The Article

EVO 5.1 & 5.2 FROM WHARFEDALE

21st October 2025

Sporting AMT tweeters and enhanced midrange and mid/bass drivers, Paul Rigby could wait to get his hands on these Wharfedale stand mounts

Well, I say Wharfedale and yes, Wharfedale is selling these speakers. The Wharfedale name is all over them and the Wharfedale sound emanates from within but really? The brains behind these EVO designs is an Englishman, Peter Comeau.

Comeau is the Director of Acoustic Design at Wharfedale but he has over 50 years of HiFi knowledge behind him. He was the founder of the UK’s own Heybrook HiFi releasing the classic HB1 and HB2 speakers and, since he joined the company IAG, has worked on products for Audiolab, Mission, Quad, Castle and, yes Wharfedale.

So, when compared to the EVO 4 series, the EVO 5, and I quote Mr Comeau himself, “…reworked cabinet volumes, redesigned crossovers and applied advanced techniques and materials to the drive units.”

Here, I am looking at two models from the EVO 5 Series: the EVO 5.1 and 5.2 standmounted speakers.

EVO 5.1

Both 4 Ohm designs and both featuring AMT tweeters and both featuring bass portsat the the bottom of the cabinets, the EVO 5.1 includes a 130mm mid/bass unit has a 87db sensitivity, spans 340 x 220 x 285mm , weighs 8kg and needs a 25W amplifier or more to run. It can be bought with either Walnut or a Black Oak Veneer finish.

EVO 5.2

The EVO 5.2s are 3-way designs with a 165mm Black Woven Kevlar bass cone and 50mm soft dome midrange unit. Featuring an 88db sensitivity, it spans 497 x 260 x 350mm and weighs in at 15kg. Offering the saem finishes, it also needs a 25W amplifier or higher to run properly.

And that’s the basic tech for these speakers. But what do they sound like?

SOUND QUALITY

Starting with the EVO 5.1 speakers I played some high-energy rock and the vinyl version of Frank Black and the Catholics track, All My Ghosts from their self-titled 1998 album on vinyl.

EVO 5.1 vs 3030C

And because I have just reviewed them and because they sit at a similar price point and I still have them in my listening room, I compared the EVO 5.1s with the Q Acoustics 3030C speakers. The latter offering the best standmount performance I have heard in 2025. Well, before I settled down to listen to the EVO 5.1s, at any rate.

Which was the best?

Neither! Both!

Put it this way, both sound excellent. What you have here are two speaker designs right at the very top of their game, the top of the pile in terms of quality. But both offer different pros and well, I wouldn’t even say cons. Different style directions, you might say.

The 3030Cs provide tremendous freedom across the soundstage, allowing music to perform, unshackled. The EVO 5.1s have a greater focus around the stereo image but they also have a better 3D effect, pushing the sound backwards into the distance, providing a better soundstage structure.

Bass is excellent on the EVO 5.1s but possibly more immediate and impressive via the 3030Cs. Then again, while the midrange and treble is excellent via the 3030Cs the EVO 5.1s have a superior tonal accuracy with a finer reading of the treble output.

Keeping it in the family, as a contrast, compared to the Q Acoustics 5020s, I prefer the EVO 5.1s because of their greater control and tonal realism while compared to the Q Acoustic Concept 30s I prefer the EVO 5.1’s treble fragility and midrange freedom across the soundstage.

I then turned to Michael Buble on CD and the title track from the album, Call Me Irresponsible on Warners.

EVO 5.2 vs Motion 15i

So how about the EVO 5.2s? I compared those to the similarly priced (at launch) Martin Logan Motion 15i speakers. The 15i speakers also having, of course, a pair of AMT tweeters.

Firstly, be mindful when positioning the EVO 5.2s. I would position the tweeters just outside of your ears to prevent beaming. The EVO 5.1s, by contrast, are fine to point directly at your ears.

In sound terms. As you might guess, the 15i speakers couldn’t compete in terms of the sheer size of the EVO 5.2’s soundstage. The sense of bigness. The sheer physicality of the presentation. The sense of performance from the EVO 5.2s was impressive indeed.

I was also very happy to hear that bass was well integrated in the overall presentation. Be assured, bass is powerful and massy but it never swamps detail or dominates. That was a relief, actually.

The clarity of delivery from the upper mids and treble was on a par with the Martin Logans. That lean array of detail. The AMT tweeter was a highly responsive audio tool which meant that I could easily hear Frank Black’s vocal delivery and hear every word he sang which was often not the case with other speakers using soft dome tweeters, for example, The Spendor A1s being one example.

EVO 5.1 vs EVO 5.2

So how do the EVO 5.1s and EVO 5.2s compare? Which do I prefer. Well I thought both designs performed well in this review. Of course, each design will work well under different circumstances. If you have the room and can push the volume up a level without receiving too many complaints, then the 5.2s are ideal.

The bass response and soundstage will impress. The 5.1s are perfect for a smaller space, a flat, bedsit, second HiFi system in a bedroom or even a larger room where you only get to share a potion of that listening space. Even so, my preference is the 5.1 speakers. For my ears the 5.1s offer a well integrated sound that’s perfectly balanced. The 5.2s are great but my ears vote for the 5.1s. You ears might disagree, of course.

CONCLUSION

The EVO series of Wharefdale speakers are always interesting to listen to, offering fascinating sound presentations. Both the 5.1 and 5.2 iterations are no different.

From the EVO 5.2’s theatrical, big personality that surrounds the ear with sound to the EVO 5.1’s attention to detail and carefully constructed soundstage, you will find plenty to love here. Peter Comeau should be proud.

WHARFEDALE EVO 5.1 & 5.2 STANDMOUNT SPEAKERS

Prices: EVO 5.1 @ £549; EVO 5.2 @ £749

Websites…

EVO 5.1: www.wharfedale.co.uk

EVO 5.2: www.wharfedale.co.uk

EVO 5.1 RATINGS

GOOD: tonal realism, 3D soundstage, treble accuracy, smooth mids

BAD: nothing