Revel M106 vs M126Be: worth the upgrade?

[thewas]

Unless you buy it new, then it’s free for 5 years . And since it came out in 2018. Every 126Be should be under warranty.

I am not sure if most loudspeaker manufacturers would see a tweeter with a burned voice coil which is a clearly a sign of overload as a warranty case.

 

[Chippyboy]

Just got my M126BE's a few days ago. Honestly, my first impression was "Oh no what have I done!" They are replacing a pair of Wilson Benesch Arcs and on first listening the Revels sounded flat, lifeless and just plain dull.

But I am delighted to say that after many hours of persevering now, I am starting to love them. Whether it is me getting used to the sound, or the drivers breaking in, or both, I don't know.

A few things strike me about them, especially compared to the Wilson Beneschs. First, they have WAY less bass extension. I had got so used to the WB Arcs over many years that I had kindof assumed that similarly sized, reflex-ported standmounts would have similar bass response. Well, no. The Arcs go way deeper and are quite useable in my room without a sub. The Revels absolutely are not. At least not in my room - which is not large - nor with the music I like. Jazz trios or chamber music maybe they would be OK but for Sting, Clapton, Knopfler etc, no, I think you need a sub.

They are also much less sensitive than the Arcs - I have to turn the wick right up on the NAD M33 compared to similar listening levels previously

Having connected up my REL sub now though, the Revels really are starting to shine. The sound is extremely smooth to my ear, almost too laid back, but as you listen you realise all the detail is there, just without the rough edges. Tracks with previously painful amounts of treble are now quite listenable.

And another positive is the incredible sense of space these things create. Put on any orchestral piece and you're immediately in an enormous hall with the orchestra laid out in front of you. That's really fabulous.

So overall I am now delighted with them. But I am shocked at just how different two £4k standmounts could be! At that sort of price point, I had naively thought that the WB's and the Revels would be fairly similar - laws of diminishing returns etc. Wrong!

 

[YSC]

I recently upgraded to the m126Be from an old pair of B&W bookshelfs from the early 2000's - since I held out upgrading for that long, it was worth it Picked them up used from USAM, and it was a little over $2k.

Btw, measurements were brought up on Revel Be series speakers on another thread, and there I learned that spinorama for m106 vs m126Be can be found as well at this site: Speaker Data 2034. These two speakers are characterized by different crossover freq it seems, and slightly non-ideal stuff (dB dip, and directivity errors to parrot @amirm's review of the m106) occurs at those freqs. Not that I would notice, and not that I would care to at any rate.

Re: deals, may want to check Music Direct from time to time for open box deals; or call A&B in Austin (I just did to fantasy shop f208 vs. f226Be) as they seem friendly.

The listening windows looks really nice but at that price I always wonder why don’t go active and save up more

 

[RichB]

Also I would think with how much of passive output boost the waveguide provides, it should be almost impossible to blow the tweeter without blowing the woofers first.

Amplifier clipping differs by design but here is an interesting article.
Why Do Tweeters Blow When Amplifiers Distort? (sound-au.com)

In the article, moderate clipping

Moderate Clipping

Figure 4A - Moderate Clipping

Increasing the gain further (another 6dB), the waveform is now visibly distorted, and if you look at the green trace (the tweeter) you can see that there are very noticeable 'dropouts'. When the overall signal clips, sections of high frequency signal are simply lost, and replaced by harmonics of the clipped waveform. These harmonics do not replace (musically speaking) the frequencies that were removed by clipping.

The relative amplitudes of the tweeter signal and the full range signal show us that while the tweeter voltage has increased to 8.9V, the overall is now 24.7V. This is an increase of 7.6dB for the tweeter, and 6.9dB for the overall signal (compared to the unclipped waveform).

Figure 4B - Tweeter Spectrum, Moderate Clipping

The overall level is now much greater than before - it has risen quite dramatically over the entire spectrum. Not only are the wanted frequencies at a higher level, but so are the harmonics of the lower (clipped) frequencies. However, the background 'noise' of the harmonics is still more than 10dB below the peaks, so the contribution from harmonics is not great.

What we do see is the increase of signal level to the tweeter, with the moderate clipping example showing a 7.6dB increase. Remember that this translates to an average power increase of over 5 times to the tweeter. If the tweeter would normally be expected to handle a peak power of 15W and an average power of perhaps 5W (based on Figure 1 and a 100W amplifier), a 7dB increase will take that average to 25W! The tweeter will not survive.

There are amplifiers with clip indicators, soft clipping (limiting, I am not in favor of this), and protection that will protect tweeters.

For example, the AHB2 will shutdown with extended 1% distortion.
A Revel Salon2 tweeter replacement is about $1000 and will soon be discontinued so protection become an important feature (for me).

- Rich

 

[RichB]

I have had scratchy drivers on the Revel Salon1a and Voice1 that turned out to be related to design issue were the glue failed.
I detected these issues with content and verified them with measurements.

If concerned about damage, I would play each speaker separately and if possible, play some tones and measure the distortion components.

- Rich

 

[steveo242]

Since you’ve already had them for 3 weeks, if It sounds better in a few months, it’s more likely your brain adapted than the driver changed.

I do believe you are correct. Today I returned them and went back to the M106 and am very happy to do so! Thanks for the nudge in the right direction.

 

[jonfitch]

Just got my M126BE's a few days ago. Honestly, my first impression was "Oh no what have I done!" They are replacing a pair of Wilson Benesch Arcs and on first listening the Revels sounded flat, lifeless and just plain dull.

But I am delighted to say that after many hours of persevering now, I am starting to love them. Whether it is me getting used to the sound, or the drivers breaking in, or both, I don't know.

A few things strike me about them, especially compared to the Wilson Beneschs. First, they have WAY less bass extension. I had got so used to the WB Arcs over many years that I had kindof assumed that similarly sized, reflex-ported standmounts would have similar bass response. Well, no. The Arcs go way deeper and are quite useable in my room without a sub. The Revels absolutely are not. At least not in my room - which is not large - nor with the music I like. Jazz trios or chamber music maybe they would be OK but for Sting, Clapton, Knopfler etc, no, I think you need a sub.

They are also much less sensitive than the Arcs - I have to turn the wick right up on the NAD M33 compared to similar listening levels previously

Having connected up my REL sub now though, the Revels really are starting to shine. The sound is extremely smooth to my ear, almost too laid back, but as you listen you realise all the detail is there, just without the rough edges. Tracks with previously painful amounts of treble are now quite listenable.

And another positive is the incredible sense of space these things create. Put on any orchestral piece and you're immediately in an enormous hall with the orchestra laid out in front of you. That's really fabulous.

So overall I am now delighted with them. But I am shocked at just how different two £4k standmounts could be! At that sort of price point, I had naively thought that the WB's and the Revels would be fairly similar - laws of diminishing returns etc. Wrong!

Revel speakers tend to roll off the bass more rapidly than other brands in my experience. Their speakers seem to be primarily aimed at HT and pairing with subs. I find even their floorstanders roll off in the bass frequencies earlier than many bookshelf sized speakers. But this tradeoff can mean less dynamic compression for movies.

 

[Howaboutthat]

Chippyboy -- I am generally a Revel fan, but not sure I would have moved along a set of Wilson Benesch Arcs for them. I hope you kept the Arcs, but if not, I would be happy to test them for you (for, say, 10 years, or so?).

 

[Alice of Old Vincennes]

Revel speakers tend to roll off the bass more rapidly than other brands in my experience. Their speakers seem to be primarily aimed at HT and pairing with subs. I find even their floorstanders roll off in the bass frequencies earlier than many bookshelf sized speakers. But this tradeoff can mean less dynamic compression for movies.

I simply don't agree.

 

[jonfitch]

I simply don't agree.

Facts don't really care about your feelings though.

 

[Lsc]

I simply don't agree.

Yes me too because it’s a wrong generalization. Revel speakers are not designed for HT (whatever that means).

Revel does have 3 excellent center channels but it doesn’t mean it’s geared toward HT. Instead they did a nice job making good center channels so it’s nice to have a system that does a good job at both music and HT. I listen to music about 90% of the time (F228Be).

 

[CatDad]

Would the F126Be be a good fit for a surround speaker? If I go with the Be line, then I am thinking about going with the F226Be since I do mainly home theater. I have 2 Rhythmik 18" subs already. Thanks!

 

[Asinus]

Would the F126Be be a good fit for a surround speaker? If I go with the Be line, then I am thinking about going with the F226Be since I do mainly home theater. I have 2 Rhythmik 18" subs already. Thanks!

It is overkill but it will do more than OK and you will have the closest timbre match short of having identical 226s all around you.

However, if you go with F226Be as fronts (and potentially the C426Be as center) you might also want to consider F206s or even M106 as surrounds instead of the M126Be. Unless you have to wall-mount, the F206 will take the same floorspace, any Performa will match the timbre pretty closely and it will cost less, besides, it is hard to discern the advantages of the Bes when they are on surround duty.

 

[CatDad]

It is overkill but it will do more than OK and you will have the closest timbre match short of having identical 226s all around you.

However, if you go with F226Be as fronts (and potentially the C426Be as center) you might also want to consider F206s or even M106 as surrounds instead of the M126Be. Unless you have to wall-mount, the F206 will take the same floorspace, any Performa will match the timbre pretty closely and it will cost less, besides, it is hard to discern the advantages of the Bes when they are on surround duty.

I definitely agree with you. I think this is just an OCD thing for me that they all should be matching as close to each other. I should probably get over it because I'm going to have to go with something like M80xc for the Atmos. I definitely want as close as possible so the 206s or the 106s would be a good choice as well. I considered the 206s for surrounds but the tweeter height will be lower than the mains. I would most likely have to build some type of platforms to put the F206s on for surround duties.

Also, I am still on the fence in regards to the F208 vs F226Be. I have read such amazing things about both. This room is mainly used for home theater so the F208s may make more sense both financially and for our current room. I definitely know that you can't go wrong either way. thanks!

 

[richard12511]

I definitely agree with you. I think this is just an OCD thing for me that they all should be matching as close to each other. I should probably get over it because I'm going to have to go with something like M80xc for the Atmos. I definitely want as close as possible so the 206s or the 106s would be a good choice as well. I considered the 206s for surrounds but the tweeter height will be lower than the mains. I would most likely have to build some type of platforms to put the F206s on for surround duties.

Also, I am still on the fence in regards to the F208 vs F226Be. I have read such amazing things about both. This room is mainly used for home theater so the F208s may make more sense both financially and for our current room. I definitely know that you can't go wrong either way. thanks!

Will you be running them with grills? IMO the biggest difference between the two series is the white vs black woofers.

 

[CatDad]

Will you be running them with grills? IMO the biggest difference between the two series is the white vs black woofers.

Really? I thought the beryllium tweeters in the Be series would be a big upgrade in clarity and detail over the aluminum in the F208. I like the aesthetic of both speakers and would run both without the grills. Since we mainly use the room for home theater, the F208 would probably be more pleasing since the white could be distracting. Ultimately, I just don't want to make the wrong decision. This is a TON of money for us financially. These speakers will be our upgrade over the SVS Ultra towers that we have owned for several years. Either way we go, it will be a massive upgrade but if the F226Be is seriously a lot better than the F208, then I am definitely considering it. I've had buyer's remorse way too many times. Thanks!

 

[richard12511]

Really? I thought the beryllium tweeters in the Be series would be a big upgrade in clarity and detail over the aluminum in the F208. I like the aesthetic of both speakers and would run both without the grills. Since we mainly use the room for home theater, the F208 would probably be more pleasing since the white could be distracting. Ultimately, I just don't want to make the wrong decision. This is a TON of money for us financially. These speakers will be our upgrade over the SVS Ultra towers that we have owned for several years. Either way we go, it will be a massive upgrade but if the F226Be is seriously a lot better than the F208, then I am definitely considering it. I've had buyer's remorse way too many times. Thanks!

I've heard the M106be and the M105 side by side, and I did like the Be series slightly more. It wasn't blind, though, and I definitely prefer the look of the white drivers. I also know they "should" sound better.

I don't have a lot of experience with HT. For Multichannel music(and upmixing) I would say it's definitely not worth it to spend more money on the surrounds. That's music, though, where all the surrounds do is play -20dB echos. For HT, where the surrounds play actual content, it might be completely different.

For me it's a matter of how much do you want that last 5% of performance? The normal performa series gives you 95% of the performance for half the price. If it were my money, I'd probably go with the Be series for the LCR, but I also recognize that's a bit irrational. That's just me though. I think it's a personal dilema based on how much you care on having the absolute best(that last 5%). Even I'd probably go M106 for surrounds, though. LCR is 90%+ of the experience IMO.

 

[CatDad]

I've heard the M106be and the M105 side by side, and I did like the Be series slightly more. It wasn't blind, though, and I definitely prefer the look of the white drivers. I also know they "should" sound better.

I don't have a lot of experience with HT. For Multichannel music(and upmixing) I would say it's definitely not worth it to spend more money on the surrounds. That's music, though, where all the surrounds do is play -20dB echos. For HT, where the surrounds play actual content, it might be completely different.

For me it's a matter of how much do you want that last 5% of performance? The normal performa series gives you 95% of the performance for half the price. If it were my money, I'd probably go with the Be series for the LCR, but I also recognize that's a bit irrational. That's just me though. I think it's a personal dilema based on how much you care on having the absolute best(that last 5%). Even I'd probably go M106 for surrounds, though. LCR is 90%+ of the experience IMO.

Thank you for your detailed response. Just to clarify, you meant the F126Be vs the M106? From what I have seen the F208, with the bigger drivers, will have an advantage in the bass region over the F226Be. This most likely won't matter since I have dual Rhythmik FV18 subwoofers. It does make it a bit tricky since you get A LOT for your money with the F208s. The F226Be shares the same cabinet so you're just paying for the drivers (less size in the woofers but still upgraded over the F208). The availability is pretty scarce on both of these speakers so it is going to be a tough decision. I also agree that I should probably spend less on the surrounds. The m106s or F206s will probably be enough with either setup. I definitely worry about them not being timbre matched completely if I go with the Be series but it shouldn't be too noticeable for surrounds. The center channel that the Be offers is a Massive upgrade it does seem though. That's another factor to consider. Thanks!

 

[richard12511]

Thank you for your detailed response. Just to clarify, you meant the F126Be vs the M106? From what I have seen the F208, with the bigger drivers, will have an advantage in the bass region over the F226Be. This most likely won't matter since I have dual Rhythmik FV18 subwoofers. It does make it a bit tricky since you get A LOT for your money with the F208s. The F226Be shares the same cabinet so you're just paying for the drivers (less size in the woofers but still upgraded over the F208). The availability is pretty scarce on both of these speakers so it is going to be a tough decision. I also agree that I should probably spend less on the surrounds. The m106s or F206s will probably be enough with either setup. I definitely worry about them not being timbre matched completely if I go with the Be series but it shouldn't be too noticeable for surrounds. The center channel that the Be offers is a Massive upgrade it does seem though. That's another factor to consider. Thanks!

Sorry, I meant the M126Be vs the M105. This was last weekend, and both me and my friend slightly preferred the Be version(both were crossed to subs at 100hZ). No idea how it would go blind. I own the M105 and my friend owns the M126Be.

I agree with you about the F208 vs F226Be. The F208 is (imo) the better full range speaker, but the F226Be is the better speaker if subwoofers are in play. This is a gray area, though. Measurements are very close. Be series seems to measure very similarly to performa series, but with better distortion.

 

[CatDad]

Sorry, I meant the F126Be vs the M105. This was last weekend, and both me and my friends slightly preferred the Be version(but it wasn't blind). No idea how it would go blind.

I agree with you about the F208 vs F226Be. The F208 is (imo) the better full range speaker, but the F226Be is the better speaker if subwoofers are in play. This is a gray area, though. Measurements are very close. Be series seems to measure very similarly to performa series, but with better distortion.

No problem at all! I just wanted to clarify to ensure we were on the same page. I completely agree with you! Since I have amazing subwoofers, I cannot go wrong either way. I will wait and see what price these two are from the dealer and decide from there. Thank you again for your input !