Wharfedale Diamond 220 vs Monitor Audio Bronze 2 SOUND DEMO

[@totizedger]

The Wharfedales have clearer mids without a doubt, in the first song you can hear more clarity and detail on the Guitar for example while the Monitor Audio mids sounds recessed and cloudy. The Wharfedales is an easy winner here, no competition at all, it also sounds very natural

[@mykeldg]

surprised how well the wharfedales did. I preferred them over the larger MA in this demo. its sounds more transparent & textured despite having a smoother sound. the MA seem to have smeared mids in comparison.

[@cybergod77]

Wharfedale Diamond 220 sounds more natural & musical (especially evident on track 4)

[@rodplanet5901]

2nd time listening to this review. I really like the wharfs over the bronze2

[@YGDification]

Wharfedale 225 is from another planet for the price !The Monitor audio bronze 2 has a depper bass in the lows, but overall, the mids and hight's of the WDiamond 225 are much clear !I have to this baby's (WD 225) and i'm very satisfied with !

[@freezak3864]

Is WD 225 much better than WD 220 in the lows (provided i can find a used one somewhere) seeing how i will have to use them without a sub? i am living in an apartment for now.

[@YGDification]

@@freezak3864 WD 225 have more than enough bass for an apartment !If you need more buy an active sub ( but is no need!)

[@freezak3864]

@@YGDification That's cool! what about the WD 220 from the video?

[@YGDification]

@@freezak3864 WD is OK, but WD 225 is another level superior !(in the bass department !) At vocals and heights is the same !

[@wkb8409]

I have it wharfedale 220. I wnat to caompare other speaker but i cant find other demo review. Now i had good decision buy to diamond 220 speaker. Thanks for your speaker compare demo. I think this demo was very objective campare demo.

[@Kryptonitetay]

Wharfedale more sweet and complete, But still prefer to 225 than 220

[@johnsams1388]

The Wharfedale Diamond 220 sounds great through my Wharfedale diamond 220 XD

[@freeair7292]

😆

[@kirilkirilov7236]

🤣🤣🤣🤣

[@Synthematix]

Clear winner = wharfedale, my old diamond 9.1 are amazing little speakers, all the monitor audio speakers sound like hitting a drumstick against a milk bottle, the wharfs have fantastic sound

[@nocturn1ts]

Had the 220s with matching wharfedale 10 in sub, and an nad 302. That setup out performed many more expensive rigs I heard. Mich leass smearing in the midrange here

[@alanwise8053]

Assolutamente superiori le Diamond!

[@karolisj.5090]

Hi. Like your reviews. No nothing about this. Have ma bronze 2 hooked up to denon dm39. Want to upgrade. Not sure what to. Any suggestions? Thinking lsx2 or maybe just need a better amp for speakers? As watching all the reviews realized they are rather good. Thanks if you have a time to reply..😊

[@leeh4722]

I purchased some bronze2’s a few weeks ago because the price has lowered since new ones came out. Sent them back. Way too warm and not enough detail.

[@tshaolin971]

Price is not the first criteria to consider when you buy a pair of speakers.

[@padmeshsethuraman5617]

I have the BX2 + Marantz PM6005 + Macbook Pro + Audirvana + Tidal MQA + Helm bolt DAC + Audioquest 14/2 flex speaker cables & forest green rca...sounds good

[@dhomitha]

I think during your earlier test between KEF LS50 and MA Bronze 2 there was only a slight difference between the sound whereas the sound signatures were a bit alike of both. But here the 220 sound noticeably more rich in midrange and airy compared to the Bronze 2. Is it the Wharfedales sounding better than the LS50 (obviously which cannot be) or is it after a different sound signature?

[@iiWiReviews]

It's just a different sound signature that for some reason plays well with mic and YT. LS50 is clearly superior in real life listening.

[@weaselpopper]

There`s a whole world of mid range missing on the MAB 2.

[@tshaolin971]

Right, the Wharfedales are more consistent through their frequency response, they mesure up to the Kef ls50 in this regard.

[@normanham6142]

Love the Diamonds 💎 🎼

[@allan.n.7227]

Wharfedale Diamond 220 for the win ..

[@nicktaylor7680]

Nice midrange on the wharfdale-musical speaker.

[@joeygonzo]

it's not even close. The Diamond sounded so much more refined and unassuming .

[@belotan4218]

Wharf for the sound stage and clarity. MA sound muffled

[@anonymous4201]

Can get the W220 for £100, is it worth it? I want cheap easy simple set up for stereo music. Would I need a subwoofer or is the bass sufficient from these speakers? Thanks

[@geterpleyer]

Monitor Audio bronze 2 have a breakin period after about a hundred hours they loosen up sparking highs tight low end wouldn’t trade them they are awesome.

[@fraguzz]

How do you judge speakers through a mic and other speakers... Isent it like judging the quality of a blueray on a vhs tape? I guess you can hear clear differences if one playes a thing vastly differently from the other.. Im hearing this in my work van.. stock speakers and i would think the speakers in the video would never sound better than the speaker and system its played on... Correct me!?

[@김민규학생미학과]

Hi! Wharfedale Diamond 220 or JBL Arena 130? Gotta choose between those two options... I can get both at the same price, around $250.

[@iiWiReviews]

If you like punchy bass and highs with slightly recessed mids, then JBL. If you prefer midrange-centric sound then Wharfedale. Personally, I prefer Wharfedales but everybody has to follow their own taste.

[@김민규학생미학과]

@@iiWiReviews thx for the reply man keep up the great work :)

[@happychappy2014]

220 for texture/midrange detail vs Bronze 2's for fuller bass, but muddier mid range.

[@tshaolin971]

We can say that the Bronze almost sound fat.

[@ArdaiThomasPoker]

@@tshaolin971 no they don't, they sound muddy having no mids

[@AromaFrank]

I would like to hear Kef Q150 with Diamond 220/225

[@daveclark8337]

You'd need to find a KEF that can make through the break-in period and the comparison without the tweeter crapping out.

[@saurabhkaushik7414]

Awesome comparison bro,😘😘😘😎😎

[@richardblaauwgeers4349]

Both have some parts i like. But both lack live like sound

[@KCinSD84]

Wharfedale more musical sounding.

[@petersmith4202]

Wharfdale all day long I am getting some

[@williamjueschke9960]

The Diamonds sounded better to me.

[@myplaguesify]

keep reviewing bookshelf speakers

[@McBeast22]

If the microphone is is in the same position than camera the factor that Wharfedales have a waveguide should come in count since that enables high frequencies to desperse more to the sides of the speakers therefore the recording will have more detail in the top end.

[@ryutakashi1697]

What's better presonus 4.5e or whaferdale diamond 220? Only sounds quality

[@iiWiReviews]

I haven't heard Presonus so can't comment on it. If anyone else can help with this one, feel free to pitch in.

[@JPWinters]

I've owned the Diamond 250 & the Presonus 3.5, and I'd be more interested in the other Presonus speakers than the Diamond series.

[@pas0003]

Are Wharfedale Diamond 220 a good speaker for casual near-field music listening + gaming? I was considering pairing it up with a Dayton Audio DTA-2.1BT2 100W

[@iiWiReviews]

Yeah, I think they would be pretty good for that kind of use.

[@connermiller7784]

They cope with lots of sounds that clash together and stay very true throughout volume . Rotel ra920ax with mine

[@addikt]

The D220's hands down. It's not even a contest. For future comparisons, you should really contrast the difference between the guitar plucking toward the end of track 4.

[@christoszois928]

Wharefadale the winner. Better mids. You feel like the music is hanging your ears.

[@mmil]

From this recording I would say the Wharfedales sound cleaner and more detailed, where the MAs have more bass but they are muffling some of the sound. BTW I do own the MAs Bronze 2s and they do sound fantastic but I am considering the Wharfedale EVO 4.4 as a replacement. Anybody that has experience with EVOs, please comment.

[@thakery5720]

Viewers should remember that unless they have a premium speaker system for their own computers then they will barely be able to notice any difference between these two speakers.... I bought some wharfedales and as I use them for the rear speakers on my tv/computer monitor surround sound system of a Sherwood amplifier and 36 year old Bowers and Wilkins main speakers, then the wharfedales aren't worth the money - I picked up another set of B&W's DM110 speakers in excellent condition for less than half the price and the B&W's are a far better buy !

[@astrotrance]

Proving that sound demos ARE useful when comparing and contrasting two speakers. I think I prefer the Wharfedales but they would benefit from a small subwoofer or two.

[@AmbientWanderer]

agree, if you added a sub to the Wharfedales, then they win in pretty much every respect compared to the MA's. Something with the MA's mid range and highs that i just didn't like.

[@Millqvistaren]

How do u think the 220:s matches with my Onkyo 9010? :) Wonderful speakers, sounds great.

[@KonradSkowronski]

I'm glad I didn't bought MA Bronze 2. Muffled and unnatural midrange, weak highs. Whafedale 220 (especially 225) is better sounding speaker. I would like to hear 225 with Elac Debut 6.2.

[@joeygonzo]

didn't BUY . They do sound "boxy" to me

[@raygu1818]

From my ears on tracks 1 and 2 the MA's edge for the more edgier bass. Track 3 Wharfdale edge for more detail but on tracks 4 and 5 the Wharfedale's opened up a can of whup ass. I was already leaning towards the Wharfedale's for Christmas but I'm undecided on the 220's or 225's. With that said the MA's were no slouch.

[@charleyweinhardt]

wish wharfdale's could just come with some bass already... there always lacking low bass body and bass separation, but there mids are like literally physical therapy for my heart. the monitors- a complete speaker, the wharfedales- magic minus the bass

[@lowrider007007]

Very surprising, I expected the B2's to perform better than that, they sound closed in with poor detail in the mid-range, the Wharfedales creamed the B2's, the Wharfedales sounded quite fast and punchy in comparison, nice tonality as well.

[@Music_On_Records]

bronze 6 will sounds like bronze 2 in tonal and timbre but with much bigger scale and impact

[@stephencosta6814]

Yes baby I am the first commenter it's great the way you cut to the next speaker without interruption I'll take the wharfedale please

[@adriankhourian6568]

Monitor Audio Bronze sound larger and more detailed no vocal theme to compare upper middle zone

[@mivanp2185]

Wharfedale sound so much fuller. Monitors sound held back in comparison.

[@R1Zig]

Weird, the Wharfedale soundstage image was more centered while the monitor seemed like it was lacking the right speaker detail especially up higher in the frequency range, (probably the way audio reached the mic through room reflections) but the highs and mids sounded a little more forward on the Wharfedales compared to the Monitor audio. So the Wharfedales are more exciting which could probably lead to a little more listeners fatigue sooner. From this experience I'd probably go for the monitor Audio. Very interesting experience. Thank you.

[@ok4486]

Wharfedale are well balance sound. Monitor audio mid have cover the highs

[@Panslapper]

Mids and uppers of the WD220s with the bass of the MAB2 would be a better speaker....Frankenspeaker!

[@jm-vq4cm]

MA sounds bigger but hollow.

[@솟을봉]

Wharfedale Diamond 220 sounds more clear than Bronze 2 to me

[@Veselchak9082]

Monitor Audio the sound is more pre-decorated. Wharfedales the sound is more realistic.

[@hoanghai2k]

More details comming from the MA

[@IgorMisic2101]

W more ditail BRONZE strong in lowerbas region,that in live can be a diferent wery similar sonund,

[@weaselpopper]

MAB2 has over hyped lows and shallow mids.

[@DougMen1]

They're very close, but the MAs are deeper, faster, and punchier in the bass and more detailed, crisper, and airier on top

[@SoundSegaOfficial]

that is way too hard to review when you are only playing classic songs through them cause real instrument barley have heavy bass notes or modern musics as what those systems are designed for in my opinion

[@therazmatazz732]

Wharfdale by miles.

[@ec6843]

DIamond 220s destroyed the Bronze 2, especially on track 4.

[@ParasKPatel]

Monitor Audio Bronze 2. The Wharfedales sound thinner on the low end and brighter on high.

[@robertwoodward9231]

Wharfedales win this one imo..

[@kirilkirilov7236]

Warfs is more natural.!!!!

[@dimskarabas1579]

Monitor Audio Bronze 2 dump

[@corkydukeII5898]

The MA's have more of a 'Meatier' mid-bass, and also a more pronounced V-curve. I'm more of a Wharfedale fan, but the MA's sound better to me here....

[@robertogarcia-qu9nb]

The BEST, Monitor Audio. For me.

[@legion2252]

Варфедал поприятней звучит на середине.

[@jozinzbazin7069]

WD220 ярчат, а МА по-басовитее будут. Мне симпатичнее звучание первых.

[@wiechosta100]

Only MA bronze 2👍

[@Plastpackad]

Da music sucks. Why do hifi people listen to shit music? Just play sinus curves and leave music to normal people.

[@benjamin9349]

You nailed It!

[@solarsailer4278]

Нужны деньги?

[@SMEHUYOK]

Ну конечно!

[@gsn2072]

diamond better

[@SoundRoomByKrzysztof]

1. Monitor Audio Bronze 2 ;)

[@sunray9315]

MAs are cleaner and more musical. Wharfdale have a steely edge

[@Greggiexplore]

Diamond 220 is very bad for movies, I have them, and reproduction of sound is terrible.

[@apusista]

Wharfdale too expensive and Bronze 2 wins by a mile. Bought it, love it! Great bang for the buck. Great bass, smooth full mids and sweet silky highs. Needs a decent amp or tone control for highs but that's just me. I turn up the treble and the bass fractionally on my amp for the music that I like (terrible recordings) but for most people, this would be a very balanced speaker. Good looking and beautifully finished too! For better than this, you'd have to spend a LOT more!

[@elviscaragea4433]

what a stupid sound demo