SKU: 73530820437

Dali Phantom E‑60 WR In‑Ceiling Speaker (Each)

$247.50 $275.00
Save 10%
No.2 Bestseller on lamcf.fr >

Pay in installments of $68.75 with ShopPay, AfterPay and Klarna

Shipping Estimate
USA
  • USA
  • CAN

Ships within 48 hours · Estimated delivery Aug 22 - Aug 27

Promo Codes Available:

For Your Every Summer RSVP, with Code: SUMMER15

Description

Dali Phantom E‑60 WR In‑Ceiling Speaker (Each)DALI Phantom E 60 WR In Ceiling Speaker at Vinyl Sound Toronto Canada The DALI Phantom E 60 WR is an IP65 rated weather resistant in ceiling loudspeaker from DALI (Struer, Denmark), available at Vinyl Sound in Toronto, Canada. Engineered for high humidity and covered outdoor environments, the E 60 WR combines a 6. 5 inch polypropylene cone bass midrange driver and a 25 mm soft woven fabric dome tweeter to deliver a frequency range of 52 Hz to 25,000

DALI Phantom E-60 WR In-Ceiling Speaker at Vinyl Sound Toronto Canada

The DALI Phantom E-60 WR is an IP65-rated weather-resistant in-ceiling loudspeaker from DALI (Struer, Denmark), available at Vinyl Sound in Toronto, Canada. Engineered for high-humidity and covered outdoor environments, the E-60 WR combines a 6.5-inch polypropylene cone bass/midrange driver and a 25 mm soft woven fabric dome tweeter to deliver a frequency range of 52 Hz to 25,000 Hz with a maximum SPL of 105 dB. A 5-degree off-axis driver tilt reduces baffle resonance and directs sound toward the primary listening position, while onboard Normal/High+ and Normal/Mid+ voicing switches allow the frequency response to be tailored to any room, from a tiled bathroom to a covered outdoor terrace in the Canadian climate.

IP65 Weather Resistance for Indoor and Outdoor Installations

The DALI Phantom E-60 WR is purpose-built for environments that standard in-ceiling speakers cannot survive. Its IP65 rating confirms complete dust protection and resistance to water jets from any direction, making it a reliable choice for bathrooms, steam rooms, laundry rooms, spas, and covered patios. An operational temperature range of -20 to +60°C accommodates the full seasonal range of Canadian covered outdoor installations, from heated indoor spaces in winter to sun-exposed terraces in summer. The electroplated galvanized magnetic grille provides an additional barrier against moisture and corrosion, and its paintable white surface allows it to blend into or contrast with any ceiling finish.

Tilted Driver Design for Accurate Sound Reproduction

The E-60 WR's 5-degree off-axis driver tilt is a key differentiator from conventional flat-mounted in-ceiling speakers such as the Polk Audio Atrium 60 or the Sonance Marine 63. By rotating the speaker within its cutout, the tilted woofer and tweeter can be aimed directly at the primary listening position, improving on-axis frequency response and stereo imaging. The tilt simultaneously decouples the driver from the baffle mechanically, reducing resonance and lowering distortion for a more accurate audio reproduction than flat-mounted alternatives. This acoustic benefit is combined with a very low-loss rubber surround on the 6.5-inch woofer, producing uncoloured midrange and rich low-frequency output extending to 52 Hz.

Key Features

  • IP65 Weather Resistance: Fully sealed against dust and water jets, the E-60 WR performs reliably in bathrooms, spas, laundry rooms, and covered outdoor terraces without degradation to drivers, crossover, or grille.
  • Wide Operating Temperature Range: Rated from -20°C to +60°C, the E-60 WR handles Canadian seasonal extremes in covered outdoor installations throughout the year.
  • 6.5-Inch Low-Loss Polypropylene Woofer: A stiff, lightweight polypropylene cone with a very low-loss rubber surround delivers natural, uncoloured midrange and bass extension to 52 Hz.
  • 25 mm Soft Dome Tweeter: A soft woven fabric dome tweeter provides detailed, extended high-frequency response up to 25,000 Hz, consistent with DALI's cabinet speaker heritage.
  • 5-Degree Tilted Driver Baffle: The off-axis driver tilt directs sound toward the listening position when rotated and reduces mechanical resonance between driver and baffle, lowering distortion for more accurate reproduction.
  • Normal/High+ and Normal/Mid+ Voicing Switches: Two onboard slide switches allow independent adjustment of high and midrange output levels to compensate for room acoustics, ceiling height, and off-axis listening positions.
  • Dogleg Clamp Mounting System: Tool-free front-access installation compatible with ceiling and wall thicknesses from 10 mm to 70 mm, with spring-terminal cable connections for fast and secure wiring.
  • Paintable Galvanized Magnetic Grille: An electroplated white grille resists corrosion, blends into any ceiling finish, accepts paint for a custom colour, and snaps on and off magnetically without tools.
  • Flexible Placement: Recommended for ceiling, front, centre, and surround positions across stereo music, home cinema, and multi-room distributed audio applications.

Technical Specifications

Frequency Range 52 - 25,000 Hz, +/-3 dB
Sensitivity 88 dB @ 1 m for 2.83 V
Nominal Impedance 8 ohm
Maximum SPL 105 dB @ 1 m
Crossover Frequency 3,300 Hz
Crossover Principle 2-way
Recommended Amplifier Power 30 - 120 W
High Frequency Driver 1 x 25 mm soft dome (Soft woven fabric)
Low/Mid Frequency Driver 1 x 6.5 inch (Polypropylene)
Connection Input Single wire
Enclosure Type Open back
Voicing Switches Normal/High+, Normal/Mid+
IP Rating IP65
Operating Temperature -20 to +60°C
Installation Location In-ceiling / In-wall
Recommended Placement Ceiling / Front / Centre / Surround
Outer Dimensions (incl. grille) 258 mm diameter x 104 mm (10.16 x 4.09 inches)
Outer Dimensions (excl. grille) 242 mm diameter x 100 mm (9.52 x 3.94 inches)
Cut-out Dimensions 225 mm diameter (8.86 inches)
Mounting Depth 96 mm (3.78 inches)
Ceiling/Wall Thickness (Dogleg Span) 10 - 70 mm (0.39 - 2.76 inches)
Recommended Rear Volume (Backbox) 5 - 50 litres (Optimum: 15 litres)
Weight (incl. grille) 2.0 kg (4.40 lbs)
Finish White
Sold As Each (single speaker)

What's in the Box

  • DALI Phantom E-60 WR In-Ceiling Speaker (1 unit)
  • Galvanized paintable magnetic grille
  • Owner's manual

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the DALI Phantom E-60 WR?

The DALI Phantom E-60 WR is an IP65-rated weather-resistant 2-way in-ceiling loudspeaker from DALI (Struer, Denmark) featuring a 6.5-inch polypropylene cone woofer, a 25 mm soft dome tweeter, and a frequency range of 52 Hz to 25,000 Hz. It operates from -20 to +60°C, handles 30 to 120 W at 8 ohms, and is sold individually at Vinyl Sound in Toronto, Canada. It is designed for bathrooms, spas, laundry rooms, and covered outdoor terraces where standard in-ceiling speakers cannot be used.

How does the DALI Phantom E-60 WR compare to other weather-resistant 6.5-inch in-ceiling speakers?

The DALI Phantom E-60 WR offers a more acoustically refined approach than most weather-resistant in-ceiling speakers in its size class. Competitors such as the Polk Audio Atrium 60 and the Klipsch AW-525 offer outdoor-rated performance but use flat-mounted driver baffles without the E-60 WR's 5-degree tilt for resonance reduction. The Sonance Marine 63 is a close size-class competitor but lacks onboard voicing switches. The E-60 WR's combination of IP65 protection, tilted driver baffle, independent Normal/High+ and Normal/Mid+ switches, and paintable galvanized grille makes it one of the most versatile and acoustically considered options available in the 6.5-inch weather-resistant in-ceiling category.

Can the DALI Phantom E-60 WR be installed in a bathroom or shower area?

Yes, the DALI Phantom E-60 WR is specifically designed for bathrooms and high-humidity environments. Its IP65 rating provides complete protection against dust and water jets from any direction, covering the condensation, steam, and incidental water contact typical of bathroom and shower ceiling installations. It should be installed in the ceiling above or adjacent to the shower area, not directly in the path of the shower spray, and the ceiling cavity behind the speaker should be protected from direct moisture ingress using a suitable backbox or moisture barrier.

What does the 5-degree driver tilt on the DALI Phantom E-60 WR do?

The 5-degree off-axis driver tilt on the DALI Phantom E-60 WR allows the speaker to be rotated within its ceiling cutout so that the woofer and tweeter aim toward the primary listening position rather than projecting sound straight down. This improves on-axis frequency response at the listening position and broadens the effective sweet spot. The tilt also physically decouples the driver from the baffle at a slight angle, reducing mechanical resonance between the two components and lowering distortion for a more accurate and natural audio reproduction than flat-mounted weather-resistant speakers provide.

Where can I buy the DALI Phantom E-60 WR in Toronto or Canada?

The DALI Phantom E-60 WR is available at Vinyl Sound, an authorised DALI dealer in Toronto, Canada. Vinyl Sound serves customers throughout the Greater Toronto Area and ships across Canada. The E-60 WR is sold as a single unit, allowing customers to purchase the exact quantity required for their bathroom, spa, or outdoor terrace installation.

What amplifier should I pair with the DALI Phantom E-60 WR?

The DALI Phantom E-60 WR is compatible with any amplifier or AV receiver rated between 30 W and 120 W into 8 ohms. At 88 dB sensitivity it is efficient enough for use with compact multi-zone amplifiers such as the Sonos Amp, Denon HEOS Amp, or Russound MCA-C5, all of which are well suited to bathroom and distributed audio installations. For covered outdoor terrace setups with multiple E-60 WR units per zone, a dedicated multi-zone amplifier with impedance protection is recommended to maintain stable performance across all speakers.

Does the DALI Phantom E-60 WR require a backbox?

A backbox is not required for the DALI Phantom E-60 WR to operate, but DALI recommends one for optimal bass performance. The optimum rear volume is 15 litres, with acceptable results from enclosures between 5 and 50 litres. In bathrooms and wet areas, a waterproof backbox is strongly recommended to isolate the ceiling cavity from moisture, protect the speaker's rear components, and improve bass response consistency. In large open plenum spaces on outdoor terraces, the E-60 WR performs well without a dedicated enclosure provided the cavity volume is sufficient.

Shipping Notes
  • Free Standard Shipping on $100+ Orders to the USA.
  • Except Preorder products are shipped in 48 hours.
  • Delivery to the USA:
  1. Standard Shipping : 3-10 business days
  • If time is of the essence, please consider selecting expedited delivery for faster service.
Exchange/Return Notes
  • We offer a 30-day return/exchange service after receiving.
  • Final sale items are not eligible for returns or exchanges.
  • To process your return/exchange, please contact us at [email protected]
  • Please click here for more details>>> Return & Exchange Policy
SKU: 73530820437

Discover Niche Categories That Outsell

Top-Converting Item to Boost Your Average Order

4.8 ★★★★★
Based on 7 reviews
Sort
Highest Rating
Newest First
Oldest First
Product Reviews
C
Verified Purchase
Connie Jones
Dallas, US
★★★★★ 5
Transcends the Historiography on the Constitution
Format: Hardcover
“This is the most important book to be written on the Constitution since Gordon Wood’s Creation.”
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on May 9, 2020
M
moxielady
Draper, US
★★★★★ 2
I Really Wanted to Like This, But...
Format: Audiobook
My 2 star review is entirely due to the audio performance. While the premise and scholarly research in this book is fascinating, the narration is anything but. The narrator speaks, and at times even PERFORMS, every "quote" and "unquote" no matter where they are in the text. In a long (20 hours) book relying heavily on quotations, this narrative choice dramatically detracts from the listener's ability to absorb the material. One wonders why he doesn't say, "period," after every sentence! In addition, he sounds like he's spraying a lot of spit at the mike while speaking. Yes, euw. I listen to 3-8 audiobooks a week, and have done so since the early 1990s, so this isn't my first, or even my first scholarly, audiobook. The better narrators designate quoted text with a shift in vocal tone or slight pause. If you are considering this book, I hope you choose the print version.
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on November 5, 2021
A
[email protected]
West Palm Beach, US
★★★★★ 3
Good to excellent content - terrible publishing policy
Format: Hardcover
Lewis (Not "Flewis") wrote a decent text a number of years ago. It was then expanded to a companion volume (Analytical Sedimentology) with another author. The two nicely complement each other but the mind boggles at a price of almost $100 per each. The publisher has clearly made little effort to control the cost. Redundancy between the two volumes is excessive, hard cover rather than soft is used and, indeed, both could easily have been combined in one less pricey volume. A valuable resource to students and professionals has therefore been compromised by publisher, author or both due to ignorance, greed or stupidity. A terrible shame!
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on January 5, 1998
J
Verified Purchase
JMB1014
Grantham, US
★★★★★ 5
An Excellent Introduction to Legal and Constitutional Reasoning
Format: Hardcover
This is an excellent introductory volume for people who feel confused by the debate over "original intent" versus a "living Constitution." David A. Strauss is a law professor at the University of Chicago. His book is a quick read (139 pages), with no notes, bibliography or other impedimenta - just an index. It's a very lucid explanation of legal reasoning and how the Supreme Court has followed this basic process over time. Hence the "living constitution" is really just an instance of the English common law tradition functioning normally. This book will teach many Americans how legal reasoning actually operates in practice. It is a common-sensical and conservative process that seeks at once to promote predictability and fairness. By and large, it has worked well. The phrase "living Constitution" has been denigrated by people who seek to turn back the calendar to a day when more "traditional" values were imposed by law. In so doing, they have invoked an historical fiction, the "original intent" of the framers of the Constitution. The myriad problems arising from this effort, if not its disingenuousness, have been discussed with insight and erudition by such excellent minds as Jack Rakove ("Original Meanings")and Akhil Reed Amar ("The Bill of Rights," and "The American Constitution: A Biography"), to name just two. The real point of this book, I think, is to explain basic legal reasoning to a mass audience. This does a great service. It also shows how naturally the common law evolves, how it tends to restrain judicial activism and yet to permit flexibility as times and circumstances change. As Dean Roscoe Pound of the Harvard Law School put it in his book, "The Spirit of the Common Law," the common law is "essentially a mode of judicial and juristic thinking, a mode of treating legal problems rather than a fixed body of definite rules...." This is a critical distinction. Some so-called conservatives insist that judges must simply apply the law like automatons, as if it were a "fixed body of definite rules." They then seek to enlist the founding fathers in declaring what those rules are, or how definite they must be. But as Dean Pound and centuries of legal history demonstrate, this notion is far removed from the truth, and remote from any useful notion of adjudication. All Anglophone law schools, lawyers and judges are engaged in the process Dean Pound discusses. The common law tradition arose in England over the course of centuries. We imported it to this country in part because it was workable and practical, and because it was brilliantly and systematically expounded by Chief Justice Edward Coke in the 17th century and by Lord William Blackstone shortly before the American Revolution. No one would suggest that the common law tradition means the law is the captive of judges' subjective whims. Such an assertion would have sounded ludicrous to the English as well as to the founders. But as Strauss - and volumes of legal history - unsurprisingly demonstrate, the common law tradition is the key to constitutional interpretation. The common law is an inherently conservative instrument. It evolves incrementally. Those who complain about the "living Constitution" argue that judges merely rule according to their subjective prejudices. They contend that it is the legislative branch that should be charged with interpreting the Constitution. Of course, all three branches of government must interpret the Constitution from time to time. But the legislative branch should not have the last word in determining whether its own enactments meet constitutional scrutiny: To borrow from Chief Justice Coke, no one (including the legislature) may be the judge of his own cause. The function of determining whether legislation conforms to the Constitution has been and still is wisely confided to the courts, which by virtue of centuries of practice (as reflected in published opinions) have substantial expertise in the area and are independent. One also hears complaints that judges are insulated from reality. But courts are not insulated - they are independent. And they are independent precisely so they are not subject to being influenced by lobbyists or terrified by a challenger in a primary election. To show how the common law works, Strauss discusses the evolution of constitutional thought in relation to two major issues: freedom of speech and segregation in public schools. He explains how the "clear and present danger" test in freedom of speech cases evolved, implicating not just such considerations as the threat of imminent harm, but also that some kinds of speech have lower societal value (libel, obscenity, fighting words), while other kinds of speech have more societal value (great literature, political speech). Strauss goes on to discuss how Brown v. Board of Education (1954) was far less a radical overturning of an entrenched precedent, Plessy v. Ferguson (1896), than a logical step in the development of the law. In so doing, he uses an example from the law of torts, where customers injured by dangerous products originally were barred from suing the manufacturer unless they had a contractual relationship with it. At first, the fact that a product was inherently dangerous overcame the requirement of a contractual relationship. As it became harder to draw a line between ordinary products and those that were inherently dangerous, however, the old requirement of a contractual relationship was found to have outworn its purpose and customers were permitted to sue the manufacturer who had created a foreseeable risk of harm. Thus, in products liability cases, as in racial equality cases, the law evolved to meet the new demands posed by changed circumstances. Strauss shows the development of the law by discussing cases on racial equality decided after Plessy that gradually undercut the Plessy decision until it was no longer tenable. Strauss does what law professors do every day: teach the law by showing how it evolved. His explanation, however, is so concise and clear that it makes the discussion seem not just sensible but compelling. Thus we see that the law works. As Strauss points out, we never wrangle over some constitutional issues because they are cut and dried (you have to be 30 years old to be a senator) or because certainty is required (January 20 is the day the new president takes office, no matter how unstable the current domestic or world situation). Other provisions require more effort to interpret, but this is because the founders brilliantly provided that some matters could be spelled out specifically in advance, while others would have to be expressed in more general terms, which could be adjusted to changing needs and times (e.g., the "necessary and proper" clause in Article I, Sec. 8). Interestingly, Strauss does not consider amendments to the Constitution to be part of what makes it a living document, since the amendment process is so onerous, slow, and seldom used. He points out how some amendments merely ratified the status quo, or served to clean up outliers, resolved technical issues, or were ahead of their time. As he offers these judgments, which seem balanced and reasonable, he also explains some of the less familiar amendments in a way that will have readers raising their eyebrows and saying "Oh, so that's where that came from." At the outset of the book, Strauss sets out three objections to originalism: That it is often, as a practical matter, impossible even for professional historians to discover what the intentions were of various founders with respect to matters discussed in the Constitution. That even if an intent of the founders could be discovered, it would pertain to the understanding they had about their world: how does one go about trying to fit that understanding to our world? That as Thomas Jefferson pointed out, one generation is to another as one sovereign nation is to another. The world belongs to the living. The notions of people long dead cannot bind us in the present or future. Strauss correctly observes that the third of these objections is by itself fatal to originalism. The founders were not so impressed with themselves that they felt their "intentions" should be forever imposed on posterity. Had they been dedicated to such a dubious project, they would surely have done a better job of documenting their debates and compromises during the Philadelphia convention. But little remains of those deliberations aside from the notes kept by James Madison. The Constitution, moreover, reflects their understanding that the future could not be shackled forever to the time in which they lived. They realized that the slave trade, for example, would prove intolerable and therefore provided that it could be abolished by at least 1808. So was their "original intent" to permit the slave trade, or was it that the slave trade should be abolished? And what does this say, if anything, about their intentions toward the institution of slavery - a word that did not even appear in the Constitution until the Thirteenth Amendment was adopted in 1865? Most damning of all to the originalist position is what Thomas Jefferson said on the subject. In a letter dated July 12, 1816, to Samuel Kercheval, Jefferson wrote "Some men look at constitutions with sanctimonious reverence, and deem them like the arc of the covenant, too sacred to be touched. They ascribe to the men of the preceding age a wisdom more than human, and suppose what they did to be beyond amendment. I knew that age well; I belonged to it, and labored with it. It deserved well of its country. It was very like the present, but without the experience of the present; and forty years of experience in government is worth a century of book-reading; and this they would say themselves, were they to rise from the dead. I am certainly not an advocate for frequent and untried changes in laws and constitutions. I think moderate imperfections had better be borne with; because, when once known, we accommodate ourselves to them, and find practical means of correcting their ill effects. But I know also, that laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind. As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths disclosed, and manners and opinions change with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also, and keep pace with the times. We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy, as civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors." He added, "Let us follow no such examples nor weakly believe that one generation is not as capable as another of taking care of itself, and of ordering its own affairs." He even called for revision of the constitution at stated periods. While originalists would love to claim Jefferson as one of their own, his words - and indeed his whole life - prove that he was completely at odds with their approach. Men like Jefferson and Franklin, who were devotees of science, were fascinated by the progress men could make in trying to understand and improve their lives. Jefferson was an eager student of nature and did considerable experimentation with crops on his plantation. He famously wrote his "Notes on the State of Virginia" to refute the widely read claims of the French naturalist Buffon about the supposedly weak, degenerate, and insipid life forms to be found in the New World. The idea that such men, who were committed to the growth of knowledge, would seek to confine all future generations to the limited understanding they possessed of the universe in 1787, is worse than laughable. It can only be explained by the polemical purposes of those whose arguments for a regressive social order are so feeble that they have to seek refuge behind an imaginary "original intent" that they erect - as if the founders wanted their limited knowledge and often unarticulated, conflicting, or ambivalent intentions to restrict the great national experiment forever. Given the explicit language of Thomas Jefferson, quoted above, it is apparent that "originalism" actually belies and defies the express intent of Jefferson, one of the most eminent of the founders. It seems paradoxical but it was his original intent that his original intent should not govern future generations! Original intent also appears anomalously restrictive when one considers that the founders never contemplated the existence of an Air Force, though they expressly provided for the Army and the Navy. And ask an originalist what the original intent was with respect to the Second Amendment's use of the term "arms." The founders had no concept of assault rifles or machine guns, let alone nerve gas, laser-guided bombs, predator drones, or nuclear weapons. How do we impose an intention on them to assert what they could not have foreseen, namely, that ordinary householders in the 21st century should have a personal, constitutional right to be able to obliterate a small army in a matter of seconds, based on the founders' notions about the 18th century saber, musket or pistol? Likewise, the Eleventh Amendment says nothing to prohibit a person from suing her own state - just other states. Yet even "textualists" read an unwritten provision into the Eleventh Amendment because it suits their view of how "sovereign" the states should be. When given this kind of a taste of their own medicine, originalists collapse in helpless sputtering and exasperation. Exposed to Strauss' very sensible discussion, the concerns of originalists reflect opportunism and disingenuousness. After all, we should not expect lawyers and judges to become armchair historians, especially under the time pressures of litigation and in the face of hotly contested issues. We should not pretend the founders had some monolithic intent, least of all with respect to matters of which they had no concept. And as Jefferson pointed out, the relationship of one generation to another is like that of one sovereign nation to another: we cannot expect to bind future generations by the intentions of people who are long since dead. In short, there will always be those who resist change and those who welcome it. If you really want to see "judicial activism" at work, you will not find much of it in the common law tradition. A far better example is the recent decision - by the so-called conservatives on the Supreme Court - in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission.
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on May 18, 2010
B
Verified Purchase
Benjamin Douglass
Cuba, US
★★★★★ 5
An Excellent Read
Format: Kindle
The author talks about our constitution as a "living document" and expertly draws the distinction between this and the originalist interpretation as a "dead document."
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on October 5, 2018

recommand products

Aluminum 4140 Carbon Steel Front & Rear CVD Drive Shafts With Alloy 7075 Wheel Hex (Pins Thickened 2mm) For Arrma 1:18 GRANITE GROM / 1:14 TYPHON GROM Small Scale Buggy Upgrades - Silver
68.90
double diamond double chain earrings
497.00
Engagement Ring
310.00
Byredo Deep Viola EDP
287.50
Burberry Her EDT
25.00