparent in the
orchestral pieces where you could feel each instrument' location on stage.
While vocals sounded a little hollow through Boston's speakers, the Cambria
reproduced it warmly and naturally. Although MBQuart speakers also produced
the vocals clearly, there were some frequency response peaks, which could
be detected to be at a higher output, made sound it slightly unbalanced.
As in any audio component, speaker's choice is dependent on the type of
music most favored by the listener. Each speaker has a different
characteristic, but was judged by how accurate or how close to the original
recording it could produce. Also, it must be sufficiently sensitive to the
smallest of signals and able to reproduce the most dynamic pieces of
music. A good speaker will give a clean and well-balanced reproduction of the
music, adding nothing unnatural to the music and being even across the
music spectrum. The bass should be weighty and real, the treble crystalline
and the overall sound, transparent.
As an overall package, the Cambria CA-60 would have to come out tops in
this comparison. Second and third places are more difficult to
differentiate as each have their own area of strengths. Well, after hearing
the music from the Cambrias, all I can think of will be to spend my next
$300.00 to $400.00 to change my current front speakers.
Note: All speakers were sponsored by Ever-li Auto and Accessories Pte LTD.
Simon Oh.
|
