Revel Owners Thread - Page 267 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Baselworld is only a few weeks away. Getting the latest news is easy, Click Here for info on how to join the Watchuseek.com newsletter list. Follow our team for updates featuring event coverage, new product unveilings, watch industry news & more!


Forum Jump: 
 126Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #7981 of 8008 Old 01-19-2016, 12:47 PM
gsr
Oppo Beta Group
 
gsr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Massachusetts, USA
Posts: 8,527
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 686 Post(s)
Liked: 524
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Schuermann View Post
Kevin is a straight science guy; I would be amazed if he saw a benefit to bi-wiring (vs. bi-amping). I will post any quotable answer I get
LOL I guess a related question is that if he feels bi-amping is preferred with the Salons, would replacing the pair of JC-1's with a pair of A21's be better in this application?
gsr is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #7982 of 8008 Old 01-19-2016, 01:02 PM
Oppo Beta Group
 
RichB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 9,328
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 556 Post(s)
Liked: 367
Quote:
Originally Posted by gsr View Post
I'm using Parasound JC-1's with my Salon 2's. If he has any recommendations on whether biwiring would be beneficial or not, I'd be interested in hearing his recommendation. And no, adding another pair of JC-1's to biamp them isn't an option.

I can always bring an A21 over


- Rich
gsr likes this.

Oppo BDP-105D | Oppo HA-1 | Emotiva XMC-1 | Oppo PM-1 | Parasound A21 + A21 + A51 | Revel Salon2s, Voice2, Studio2s | Velodyne HGS-15

Last edited by RichB; 01-19-2016 at 02:44 PM.
RichB is offline  
post #7983 of 8008 Old 01-19-2016, 01:05 PM
Oppo Beta Group
 
RichB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 9,328
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 556 Post(s)
Liked: 367
Quote:
Originally Posted by lsdec View Post
This video is perfect when you have insomnia and need something on to put you to sleep .

Works like a charm.
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Schuermann View Post
HEY! I love that video

My favorite part of the whole Harman Academy tour was listening to Drs. Toole and Olive talk about the science behind not only Harman products, but also about their efforts to make sure that there are reference standards for mixing movies and music (which is much of what Dr. Toole covers in the video). Brad and I did notice many of the other dealers in the class checking their phones during the presentations, but seriously - we were absolutely fascinated.

My daughter was fascinated


- Rich
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_1192.JPG
Views:	85
Size:	101.1 KB
ID:	1194978  

Oppo BDP-105D | Oppo HA-1 | Emotiva XMC-1 | Oppo PM-1 | Parasound A21 + A21 + A51 | Revel Salon2s, Voice2, Studio2s | Velodyne HGS-15
RichB is offline  
post #7984 of 8008 Old 01-20-2016, 12:33 PM
AVS Special Member
 
John Schuermann's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Colorado
Posts: 2,670
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 202 Post(s)
Liked: 206
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichB View Post
I am curious as to what specifically make the Salon2's more difficult to properly drive and which aspects of an amplifier are recommended for them.


- Rich
Here you go - this comes from the top:

The complex impedance gets challenging at low frequencies, so the amp should be very stable to low impedances, and should have excellent current capabilities. Indeed, the brand-new Mark Levinson No.536 mono blocks are the ideal amplifier combo with with Salon2s.

It's my understanding that the new ML amps were at least partially designed with the Salon2s in mind - that's what Harman was demoing at CES.

John Schuermann
www.thescreeningroomav.com (under construction) Home Theater Design
JS Music and Sound Post Production Audio / Original Music for Film and Video
Check out my new movie!: www.stephensonmovie.com
John Schuermann is online now  
post #7985 of 8008 Old 01-20-2016, 12:37 PM
gsr
Oppo Beta Group
 
gsr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Massachusetts, USA
Posts: 8,527
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 686 Post(s)
Liked: 524
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Schuermann View Post
Here you go - this comes from the top:

The complex impedance gets challenging at low frequencies, so the amp should be very stable to low impedances, and should have excellent current capabilities. Indeed, the brand-new Mark Levinson No.536 mono blocks are the ideal amplifier combo with with Salon2s.

It's my understanding that the new ML amps were at least partially designed with the Salon2s in mind - that's what Harman was demoing at CES.
At ~only~ $30K for a pair , they ought to work well with just about any speaker on the planet. I guess it's not exactly shocking that they would simply recommend a sister company product.
Esox50 likes this.
gsr is offline  
post #7986 of 8008 Old 01-20-2016, 12:41 PM
AVS Special Member
 
John Schuermann's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Colorado
Posts: 2,670
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 202 Post(s)
Liked: 206
You've got a point, but of course, what other amp manufacturer would fully understand the specific requirements of the Salon2s?

John Schuermann
www.thescreeningroomav.com (under construction) Home Theater Design
JS Music and Sound Post Production Audio / Original Music for Film and Video
Check out my new movie!: www.stephensonmovie.com
John Schuermann is online now  
post #7987 of 8008 Old 01-20-2016, 12:45 PM
AVS Special Member
 
John Schuermann's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Colorado
Posts: 2,670
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 202 Post(s)
Liked: 206
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichB View Post
I have two Parasound A21's bi-amping the Salon2's connected with Monoprice 12 (guage) x 4 wire ( less than 8 feet).
The banana plugs are stackable making it a simple process to switch between bi-amping and using a single channel.

The Salons2's sound MUCH better bi-amped. It is not subtle. Clearer highs, better acoustic decay, and tighter bass.
It is not a power issue, It can be easily heard at less the 80 DB average.

There are many strongly held feeling that passive bi-amping is a waste of time, but anyone hearing my system would conclude the opposite is true.

I am curious if the benefit has to do with disconnecting the crossovers, is due to an interaction with the A21 amps, or what?
If the potential is there for other amps as well, then bi-amping should be considered.

- Rich
Some more info, again, from the top:

I too, have heard such effects from passive bi-amping. If the speaker is competently designed, you would never want to insert active crossovers, except for a rare case in which the transfer function required to properly “cross-over” the speaker is published and properly implemented. Otherwise, passive bi-amping can offer sonic improvements. One reason is likely that the impedance outside the pass-band rises dramatically—thus resulting in the amp not being significantly utilized outside the intended frequency range. So for example, an amp dedicated to the high-frequency section of a speaker (whether that is a tweeter alone, or perhaps a tweeter and midrange), will not have significant current draw at low frequencies, resulting in lower distortion.


Hope that helps!
RichB likes this.

John Schuermann
www.thescreeningroomav.com (under construction) Home Theater Design
JS Music and Sound Post Production Audio / Original Music for Film and Video
Check out my new movie!: www.stephensonmovie.com
John Schuermann is online now  
post #7988 of 8008 Old 01-20-2016, 12:56 PM
AVS Special Member
 
John Schuermann's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Colorado
Posts: 2,670
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 202 Post(s)
Liked: 206
Quote:
Originally Posted by gsr View Post
I'm using Parasound JC-1's with my Salon 2's. If he has any recommendations on whether biwiring would be beneficial or not, I'd be interested in hearing his recommendation. And no, adding another pair of JC-1's to biamp them isn't an option.
See above for bi-amping comments.

Got this back, directly referencing bi-wiring:

...it turns out that the difference most people hear bi-wiring, if there is any audible difference, is due to mis-termination of the speaker crossover. As you know, a filter network (crossover) must be terminated on its input and output with a known load. The input side then is sensitive to the simple loop resistance of the speaker cable. (We assume a solid state amplifier, but many customers are very pleased with the results using tube amps—including with the Salon2.) Solid-state amps (assuming they do not use output transformers) present a very low-impedance input to the speaker; almost a “short.”...People often hear an effect from bi-wiring due to increasing the loop resistance of the cable to each section, and mis-terminating the filter. Several dB of peaks and dips around the crossover point can result. But when people have changed to bi-wiring, they unfortunately assume it is an improvement, even when it is actually a degradation. The worst examples are bi-wire cables with thinner wire for the tweeter than the woofer. They should of course be the same gauge, as it is not a case of “fitting little high frequencies into smaller wire,” which is the quality of the logic of anyone making such cables.
RichB likes this.

John Schuermann
www.thescreeningroomav.com (under construction) Home Theater Design
JS Music and Sound Post Production Audio / Original Music for Film and Video
Check out my new movie!: www.stephensonmovie.com
John Schuermann is online now  
post #7989 of 8008 Old 01-20-2016, 12:57 PM
AVS Special Member
 
John Schuermann's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Colorado
Posts: 2,670
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 202 Post(s)
Liked: 206
A note to everyone reading - the ability to get these hi-level answers is a precious resource for me. I am very happy to have the high level access I do, so obviously I don't want to jeopardize it. The people I am discussing all of this with are very very busy people, so please don't overload me with questions now that I've got a few answered

That said, I am happy to pass along the occasional "high level" question where an answer might benefit the audience at large reading this Forum. I can't guarantee I will always get an answer, but I am willing to try.

Hope that makes sense!

John Schuermann
www.thescreeningroomav.com (under construction) Home Theater Design
JS Music and Sound Post Production Audio / Original Music for Film and Video
Check out my new movie!: www.stephensonmovie.com
John Schuermann is online now  
post #7990 of 8008 Old 01-20-2016, 01:17 PM
Oppo Beta Group
 
RichB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 9,328
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 556 Post(s)
Liked: 367
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Schuermann View Post
Some more info, again, from the top:

I too, have heard such effects from passive bi-amping. If the speaker is competently designed, you would never want to insert active crossovers, except for a rare case in which the transfer function required to properly “cross-over” the speaker is published and properly implemented. Otherwise, passive bi-amping can offer sonic improvements. One reason is likely that the impedance outside the pass-band rises dramatically—thus resulting in the amp not being significantly utilized outside the intended frequency range. So for example, an amp dedicated to the high-frequency section of a speaker (whether that is a tweeter alone, or perhaps a tweeter and midrange), will not have significant current draw at low frequencies, resulting in lower distortion.

Hope that helps!
Thank you for this information which confirms my understanding. The upper crossover does not draw current. No current = no power.
So, at the very least, there will be less distortion and an amp like the A21 will stay longer in class-A mode, if that makes if difference.


- Rich

Oppo BDP-105D | Oppo HA-1 | Emotiva XMC-1 | Oppo PM-1 | Parasound A21 + A21 + A51 | Revel Salon2s, Voice2, Studio2s | Velodyne HGS-15
RichB is offline  
post #7991 of 8008 Old 01-21-2016, 03:24 AM
AVS Special Member
 
jima4a's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Southeast USA
Posts: 1,849
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 213 Post(s)
Liked: 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichB View Post
Thank you for this information which confirms my understanding. The upper crossover does not draw current. No current = no power.
So, at the very least, there will be less distortion and an amp like the A21 will stay longer in class-A mode, if that makes if difference.


- Rich
I think that confirms the benefits that many have discounted.
jima4a is online now  
post #7992 of 8008 Old 01-21-2016, 09:24 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 4,386
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 754 Post(s)
Liked: 410
Revel Owners Thread

[deleted - mods please remove as I can't figure out how to do so on tapatalk]

--
"In many cases there aren’t two sides unless one side is 'reality' and the other is 'nonsense.'" - Phil Plait
Serious Audio Blog 
DS-21 is offline  
post #7993 of 8008 Old 01-28-2016, 02:34 PM
Senior Member
 
yacht422's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: fl
Posts: 272
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Schuermann View Post
Here you go - this comes from the top:

The complex impedance gets challenging at low frequencies, so the amp should be very stable to low impedances, and should have excellent current capabilities. Indeed, the brand-new Mark Levinson No.536 mono blocks are the ideal amplifier combo with with Salon2s.

It's my understanding that the new ML amps were at least partially designed with the Salon2s in mind - that's what Harman was demoing at CES.
but, do we then bi-amp the salons????? $60,000 ?
i am keen to find out more about the bi-amping of our fav speakers, but $60 grand?? Nope! (WAF)
i was told years back when my ultima salon ll were new that bi-amping was not needed or beneficial
looks like the thinking may have evolved.

Walt
yacht422 is offline  
post #7994 of 8008 Old 01-28-2016, 04:04 PM
Advanced Member
 
Tank_PD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 926
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 73 Post(s)
Liked: 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by yacht422 View Post
but, do we then bi-amp the salons????? $60,000 ?
i am keen to find out more about the bi-amping of our fav speakers, but $60 grand?? Nope! (WAF)
i was told years back when my ultima salon ll were new that bi-amping was not needed or beneficial
looks like the thinking may have evolved.

Walt
Ouch, would think one would be sufficient. The 536 also clearly supports biwiring, which I've also heard mixed benefits from.
Tank_PD is online now  
post #7995 of 8008 Old 01-28-2016, 04:29 PM
gsr
Oppo Beta Group
 
gsr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Massachusetts, USA
Posts: 8,527
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 686 Post(s)
Liked: 524
RichB and I conducted a somewhat non-scientific comparison on Tuesday. I lugged one of my Parasound JC-1's over to his place. Before hooking up the JC-1, he wanted to demonstrate the difference between using a single Parasound A21 channel on each of his Salon 2's versus bi-amping then with 2 A21 channels on each. Once we found some quality recordings that I was reasonably familiar with, the difference was fairly obvious in favor of bi-amping.

Next, we took the right channel out of the equation since we only had a single JC-1 to compare with. We confirmed that the single amp channel versus bi-amping difference was still noticeable.

We then hooked up my JC-1 in place of his A21 and we both felt that the JC-1 was a reasonably significant improvement over the A21 in either configuration.

Since I was just over there during my lunch break (albeit a somewhat long lunch break), we didn't have time to level match, but the improvement the JC-1 brought to the table was significant enough that I don't believe we would have come to a different conclusion if we had been able to take the time to do so.

We also switched the JC-1 between high bias and low bias mode without any discernible difference in sound quality, presumably because we weren't playing music loud enough to leave class A in either case (10 watts in low bias versus 25 in high bias).

I suspect that the result could easily be different with speakers that are less difficult to drive than Salon 2's, but at least in this case there's definitely a difference.

The next step is for RichB to decide if he sticks with his A21's or upgrades to something else and if I stick with my A51 to drive the center, sides, and rears (I've got a Voice 2 and a total of 3 pairs of Salon 2's in my system). I believe the most likely candidate amps are JC-1's or ATI Signature series for RichB and ATI Signature series for me.

The $15K ML amps really aren't a consideration for either of us as that's going way too far.
RichB and audiofan1 like this.
gsr is offline  
post #7996 of 8008 Old 01-28-2016, 05:34 PM
Oppo Beta Group
 
RichB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 9,328
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 556 Post(s)
Liked: 367
^^^
GSR, thanks for the summary.

We had an SPL meter in hand and for the single speaker listening the level did not exceed 88 DB.
Even at lower levels with the A21's, the effect remains, bi-amping was clearer, more open, and with tighter bass.

The JC-1 was fantastic but eyeballing the SPL meter it was about 1 DB louder than the A21.
Still, based on what I heard, the JC-1 is a winner and a fantastic amplifier.

- Rich

Oppo BDP-105D | Oppo HA-1 | Emotiva XMC-1 | Oppo PM-1 | Parasound A21 + A21 + A51 | Revel Salon2s, Voice2, Studio2s | Velodyne HGS-15

Last edited by RichB; 01-28-2016 at 08:26 PM.
RichB is offline  
post #7997 of 8008 Old 01-29-2016, 02:17 PM
Senior Member
 
yacht422's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: fl
Posts: 272
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichB View Post
^^^
GSR, thanks for the summary.

We had an SPL meter in hand and for the single speaker listening the level did not exceed 88 DB.
Even at lower levels with the A21's, the effect remains, bi-amping was clearer, more open, and with tighter bass.

The JC-1 was fantastic but eyeballing the SPL meter it was about 1 DB louder than the A21.
Still, based on what I heard, the JC-1 is a winner and a fantastic amplifier.

- Rich
RE: testing, which i found very informative - - -but - - - I have a question as relates to the test as well as to normal everyday usage.
Test: where was the crossover set for the woofers and in normal usage, do you have them set as full range, or use the pre-pro to set at , say, 80 hZ?
I have the salon II,et. al. plus six subwoofers and drive the revels using an Anthem P5 for all five speakers (L;C;R + embraces[s])
Being an Anthem customer, I use the 'ARC' equalization software, and the instructions are to set the Salon to 'small', as opposed to full, which reduces the draw on the P5.(allowing more current for the 4 ohm mids and whatever the tweeter really is)
So, gents, again many thanks for the data, and I look forward to your response.
Walt in sunny Florida
yacht422 is offline  
post #7998 of 8008 Old 01-29-2016, 03:25 PM
AVS Special Member
 
John Schuermann's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Colorado
Posts: 2,670
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 202 Post(s)
Liked: 206
Quote:
Originally Posted by yacht422 View Post
but, do we then bi-amp the salons????? $60,000 ?
i am keen to find out more about the bi-amping of our fav speakers, but $60 grand?? Nope! (WAF)
i was told years back when my ultima salon ll were new that bi-amping was not needed or beneficial
looks like the thinking may have evolved.

Walt
When you say $60K, I am assuming you mean between the Revel Salons and the two ML MonoBlock amps? To be fair, you are only talking $52K, not $60K

Unless you are talking two amps per speaker, then I get your $60K figure.

Either way it's still a lot of dough, obviously On the "mitigating factor" side, Kevin Voecks was personally demoing the Salons at CES with only one Mark Levinson 536 per side, so evidently feels that these new amps deliver all the benefits without bi-amping. And these demos were for the high end audio press, as well as dealers like ourselves that were invited.

Kevin would probably say that the audible benefits of bi-amping are subtle vs. dramatic. Obviously that clashes a bit with what RichB is reporting, but without knowing all the variables, it's hard to say what is at work here. Certainly the Salons do present a challenging load to an amp, which certain amps are going to handle better than others. Therefore, there may be benefits to bi-amping with certain amps vs. where not so much with others.

John Schuermann
www.thescreeningroomav.com (under construction) Home Theater Design
JS Music and Sound Post Production Audio / Original Music for Film and Video
Check out my new movie!: www.stephensonmovie.com
John Schuermann is online now  
post #7999 of 8008 Old 01-29-2016, 03:39 PM
gsr
Oppo Beta Group
 
gsr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Massachusetts, USA
Posts: 8,527
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 686 Post(s)
Liked: 524
Quote:
Originally Posted by yacht422 View Post
RE: testing, which i found very informative - - -but - - - I have a question as relates to the test as well as to normal everyday usage.
Test: where was the crossover set for the woofers and in normal usage, do you have them set as full range, or use the pre-pro to set at , say, 80 hZ?
I have the salon II,et. al. plus six subwoofers and drive the revels using an Anthem P5 for all five speakers (L;C;R + embraces[s])
Being an Anthem customer, I use the 'ARC' equalization software, and the instructions are to set the Salon to 'small', as opposed to full, which reduces the draw on the P5.(allowing more current for the 4 ohm mids and whatever the tweeter really is)
So, gents, again many thanks for the data, and I look forward to your response.
Walt in sunny Florida
The speakers were being driven full range for the test with no room correction or other processing beyond DA conversion.
gsr is offline  
post #8000 of 8008 Old 01-29-2016, 03:59 PM
AVS Special Member
 
John Schuermann's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Colorado
Posts: 2,670
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 202 Post(s)
Liked: 206
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tank_PD View Post
Ouch, would think one would be sufficient. The 536 also clearly supports biwiring, which I've also heard mixed benefits from.
Already posted this, but here is what Revel has to say about bi-wiring:

..it turns out that the difference most people hear bi-wiring, if there is any audible difference, is due to mis-termination of the speaker crossover. As you know, a filter network (crossover) must be terminated on its input and output with a known load. The input side then is sensitive to the simple loop resistance of the speaker cable. (We assume a solid state amplifier, but many customers are very pleased with the results using tube amps—including with the Salon2.) Solid-state amps (assuming they do not use output transformers) present a very low-impedance input to the speaker; almost a “short.”...People often hear an effect from bi-wiring due to increasing the loop resistance of the cable to each section, and mis-terminating the filter. Several dB of peaks and dips around the crossover point can result. But when people have changed to bi-wiring, they unfortunately assume it is an improvement, even when it is actually a degradation. The worst examples are bi-wire cables with thinner wire for the tweeter than the woofer. They should of course be the same gauge, as it is not a case of “fitting little high frequencies into smaller wire,” which is the quality of the logic of anyone making such cables.

John Schuermann
www.thescreeningroomav.com (under construction) Home Theater Design
JS Music and Sound Post Production Audio / Original Music for Film and Video
Check out my new movie!: www.stephensonmovie.com
John Schuermann is online now  
post #8001 of 8008 Old 01-29-2016, 04:19 PM
AVS Special Member
 
jima4a's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Southeast USA
Posts: 1,849
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 213 Post(s)
Liked: 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Schuermann View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by yacht422 View Post
but, do we then bi-amp the salons????? $60,000 ?
i am keen to find out more about the bi-amping of our fav speakers, but $60 grand?? Nope! (WAF)
i was told years back when my ultima salon ll were new that bi-amping was not needed or beneficial
looks like the thinking may have evolved.

Walt
When you say $60K, I am assuming you mean between the Revel Salons and the two ML MonoBlock amps? To be fair, you are only talking $52K, not $60K

Unless you are talking two amps per speaker, then I get your $60K figure.

Either way it's still a lot of dough, obviously On the "mitigating factor" side, Kevin Voecks was personally demoing the Salons at CES with only one Mark Levinson 536 per side, so evidently feels that these new amps deliver all the benefits without bi-amping. And these demos were for the high end audio press, as well as dealers like ourselves that were invited.

Kevin would probably say that the audible benefits of bi-amping are subtle vs. dramatic. Obviously that clashes a bit with what RichB is reporting, but without knowing all the variables, it's hard to say what is at work here. Certainly the Salons do present a challenging load to an amp, which certain amps are going to handle better than others. Therefore, there may be benefits to bi-amping with certain amps vs. where not so much with others.
Don't mean to speak for Rich, but he stated using two A-21s with biamping was better than a single A-21 for single amp per channel. Rich and GSR indicated the same for the A-21 configurations but a single JC1 per channel was better than either A-21 configuration. I think everything is consistent with what I have read from reputable sources, a better amp beats biamping but there can subtle advantages to biamping.
RichB and John Schuermann like this.
jima4a is online now  
post #8002 of 8008 Old 01-29-2016, 04:49 PM
Oppo Beta Group
 
RichB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 9,328
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 556 Post(s)
Liked: 367
Quote:
Originally Posted by jima4a View Post
Don't mean to speak for Rich, but he stated using two A-21s with biamping was better than a single A-21 for single amp per channel. Rich and GSR indicated the same for the A-21 configurations but a single JC1 per channel was better than either A-21 configuration. I think everything is consistent with what I have read from reputable sources, a better amp beats biamping but there can subtle advantages to biamping.
You say it so much better than I



Ranked:
  1. JC-1
  2. A21 bi-amp
  3. A21 Single channel
It seems that the Salon2's load is such that a single A21 was not the best choice.
Bi-amped A21 was well worth the price $2500 list (street price is less .

JC-1 was the best with the caveat that we know it had about 1 DB more gain.
Would Mark Levinson No.536 mono blocks be even better, perhaps, but at their price, I am not going to find out

Other thouhgts:
  • It may well be worth upgrading amps. The simplest upgrade is two sell the A21's and replace them with JC-1s.
  • Don't dismiss the potentioal benefits of bi-amping because it changes the load on each amp.
  • Examining impedance charts is useful but it does not tell you how an amp handles the complex reactive load
  • Salon2's (Full Range) excel with monster mono-block amplifers

- Rich
John Schuermann likes this.

Oppo BDP-105D | Oppo HA-1 | Emotiva XMC-1 | Oppo PM-1 | Parasound A21 + A21 + A51 | Revel Salon2s, Voice2, Studio2s | Velodyne HGS-15
RichB is offline  
post #8003 of 8008 Old 01-29-2016, 04:56 PM
Oppo Beta Group
 
RichB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 9,328
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 556 Post(s)
Liked: 367
Quote:
Originally Posted by yacht422 View Post
RE: testing, which i found very informative - - -but - - - I have a question as relates to the test as well as to normal everyday usage.
Test: where was the crossover set for the woofers and in normal usage, do you have them set as full range, or use the pre-pro to set at , say, 80 hZ?
I have the salon II,et. al. plus six subwoofers and drive the revels using an Anthem P5 for all five speakers (L;C;R + embraces[s])
Being an Anthem customer, I use the 'ARC' equalization software, and the instructions are to set the Salon to 'small', as opposed to full, which reduces the draw on the P5.(allowing more current for the 4 ohm mids and whatever the tweeter really is)
So, gents, again many thanks for the data, and I look forward to your response.
Walt in sunny Florida
As GSR said, we were using the Salon2's full range.
The P5 is a beast with more power and rated into 2 ohms.

Bi-amping is a very simple test. Simply listen to a single Salon with one amp channel and then 2 channels bi-amped.
If you can't find an obvious difference, you are all set.

I recommend splitting the preamp out with a Y connector and using stackable banana plugs to make quick changes.
As always, be careful when switching

- Rich
John Schuermann likes this.

Oppo BDP-105D | Oppo HA-1 | Emotiva XMC-1 | Oppo PM-1 | Parasound A21 + A21 + A51 | Revel Salon2s, Voice2, Studio2s | Velodyne HGS-15

Last edited by RichB; 01-30-2016 at 12:42 PM.
RichB is offline  
post #8004 of 8008 Old 01-30-2016, 02:45 PM
Senior Member
 
yacht422's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: fl
Posts: 272
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichB View Post
As GSR said, we were using the Salon2's full range.
The P5 is a beast with more power and rated into 2 ohms.

Bi-amping is a very simple test. Simply listen to a single Salon with one amp channel and then 2 channels bi-amped.
If you can't find an obvious difference, you are all set.

I recommend splitting the preamp out with a Y connector and using stackable banana plugs to make quick changes.
As always, be careful when switching

- Rich
many thanks to all!! very helpful for an old guy like me. i have an old Adcom class A two channel amp, memory suggests 250 per channel, both driven.
I can try it: perhaps there will be an improvement.
the P5, as noted, is a beast in its own right, and as i cross over the revel towers at 40 hertz, the loads are not as great as full range would be. (actually, the amp rarely gets warm, even in the most hollywood of hollywood movies.)
so - - - work to be done.
again, many thanks to all.
Walt
yacht422 is offline  
post #8005 of 8008 Old 01-31-2016, 09:41 AM
Senior Member
 
bigguyca's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 221
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 92 Post(s)
Liked: 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Schuermann View Post
See above for bi-amping comments.

Got this back, directly referencing bi-wiring:

...it turns out that the difference most people hear bi-wiring, if there is any audible difference, is due to mis-termination of the speaker crossover. As you know, a filter network (crossover) must be terminated on its input and output with a known load. The input side then is sensitive to the simple loop resistance of the speaker cable. (We assume a solid state amplifier, but many customers are very pleased with the results using tube amps—including with the Salon2.) Solid-state amps (assuming they do not use output transformers) present a very low-impedance input to the speaker; almost a “short.”...People often hear an effect from bi-wiring due to increasing the loop resistance of the cable to each section, and mis-terminating the filter. Several dB of peaks and dips around the crossover point can result. But when people have changed to bi-wiring, they unfortunately assume it is an improvement, even when it is actually a degradation. The worst examples are bi-wire cables with thinner wire for the tweeter than the woofer. They should of course be the same gauge, as it is not a case of “fitting little high frequencies into smaller wire,” which is the quality of the logic of anyone making such cables.
I must remember this line because it would be useful in many situations, "...but many customers are very pleased with the results using tube amps—including with the Salon2..." It avoids giving one's own opinion; and getting into pointless discussions, and just moves the conversation on to other subjects. It's a good thing to say in my opinion, I'm not being negative here.

In the Salon2 manual Revel provides guidance on the maximum total resistance of speaker wire (.07 ohms, 34 feet of 10 AWG for example) that should be used to connect to the Salon. Revel is clearly interested in what is connected to the Salon2 for best performance. The resistance of the speaker wire becomes part of the crossover and can effect its performance. Because the performance of the Salon2 is finely tuned, and the crossover likely has components with tight tolerances; it is likely more important to control the external parameters, such as wire resistance; than control these parameters for speakers with crossovers with that have wider production tolerances.

Tube amps that have high output impedance (not all of them do) certainly appear to change the characteristics of the Salon2 based on my meager knowledge of filter design. Those with more knowledge, or specific knowledge of the detailed design of the Salon2 might want add to this. I don't know the Q of the bass of the Salon2, but .7 would be a common number for well controlled bass. I would guess the resistance (real part of the impedance) of the bass drivers is around 3 ohms given that the minimum impedance is close to 3 ohms . Some tube amps (many are lower of course) have an output impedance of around 1 ohm. Using such a tube amp with the Salon2 would raise the Q to almost 1. (.7 x ((1 + 3) / 3). Some tube amps approach 2 ohms which would raise the impedance well over 1.

The .7 Q case is like a car with good shock absorbers. Press down on the hood, and then let go, and the car returns to its rest position if a cycle or so. In this example, if the shockers were warn they might have a Q of 1, and the car would have higher and longer oscillations; far over a Q of 1, and the car oscillations just keep going and going. A Q of .7 would likely mean tighter bass, a Q of 1 and higher would be looser bass or however it might be described.
bigguyca is offline  
post #8006 of 8008 Old 01-31-2016, 12:24 PM
Member
 
hal26's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 32
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Revel B15a transformer removal?

How do you get it out of the cabinet? It will turn counter clockwise but does not seem to loosen up......long sad story... don't even ask!
hal26 is offline  
post #8007 of 8008 Old Today, 10:57 AM
Senior Member
 
yacht422's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: fl
Posts: 272
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigguyca View Post
I must remember this line because it would be useful in many situations, "...but many customers are very pleased with the results using tube amps—including with the Salon2..." It avoids giving one's own opinion; and getting into pointless discussions, and just moves the conversation on to other subjects. It's a good thing to say in my opinion, I'm not being negative here.

In the Salon2 manual Revel provides guidance on the maximum total resistance of speaker wire (.07 ohms, 34 feet of 10 AWG for example) that should be used to connect to the Salon. Revel is clearly interested in what is connected to the Salon2 for best performance. The resistance of the speaker wire becomes part of the crossover and can effect its performance. Because the performance of the Salon2 is finely tuned, and the crossover likely has components with tight tolerances; it is likely more important to control the external parameters, such as wire resistance; than control these parameters for speakers with crossovers with that have wider production tolerances.

Tube amps that have high output impedance (not all of them do) certainly appear to change the characteristics of the Salon2 based on my meager knowledge of filter design. Those with more knowledge, or specific knowledge of the detailed design of the Salon2 might want add to this. I don't know the Q of the bass of the Salon2, but .7 would be a common number for well controlled bass. I would guess the resistance (real part of the impedance) of the bass drivers is around 3 ohms given that the minimum impedance is close to 3 ohms . Some tube amps (many are lower of course) have an output impedance of around 1 ohm. Using such a tube amp with the Salon2 would raise the Q to almost 1. (.7 x ((1 + 3) / 3). Some tube amps approach 2 ohms which would raise the impedance well over 1.

The .7 Q case is like a car with good shock absorbers. Press down on the hood, and then let go, and the car returns to its rest position if a cycle or so. In this example, if the shockers were warn they might have a Q of 1, and the car would have higher and longer oscillations; far over a Q of 1, and the car oscillations just keep going and going. A Q of .7 would likely mean tighter bass, a Q of 1 and higher would be looser bass or however it might be described.
√In the Salon2 manual Revel provides guidance on the maximum total resistance of speaker wire (.07 ohms, 34 feet of 10 AWG for example) that should be used to connect to the Salon. Revel is clearly interested in what is connected to the Salon2 for best performance. The resistance of the speaker wire becomes part of the crossover and can effect its performance. Because the performance of the Salon2 is finely tuned, and the crossover likely has components with tight tolerances; it is likely more important to control the external parameters, such as wire resistance; than control these parameters for speakers with crossovers with that have wider production tolerances.

FWIW: i was advised that loop resistance was not material to the cable used as all wires we would use are far less than 0.07 ohms.
"from Revel and 'my cable guy".
But, for the record, the 0.07 comment made me look at something I had ignored - - - totally!
So, thank you.
walt
yacht422 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply Speakers

Tags
Revel

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off