2. speakers
  3. 128684-84248

ProAc comparison

What are your thoughts on comparing different ProAc models? I’m currently on my 3rd pair.

I started out with the Tablette 2000, which was a superb value for the money, and a wonderfully musical speaker with surprising bass for its size. I kind of regret selling them, because I think they’d be just about the perfect bedroom system speakers. However, I always had these on hardwood floors, so I suspect they could be a bit soft in carpeted rooms.

Then I got a good deal on a pair of Response 2S, which I had been coveting since 1998. The Response 2S had better extension in both directions than the Tablette 2000, and I found them to be considerably brighter, to the point where I actually had to lay down a carpet on top of the hardwood floor of their initial room. But they certainly had all of the musicality of the Tablettes, and seemed to have no sacrifices once the tweeter was tamed. Then I moved into a bigger space. My current living room is 17’ x 17’, and carpeted. The carpet here eats high frequencies for lunch, but the Response 2S proved to be absolutely phenomenal imagers in here. They were throwing images well beyond the walls.

After hearing the Proac Studio 140, and being completely blown-away by it, I found a good deal on the Studio 140 Mk. II, and jumped on it. What I found was a trade-off from the Response 2S. I got an extra 10 Hz of bass extension, which has proved to be deeper than expected. I got better high-frequency extension, as well. The Studio 140 Mk. II are also much more dynamic, and more efficient. I can really feel the music with these speakers in a way that I couldn’t with the Response 2S. But the Response 2S were much better at imaging. They were warmer, had better bass-mid integration, and were much better at presenting vocal textures. The Studio 140 Mk. II are much better with instrumental textures. There’s no clear winner here - it really seems to be a matter of taste. For my part, I’ve decided to stick with the Studio 140 Mk. II for now, as the dynamics, clarity, and rhythmic drive of them work really well for the music I listen to. But I can really see tube lovers going for the Response 2S.

My one mythical lust object in the ProAc lineup remains the Response 2.5. I heard them in the late-’90s, and I have never heard anything else that did such an amazing job with acoustic bass texture. I really wonder how they hold up in the context of a modern system, and how they compare to newer models. I listened to the Response D25 and was not impressed. They sounded sluggish and muddy in comparison, despite the dealer telling me they had been improved.

So what are your experiences comparing different ProAc models? Which ones have really stood out to you, and which do you covet as part of your dream system?
128x128bainbmil
kink56's avatar
kink56
91 posts
 
I have had the 1. EBT (Extended bass tablette w/ two midrange drivers) 2. Original Super Tower, but I replaced the Ti tweeter with the same tweeter used in the Tablette. 3. Response 1S. 4. Response 2S. And 5. Response D2.  ALL of them had incredible imaging and soundstage. The Super Towers being the best even in that regard. 


1. I loved it! But the bass was still too lean even to integrate/blend in well with my ENTEC subwoofers. 
2. The best (after tweeter mod) speakers I have ever had.  It almost had enough bass to render the ENTECs redundant. 

3. Sweet but also not enough bass to blend.

4. My second favorite ProAc, the warmest of all of these.  

5. Too damned hot, the first and only ProAc I have ever heard that caused me fatigue. 
obergaiman's avatar
obergaiman
6 posts
 
gary_c
For anyone contemplating ProAc, one of their strengths is imaging (very spatial, almost holographic), but they can be fussy with pairing of electronics and cables. The good thing as well as the bad thing about them is that they will show the faults of everything else in your system, but I like that characteristic. Some people may feel it’s because they’re not as balanced or neutral as other brands, but I feel it’s because they are revealing and I find that a good trait. And although they may sound warm in some respects, they can also sound forward. But I've found that I prefer this quality, because they sound good at lower volumes (the D38 also plays loud just fine).
I agree with more or less everything in this paragraph. I haven't much experience with the older Response or Studio range, but owned a pair of Response D30Rs for nearly five years. They performed very well and I had no complaints or issues with them, but last November I traded them in for a pair of K6s. As rsypder said above:

The K-6 was in sound a completely different speaker from the bass up.  Completely and seemlessly coherent/balanced.  Also, I have yet to hear a speaker with a footprint as small as the K-6 that goes as deep, full and controlled in the bottom end.
I had also upgraded my CD player two months previously (to a Metronome CDt-8 S), but my pre- and power amps remained the same. Well, the long and the short of it is that the K6s were able to demonstrate a great deal more of my system's strengths (and possibly weaknesses too) than the D30Rs - and, as mentioned, I never knew the latter to be caught napping. I was considering upgrading the amps too, but after a month or so with the K6s properly broken in I changed my mind. Just like some of us here are proud of '90s speakers till today, I can recommend with full confidence the K6s, which may well stay in my system for the next 15 years ... though I hear there is a new version, the K6 Signature, out this month. At the Bristol Hi-Fi Show they were listed at five pounds short of £20,000.

In case anyone wonders why I didn't get the K8s, 1) they would have been too large and powerful for my room, and 2) they were far beyond my budget anyway.
sbrownnw
686 posts
 
Giving a great thread a bump.  I would really like to hear the DT8s vs my 148s.  It is interesting that some of the 2.5 owners mentioned their speakers bottoming out easily.  I experienced this with the 125 used ones I took home for demo and the D18 I demoed in store.  I don't think the DT8s go quite as low and I was assured the dome tweeters are the same in the 148s and Reference line (including the DT8).

Here is the gear I use with my 148s (everything is 2 channel):

Audio Refinement Pre 5 (by YBA)
Audio Refinement Multi 5
Audio Refinement Tuner
Modified RP6 with GT subplatter, Herbie Mat and AT-33PTG/II
Jasmine LP2 mkII phono stage
Mogami speaker cables (2921 with gold BFAs in biwire config)
Mogami RCAs (2549 with KLEI Copper Harmony or Furutech 126g)
Signal Cable MagicPower power cords
Soundocity SEV9 outriggers for stabilizing my 148s

Also, if you have DC on your line like I do (makes my preamp transformer hum) try the Emotiva CMX-2.  
itzhak1969
515 posts
 
I heard all speakers you mentioned ,The DT8 is by far better than the D18 and the 148 , What HiFi magazine mentioned this speakers the best in its price in 2018 and 2019 and rightly so they do go low , has deep bass and excellent mid their soundstage is unbelievable huge certainly the best speakers I ever heard in this price level .I found the D18 speakers interesting and musical only with tube amp but deep bass and dynamics are not their strength.finally the 148 are the only ever Proac speakers that I heard and didn’t like at all they’re too aggressive and their mid is blur and messy the former 140 mk2 which I owned till 2 years ago where much better . currently I own the D30RS wonderfull speakers very neutral, natural and balanced.
More to discover