Tweet
Introduction
In one?s quest for the perfect speaker (within financial reason), the road is often paved with disappointment in one aspect or another. Our ears are not perfect.. neither are our source components or the recorded media we are playing. So just how close to perfection can we expect a wooden box stuffed with poly, wires, magnets, and cones to be? This speaker is too bright.. That one is dull and lifeless.. It is the audio equivalent of Goldilocks And The Three Bears. As we listen to and evaluate speakers we follow the same path she did. When we drive to the local audio boutique with CD?s in hand... When we punch in our credit card numbers online and sign up for that 30-day in-home trial? The speakers, amps, and processors that we test are our modern-day porridge, chair, and bed. And we all strive to make the right choice. Because no one is deliberately looking for a speaker that is too hard or too soft.
All analogies out of the way, I was introduced to a product that I consider to be ?just right? and beyond. Actually, it?s more accurate to say it is the right one at a much larger price point. The loudspeaker that I?m referring to is the ?6.2F? from Swan. It is a full-range tower easily capable of turning heads and dropping jaws with each pass and with each listen. It is their flagship in that line. And it is my hope with this evaluation that you get an understanding of what kind of presence this speaker makes in a room, both aesthetically and performance-wise. While no piece of audio gear is perfect, the 6.2?s come as close to it as possible at its price.. and even more.
Design
Classy. Sophisticated. Stunning. Just a few adjectives I?d use to describe the outward appearance of the 6.2?s. Standing tall at just under 4 1/2 ft., these rosewood beauties put on a ?shock and awe? campaign that would make Donald Rumsfeld shed a tear.
These are GORGEOUS. I can?t quite tell if it?s just a really well-done laminate or actual rosewood veneer adorning the outside of these lovelies, but I can tell you that whatever it is, it?s perfect. And it is beautifully wrapped around a bentwood cabinet that nearly meets at a rounded point around back. The entire wood finish is then glossed with a fine furniture-grade clear that makes them very elegant.
The front baffle of the 6.2?s (as well as others in the line) is not in congruence with the rest of the loudspeaker materials-wise. A black composite surface runs the full length top to bottom. A similar stripe of the same material also runs down the back spine of the cabinet. I would have preferred to see the wood finish continue around the entire circumference of the speaker. A wood-faced front baffle would make for a better showing for those that like to keep their grilles off, but it?s a minor thing to me since I leave my speakers fully clothed at all times.
Turning to the drivers, dual 8? woofers provide the slam down low. The familiar Danish-made top-mount 1? tweeter that was popularized in the "x.1" line handles the highs. And a new 5? mid-range driver handles what lies between. All of these are tied together nicely with Swan?s sophisticated 4th order crossover network which is key in managing so many different drivers with different ranges. The best speaker components in the world can sound like garbage if the crossover is not done right, and Swan understands this. With the development time they have invested.. let me tell you.. it is done right.
The top and bottom of the ?x.2? line is again graced with piano black caps, but this time the top-mounted tweeter housing is done a little bit better. Like the end cap itself, it is also done in a gloss black finish and there is more of a uniformity of surface texture and appearance now. I would still like to see the top cap and tweeter housing molded into one solid piece some day. Perhaps that would be a cost buster, but it would look seamless and more refined in my opinion.
One design feature that I?m not that fond of is that the speaker binding posts are not on the back of the speaker, but rather are underneath in the middle of the bottom cap. Personally, I like seeing those large posts on the back of my speakers displaying the hefty banana plugs I have. I also don?t like the fact that I now have to think twice about swapping my cables. The entire speaker has to be tilted to get underneath and reach the posts, and this is really a two-person job. I?m always tweaking and testing things, so this is definitely an inconvenience for me.
All in all, the 6.2 is an extremely beautiful piece of art. They are quite large, but with their looks they could live just about anywhere. They are NOT the big black boxes of old or the intrusive industrial anomalies we find so many times in speakers today. No, these are furniture-grade pieces that just so happen to put out GREAT sound as well. So, let?s get on to that part of the discussion, shall we?
Listening
I own several Swan speakers in the Diva line already. The 2.1 bookshelves, the C3 center, the R2 dipoles, and the Sub10 all have full reign in my family room. I am familiar with the company and what to expect of the sound. Or, so I thought. I have been extremely happy with the older Diva line and was expecting more of the same with the new ones, but maybe on a more grand scale with the 6.2?s. What I was not prepared for was the fantastic detail, soundstage, and imaging these speakers created. I have never had the opportunity to hear the 6.1 towers, but the 6.2?s absolutely floored me. My 2.1 bookshelves are quite good, and although I am cognizant of the fact that my next point will be comparing apples to kumquats, I?m going to make it anyway. The 2.1?s do not have anywhere near the imaging that the 6.2?s have. Forgetting size, volume, and heft of sound, the 6.2?s created a soundstage like I?ve rarely heard from speakers costing twice as much. Depth of field was also vastly better on the 6.2?s. Music was completely three-dimensional and tonal separation was masterful. The 2.1?s sound seems very flat and narrow in comparison. Again, it?s probably unfair to pit a full range 3-way tower against a small 2-way bookshelf costing a third of the price. They are two completely different animals. But I am talking about strict presentation here and not an all-encompassing sound interpretation. Anyway, take that comparison however you?d like.
The equipment I will be using for this test was selected from a few different candidates. I ended up choosing Rotel driving components: A 990BX amp (2-channel, 200WPC) and an RC-995 preamp. This is the best overall pairing I have in-house to do a proper evaluation. I also experimented with an older Denon pair consisting of a POA 1500 amp and PRA 1000 preamp (ca. 1980), and these also did quite well.. right up there, in fact, with the Rotels. I originally had the speakers hooked up to a less expensive Denon 2805 receiver. They did admirably in this configuration, but you really do get out what you put in.. and the pure high-current power of the Rotels provided the best performance overall. So, I will be doing all of the testing with this pair.
For the transport and DAC duties I will be using an Onix XCD-99 single disc CD player.
Speaker cables are custom-made with 4-14 gauge conductors and gold bananas at each end. 12-ft. runs.
The testing I?m doing today wil focus on the music reproduction of these speakers as I don?t have them connected to any video source and I do not have a full matching set to evaluate HT anyway. So, it will be just the 6.2 pair. The 6.2's will run full-range without a subwoofer.
The Music
I wanted to select a variety of music, but I definitely wanted tracks that would be good exhibitors in a critical listening test. Yes, it?s always good to listen to speakers with what you like to listen to every day, but it?s also very important to hand pick albums and songs that highlight particular elements. With this in mind, I chose a pretty good mix and will comment on each of them.
First, from James Taylor?s ?Hourglass? album, the song ?Little More Time With You?.... The opening harmonica on this track is really out in front to start the song. To me, it wasn?t mixed the way it was to just be a regular harmonica open, but rather it seems intended to grab you and pull you in to the song. This effect is a real attention-getter that the 6.2?s handle superbly. Again, on the 2.1?s, it?s a great sounding harmonica also. But, it?s just a harmonica and nothing more. There is also a really nice subtle bass line that doesn?t get lost in the shuffle with all the other things going on. James? voice here is also very natural and "live" sounding as if he was in the room with me. Adding to the overall depth were several quick guitar riffs during the song that seemed to dart out at you and then quickly retreat. Fantastic effect.
Next was the fourth track from the same album.. a song called ?Gaia"?. The mood of this one is set within the first few seconds as a building bass movement starts from nothing and picks up along with a faint wind chime in the background. I know that on other speakers I?ve heard, the wind chime was barely present and not very detailed. Here, it definitely was. This song demonstrates some things extremely well. Particularly, soundstage and separation. The stage is extremely wide on this track, and it extended past my speakers to the sidewalls which are 4 feet beyond the speaker itself. All of the vocals and instrumentation was separated clearly. James? voice was coming from dead center with the backup vocals eminating from either side of him. The tenor sax also came from the middle with James and would stay in the background for the most part until there was a solo break. There was one point during the song at the 3:20 mark or so where this took place and the sound of the tenor was all around me. It was to the left, right, and almost directly above all at once.. An incredible feeling! When James was singing, though, his voice was out in front as the dominant force and seemed very close to me. By the sound I perceived that his voice stretched out to within, say, 5 ft. of me. And this despite the fact that the speakers were 12 ft. away! Later in the song, you cannot possibly miss an extremely impactful drum sequence at about the 4:10 mark. Great power exhibited there from the 6.2?s. I had to double-check and make sure my sub was turned off. Also take note of the subtle cello in the background at about 4:45. This, too, is lost on many speakers.
I just love the voice of this next artist.. Natalie Merchant sings on ?Tigerlily", and this song, ?San Andreas Fault"?. It opens with Natalie?s beautiful voice which, it seems, is very close to you. This is a fairly simple song that is good for looking at a speaker?s grandness of stage. Her voice is not only close to you, but it also has a great deal of height to it. It sounds funny, but she sounds as if she?s standing in my listening room, where James may have been sitting on a stool with his guitar. One thing I really like about the tweeter on these speakers is that they make ?S?s? sound very natural and unprocessed. No sibilance at all, which is common for this track on another set of speakers I own.. speakers costing considerably more money.
The next track, also by Natalie, is called ?I May Know The World? and is also off the ?Tigerlily? album? Another pair of speakers I have (the same as mentioned before) has her voice sounding pinched and constricted on this one. The 6.2?s let her highs open up freely and naturally. Throughout the song, in the background, there is a soft kick drum which has nice definition. Natalie?s voice is flat out huge in this song even though it's a fairly gentle track. The entire front wall in my listening room seemed to be projecting her lovely voice. And the guitars, smartly, remained in the background to suppliment her vocals.
Norah Jones (of course) is up next with ?Cold Cold Heart? from the album, ?Come Away With Me"? I know it is partially how the track is recorded, but Norah is sitting on my lap in this one! (not bad, eh?). The constant repetitious bass line is well defined. The accompanying piano is there with Norah, but the two don?t fight each other for dominance. This track allows one to hear some real detail thoughout. You can catch the vibration from an overzealous string pluck.. fingers actually tapping onto the strings just before they strike.. and I think I heard what sounded like Norah licking her lips and then a quick inhale before belting out her next few bars. Good stuff.
The smooth Jazz quartet FourPlay was up next with their track ?Max-O-Man? off their Greatest Hits album? This song has a lot going on all at once and it?s presented well. The first thing I noticed here was the crispness of the highs. I cranked this one up real high and it never got fatiguing. Listen to this one and pick out all of the different instruments being used together at any given time. I heard several cases of impromptu finger snapping by the artists, a faint woodblock tap throughout, and fingers sliding on the guitar strings. This is a very well-produced album and sounds great on these speakers.
Lastly we have The Dave Matthews Band playing ?Let You Down? from their album, ?Crash"? This song also has quite a bit going on, but in a reserved way. Triangles, bongos, multiple acoustic guitars, wood block.. it?s all there. But it?s all soft and subtle. The source of his voice was on a lower plane than, for example, Natalie?s in ?San Andreas Fault?. But it was just as wide. One very cool effect came at about 3:10.. a whistle enters the song and it sounded as though it were directly overhead. It was very cool.
Conclusion
Well, I guess it ultimately comes down to whether or not I recommend the Swan Diva 6.2F's. And the answer is a whole-hearted YES. Not that you have to take my word for it.. after all, who is jephdood? I don?t have a technical background in audio engineering. I am simply basing this "review" from what I perceive to be good sound.
In my opinion, these are an absolute bargain at their price point. Are there some things I?d change about them? Well, sure I guess. Nothing is perfect. But the flaws that I see (if one could even call them that) are minor in comparison to the enjoyment of sound you?ll get from them. My down points are cosmetic design characteristics having nothing to do with the actual sound of the 6.2's. They are merely footnotes in this book called Audio Bliss.
Simply said, if you are looking for a ?classy?, ?sophisticated?, ?stunning? speaker at this price point, I think you need look no further.
Jeff M (aka ?jephdood?)
Audio Enthusiast
Pics
The palette has come!
Ain't that the truth.
Good things come in BIG packages.. :)
All looks well..
So firm.. So FULLY PACKED!
Holy schneikies!!
Nice backside.. :oops:
Beauty
Like looking into a mirror.
Nekkid! :oops:
Awesome
An imposing figure
Thanks for looking..
-Jeff
In one?s quest for the perfect speaker (within financial reason), the road is often paved with disappointment in one aspect or another. Our ears are not perfect.. neither are our source components or the recorded media we are playing. So just how close to perfection can we expect a wooden box stuffed with poly, wires, magnets, and cones to be? This speaker is too bright.. That one is dull and lifeless.. It is the audio equivalent of Goldilocks And The Three Bears. As we listen to and evaluate speakers we follow the same path she did. When we drive to the local audio boutique with CD?s in hand... When we punch in our credit card numbers online and sign up for that 30-day in-home trial? The speakers, amps, and processors that we test are our modern-day porridge, chair, and bed. And we all strive to make the right choice. Because no one is deliberately looking for a speaker that is too hard or too soft.
All analogies out of the way, I was introduced to a product that I consider to be ?just right? and beyond. Actually, it?s more accurate to say it is the right one at a much larger price point. The loudspeaker that I?m referring to is the ?6.2F? from Swan. It is a full-range tower easily capable of turning heads and dropping jaws with each pass and with each listen. It is their flagship in that line. And it is my hope with this evaluation that you get an understanding of what kind of presence this speaker makes in a room, both aesthetically and performance-wise. While no piece of audio gear is perfect, the 6.2?s come as close to it as possible at its price.. and even more.
Design
Classy. Sophisticated. Stunning. Just a few adjectives I?d use to describe the outward appearance of the 6.2?s. Standing tall at just under 4 1/2 ft., these rosewood beauties put on a ?shock and awe? campaign that would make Donald Rumsfeld shed a tear.
These are GORGEOUS. I can?t quite tell if it?s just a really well-done laminate or actual rosewood veneer adorning the outside of these lovelies, but I can tell you that whatever it is, it?s perfect. And it is beautifully wrapped around a bentwood cabinet that nearly meets at a rounded point around back. The entire wood finish is then glossed with a fine furniture-grade clear that makes them very elegant.
The front baffle of the 6.2?s (as well as others in the line) is not in congruence with the rest of the loudspeaker materials-wise. A black composite surface runs the full length top to bottom. A similar stripe of the same material also runs down the back spine of the cabinet. I would have preferred to see the wood finish continue around the entire circumference of the speaker. A wood-faced front baffle would make for a better showing for those that like to keep their grilles off, but it?s a minor thing to me since I leave my speakers fully clothed at all times.
Turning to the drivers, dual 8? woofers provide the slam down low. The familiar Danish-made top-mount 1? tweeter that was popularized in the "x.1" line handles the highs. And a new 5? mid-range driver handles what lies between. All of these are tied together nicely with Swan?s sophisticated 4th order crossover network which is key in managing so many different drivers with different ranges. The best speaker components in the world can sound like garbage if the crossover is not done right, and Swan understands this. With the development time they have invested.. let me tell you.. it is done right.
The top and bottom of the ?x.2? line is again graced with piano black caps, but this time the top-mounted tweeter housing is done a little bit better. Like the end cap itself, it is also done in a gloss black finish and there is more of a uniformity of surface texture and appearance now. I would still like to see the top cap and tweeter housing molded into one solid piece some day. Perhaps that would be a cost buster, but it would look seamless and more refined in my opinion.
One design feature that I?m not that fond of is that the speaker binding posts are not on the back of the speaker, but rather are underneath in the middle of the bottom cap. Personally, I like seeing those large posts on the back of my speakers displaying the hefty banana plugs I have. I also don?t like the fact that I now have to think twice about swapping my cables. The entire speaker has to be tilted to get underneath and reach the posts, and this is really a two-person job. I?m always tweaking and testing things, so this is definitely an inconvenience for me.
All in all, the 6.2 is an extremely beautiful piece of art. They are quite large, but with their looks they could live just about anywhere. They are NOT the big black boxes of old or the intrusive industrial anomalies we find so many times in speakers today. No, these are furniture-grade pieces that just so happen to put out GREAT sound as well. So, let?s get on to that part of the discussion, shall we?
Listening
I own several Swan speakers in the Diva line already. The 2.1 bookshelves, the C3 center, the R2 dipoles, and the Sub10 all have full reign in my family room. I am familiar with the company and what to expect of the sound. Or, so I thought. I have been extremely happy with the older Diva line and was expecting more of the same with the new ones, but maybe on a more grand scale with the 6.2?s. What I was not prepared for was the fantastic detail, soundstage, and imaging these speakers created. I have never had the opportunity to hear the 6.1 towers, but the 6.2?s absolutely floored me. My 2.1 bookshelves are quite good, and although I am cognizant of the fact that my next point will be comparing apples to kumquats, I?m going to make it anyway. The 2.1?s do not have anywhere near the imaging that the 6.2?s have. Forgetting size, volume, and heft of sound, the 6.2?s created a soundstage like I?ve rarely heard from speakers costing twice as much. Depth of field was also vastly better on the 6.2?s. Music was completely three-dimensional and tonal separation was masterful. The 2.1?s sound seems very flat and narrow in comparison. Again, it?s probably unfair to pit a full range 3-way tower against a small 2-way bookshelf costing a third of the price. They are two completely different animals. But I am talking about strict presentation here and not an all-encompassing sound interpretation. Anyway, take that comparison however you?d like.
The equipment I will be using for this test was selected from a few different candidates. I ended up choosing Rotel driving components: A 990BX amp (2-channel, 200WPC) and an RC-995 preamp. This is the best overall pairing I have in-house to do a proper evaluation. I also experimented with an older Denon pair consisting of a POA 1500 amp and PRA 1000 preamp (ca. 1980), and these also did quite well.. right up there, in fact, with the Rotels. I originally had the speakers hooked up to a less expensive Denon 2805 receiver. They did admirably in this configuration, but you really do get out what you put in.. and the pure high-current power of the Rotels provided the best performance overall. So, I will be doing all of the testing with this pair.
For the transport and DAC duties I will be using an Onix XCD-99 single disc CD player.
Speaker cables are custom-made with 4-14 gauge conductors and gold bananas at each end. 12-ft. runs.
The testing I?m doing today wil focus on the music reproduction of these speakers as I don?t have them connected to any video source and I do not have a full matching set to evaluate HT anyway. So, it will be just the 6.2 pair. The 6.2's will run full-range without a subwoofer.
The Music
I wanted to select a variety of music, but I definitely wanted tracks that would be good exhibitors in a critical listening test. Yes, it?s always good to listen to speakers with what you like to listen to every day, but it?s also very important to hand pick albums and songs that highlight particular elements. With this in mind, I chose a pretty good mix and will comment on each of them.
First, from James Taylor?s ?Hourglass? album, the song ?Little More Time With You?.... The opening harmonica on this track is really out in front to start the song. To me, it wasn?t mixed the way it was to just be a regular harmonica open, but rather it seems intended to grab you and pull you in to the song. This effect is a real attention-getter that the 6.2?s handle superbly. Again, on the 2.1?s, it?s a great sounding harmonica also. But, it?s just a harmonica and nothing more. There is also a really nice subtle bass line that doesn?t get lost in the shuffle with all the other things going on. James? voice here is also very natural and "live" sounding as if he was in the room with me. Adding to the overall depth were several quick guitar riffs during the song that seemed to dart out at you and then quickly retreat. Fantastic effect.
Next was the fourth track from the same album.. a song called ?Gaia"?. The mood of this one is set within the first few seconds as a building bass movement starts from nothing and picks up along with a faint wind chime in the background. I know that on other speakers I?ve heard, the wind chime was barely present and not very detailed. Here, it definitely was. This song demonstrates some things extremely well. Particularly, soundstage and separation. The stage is extremely wide on this track, and it extended past my speakers to the sidewalls which are 4 feet beyond the speaker itself. All of the vocals and instrumentation was separated clearly. James? voice was coming from dead center with the backup vocals eminating from either side of him. The tenor sax also came from the middle with James and would stay in the background for the most part until there was a solo break. There was one point during the song at the 3:20 mark or so where this took place and the sound of the tenor was all around me. It was to the left, right, and almost directly above all at once.. An incredible feeling! When James was singing, though, his voice was out in front as the dominant force and seemed very close to me. By the sound I perceived that his voice stretched out to within, say, 5 ft. of me. And this despite the fact that the speakers were 12 ft. away! Later in the song, you cannot possibly miss an extremely impactful drum sequence at about the 4:10 mark. Great power exhibited there from the 6.2?s. I had to double-check and make sure my sub was turned off. Also take note of the subtle cello in the background at about 4:45. This, too, is lost on many speakers.
I just love the voice of this next artist.. Natalie Merchant sings on ?Tigerlily", and this song, ?San Andreas Fault"?. It opens with Natalie?s beautiful voice which, it seems, is very close to you. This is a fairly simple song that is good for looking at a speaker?s grandness of stage. Her voice is not only close to you, but it also has a great deal of height to it. It sounds funny, but she sounds as if she?s standing in my listening room, where James may have been sitting on a stool with his guitar. One thing I really like about the tweeter on these speakers is that they make ?S?s? sound very natural and unprocessed. No sibilance at all, which is common for this track on another set of speakers I own.. speakers costing considerably more money.
The next track, also by Natalie, is called ?I May Know The World? and is also off the ?Tigerlily? album? Another pair of speakers I have (the same as mentioned before) has her voice sounding pinched and constricted on this one. The 6.2?s let her highs open up freely and naturally. Throughout the song, in the background, there is a soft kick drum which has nice definition. Natalie?s voice is flat out huge in this song even though it's a fairly gentle track. The entire front wall in my listening room seemed to be projecting her lovely voice. And the guitars, smartly, remained in the background to suppliment her vocals.
Norah Jones (of course) is up next with ?Cold Cold Heart? from the album, ?Come Away With Me"? I know it is partially how the track is recorded, but Norah is sitting on my lap in this one! (not bad, eh?). The constant repetitious bass line is well defined. The accompanying piano is there with Norah, but the two don?t fight each other for dominance. This track allows one to hear some real detail thoughout. You can catch the vibration from an overzealous string pluck.. fingers actually tapping onto the strings just before they strike.. and I think I heard what sounded like Norah licking her lips and then a quick inhale before belting out her next few bars. Good stuff.
The smooth Jazz quartet FourPlay was up next with their track ?Max-O-Man? off their Greatest Hits album? This song has a lot going on all at once and it?s presented well. The first thing I noticed here was the crispness of the highs. I cranked this one up real high and it never got fatiguing. Listen to this one and pick out all of the different instruments being used together at any given time. I heard several cases of impromptu finger snapping by the artists, a faint woodblock tap throughout, and fingers sliding on the guitar strings. This is a very well-produced album and sounds great on these speakers.
Lastly we have The Dave Matthews Band playing ?Let You Down? from their album, ?Crash"? This song also has quite a bit going on, but in a reserved way. Triangles, bongos, multiple acoustic guitars, wood block.. it?s all there. But it?s all soft and subtle. The source of his voice was on a lower plane than, for example, Natalie?s in ?San Andreas Fault?. But it was just as wide. One very cool effect came at about 3:10.. a whistle enters the song and it sounded as though it were directly overhead. It was very cool.
Conclusion
Well, I guess it ultimately comes down to whether or not I recommend the Swan Diva 6.2F's. And the answer is a whole-hearted YES. Not that you have to take my word for it.. after all, who is jephdood? I don?t have a technical background in audio engineering. I am simply basing this "review" from what I perceive to be good sound.
In my opinion, these are an absolute bargain at their price point. Are there some things I?d change about them? Well, sure I guess. Nothing is perfect. But the flaws that I see (if one could even call them that) are minor in comparison to the enjoyment of sound you?ll get from them. My down points are cosmetic design characteristics having nothing to do with the actual sound of the 6.2's. They are merely footnotes in this book called Audio Bliss.
Simply said, if you are looking for a ?classy?, ?sophisticated?, ?stunning? speaker at this price point, I think you need look no further.
Jeff M (aka ?jephdood?)
Audio Enthusiast
Pics
The palette has come!
Ain't that the truth.
Good things come in BIG packages.. :)
All looks well..
So firm.. So FULLY PACKED!
Holy schneikies!!
Nice backside.. :oops:
Beauty
Like looking into a mirror.
Nekkid! :oops:
Awesome
An imposing figure
Thanks for looking..
-Jeff
Comment