Is REL being more 'musical' than SVS a myth, or is there some real science behind this?

[Spkrdctr]

As I've already mentioned, I own REL T9i. Actually, two of them.

There are couple of reasons I bought them. First, I bought into their marketing "There are subwoofers and then there is REL" which is a good line, btw.

Then I liked their connection possibilities. You can connect them with stereo system alone, with HT system alone but you can connect with both systems independently and have the manual crossover for stereo system and AVR's crossover for the LFE channel and bass managament. SVS has those similar features, but not a lot of other subs do.

Then, I liked REL's industrial design more then SVS. That visual aspect is important for me and i not ashamed to admit it. Most audiophiles are lying to themselves and others when they say that they only care about the sound quality and not the esthetics.

Now, the only flaw I see with REL T9i is that it there are no balanced inputs, because I have a problem with ground loops. Those high level inputs can help in that department, so for that it is not bad to have it. I would like to see measurements that show that high level input is inferior to line level. I might do it when I find the time. I have them on LFE RCA now only.

As for their low end extension, I have them at 5% volume setting on their knob and -6db in DENON AVR4500H and they are plenty loud and they rumble the room. I don't need more low end. Or maybe I do, but I am unaware of it.

I did consider SVS and still do, if I am to change/upgrade for T9i, but SVS is also very expensive in my country. The cheapest SVS PB-1000 is little more then 600 euros. SVS prices keep rising for better models, and the first model to feature XLR input (which is the only reason if i would upgrade) is SVS-SB4000 which is 2000 euros. And that is the black ash version (not pretty finish). REL has their S/510 with XLR input and 2000 GBP price, but looks beautiful compared to SVS.

Other subs to consider with XLR inputs are Pro Audio subs and their prices are competitive. Dynaudio 9s comes to mind with nice features, balanced inputs and outputs, fair looking, claiming 22hz low end extension, around 900euros, but I have not found any measurements for it.

Finally, I know that SVS has some better measured performance then REL but I am not sure if it contibutes much more in the whole experience. I don't believe anymore in REL's marketing claims, but knowing more now about subs (still not enough and still learning more everyday, here on ASR), I am not sure I would choose SVS over REL... but i might change my mind.

I don't think you should buy new subs just to buy new ones. If your current subs are rocking your house and they are not even turned up at all, they should last years and will give good performance. It seems you barely have them turned on. 5% volume setting is very low, so why spend the money? Just enjoy what you have!

 

[Chrise36]

As I've already mentioned, I own REL T9i. Actually, two of them.

There are couple of reasons I bought them. First, I bought into their marketing "There are subwoofers and then there is REL" which is a good line, btw.

Then I liked their connection possibilities. You can connect them with stereo system alone, with HT system alone but you can connect with both systems independently and have the manual crossover for stereo system and AVR's crossover for the LFE channel and bass managament. SVS has those similar features, but not a lot of other subs do.

Then, I liked REL's industrial design more then SVS. That visual aspect is important for me and i not ashamed to admit it. Most audiophiles are lying to themselves and others when they say that they only care about the sound quality and not the esthetics.

Now, the only flaw I see with REL T9i is that it there are no balanced inputs, because I have a problem with ground loops. Those high level inputs can help in that department, so for that it is not bad to have it. I would like to see measurements that show that high level input is inferior to line level. I might do it when I find the time. I have them on LFE RCA now only.

As for their low end extension, I have them at 5% volume setting on their knob and -6db in DENON AVR4500H and they are plenty loud and they rumble the room. I don't need more low end. Or maybe I do, but I am anaware of it.

I did consider SVS and still do, if I am to change/upgrade for T9i, but SVS is also very expensive in my country. The cheapest SVS PB-1000 is little more then 600 euros. SVS prices keep rising for better models, and the first model to feature XLR input (which is the only reason if i would upgrade) is SVS-SB4000 which is 2000 euros. And that is the black ash version (not pretty finish). REL has their S/510 with XLR input and 2000 GBP price, but looks beautiful compared to SVS.

Other subs to consider with XLR inputs are Pro Audio subs and their prices are competitive. Dynaudio 9s comes to mind with nice features, balanced inputs and outputs, fair looking, claiming 22hz low end extension, around 900euros, but I have not found any measurements for it.

Finally, I know that SVS has some better measured performance then REL but I am not sure if it contibutes much more in the whole experience. I don't believe anymore in REL's marketing claims, but knowing more now about subs (still not enough and still learning more everyday, here on ASR), I am not sure I would choose SVS over REL... but i might change my mind.

The problem with high level connection is the stress on the amp driving the sub input and the speakers in parallel.Distortion and SINAD is worse than rca but for subwoofers is not a problem since you will not hear it.

 

[mansr]

The problem with high level connection is the stress on the amp driving the sub input and the speakers in parallel.Distortion and SINAD is worse than rca but for subwoofers is not a problem since you will not hear it.

The impedance of the high-level input is very high compared to the speakers. Amp loading is not the issue here.

 

[stevenswall]

Usually "more musical" means "this sub has less low-bass output and since I don't use room EQ like I should, my room modes ruin the low bass if it's loud."

This to a T. REL woofers don't have good deep bass output, so they sound more accurate because they simply omit lower frequencies to sound less boomy.

Similar thing when someone says not to get speakers too large for your room: Nonsense. Use room calibration like you should and enjoy the extension without peaks like it should be.

The most "musical" sub I've heard is the Genelec 7271... Which is horribly bloated and boomy, and makes music sound like mud, until I used GLM to calibrate it.

It's heaven now. The best integrated sub I've ever used. Bass comes from nowhere in particular, and sounds tight.

 

[Chrise36]

The impedance of the high-level input is very high compared to the speakers. Amp loading is not the issue here.

Still it is far from ideal but do you have any numbers it would be good to know?

 

[richard12511]

I think if audiophools are claiming it, then it might be some sort of distortion in measurement whihc they are thinking to be musical. Rel needs to be on a test bench soon

I agree we need CEA-2010 measurements for REL subs. I wouldn't expect great results, though .

 

[Chrispy]

Subs definitely do sound different. I've got 4 Infinity R12s in one of the guest bedrooms


I agree we need CEA-2010 measurements for REL subs. I wouldn't expect great results, though .

Yep, your four R12s may sound different in your guest bedroom but probably no better than Rel

 

[ta240]

I agree we need CEA-2010 measurements for REL subs. I wouldn't expect great results, though .

It seems about as useful as measuring single ended tube amps, which people enjoy for their 2nd harmonics and then yelling "distortion!!!" at the results. No REL fan is going to look at the results and go "wow, I shouldn't like this with my music. I feel so terrible now".
From what we've covered here, it is quite likely that what people find good about these subs is the reduced output allowing them to fit into room acoustics better.
Until you find a way to force people to add components to do room correction, I would think there will be a large market of people for subs like this. And I will admit it makes me laugh a bit that I know several people just gritted their teeth reading that line.

I guess if Rel changed their advertising to "We don't give you ridiculous IMAX level output, just easy to blend, usable bass for music without any fancy setup" some people would be happier?

The decibel meter just nearly exceeded 50 at my average listening distance and level. Maybe I should find a sub that can do 105 dB at 20 Hz to replace my DIY Dayton 8" sealed sub.

 

[richard12511]

It seems about as useful as measuring single ended tube amps, which people enjoy for their 2nd harmonics and then yelling "distortion!!!" at the results. No REL fan is going to look at the results and go "wow, I shouldn't like this with my music. I feel so terrible now".
From what we've covered here, it is quite likely that what people find good about these subs is the reduced output allowing them to fit into room acoustics better.
Until you find a way to force people to add components to do room correction, I would think there will be a large market of people for subs like this. And I will admit it makes me laugh a bit that I know several people just gritted their teeth reading that line.

I guess if Rel changed their advertising to "We don't give you ridiculous IMAX level output, just easy to blend, usable bass for music without any fancy setup" some people would be happier?

The decibel meter just nearly exceeded 50 at my average listening distance and level. Maybe I should find a sub that can do 105 dB at 20 Hz to replace my DIY Dayton 8" sealed sub.

I agree with some of what you say, but I'd be willing to bet the vast majority of people would rate REL subs horribly under fair blind conditions. Where REL is truly elite is with their marketing.

 

[mkawa]

marketing blind testing. the next revolution in double blind.

 

[Chrispy]

So who wants to buy a Rel sub and send it to Amir? Personally I just wouldn't bother with Rel to begin with, so many more worthy candidates just on basic price/spec and aesthetic....

 

[richard12511]

So who wants to buy a Rel sub and send it to Amir? Personally I just wouldn't bother with Rel to begin with, so many more worthy candidates just on basic price/spec and aesthetic....

Personally, I'd still like to see the objective performance of REL subs.

However, I also agree with @ta240 that REL customers likely don't care about objective performance. Kinda similar to Zu speakers. I'd love to see a Zu on the NFS, but I doubt Zu owners care.

Where I disagree with @ta240 is that just because REL owners aren't interested in objective performance, that it's a waste to measure them. I think there are plenty of us non-owners out there who would be interested in seeing their objective performance.

 

[polmuaddib]

I think you are simplifying a bit when equating all REL owners. Why wouldn't most of them care about objective performance? I would. There are lot of people here that use to own REL and now they don't. There are people here that were cable worshipers and now they care about objective performance and audibility.
The very fact that an audiophile even invested in a subwoofer says something.

 

[Chrise36]

I think the best would be to have a large SVS for high ultra low output and a couple of smaller RELs for kickbass.

 

[polmuaddib]

I think that high ultra low output IS what gives a kick drum it's weight and umpf...

 

[Everett T]

I think that high ultra low output IS what gives a kick drum it's weight and umpf...

50hz is the average kick drum, down to 40hz at the lowest and all the way up to 80hz. Mid bass is where the thump is. Good dynamics from 40hz and up is what you want for most instruments, unless you listen to pipe organ.

 

[polmuaddib]

50hz is the average kick drum, down to 40hz at the lowest and all the way up to 80hz. Mid bass is where the thump is. Good dynamics from 40hz and up is what you want for most instruments, unless you listen to pipe organ.

I am hearing a lot that there is very little music content below 40hz, but I am not so convinced.
For instance, when you pluck a note on a bass, and let that note be low E on a bass which is around 41hz, there is also a decay that you want to hear. It starts at 41hz when plucked, and then it still vibrates and slowly frequency diminishes all the way to 0hz. If a speaker cuts off at 40hz, you don't hear that decay.
I could be wrong, but I also believe that area between 20 and 40, 50 hz gives that something special to the music. And sometimes can change the way you percieve a song completely.

 

[Everett T]

I am hearing a lot that there is very little music content below 40hz, but I am not so convinced.
For instance, when you pluck a note on a bass, and let that note be low E on a bass which is around 41hz, there is also a decay that you want to hear. It starts at 41hz when plucked, and then it still vibrates and slowly frequency diminishes all the way to 0hz. If a speaker cuts off at 40hz, you don't hear that decay.
I could be wrong, but I also believe that area between 20 and 40, 50 hz gives that something special to the music. And sometimes can change the way you percieve a song completely.

Depends on the music. Yes notes on an instrument are note brick walls, like a crossover, so there will be roll off. Most designers will consider a speaker full range between 30 to 35hz down 3/6 dbs. If you listen to electronic instruments you can drop well below or pipe organs. Nothing like playing a 32' pipe organ at 100db, 16hz. That will move you.

 

[dominikz]

For instance, when you pluck a note on a bass, and let that note be low E on a bass which is around 41hz, there is also a decay that you want to hear. It starts at 41hz when plucked, and then it still vibrates and slowly frequency diminishes all the way to 0hz. If a speaker cuts off at 40hz, you don't hear that decay.

The decay of a note can be described as a magnitude envelope (decrease of level with time), and not one of frequency - so with a decaying note what changes is its loudness from beginning to end, but the fundamental frequency is relatively unchanged (until the note volume becomes so low in volume that it disappears). So if a speakers plays 40Hz with reasonable volume, you will have no issue hearing the entire decay of a low E on bass.

But some music still has content under 40Hz, so it can be pretty satisfying to be able to reproduce that

EDIT: I say the frequency is 'relatively unchanged' as string instruments such as bass guitar typically don't have all that stable pitch throughout the note duration - but this variation is relatively small and insignificant for this example.

 

[polmuaddib]

Really? I was sure that a string starts slowing done immediately after it has been released, but of course that slowing down is so minute in the beginning that we don't hear the pitch change until the end. I did think that we can hear that slight pitch change at the very end...
But you might be right.