ON TEST

Q Acoustics
Concept 40
Loudspeakers

I
t appears that Q Acoustics’ Concept 40
loudspeakers are the result of a speaker
design project that ‘went off the rails’…
so to speak. It all started when the
Concept 2020i became so phenomenally
successful for Q Acoustics that the company
was inspired to build the Concept 20, which
was equally successful. However, both were
only small two-driver two-way bookshelf
speakers with small cabinets and thus their
deep bass response and maximum output
levels were constrained by the immutable
laws of physics. So when customers started
asking for a model with more bass and more
power-handling ability, Q Acoustics initially
took the KISS (Keep It Simple & Straightfor-
ward) approach to design and simply added
a second bass/midrange driver, while at the
same time increasing the size of the cabinet
to accommodate the second driver.
Alas, for once the KISS solution did not
work… well it worked, but it didn’t give Q
Acoustics’ hired-gun designer (none other
than the famous Karl Heinz-Fink, of German
design firm Fink Audio Konsulting, whose
high-powered team includes Markus Strunk,
Lampos Ferekidis, Henry Loch, and Bernd
Sander) the increase in bass output he’d been
aiming at, so he ended up souping-up both
bass/midrange drivers by fitting them with
much larger magnets, and adding additional
Gelcore bracing inside the cabinet (which is
itself made of Q Acoustics’ Gelcore material,
about which more later).
This larger, ‘hotted-up’ design ticked all
the boxes for Fink as well as his team and Q
Acoustics’ product designer, Steve Reichert,
so Q Acoustics went into production with
the Concept 40 and having heard the back
story, and been a huge fan of both the 2020i
and the Concept 20, I couldn’t wait to get my
hands on a pair of Concept 40s for review.

52 Australian
 Q Acoustics Concept 40 Loudspeakers
I’m a huge fan of isolating tweeters,
because the performance of a tweeter can be
dramatically altered by cabinet vibrations…
The Equipment
Although Fink souped-up the bass drivers
with larger magnets, he didn’t take the seem-
ingly obvious step of turning the Concept
40 into a 2½-way design so, despite its size,
orientation and driver layout, the Concept 40
is still, electrically-speaking, a standard two-
way design. Two identical drivers deliver bass
and midrange and leave the delivery of high-
frequencies to a single 25mm dome tweeter
(the nominal crossover point is at 2.3kHz,
slightly lower than the Concept 20’s 2.9kHz
crossover point). As for those bass/midrange
drivers, Q Acoustics’ website is surprisingly
shy on technical detail, saying only that: ‘the
low distortion drive units incorporate powerful
oversized magnets to ensure wide dynamics and
an ultra-fast transient response.’
You won’t see any signs of Fink’s souping-
up on the exterior, because externally the
driver is identical to the one used on the
Concept 20, with a diameter of 125mm…
or rather that’s the diameter specified by Q
Acoustics. In fact the total moving diameter
of the driver is 118mm, and the Thiele/Small
diameter is 110mm. This puts the effective
cone area (Sd) at 95cm². The cone material
is a paper pulp that’s covered (on the visible
side only, the rear of the cone is uncoated) by
a thin coating of a material Q Acoustics says
is made from ‘carbon-fibre and ceramic’. The
speaker basket is made from pressed steel.
However because the Concept 40 has two
bass drivers covering the same bandwidth,
the total effective area (Sd) available to
deliver bass is 190cm². So if Fink had used a
single driver to deliver this same equivalent
area, it would have had a nominal diameter
of around 165mm.
Why use two drivers, rather than simply
fitting a single larger driver? Lots of reasons
really: improved driver speed, increased
dispersion at high frequencies, more seamless
transition to the tweeter… all midrange issues
but, as the late J. Gordon Holt, (founder and
editor of famous US magazine Stereophile)
once wrote: ‘If the midrange isn’t right, nothing
else matters.’
The tweeter to which the twin bass/
midrange drivers cross is exactly the same
one that’s used in the Concept 20: a 25-
mm diameter soft-dome design with a very
wide fabric suspension. So wide that my
measurement put the overall diameter,
including the suspension, as being 38mm,
and the diameter of the dome on its own at
28mm. The tweeter operates from a shallow
plastic horn and is powered by a neodymium
magnet. But wait! There’s more… In common
with many modern high-end loudspeaker
designs, the tweeter is not fixed directly
to the Concept 40’s front baffle, but is
vibrationally isolated from it by means of
a very flexible soft rubberised surround…
though this has been done so artfully it’s
difficult to discern.
I’m a huge fan of isolating tweeters in
this fashion, because the performance of a
tweeter can be dramatically altered by cabinet
vibrations. By way of example, consider
this extreme example: To deliver an audio
signal at 10kHz, a tweeter dome has to move
back and forward ten thousand times every
second, and this forward/backward movement
amounts to only a few microns of travel. So
if a loudspeaker cabinet is also vibrating at
10kHz (sympathetic vibration induced in
it by the movement of the tweeter itself),
and the cabinet moves ‘backwards’ at the
same moment the tweeter’s dome moves
‘forwards’, the net movement of the dome in
the air would be zero, so no sound would be
produced at all. Such a scenario (total sound
cancellation) is impossible, but in reality any
vibration of a speaker baffle has the potential
to adversely affect the performance of a
tweeter… and in turn the quality of the high-
frequency sound you will hear from it. But
with the Concept 40, Q Acoustics has done
more than prevent cabinet vibrations from
reaching the tweeter… it’s tried to prevent the
cabinet from vibrating because, as Q Acoustics’
Steve Reichert says: ‘Cabinet vibrations
are the elephant in the room in speaker
design, because (…) they mask the low-
level detail in the music.’
ON TEST
It’s to prevent the cabinet from vibrating that
Q Acoustics makes the sides, top and bottom
of the Concept 40 cabinet from a material
it calls ‘Gelcore’, which is a three-layer
‘sandwich’ where the outer (‘bread’) layers are
made from 10mm medium density fibreboard
(MDF) and the ‘filling’ is a 1mm layer of non-
hardening adhesive material that bonds the
two layers together but never sets. The idea
is that vibrations in one layer of MDF are not
transmitted to the next layer, because the
adhesive material absorbs them and converts
them into heat.
Q Acoustics Concept 40
Loudspeakers
Brand: Q Acoustics
Model: Concept 40
Category: Floorstanding Speakers
RRP: $1,999
Warranty: Five Years
Distributor: Westan Australia Pty Ltd
Address: 13 Bastow Place
Mulgrave VIC 3170
(03) 9541 8888
salesvic@westan.com.au
www.westan.com.au
• ‘Amazing highs
• Balanced bass
• Lovely imaging
• Cabinet stability
• Midrange articulation
LAB REPORT
Readers interested in a full technical
appraisal of the performance of the Q
Acoustics Concept 40 Loudspeakers
should continue on and read the
LABORATORY REPORT published on
page 82. Readers should note that
the results mentioned in the report,
tabulated in performance charts and/
or displayed using graphs
and/or photographs should
be construed as applying only
to the specific sample tested.
Lab Report on page 82
avhub.com.au 53
ON TEST Q Acoustics Concept 40 Loudspeakers
However, although Reichert says this is
a ‘cabinet within a cabinet’ this is not
strictly true, since the front baffle and rear
panel are made not from Gelcore but from
conventional—albeit thicker—MDF.
Size-wise, the Concept 40s check in
as being 972mm high, 288mm deep and
170mm wide. They weigh in at 18.5kg.
They’re available in two finishes—both
of them stunning, I have to say (they’re
available in either high-gloss black or high-
gloss white… I prefer the white), whose
appearance is further enhanced by the use of
alloy plating around the drivers. Each speaker
cabinet is supported by three beautifully
chromed feet, two of which are attached to
a piece of angled safety glass that has to be
bolted to the rear of the cabinet (it’s held in
place by a rubber-backed section of powder-
coated steel plate) prior to installation. The
third foot is attached to the front of the
cabinet itself. I’d be the first to admit that the
visual effect of these glass/chrome ‘wings’ is
stunning—it looks absolutely fabulous, and it
means the speaker can’t ‘rock’ like one with
a four-footed support. However the three-
point design compromises the stability of the
speakers in the forward/sideways direction,
such that a small amount of angular force
from either rear corner of the cabinet will see
them topple over. So careful positioning and/
or some type of anchor would be advisable.
In Use and Listening
Sessions
As with the Concept 20s, I had no doubt that
the Concept 40s’ high-frequency perfor-
mance was the high point when I was listen-
ing. The tweeter’s ability to reveal even the
most microscopically small acoustic details
in the upper treble region will make your jaw
drop. To experience it, listen carefully to the
shimmer after a drummer has hit a cymbal
and let it ride… but the trick here is to listen
not just to the sound of the cymbal but in-
stead to the other high-frequency sounds be-
ing reproduced at the same time. I used one
of my favourite test tracks, Lover’s Mask, from
Michael Ruff’s album ‘Speaking in Melodies’,
which also has precisely picked guitar riffs.
My only minor niggle was that, as had hap-
pened with the Concept 20s, if I played these
speakers for extended periods of time at very
high volume levels, I heard the treble ‘soften’,
so it became a little laid-back compared to
the midrange, but once I turned the volume
back down to ‘normal-to-loud’ levels, the cor-
rect tonal balance quickly re-appeared.
But if I thought the high-frequencies
were the stand-out area of sonic performance
54 Australian
found the midrange to be outstanding …
excellent clarity when listening to vocalists,
and accurate timbral reproduction…
for the Concept 40s (and I hope I’ve made positions of the left and right speakers, with
it obvious that I did), this time around musicians positioned accurately across the full
they were definitely competing with the width. Image height is there in abundance…
bass response for my highest accolades. this is an important component of imaging
The additional bass driver, the increased that the Concept 40s do really well… as they
magnetic force, and the much larger cabinet also do with image depth.
compared to the Concept 20s means the
bass digs far deeper into the bottom octaves Conclusion
and also meant that I was able to wind up I have to say it again: the design and execu-
the volume considerably higher, so the bass tion of Q Acoustics’ Concept 40 speakers is un-
become deeper, harder-hitting and much, believably good. The superb gloss finish, the
much louder… a winning trifecta for any rounded corners, the fact they look equally
loudspeaker. Moreover, the ‘feel’ of the bass good with or without their grilles, the stylish
was super-comfortable to my ears, being chrome/glass tripod support system… these
tuneful, nicely paced and well-mannered, speakers look so good they really wouldn’t
with none of the ‘false’ upper bass that’s be out of place as an exhibit in a museum of
often deliberately engineered into some modern art. And the even-better news? They
speakers to make them stand out on the sound every bit as good as they look. ‘Win-
showroom floor during a quick audition. This win’ is what I say. greg borrowman
is bass that’s been perfectly balanced for the
long haul in your own living room. Indeed
the bass of the Concept 40s is so perfectly
balanced against the midrange that your first
impression might be that there’s too little of
it. Don’t be fooled… what you’re
hearing is exactly right.
I also found the midrange to
be outstanding, hearing excellent
clarity when listening to vocalists,
and also accurate timbral
reproduction. I thought there was
a very slight loss of articulation
compared to the Concept 20s,
but the Concept 40s more than
compensated for this by sounding
‘way fuller and richer across the
entire midrange, while at the
same time imbuing a greater
overall sense of smoothness to the
overall sound… complementing
the smoothness I remarked
on that also characterises this
speaker’s delivery of bass.
Three-driver two-way
speakers can never deliver
quite the imaging precision of
two-driver two-ways, but I was
still impressed with the spatial
accuracy of the Concept 40s’
presentation. Sit in the sweet
spot and you will hear a hugely
wide spread of sound, extending
‘way beyond the actual physical
CONTINUED ON PAGE 82
LAB REPORT Q Acoustics Concept 40 Loudspeakers
CONTINUED FROM PAGE 54

Laboratory Test Results An expanded view of the Q Acoustics is… less than 0.5dB. The slight dip in the
Newport Test Labs measured the overall fre- Concept 40’s high-frequency response is response of the bass/midrange drivers at
quency response of the Q Acoustics Concept shown in Graph 2, this time showing the dif- around 180Hz appears to be caused by a
40 loudspeakers as being 42Hz–33kHz ±3dB, ference between using the speakers with the resonance of some sort. It’s fairly minor and
which is an outstanding result, and this is the grilles on (red trace) and with the grilles off so sharp that I doubt it would be audible and
response that’s shown in Graph 1. As you can (black trace). You can see the response is mar- because each of the two drivers is affected dif-
see from the caption, the trace shown is the re- ginally flatter when the grilles aren’t fitted, ferently, they tend to cancel each other out.
sult of using two different measurement tech- but the differences are so slight, and at such a Newport Test Labs’ graph of impedance
niques, one for low and midrange frequencies, high frequency (well above the highest notes shows firstly that the pair-matching between
and the other for high frequencies. Using two on a piano keyboard), that I’d recommend the left and right speakers is excellent (the
methods allows both frequency resolution and leaving the grilles in place. red and yellow traces). It also shows that the
level accuracy over the entire audio frequency Low-frequency response is shown in electrical crossover point is at around 1.7kHz,
range—something that is not possible when Graph 3. You can see that the bass/midrange so presumably the 2.3kHz figure quoted in
using any single measurement technique. The drivers start rolling off fairly smoothly below the specification is the acoustic crossover
response isn’t only within ±3dB over a very around 120Hz, but the bass reflex port takes point. Judging by these results, I’d suggest
wide bandwidth, it’s also spectrally neutral, over nicely to compensate, with its output the nominal impedance of the Q Acoustics
so the minor variations in the response are peaking at 50Hz and only 6dB down at 34Hz Concept 40 is actually 6Ω rather than the 8Ω
spread equally over the bandwidth—that is and 110Hz. The maximum output of the quoted, but the impedance is mostly above
to say the response isn’t ‘skewed’ at all (such port has been tuned slightly below the bass/ this, and never drops below 4Ω, so the speak-
a skew would tend to emphasise either the midrange drivers’ minima at 53Hz. The port ers will be an easy load for any amplifier, not
bass or the treble), neither is there any specific has a little unwanted high-frequency leakage least because the phase angle (blue trace) is
spread of frequencies that is higher or lower centred at 700Hz, and you can see this has benign. I noted that the discontinuity on the
than the average. You can see there’s a slight a slight effect on the bass/midrange drivers’ trace shifts from 180Hz to 200Hz when the
discontinuity around 4–5kHz, but it’s very output, visible on the traces immediately lower section of the crossover is disconnect-
small, and only obvious because the remain- above, as well as on Graph 1, though you ed, so what I thought was a resonance might
der of the frequency response is so flat. can see from Graph 1 how slight the effect also be related to the crossover network.
100
dBSPL
100
dBSPL
However, since I can’t see
Newport Test Labs Newport Test Labs
95 95 any effect on the overall
90 90
frequency response (Graph
85

1) around this frequency it

85

80 80

75 75 would appear to be just a cu-

70 70
rious artefact of the design.
The sensitivity of the Q
65 65

60 60

55 55
Acoustics Concept 40 was
50 50 measured by Newport Test
Labs as being 87.5dBSPL at
45 45

40 40

one metre, using a 2.83Veq

20 Hz 50 100 200 500 1K 2K 5K 10K 20K 40K 700 Hz 1K 2K 5K 10K 20K 40K

Graph 1. Frequency response. Trace below 750Hz is the averaged result of nine individual Graph 2. High-frequency response, expanded view. Test stimulus gated sine. Microphone
frequency sweeps measured at three metres, with the central grid point on-axis with the
tweeter using pink noise test stimulus with capture unsmoothed. This has been manually
placed at three metres on-axis with dome tweeter. Black trace shows response without input and that lab’s standard,
speaker grille. Red trace is with grille. Lower measurement limit 700Hz. [Q Acoustics C40]
spliced (at 750Hz) to the gated high-frequency response, an expanded view of which is
shown in Graph 2. [Q Acoustics Concept 40 Loudspeaker]
rigorous test procedure. This
dBSPL Ohm
is quite a bit lower than
Deg
100 30 180
Newport Test Labs
95
Newport Test Labs the 90dBSPL quoted by Q
150

90
20 Acoustics, which obviously
120

85
uses a different measurement
90

80 60

75
technique, but it’s still a
30

70
10
9
solid, above-average result
0

65 8

7
that will mean you’ll be able
-30

60 -60

55
6
to get high sound pressure
-90
5

50 levels from these speakers

-120
4
45
with only modest amounts
-150

40 3 -180
10 Hz 20 50 100 200 500 1K 10 Hz 20 50 100 200 500 1K 2K 5K 10K
of power.
20K 40K

Graph 3. Low frequency response of front-firing bass reflex port (red trace); lower Graph 4. Impedance modulus of left (red trace) and right (yellow trace) speakers plus
bass/midrange driver (black trace) and upper bass/midrange driver (blue trace). Nearfield phase (blue trace). LF crossover section (green trace); HF crossover section (pink trace). Overall, the Q Acoustics
acquisition. Port/woofer levels not compensated for differences in radiating areas. [QAC40]
Concept 40 speakers
100
dBSPL

Newport Test Labs

100
dBSPL

Newport Test Labs

performed outstandingly-
95 95
well in all Newport Test
90 90

85 85
Labs’ tests. This is a really
80 80 well thought-out and
75 75
implemented design with
70 70

65 65
impressively-extended
60 60 bass response, a superbly-
55 55
extended high-frequency
50 50

45 45
response and excellent
40
20 Hz 50 100 200 500 1K 2K 5K 10K 20K 40K
40
20 Hz 50 100 200 500 1K 2K 5K 10K
overall linearity.
20K 40K

Graph 5. Averaged in-room frequency response using pink noise test stimulus. Trace Graph 6. Composite response plot. Red trace is output of bass reflex port. Dark blue trace Steve Holding
shown is averaged results of nine individual frequency sweeps measured at three metres, is anechoic response of lower bass/mid driver. Light blue trace is pink noise response
with the central grid point on-axis with the tweeter. [Q Acoustics Concept 40 Loudspeaker] above 750Hz. Black trace is gated (simulated anechoic) response above 750Hz and pink
noise in-room response below 750Hz. [Q Acoustics Concept 40 Loudspeaker]

82 Australian
 REVIEWED
Triangle Esprit Titus EZ
Loudspeakers

Benchmark DAC2 HGC

AC Yes, you can read some of our reviews in full on
Pre-amp/D
Marantz PM6005
Integrated Amplifier AVHub.com.au. You can now swipe your way through
B&W P5 Wireless
Bluetooth Headphones
KEF Reference 3 every page of Australian Hi-Fi on your iPad or Android
Loudspeakers
06
Sept/Oct 2015 | $9.95 | www.avhub.com
.au
Rhyme Acoustics P22kers
Loudspea
tablet, (or computer) using our snazzy Digital Issues.
But there’s nothing like the proper print edition,
landing in your letterbox sealed in shiny cellophane,
ready for you to read at your leisure, at full size, in
the order we intended, in the bath, if you like.

NEW DAC DOES

Get every issue of Australian Hi-Fi the way it should be.

EVERY THING! nce than DACs ten times its

price…
PLUS better performa
CH
E TWEETER TE
RNS: TRIANGLE’S UNIQU
FRENCH HO
YES! PLEASE SEND ME A 14 ISSUES (2 YEARS) $109 SAVE OVER $30
7 ISSUES (1 YEAR) $59 SAVE 15%
SUBSCRIPTION TO AUSTRALIAN HI-FI INCLUDES HOME CINEMA & HI-FI LIVING SPECIAL EACH YEAR

New Subscription or
Mr Mrs Miss
Extend Subscription or
Ms
Gift Subscription
W
Your Name MYMAGAZINES.COM.AU SYDNEY (02) 9901 6111 SUBSCRIPTIONS
TOLLFREE 1300 361 146 PO BOX 3355
Your Address
ST LEONARDS NSW 1590
Postcode
PAYMENT DETAILS
Daytime Phone ( )
I enclose a cheque/money order for $
E-mail
Please provide phone or email in case of delivery issues
payable to Next Media Pty Ltd OR Charge my credit card:
Mastercard Visa American Express
IF A GIFT SUBSCRIPTION Mr Mrs Miss Ms
Recipient’s Name
Recipient’s Address
Postcode Name on Card

Daytime Phone ( ) Expiry Date / CVV:

E-mail Cardholder’s Signature

Terms and conditions: Price offer available to Australian and NZ residents. Expires 27/12/15. Includes GST. Savings based on total cover price. Overseas Airmail 14
MA/HF

issues A$195 or 7 issues A$99. Australian Hi-Fi subscription comprises of 7 issues PA – 6 regular issues and 1 special issue. This form may be used as a Tax Invoice.
nextmedia Pty Ltd ABN 84 128 805 970. Please tick if you do not wish to receive special offers or information from nextmedia or its partners via email mail.
Please refer to www.nextmedia.com.au for the full Privacy Notice.
avhub.com.au 83