Home Theater Forum and Systems banner

Chane A2rx-c 5.0 Loudspeaker Review Discussion Thread

18443 Views 65 Replies 17 Participants Last post by  Jon Lane
Chane A2rx-c 5.0 Loudspeaker Review Discussion Thread​

Loudspeaker Subwoofer Sound box Audio equipment Electronics

Chane Music & Cinema has introduced the third evolution of their popular Arx series, now going by the alpha numeric '"Arx-c" designation. Using technologies not typically found at these prices, and utilizing an internet direct business model which allows customers to avoid paying dealer mark up, Chane looks to offer the public exceptional value for the money.

See less See more
1 - 8 of 66 Posts
Great review, Dennis! I enjoyed reading it very much, and I'm glad to hear that the Chanes are living up to their reputation, especially the reputation they have on this forum.

It's interesting to note how at times, with some recordings, you thought perhaps the tweeter was held back just a smidge, but later on other recordings decided maybe it was right where it should be. Did you feel the slight lack of resolution was the result of a tweeter intentionally brought down in level as part of the design, or was the tweeter itself not quite capable of the last bit of resolution regardless of its level relative to the rest of the system?

Out of curiosity, is anyone at HTS getting a pair of A5rx-c for review soon? I know they were on the docket to be reviewed when they were released this past spring, but I also see that Chane is (already) out of stock on them. I'd be quite interested to read about how they compare to the A2, since the A5 is a three-way speaker. Also I'm interested to find out what sonic differences there are compared to the original A5.
See less See more
Yep, getting reviews is and should be a bit lower on the priority list than getting them in customers' hands. Especially when they sell out faster that you can bring them in. Anyway, he is supposed to be stocked up "this summer" so hopefully that means there will be a pair for you guys in the next month or two. Fingers crossed . . . :D
Thanks Jon. Just to be clear, are you referring here to an update to the most recent release of the A5rx-c, or the addition of a model to the A-series (for lack of a better term)?
Thank you, Bryan!

I have to say, I labored over the wording of the Conclusions first paragraph. In a short, there is nothing wrong with the planar nor the resolution of the A2rx-c. The A2rx-c does come very close the best available. I'm just trying to remain objective and do not want people thinking they can buy a reference grade monitor for $229/each.

I have not experienced the level of realism and resolution the A2rx-c 5.0 set delivers in it's price range, though, and I have laid ears on many, many loudspeakers. I hope this perspective adds clarity and helps to answer your question.

Let me put it another way. The A2rx-c 5.0 does such a great job, not only in it's price range, but as an all around communicator of music and movies, that I am buying the review set. :D
Thanks for the clarification and update. To me the most ringing endorsement a reviewer can give a piece of equipment is to decide it is what he wants for his own use, compared against all the other equipment that reviewer has heard (which is often extensive as you point out). Congratulations on having a great set of speakers!

I'm more than a little OCD
Aren't the terms "OCD" and "audiophoo" -- wait -- "audiophile" more or less synonymous? :dumbcrazy:
I'll do my best to relate what I've read and how I understand it. Disclaimer: Accuracy is not guaranteed.

Crossovers are necessary for most properly functioning multi-driver speakers (2 way, 3 way designs). Crossovers help to integrate the sound between different drivers but they also interfere with other aspects of proper audio reproduction. More complex designs and greater numbers of crossovers needed in a speaker can cause increasing amounts of audio degradation. A 2 way speaker is going to need fewer crossovers than a 3 way.

So, specifically relating to the Chane A3rx-c, the Chane A5rx-c, and the older ARX A5...
The Chane A3rx-c is a 2 way design, both of the A5's are a 3 way design.
Compared to the A3, both of the A5's 3 way design is said to ever so slightly hinder some of the audiophile characteristics of the sound. On the other hand, the A5's additional drivers help to deliver louder sound with less distortion.

The difference between the older ARX A5 and the Chane A5rx-c...
The newer A5rx-c received an updated tweeter. This new tweeter improved sound in at least two ways..
1) it is capable of handling more power with less distortion.
2) it has a different bottom end roll off which integrates better with the mid freq driver. This allowed for a redesign to a simpler crossover resulting in a more audiophile sound.
Interesting. I am no expert, but it seems to me that a carefully-executed three-way design can potentially have advantages in sound quality as well as output. For one, the midrange driver in a three-way will not have to cope with the lower octaves and can be designed to excel with the midrange frequencies alone, instead of perhaps being slightly compromised in the midrange in order to handle bass. Also, it seems that a three-way has a better chance of having smooth off-axis response. A two-way speaker's woofer will have to operate up to a higher frequency, and may begin to "beam" (dispersion narrows quite a bit) as it approaches the crossover frequency. Then, when the tweeter takes over, the dispersion broadens quite a bit, making for choppy dispersion characteristics one octave or so on either side of the crossover frequency. But a three-way can keep this smoother by transitioning from the bass driver to the midrange before the bass driver starts to beam, and then from the midrange driver to the tweeter before the midrange starts to beam.

Of course crossover components do more than filter frequencies, and can be a source of distortion. It is my understanding that the A5rx-c crossover is as simple as it can be, which should help with this. Ideally a 3-way would be crossed over actively (digitally) which would mitigate many of the negative effects of a standard crossover using resistors, capacitors, inductors, etc, and give you more control over what is happening. Of course, this is more expensive to build and also to provide amplification for.

Sorry, just thinking out loud here.
See less See more
I'm pretty sure the A5 (original version) was considered superior to the A3 (original version). Then the A3rx-c came out, and was proclaimed to be extremely close in character to the A5 (original). My understanding was that the goal with the A5rx-c was to make a significant improvement to the A5 (original); otherwise it was not going to be worth it to release an updated version.

Now that we've both speculated away :bigsmile: hopefully Jon will come back and set us all straight.
'superior' is a very vague term.
My understanding is that Jon (and others) considered the A3 to have superior audiophile characteristics. And the A5 to have superior power handling capabilities.
I think I'm remembering correctly that when pushed for a suggestion, Jon would recommend the A3 (over the A5) for people looking for musicality.
I was referring to the audiophile capabilities, but good point that I didn't qualify the word "superior."
^ Agreed, and they don't cost any more than a pair of A2 and a good set of stands cost either. That's the way I would go too. Stands built in! :T
1 - 8 of 66 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.