Revel Owners Thread - Page 96

Perhaps I was unclear but that was exactly my point.
More expensive does not always mean better and solid wood speaker cabinets are a perfect illustration.

As far as cost, FWIW, I did not pay retail or anywhere near it for my Studio2s. I wish I had that kind of disposable cash and even if I did I don't know that I would spend ~$16k on any speaker.
I bought mine in as new condition. The bitch with speakers and especially large honkers like these is the cost of freight shipping and insurance.
Audiogon regularly has demos and well-cared for Ultima2s for 50% of new.
Still not cheap.

Even though I live in pretty large metro area with a very good supply of Home Theater\Audio retailers a lot of speaker brands are not represented
or perhaps just the ones I end up buying aren't

I would say that if the F208 is 90% of the Studio2, you like the Revel sound and have the cash it would be a very good value.
Then again F52s can be had used for $2300 to $2500 which is really good value.
Stating the obvious, but the law of diminishing returns really comes into play when you get above certain price points

If you read the Stereophile reviews of the Studios and the Salons, you can tell that they like the Salons a good bit better.
I don't think it's a coincidence that the Studios are the least expensive floorstanders in the Class A section if that carries any water with anyone.
Edited by Milt99 - 1/26/13 at 1:56pm

So, you haven't heard the C205, but based on the design you see, you dismiss the entire Performa3 line earlier in the thread. Makes sense. Have you heard the LC1 and LC2, or are you speculating there too? What about the crossover frequency? What about the dispersion pattern Revel is trying to achieve here? Or did you just read some article online re: center channel speaker design?

In the meantime, I would love to go audition your proprietary & award winning speaker designs. You seem to be so knowledgeable in speaker design & driver materials, enough that you can tell us how speakers you have not heard are going to sound.

Perhaps once you actually listen to the speakers, you can come back here and regale us with your wisdom.

You read what you want to read, not what I said. And dismiss other parts altogether. like this part:
As I have never auditioned speakers with the WG rotated I have no way of knowing the resulting sound. Maybe it some how changes the straight MTM typical off axis sound.

In other words I am giving the C205 the benefit of the doubt that having the WG rotated 90* it just might be better than a straight MTM. And to date on this thread, I am the only one even mentioning the rotated WG.
BUT as an entire series, I do not think I am alone making the comment the Performa3 might not be as good as the Performa2.

And actually I have built speakers that are far from the norm. And imo, and others who have heard them, they are better than a large % of run of the mill factory speakers, from any company. I've also turned down many offers to sell them, due to unavailability of some of the components I can not duplicate them, as I built them over a decade ago. So, yes, I do know what I am talking about.

Robby,

I checked my Studio2s. One ends in 57, the other in 61 so they are 4 units apart. How wide is your number spread?

Dennis

There is a 125 unit spread between them, thought it was very odd

My F52s are 67 apart.

No, I can read just fine. What you seem to miss is my point. That point is, again, that you are dismissing an entire line of speakers based on the design of the smaller center channel, which Revel themselves claims was a compromise they made for a certain purpose. You seem to focus solely on this one design, and NOT the C208. Also my more subtle point, which seems to escape you, is that you are commenting/judging a speaker which you admit in blue letter that YOU HAVE NOT HEARD. So, yes, I can read just fine. Thanks. You still haven't addressed the lower crossover point to the tweeter.
How good of you to give to the benefit of the doubt to a speaker you have not heard. How extremely ridiculous. But wait, if you are giving the C205 the benefit of the doubt, how come you brought it up "as a start" in your previous post in this thread re issues and cheapness of the new Performa line.

BTW, do you own Performa2, or any other Revel speakers? Also, so if you are not alone in your assertion re these speakers, does that make what you are saying true? You seem to lack logic. Do you know these other people? Have they also not heard the speakers? So, if 20 people sign up here and post "Speaker XYZ is better than Ultima2 Salon" does that make it true? You are really stretching here.
Great. Cmon, anyone could say this. Is there anywhere on the web where we can see your designs and opine on them? Also, just because you claim someone offered to buy your design, doesnt make it good or make you the foremost expert on speaker design. I can build fishing lures that catch fish and which i could sell...doesn't make me an exert, and i certainly wouldn't comment on a design I have not used.

On the serial number thing I can only speculate.
Depends on Revel's production and shipping schedule.

I do know that they don't tune speakers in matched pairs but rather to a reference model.
Personally I wouldn't be that concerned.

Certain publications in the past have listed the serial numbers of speakers they're reviewing
and of course they're consecutive low numbers because they're hand-picked from the line.

So Robbbby, have you listened to your new Studio2s yet?
Do they sound like they were made 125 speakers apart or monozygotic twins?
J/K

Really? Perhaps you could demonstrate some additional respect, or at least a bit more perspective. From what I have read, 4DHD has rather extensive experience with a wide range of audiophile grade components as demonstrated on this forum, Lansing Audio Heritage, and quite possibly others. As for your "point," it is not likely that anyone missed it -- it was hardly profound. But, then again, who exactly did "dismiss an entire line of speakers"? That, I certainly did miss. We are commenting and speculating, sure, but that is part of the build-up and fun. Pity the day that we limit remarks to expectations- or placebo-influenced performance praises and comparisons of frequency plots.

Like many, if not most on this thread, I have a longstanding ownership history with Revel and related Harman Luxury (or whatever it is now called) speakers, but various matters surrounding this release leave me a bit skeptical that it is a significant advancement beyond its predecessor (which has been, by almost all accounts, stellar). The cabinetry finish, MDF thickness and various other elements seem terrific. Other aspects, not so much, including based on my reading of some of the ownership manuals versus those of the prior series (which frankly contained a lot more useful information about things like off-axis response measures). The resort to aluminum drivers also seems odd, as past Revel releases demonstrated a penchant for the pioneering use of more exotic, and even proprietary, materials. Not that aluminum is bad, but from a company that has implemented magnesium alloy, titanium, organic ceramic composite, and beryllium to great acclaim, its use throughout all of the drivers comes as a surprise. That the lineup includes an MTM center channel speaker (canted waveguide element, notwithstanding) also was quite surprising, springing from a company featuring an oft-quoted, sage individual who expressly recommended competing designs. Comments and observations about some of the hardware (bezel and screws and the like) contribute to the sentiment, as well. The fit, finish and solidity on the Performa1 and Performa2 was stellar in all respects (even if the design of the Performa2 speakers, including the ones I own, is, admittedly, rather plain and boxy). I hope that all of this is proven irrelevant, and that Revel has woven some transcendent magic yet again, but I somehow find myself less inspired than in the past to race out and take the first swing.

Mine are directly sequential, but I trust that Revel level matches its products expertly and uniformly, so I would not worry. Just enjoy.

I would conjecture that it depends on the manufacturer. There's a mythical aura of having consecutive serial numbers, but that's not based in anything factual.

I've owned five pairs of Revels. Two pairs have been in-ceiling, two pairs have been Performas (S30 and M22), and one pair being the Ultima2 series. All my Revels did indeed happen to be consecutive. However, I have previously owned a pair of Focals and Boston Acoustics that were not consecutive and in fact were not even close to being consecutive.

It could be in your case that a few pairs were ordered and you and another customer had the consecutive numbers split between you. It could also simply be the way they were shipped. I wouldn't sweat it and it won't knock your resale value down :-)

In case some of you guys missed it, the Performa3 was released late December and is at your local dealer for auditioning.

With respect to speculation, I do understand if its tough on the Performa2 owners. For the F52 owners especially whose value has plummeted as a result of its replacement retailing for a whopping $2k less than the outgoing model.

Fear not fellows, your F52s sound just a good today as it did yesterday. And it will sound just as good tomorrow as well. Yes the design is boxy but so what? It's still a very very good speaker.

But time does not stand still and neither does technology and efficiencies in manufacturing as well as off-shoring etc etc. and the Performa3 has arrived. It would serve this forum well as a Revel owner, if you can take the time to audition these phenomenal new speakers before questioning its merits. They are truly a world class value. And it's safe to say no one here is a renowned speaker designer so we can leave that to the experts.

May peace bring you happiness. Good night.

So...when does speculation by "experts" on this forum substitute for real world experience of those who have actually HEARD the speakers? My point is hardly profound? Really? So, it's not a big deal for someone to trash a line of speaker which they have yet to actually hear? Oooooooooooh-kay.
So you've read the manuals. How ludicrous. Instead of wasting time posting about what you guys think, why don't you go and actually hear the speakers. A novel concept, no?

Not only have a few people here posted their ACTUAL listening impressions, but if it matters to you look around the web at some of the listening impressions from some "industry experts" (if their opinion matters to you).

Sorry, but you'll have to excuse me if I automatically discount the opinion of armchair experts on a forum who have not yet even heard the speakers vs. those who have.

But feel free to carry on with the speculation & conjecture, cause that's all it is. Its not based on anything real, and it comes across as kind of silly to be honest.

I couldn't resist. Watch this and wait for the end...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rmx4twCK3_I

Objective measurements are highly correlated with subjective results, and sighted listening impressions are highly unreliable. This is very much Harman's philosophy, so I don't think even Revel would agree with you that the opinions of those who have heard a speaker overrides technical discussions.

As far as the C205, 4DHD pointed out that JBL offers 2 center channel speakers that are smaller than the C205 and yet have dedicated midranges. I also point out that the cheaper Revel C12 is about the same size but has its own midrange. This raises concerns that cannot be addressed simply by "you haven't heard it".

Show me where the Performa3 detractors discussed the actual measurements of the new Performa line rather than "aluminum tweeters aren't as good" & "I don't like this design" & "looks like they cut some corners". Thanks.

BTW, aren't you contradicting yourself? If objective measurements are highly correlated with subjective results...and "this is very much Harman's philosophy"...then we probably don't need to worry that these new Revel speakers aren't going to measure well, right? After all, we've all seen the videos of their state of the art measurement & design facility. Or are YOU guys saying that even though Revel places an emphasis on measurements...they are now going to purposely release speakers that don't measure well. Please stop. You guys are just making stuff up now.
He still hasn't answered my question. Has he heard these JBL centers? Then has he heard them compared to the new C205 in the same room/cabinet? And why the heck are we talking about the C205? Who cares about the C205. I simply brought it up because 4DHD used it as "evidence" Revel is cutting corners. By all means, if you don't like the C205...then get the C208. Revel will tell you the same thing. But how can the C205 be used as evidence Revel is cutting corners, when it hasnt been established how it sounds, or as you point out, actually measures. Or are we again saying that Revel is going to use their state of the art facility to create speakers that don't measure well. Scratching my head here. By all means, let's look at pictures of a bunch of boxes on the internet and determine which one sounds (or measures, if you prefer) better.

Just absolutely silly.

I've got good news on the M106s. After re-organizing my room, and taking out some treatments, I have gotten them to disappear and getting those magic moments.

The grain in the tweeter is gone, the whole presentation is clear and relaxed, and I'm getting the 'air'. I have them closer together and no toe-in.

This is a picture of the setup, it's not all finished up yet, yes it's really dark and black, reason is I'm going for maximum performance on contrast for projector.

Edited by HaroldKumar - 1/27/13 at 12:08am

Thanks for the picture, how about the imaging? Are those Emotiva UPA-1s?

What center speaker will you get for surround? The 205 or 208?
Edited by eliwankenobi - 1/27/13 at 5:03am

It is rather juvenile to attack points one-by-one as insufficient, while ignoring the other matters stated. Nevertheless, as for the manuals, I mentioned them as they are notably absent of the kinds of information that Revel specifically has chosen to highlight in the past regarding things like off-axis response and similar dynamics. Those are pretty relevant to a high-performance speaker, no? The new speakers may have all of that in spades, but like the other things I am noting, the absence of those references has made me, as a Revel enthusiast, wonder a bit.

Listening impressions from industry experts? Are you kidding? That is perhaps the most fundamental problem with this pursuit or hobby -- almost invariably we read how a speaker is not only wonderful but peers with speakers at double the price (seem familiar?). Lake Woebegone ad nauseam. That is why having discussions like this can level-set and bring some sense of context to bear, particularly as our own hearing impressions can be influenced greatly by expectations, pomp, and the difficulty of assessing a speaker over a short period of time and with the corrupting influences of room dynamics and so forth. Cuts through the cognitive dissonance.

As to the point raised by someone else about the F52 -- I neither own them nor plan to acquire a set (I am fairly certain that 4DHD does not, either). I do own M22s, which perform exceptionally well for me, and have greater extension than the corresponding newer models. I have no insecurities about what I own (as best I can tell, anyway), but as I look at this particular speaker release, -- especially as to the monitors and that MTM center channel -- I remain skeptical that they represent a step forward. Then again, some have preferred the M20 (a veritable tank of a great speaker) over the successor M22, and I would not dispute their position. Indeed, were I back in the market for another set of monitors, I probably would seek out a set of the M20s (after I reinforced the floor) over the new models.

the only thing i found the tweeter in the new m105 106 to be good at compared to other speakers in the price range, is that it disappears in the music and you never find yourself locating the tweeter in the sound. This is what i like about the Kef uni-q driver. Unfortunately that was the only thing good about the tweeter to me. Sound wise it was absolutely upsetting how ridiculously bland it was. But then again the blandness blended in well with the rest of the speaker. It was a neat presentation because of the phantom center and lack of depth but to me, i found it to be an insult to my music.

i mentioned that i liked the kef but the whole post was about the m105 i had heard

So, you say the above, with my emphasis on the bolded part...and then go on to do the following...
...where you have completely misrepresented what I said. I clearly put "industry experts" and "if that matter to you" in quotes or parenthesis. Cause I can tell you, I do take "industry experts" with a grain of salt. So we are in agreement on that matter. The problem is that many people DO put a lot of weight on that stuff. But, hey, thanks for playing and trying to misrepresent my point.

As far as ignoring points that maybe two or three other "detractors" have made. I have addressed them in spades. I have stated that the C205 looks to be a suboptimal design. My problem with 4DHDs comments were that he was seeming to dismiss the entire Performa line based on this particular center design. It seems disingenuous to point to one speaker and generalize that the entire line must have issues. I have stated that Revel has stated as much themselves re the C205. I have addressed the other two JBL speakers that were brought up. I can sit here and debate MTM designs vs. the JBL designs, and I thought by my previous comments about the C205 would make this clear. But again, has anyone heard them side by side? Cause I can go around to every speaker manufacturers website and post and comment on their designs and say "Looks like they cheaper out" or "this isn't a good design"...hence my comment about "looking at boxes on the internet". Oh, and by the way, is it a co-incidence those JBL centers 4DHD brought into the conversation have Titanium tweeters?

I am still waiting for 4DHD to comment on the lower x-over of the C205. I am happy to have realistic & honest debate and comments over any speaker. So why don't you armchair experts address what Revel says about the C205 configuration:

"You are correct that the preferred center channel configuration is to use a vertically-aligned midrange and tweeter in order to optimize the horizontal dispersion. However, many people use cabinets designed for very low-profile center channel speakers. The C205 addresses that need, and through a high-order crossover and a tweeter that is capable of crossing-over a a relatively low frequency, the horizontal dispersion is actually shockingly good. In "real-world" tests, a listener can move horizontally and barely detect timbre changes."

Again, seems disingenuous to dismiss a line of speakers because of a center channel, while not addressing Revels own comments/admission & design considerations on the C205 AND without actually going to hear the speaker to see if there are indeed major issues with it. AND when there is a C208 also available, a point which some of YOU seem to forget. That is all.

AND, BTW, given Revels track record...why wouldn't we give them the benefit of the doubt? It's almost like a few of you are operating under the "guilty until proven innocent" scenario when in fact given Revels attention to detail, state of the art facility with double blind listening tests, & PROVEN design track record you should be operating under the "innocent until proven guilty" scenario.

No center channel for me, I use a phantom center which works well in this narrow room and saves a bit of $$. I have Focal Chorus 800V surrounds.

Yes those are Emotiva UPA-1s.

And my original thoughts of the C205 were before I realized the WG was rotated. Which gave me pause for additional thought. As Neutralguy has pointed out, the fact the C205 has no midrange driver but the older C12 does clearly points to the fact Revel did cut corners on the C205. Weather you want to believe it or not!
And I am NOT basing my thoughts on entire line on focused on the C205, as you mistaking keep pointing out.

I would like you to point out where I said any given speaker is that the Salon2. I never said anything remotely close.
And I do own Revel designed speakers, a couple of subs. And I do own 5 JBL PT800s, which in fact is the design that Revel used to create the Gem2. And the PT800 was an update of the mid '70s L212...the same speaker design that I based my highly upgraded custom pair on. So upgraded, that only one component (mid-bass drivers) of the original design is in use in that pair.

Until you replied to Neutralguy YOU NEVER ASKED THAT QUESTION. And yes I have heard both and own the larger LC2.
And the LC2 is better than the LC1, with has no midrange driver, but at least the tweeter of the LC1 is not inline with the dual mid-bass drivers.

And I really could not care less if you do not believe I have built speakers. And I can happily say you will never have the pleasure of hearing them.

The performa3 is improved on the performa2 and the finish on the Performa3 exceeds the Ultima as stated by the man himself.

If you can make it to the 3:45 mark w/o falling asleep you can see for yourself.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=zK4c8ai0E-w

Too bad he didn't stick w the prices and decided not to add the gloss cherry.

You really seem to have a problem with referring to previous comments you never stated, as this one in quotes.

Obviously, if a given speaker does not have a midrange driver, then the XO point between the tweeter and mid-bass drivers would have to be lower, as the mid-bass drivers are not designed to play as high as the midrange driver. But then in the stated configuration, one is asking the tweeter to act as a midrange. And imo, not something I would want.


Once again, it is only you who keeps making that statement. And issues I may have with the Performa3, as a series, has nothing to do with the issues of the C205. And it really makes no difference to this conversation as to what tweeters the JBL centers have. As the conversation has to do with the lack of a midrange driver in the C205, opposed to the LC2 having one. And the LC1's tweeter not inline with the mid-bass driver, which the C205 is.

Tho
Those Focals are excellent speakers. That should be a nice setup. I owned that pair many years ago and used them with my M22 before I got the s30.

I looked at the specs for the various Performa speakers and the crossover point to the tweeter is not the same for just about all if not all of the Performa3 line.
The C205 is the lowest at 1750Hz.
There likely is some filtering applied with the mid-woofers taking the lionshare of this up to a point but I'm not expert.

I am also of the view that the Revel engineers have a pretty good idea of what their design objectives at a given price point are.

I'm hoping that some reputable site like Home Theater, Audioholics, Secrets etc., does a review of these speakers.
Perhaps they can gleen more info on the design aspects\compromises from Revel.
The problem is there are so many in this line that most reviewers would want to review the upper-end of the spectrum and not the lower end.

That's quite low. Of all the speakers I've owned or built the lowest XO was @ 2khz. And that was a bit of an odd deal.
2-way w/soft dome tweeter & 14" woofer. Might have been the only system where the 14" went anywhere near 2k.
But I certainly would not want the tweeter going below 2K either.
All the other speakers were around 3K ~ 3.5K xo.

With the Peforma line now available for sale does this mean that the Ultima 3 line is in the works? They were released 4-5 years ago, correct? I wonder if we will see them anytime soon?

-Brian