or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Speakers › Revel Owners Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Revel Owners Thread - Page 174

post #5191 of 6838
Quote:
Originally Posted by AcuDefTechGuy View Post

LOL. biggrin.gif

Aluminum (Al) - check
Magnesium (Mg) - check
Titanium (Ti) - check
Beryllium (Be) - check

Diamond would be Carbon (C) since diamond is 100% carbon?

I need Gold (Au). biggrin.gif

Well, many interconnects are gold plated so you've got your Au, Fe, Zn, Ni, Cu and possibly Si and Ag.
post #5192 of 6838
I heard revel ultima3 are going to use hydrogen tweeters. Can't beat that smile.gif
post #5193 of 6838
Quote:
Originally Posted by lsdec View Post

I heard revel ultima3 are going to use hydrogen tweeters. Can't beat that smile.gif

I don't know about that. I heard that the new boson and fermion tweeters are where it's at. Anyone who is serious about their equipment will be using them.
post #5194 of 6838
my doorbell uses a diamond tweeter. my wife insisted.
post #5195 of 6838
I actually care more about the aesthetics of the speakers than the driver materials.

Titanium is about "middle" price range (a lot less than Diamond & Be), probably tougher and more durable, and I think Ti sounds & measure as great as Be and Diamond.

KEF Reference objectively measures better than Revel, B&W, and almost all brands. KEF Reference subjectively sounds as great as any of these brands. KEF Reference has Ti tweeters. There is no need for rare and exotic driver materials IMO.

I know the speaker companies want to tell everyone that the ONLY reason they pursue these rare, exotic, and expensive driver materials is because of PERFORMANCE.

But I don't believe them. It's mostly marketing IMO, like everything else in the world. biggrin.gif

"Diamond" tweeters - exotic, Ooh, ah.

I would rather have a B&W 802T (Ti tweeter, Ti midrange, Ti woofer) for $9K, instead of $15K with the measurement of the KEF Reference. biggrin.gif
post #5196 of 6838
What about the plasma tweeters?
When someone first mentioned them I thought it was BS.
post #5197 of 6838
Quote:
Originally Posted by lsdec View Post

I heard revel ultima3 are going to use hydrogen tweeters. Can't beat that smile.gif

Actually, Audax sold a tweeter for a while that used a piezo element filled with some light gas. As one would expect, they deflate over time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AcuDefTechGuy View Post

Titanium is about "middle" price range (a lot less than Diamond & Be), probably tougher and more durable, and I think Ti sounds & measure as great as Be and Diamond.

The primary real differences in driver materials boil down to stiffness, which determines how high up diaphragm resonances will be, and damping, which influences the magnitude of said resonances. Note that there are ways to engineer structures to get the benefits of expensive materials with cheaper materials (and more building costs/labor). For instance,. KEF's newer drivers use a sandwich dome with an airgap between, conceptually quite similar to the 8" woofers on the old Thiel CS2 2.

T22figa.jpg
Source: Stereophile.

Basically, they take very thin sheets of aluminum foil, press one into a spherical section with a flat vertical mounting rim, and press the other into an elliptical section, and join them with the sphere on top and an air gap between them. Presumably, this approach could be refined for different applications with various damping materials between the two domes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Milt99 View Post

What about the plasma tweeters?
When someone first mentioned them I thought it was BS.

They work, but are quite bandwidth limited and in most designs have environmental emissions issues (NOT something one normally hears about loudspeakers!). Sadly, speakers that use them (Acapella, etc.) tend to voice the treble very hot, so that people pay attention to the tweeter. That said, with the treble turned all the way down the mids and treble of the old Acapella Violon 2000 impressed me very much. (The bass - tuned to match the efficiency of the horn loaded midrange at the expense of FR linearity - was unacceptably bad.)
post #5198 of 6838
The all aluminum drivers in my f208 are more than good enough for me but I know that the Be tweeter and titanium drivers on the studio2 sound better. What the science is behind these choices I have no idea but I do agree when you start throwing out diamond, you can charge a premium
post #5199 of 6838
Quote:
Originally Posted by lsdec View Post

The all aluminum drivers in my f208 are more than good enough for me but I know that the Be tweeter and titanium drivers on the studio2 sound better. What the science is behind these choices I have no idea but I do agree when you start throwing out diamond, you can charge a premium



If it wouldn't void my warranty I would love to try the be tweeters in my 52's and center. My highs are great especially bumping it up a notch from the back but...
post #5200 of 6838
Quote:
Originally Posted by comfynumb View Post

If it wouldn't void my warranty I would love to try the be tweeters in my 52's and center. My highs are great especially bumping it up a notch from the back but...

Probably more to the process than just switching out the tweeters.
Just a guess.
post #5201 of 6838
Quote:
Originally Posted by Milt99 View Post

Probably more to the process than just switching out the tweeters.
Just a guess.



Yeah I'm sure it would be electronics inside too Milt. The tweeter in your Studios is magical I've heard the "be" before.
post #5202 of 6838
Why get hung up on what the material is, or the specs on paper? Give a listen and if you like how the speaker sounds, then that's the speaker for you.

A given speaker may sound good in a showroom or in someone else's room, but not in yours., and vice versa.
Ken
post #5203 of 6838
I just ordered today a pair of F208's and a C208. Can't wait to get them!
Ken
post #5204 of 6838
Quote:
Originally Posted by ken6217 View Post

I just ordered today a pair of F208's and a C208. Can't wait to get them!
Ken



Congrats!
post #5205 of 6838
Quote:
Originally Posted by ken6217 View Post

I just ordered today a pair of F208's and a C208. Can't wait to get them!
Ken

Congrats! I've heard them and can say they are VERY good. I would love to compare them to my Salon2s in my room. I'd wager they'd give my Salon2s a run for their money at about a quarter of the cost. I've only heard them at my brother-in-laws house in a not so sound friendly room. They still sounded great. Very clean sounding with a large soundstage. The center is HUGE though. Be prepared for that. They are even bigger than the Voice2 center.
Edited by duc135 - 10/31/13 at 4:21pm
post #5206 of 6838
Quote:
Originally Posted by ken6217 View Post

Why get hung up on what the material is, or the specs on paper? Give a listen and if you like how the speaker sounds, then that's the speaker for you.

A given speaker may sound good in a showroom or in someone else's room, but not in yours., and vice versa.
Ken

While I do generally agree with that statement, materials and specs can give a good indication of how a speaker will perform. I would not even consider a speaker that has a FR that looks like a roller coaster.

What I can say without a doubt is that the Be tweeter in my Salon2 is much cleaner and more precise than the Al tweeter in my Performa F52. I don't know if it's due to the material used or speaker design, but it's much better to me. It is very close to the ribbon tweeter in my Philharmonic3.

My only complaints about my Salon2s is that they might be too big for my room. Obviously it's not the fault of the speaker, but I knew that going in though. These things need lots of room to perform to their fullest. Too close to the front wall and depth of soundstage is compromised. Same for the side walls. Too close and you lose the width of the soundstage. Put them too close together and the soundstage is too small. With tweeters 49.5" from the floor, it puts the sound just above ear level for me because I'm too close to the speakers (~8'). I've been working on finding the best compromise since I got them about three weeks ago. I think I'm getting close.
post #5207 of 6838
Quote:
Originally Posted by duc135 View Post


My only complaints about my Salon2s is that they might be too big for my room. Obviously it's not the fault of the speaker, but I knew that going in though. These things need lots of room to perform to their fullest. Too close to the front wall and depth of soundstage is compromised. Same for the side walls. Too close and you lose the width of the soundstage. Put them too close together and the soundstage is too small. With tweeters 49.5" from the floor, it puts the sound just above ear level for me because I'm too close to the speakers (~8'). I've been working on finding the best compromise since I got them about three weeks ago. I think I'm getting close.

But what you just said was my point in a nutshell.
Ken
post #5208 of 6838
Quote:
Originally Posted by duc135 View Post

Congrats! I've heard them and can say they are VERY good. I would love to compare them to my Salon2s in my room. I'd wager they'd give my Salon2s a run for their money at about a quarter of the cost. I've only heard them at my brother-in-laws house in a not so sound friendly room. They still sounded great. Very clean sounding with a large soundstage. The center is HUGE though. Be prepared for that. They are even bigger that the Voice2 center.

It is enormous. I checked though and it does fit.
Ken
post #5209 of 6838
Quote:
Originally Posted by ken6217 View Post

But what you just said was my point in a nutshell.
Ken

Kind of, but not as it relates to the capability of the speaker.

And congratulations on your new purchase.
Buying great stuff with your hard-earned money is always gratifying.

What is upstream of your new Revels?
post #5210 of 6838
Quote:
Originally Posted by Milt99 View Post

Kind of, but not as it relates to the capability of the speaker.

And congratulations on your new purchase.
Buying great stuff with your hard-earned money is always gratifying.

What is upstream of your new Revels?

My point was that in a crappy room, not even a great speaker will reach it's capability.

At the CES show a few years ago, they had a blind test where they put $10k of equipment in a room that was acoustically treated, and $100k of equipment in a room with no treatment. They asked people to listen and and then asked which equipment sounded better. All picked the room with the treatment.

With regards to what else I'm getting, I'm not sure yet. These speakers are only for satellite and DVD. So for the time being I'll use a Marantz 7008 and bi-amp the L,R,C giving it 250 watts per channel, or I'll get a 3 channel amp and use the pre outs on the Marantz.
Ken
post #5211 of 6838
Quote:
Originally Posted by ken6217 View Post

My point was that in a crappy room, not even a great speaker will reach it's capability.

At the CES show a few years ago, they had a blind test where they put $10k of equipment in a room that was acoustically treated, and $100k of equipment in a room with no treatment. They asked people to listen and and then asked which equipment sounded better. All picked the room with the treatment.

With regards to what else I'm getting, I'm not sure yet. These speakers are only for satellite and DVD. So for the time being I'll use a Marantz 7008 and bi-amp the L,R,C giving it 250 watts per channel, or I'll get a 3 channel amp and use the pre outs on the Marantz.
Ken

Biamping does not produce more power than the amp is capable of producing. It does not double the power.
You may receive a loss in power since you will be utilizing more of the amps channels. AVR's produce substantially less power with all channels driven.
post #5212 of 6838
Getting a power amp will be great for the F208/C208 combo. I have the Emotiva XPR-5 and it's great with the Revels.

Sounds is amazing to me...I'm all done save a 2nd sub.
post #5213 of 6838
Quote:
Originally Posted by DS-21 View Post

And measurements show that they're wrong as to the objective reality, though the measurements also lead to an inference that the voicing is widely appreciated (for now, at least). You've posted the measurements. Here's a more detailed on-axis FR plot than the averaged Stereophile one:



Your "plus or minus x dB" rubric for judging speakers just is too simplistic.

Compare to the baby Revel Performa's published measurements, which show no evidence of the "smiley face" voicing of the LS50 (as well as the driver resonance at 2kHz).
Please only use words you understand and actually apply to the quoted text, OK?

I didn't "insinuate" any thing. I wrote two simple, easy-to-unpack declarative sentences:

"But at any rate your hearsay doesn't tell you anything about the objective neutrality of the speakers. Only that for those three listeners their voicing was very effective."
Do you not understand basic principles of corporate public relations?

Are you saying that the jagged variations in response between 1 and 2 kHz are a result of voicing? If so I would love to meet the guy who designed the crossover filter to produce that result.

The KEF WP discussion of voicing centered on crossover design choices based on a listening panel who listened to recorded voices of KEF personnel, in addition to music. Tweaking the crossover design cannot produce artifacts such as those in the non-averaged response you posted using most common filter transfer functions. More typically those tweaks would result in broader shelving or raising or lowering of the level smoothly over an octave or more. Can you be more specific about exactly what feature in the response you posted you think was an intentional design choice by KEF, and what filter design choice you think they made to implement it?
Edited by russ_777 - 10/31/13 at 8:05pm
post #5214 of 6838
Quote:
Originally Posted by ken6217 View Post

My point was that in a crappy room, not even a great speaker will reach it's capability.

All other things being the same, a good speaker will still sound better than a crap speaker. Absent ability to demo speakers, a person will need to rely on honest measured specs. I auditioned many speakers, but bought Revel blindly based on specs and reviews alone. First it was the Performa2 F52 and now the Ultima2 Salon2. I'm less critical about materials, as I know implementation is much more important than materials alone. As they say the whole is MUCH greater than the sum of its parts. That being said, materials are also important when it comes to knowing their limitations.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ken6217 View Post

With regards to what else I'm getting, I'm not sure yet. These speakers are only for satellite and DVD. So for the time being I'll use a Marantz 7008 and bi-amp the L,R,C giving it 250 watts per channel, or I'll get a 3 channel amp and use the pre outs on the Marantz.
Ken

You can skip the bolded part. It doesn't really work that way. Unless you plan on taking out the passive crossover then getting an external amp and active crossover, you will gain zero benefit. Bi-amping like that is merely a marketing ploy by manufacturers to not lose out on sales to other manufacturers who claim to have that feature. Also, I believe you would only be able to bi-amp the L/R and not the center. I could be wrong though. I'm not familiar with your Marantz.

Here's my anecdotal experience. In my case, I need no more than 150W to drive my Salon2s to reference levels during bass heavy passages. That's with the speakers running full range. I just measured them this morning. The voltage at the speaker binding post stayed below 5V until there was a bass note. When the bass hit, the voltage would jump to 15V. This was with the master volume at 0 which is reference in my room. SPL never dropped below 90dBs. The Salon2s dips down as low as 3ohm under 600Hz so that equates to a 75W power draw to bring the Salon2s to reference at ~8'. I was told that the multimeter does not react fast enough to voltage swings so voltage can be double what I see. If that's the case, power draw could be as high as 150W. So all I would need to do is turn the volume down -3dB and I am back down to 75W power draw. That is well within the power capabilities of most mid-level and above receivers. -3dB from reference is still quite loud.
post #5215 of 6838
Quote:
Originally Posted by comfynumb View Post

Yeah I'm sure it would be electronics inside too Milt. The tweeter in your Studios is magical I've heard the "be" before.

Your F52s are great...enjoy the music! I love the studio2s too btw smile.gif
post #5216 of 6838
^^^^

Measuring the voltage is not a good indication of required power to avoid clipping/compressing the sound.
If your amps ruining out of power, the voltage sags. You. May have measure what is provided, not what is required.
It was not difficult to light up the clipping lights on an ATI3000 with my Salons and is a very powerful amp >450 WPC into 4 ohms.

- Rich
post #5217 of 6838
Quote:
Originally Posted by lsdec View Post

The age old argument about the not needing more power...

I have 400 watts X 5 and 500 X 2. My old amp was 1/2 that...I'm sure there are other factors but the XPR-5 is a huge improvement to me.

Stuff sounds more realistic during movies...isn't that the whole point?

That's your experience and mine is the opposite. I could only tell the difference going from the internal amps of my 4311 over the my XPA-2 when the minimum SPL was over 90dBs. That's minimum not peak. Even then, it's possible that it could have been due to a sited placebo effect. I could hear no difference going from the XPA-2 to the XPR-5. So I went from 140W to 500W. More than triple the power and heard negligible difference if any at all.
post #5218 of 6838
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichB View Post

^^^^

Measuring the voltage is not a good indication of required power to avoid clipping/compressing the sound.
If your amps ruining out of power, the voltage sags. You. May have measure what is provided, not what is required.
It was not difficult to light up the clipping lights on an ATI3000 with my Salons and is a very powerful amp >450 WPC into 4 ohms.

- Rich

If you are referring to my post, I never claimed that measuring voltage would indicate required power. I stated that was the power draw from my speakers. Those are two different things. Although, from that you can deduce what your ballpark power requirements are. My XPR-5 can provide 600W@4ohms. That is more than enough for my Salon2s at my listening distance. I measured 15V at the post. Since you stated in the other thread that it could be 2x the voltage due to the fact that my multimeter would not be able to accurately measure quick voltage swings like these, I doubled my measured numbers. Your statement about voltage sag under heavy usage is valid, but not in this case. I have sufficient power and cable sizing to make it a non issue in my measurements as far as I know.

In the other thread you stated that you needed 200W to power your speakers, but now you state you are clipping your 600W amp. Something doesn't add up here. I would recommend you double check the numbers you stated or check your gain structure. You might be clipping the amplifier input with too hot a signal from your receiver. You shouldn't be clipping a 600W/CH amp when only using 200W.
post #5219 of 6838
Quote:
Originally Posted by duc135 View Post

That's your experience and mine is the opposite. I could only tell the difference going from the internal amps of my 4311 over the my XPA-2 when the minimum SPL was over 90dBs. That's minimum not peak. Even then, it's possible that it could have been due to a sited placebo effect. I could hear no difference going from the XPA-2 to the XPR-5. So I went from 140W to 500W. More than triple the power and heard negligible difference if any at all.

I understand. Not everyone can hear differences. I went from Onkyo to XPA-5 to XPR-5 and noticed huge differences with each upgrade. XPR-5 is all the amp I need though so I'll be stopping here.

I wonder if your hearing is not the best and I say that in all seriousness.

You really can't tell the difference in the dynamic snap or the smoother high frequencies of the XPR-5 vs XPR-2?
post #5220 of 6838
Several years back I got a pair of UPA-1s (now discontinued ) with my Onkyo TX-1008 and Kef XQ40s. I preferred the internal amps in the 1008 to the UPA-1s for two channel. It took hours of listening to make that call. However, for movies having the UPA-1s were a net gain. I returned the UPA-1s. Currently the XQs are doing surround duty and the 1008 is resting nicely. I really did not want to return the UPA-1s - hassle and shipping cost. I now have a Shearborn PA5-200 running my center, surrounds and heights and have no issues but I have not done any AB comparisons. Same amp section as the UPA-1s. My gut feel is the power supply was not adequate in the UPA-1s. Some day I may get the initiative to AB the Shearborn to my 4Bsst2 in two channel but if it looses then Upgraditis might set in.
Edited by jima4a - 11/1/13 at 4:44am
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Speakers
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Speakers › Revel Owners Thread