Quad S2 vs.B&W 706 S2 Speakers

Quad S2: Refinement, Musical Sound.
Price: $899 (August, 2020) MSRP: $1195.

706 S2: Dynamic, Spacious Sound.
Price: $2000 (August, 2020)

Associated Equipments;
TBR-DS Custom Speaker Cables.

Hey!
Only Option To Listen YouTube Sound Demo is with good headphones, not your favorite sound system because listening to two rooms at once is not a good thing, no matter how good your sound system is.
All music playback is FLAC files via Marantz USB DAC to PMA-SX11 analog input stage.
All sound samples were recorded from 6-8ft away at the listening position with stereo microphones.

If you use these links to purchase any items from Amazon or eBay(No Extra Cost To You), I get a small percentage which help support my work and helps me keep going.

0:00 Build Quality
1:33 Sound Quality
10:18 Quad S2 (Sound Sample)
11:06 B&W 706 S2 (Sound Sample)
11:54 Quad S2 (Sound Sample)
16:13 B&W 706 S2 (Sound Sample)

[chrislynch]

Sir, you're videos are an ABSOLUTE pleasure to watch. So very informative and so well done. I enjoy all of them, whether I agree with you or not.

[andrewwebb]

Absolutely the Quad - it’s much more balanced. Thank you for your interesting reviews and revealing demonstrations.

[giangvu]

I love it when you described the speakers as "timeless". That's a very elegant way to describe its sound signature.

[itsmorphed]

Both sounding good . The b&w moved me with the second track . Really felt the emotion .

[edolina]

Based on your review I've bought a pair of Quads and they are every bit of what you've said about them. It's been a month now and I enjoy them more and more each day. Thanks for a great and honest review.

[nc]

I've had the Quads for a couple weeks and have put some hours on it. Have watched movies as well as listened to music. In comparison, I used Focal 807Ws to determine strengths, weaknesses, preferences using a Hegel h-160, a SoundArtist SA-200IA and an inexpensive but good performing class D amp.

In a nutshell I suppose, the strengths of the Quad S-2 using any of the amps with varying degrees of SQ according to each amps capabilities, the Quads depict voice and instrument playback with pinpoint accuracy, think 20/10 vision vs 20/20 or so. The Focals have always been more focused in this regard to other sub $1000 speakers but the Quads seem to have more precision in outlining voice and instruments. Probably instrument separation was close as I didn't notice a big difference. Now the accuracy does come at a price, with the Hegel, the Focals are smooth, forward with some depth and dimensionality and are quite euphonic. All of which I like and qualities which draw me into the music. With the Hegel, the Quads were smooth but presented a drier, flatter soundstage. While perhaps more accurate, the presentation was a bit smaller but that flatness was unappealing to me. Perhaps there are audiophiles that prefer this presentation but not me. A previous review alluded to this as well in comparison to mid tier Wharfedales.

Moving to the SoundArtisit, a lower tier class AB amp, the SQ of both speakers were affected to some degree but not enough to prove useless. I would say this amp was not a good match for the Focals as the upper mids and highs stood out more than the bass and lower mids (amp wise) making the Focals too bright and unbalanced (the amp itself should be described this way). I think this particular amp, while refined for the price is too unbalanced across frequencies. However, on the Quads, they added some life, some sparkle they were missing on the Hegel. I wouldn't say they escaped their 2-D soundstage, they just sounded a bit more exciting which they really needed to. I think people may like the Quads a bit better on brighter amps as opposed to darker, but that's my own speculation. Perhaps the Denon accentuates the highs?

Also to note, I found the Quads very enjoyable watching movies with the added clarity enhancing speech, non-musical micro details as well as soundtracks. I won't say they were always better than my Focals, just different as both present fine definition. I might like some things better on the Quads as well as some things better on the Focals. But for speech, the Quads do it very well. So the biggest difference is regarding music playback. I would say the Quads are missing something that brings out one's emotions when listening to music. It could be for me at least, they are too dry and analytical as they seem to fail to draw me into the musical experience. With the Focals, I always seem to just stop what I'm doing as they captivate attention and present a very emotional experience for me. The Focals "may" be less accurate, transparent, . etc., in comparison to the Quads but the Quads are just not as enjoyable to listen to.

Now, on a cheap little class D, the Focals are still a very nice speaker but dynamics suffer the most. So large differences between micro details and larger sounds aren't as great. Probably similar with the Quads but the Quads still sounded good on class D. You are giving up some dynamics and refinement with a cheaper class D but I did prefer it to the SoundArtist at 8X the price. The SoundArtist went back as it wasn't up to expectations but probably typical for its' price point. Still, on class D, I preferred my Focals to the Quads with music even though the Quads provide more refinement with voice and instruments. The Quads just don't draw me into the music. For strictly movies, either is fine but for music, I think the Quads are sensitive to finding the right amp or may be fine for someone who prefers accuracy while accepting a more 2-D soundstage, less excitement, less emotion perhaps?

Also, when I get close, in between my Focals the tweeter/woofer remain very cohesive and it sounds like you are wearing headphones. Some speakers do this, some don't. The Quads don't. It's like there's a bit of a disconnect between drivers. I don't think the Quads would work well in nearfield. Also, the Quads don't disappear int the room as well as the Focals do but they should given they have a smaller woofer...a trait which some say exists.

So, there's a perspective you can take with a few grains of salt. I think the Quads are talented in some things but fail to draw me into a musical experience even though I do like the highly defined quality of how voice and instruments are presented. As one who always preferred a more analytical sound, they are just too much so and kind of boring to me. Fine for movies, really fine but lacking with music only. I guess, there's a coloration or presentation I prefer that makes a speaker sound "musical". I've noticed this quality in other speakers as well. I probably would less prefer a studio monitor although I wouldn't place the Quads in this category.

With a 5 inch woofer, an amp that really grips with strong bass might not be best either. While expensive amps are overkill for the above speakers used, the Hegel and Focals are a great match. The Hegel may be OK with the Quads but with a set of Triangle Zetas I have, the mids get too muddled. The Triangles and the cheap class D are a nice match. Seems speakers with paper woofers like class D amps. I think the Quads do well with either class D or A/B amps with not to high damping factors. It's just for me, they lack some emotional engagement with music.

Lastly, there is no perfect speaker, the Quads are detailed and accurate, a set of Monitor Audios had very nice tonality for piano decay, very natural, the Focals give enough and give up little not being the best in everything but have enough to give me what I need. Can I get "more" of the same with improvements where needed? I think we all try to do that but at some point I guess you accept that what you have is good enough. If the music captivates you, you are on the right track. No perfect speaker, no one way to enjoy music. Happy listening.

[nexusgoogleplay]

Like the punchier bass of the B&Ws, but as soon as you go to vocals, the Quads are clear and the B&Ws are very sibilant.

[alvin]

Yes now I’m using Quad S2 piano finishing, pairing with tube amp kt88 triode mode very musical can listen the whole day!

[MusiGig]

One of the most accurate and honest review I have ever seen.. keep it up mate!

[Alex]

The B&Ws have a more 'impressive' sound with boosted treble and slightly bumped up bass. But the Quads sound just so natural... especially in the mids.

[mgsee]

The vocals on the Mona Lisa track are more expressive on the B&Ws, they just seem to me to be the more dynamic and musically communicative speaker overall. However, the top end is a bit sharp compared to the smoother sounding Quads. A great demo as usual.

[sweetsilage]

I always come to you for sound tests - thank you very much

[lockness]

Quad for me. Less bright on the treble and more natural sounding.

[jezmink]

Excellent review, I like the Quad S2 very much, they have something special clarity, detail and yes you are right vocals are beautiful.

[tranhuynhgiao]

I use a pair of 22l2 as the front speaker in the cinema speaker system. When the scene had a dog barking, my whole family suddenly looked around because I thought there was a neighbor's dog barking. Prove that these speakers reproduce extremely realistic sound.

[HauntedAbysss]

From my back and forthers...You can barely tell but the BW can do more. It's a tiny bit fuller on both ends I'd say extended. It's a tiny low in the mids but.. wow.... Both are unbelievable. Wish I could be there for myself to feel the bass.

[tothemax]

Wow small drivers can sound very accurate but the B&W mid/bass sounded a little fuller

[nc]

Both very good speakers. Even if B&W beats Quad it seems marginally given the greater disparity in price. So many choices between 1 and 2 grand...that's a good thing.

[hi-fihaven]

Great to see you man! Both sets of those speakers are gorgeous! Great commentary as usual. Have a great day!

[carlosoliveira-rcxt]

The B&WS are 4 dB louder in the brightness region. It would be interesting to see the off axis response.