Revel M106 vs. stock Linn Katan

[SEKLEM]

I'll lead off by stating that I performed this comparison over a month ago, so some things aren't fresh but I'm going to try to give my overall impression of the two compared head to head level match and double blind.

My setup to compare these two speakers was performed in my living room with the Linn Katans on the inside and Revel M106s on the outside. Irrespective of them being in different positions I found each position to be best suited for each speaker and they would have been placed that way in either case.

In use for testing are two Niles SI-275 amplifiers fed from the Yamaha RX-V659 preouts through a basic unbalanced line level switch. Level matching was done by ear by playing one Linn Katan and one Revel M106 from one channel of each amplifier and using the potentiometer to adjust the level with white noise generated by the receiver and an SPL meter app on the iPhone. I verified it was matched by demoing some material and I had a strong center image with one of each speaker playing from one channel of each amp. Once I initiated the test I was in the sweat spot and didn't move or get up to mess with anything, I just listened to music.

At some point during this process I forgot which amplifier was connected to which speakers, which was perfect and I initiated the process with Thom Yorke's entry for the 007 Spectre theme for it's complexity and Yorke's vocals on this track and many others from the Radiohead catalogue have a tendency to activate resonate modes in most speakers I've listened to. I also used London Grammar's "Interlude (live)" from their first studio album "If You Wait". Hannah Reid's vocals present a strong center image and the piano is delicate and offers a lot of ambience with good speakers when setup properly.

At the beginning of the test I was feeling really good that I'd bought the Revels, I identified a significant reduction in ringing from Yorke and excellent separation of instruments on the complex track. Switching to London Grammar revealed a deeper sound stage and more direct transfer of Reid's voice. The piano sounded more correct here as well.

As I switched back and forth I kept thinking how great the difference was and toyed with a couple other tracks from London Grammar and something happened. I noticed a distortion that was all too familiar as I'd heard it before. I thought there was no way my shiny new Revels could be making that noise, yet I believed those were the speakers currently playing. So I'll describe as best I can remember how those sounded. With Spectre they resolved separation of instruments quite well, but Yorke's vocals had that iconic ring I described. It wasn't terrible, but wasn't as good as the Linn at taking care of it. Reid's vocals sounded recessed comparitively and the piano resonance was slightly exaggerated to my ear.

It turned out the speakers I thought were the Revels the entire time had in fact been the Linns. On one hand the Linn's are more difficult to setup. They don't benefit from the expertly engineered tweeter waveguide. The clever back plate on the Linn's is also prone to buzzing at certain frequencies which I find very distracting. It only does it with a small handful of tracks and that was the noise that disrupted my test and got me to realize that I had confused which speakers I had been listening to.

Now I'll say that at the end of this test I was pretty disappointed in myself. I had the opportunity to take the Linn's with me to test them back to back with the Revels at the store. If I had I possibly could have come home with something else or even empty handed, but I decided against it. I didn't want to take them with me because I didn't want them shifting around in my vehicle on the trip. It's been a couple months since I made the purchase and I forced myself to put the Revels into service. While I enjoy them they don't really completely supplant the Linns. The Revels don't make idiosyncratic distortion noises like the buzzing from the terminal plate on the Linns.

All this to say, I was beside myself post test and disappointed I hadn't found speakers that handily replaced the Linns. I could just as easily put the Linns back into service in my main system. I like a lot of what the M106 has to offer, they're definitely very good speakers, but it's still a let down.

I don't know where to go from here.

 

[drfous]

Sorry about the disappointment. I've been thinking about getting a pair of Revels as well. Now you have me reconsidering.

I've had a pair of Katan's for 20ish years. They are doing mostly home theater duty. I need to put them in the main system and see how they perform. I've never tried to measure them.

 

[SEKLEM]

Sorry about the disappointment. I've been thinking about getting a pair of Revels as well. Now you have me reconsidering.

Well don't hang your hat on my impressions. My experience could be somewhat room related. That said, the Linns did sound better overall to me in the same room in close to the same position.

I've had a pair of Katan's for 20ish years. They are doing mostly home theater duty. I need to put them in the main system and see how they perform. I've never tried to measure them.

I've thought about sending mine in to be tested, but it's on the other side of the country. I am also using them in the bedroom with very satisfying results. In that room they get low enough that I don't need a subwoofer.

 

[mgood]

I always found Linn speakers to be very pleasant sounding. I once listened to the Katans with a Linn Klimax DS and a Majik integrated amp. A jaw-dropping experience, albeit in a very small room. I have the Majik 109s, the successor to the Katans. They have very good off-axis performance, and incredible high-frequency extension. Very little bass though!

 

[YSC]

somehow I feel that when one is trying to be amazed by their new speakers will be disappointed by those neutral speakers, as no frequency stands out, so when one looks for "something extra/amazing" will be focused on the peaky sections, which don't present in the neutral ones

 

[SEKLEM]

somehow I feel that when one is trying to be amazed by their new speakers will be disappointed by those neutral speakers, as no frequency stands out, so when one looks for "something extra/amazing" will be focused on the peaky sections, which don't present in the neutral ones

That’s the conundrum here. The peaky sounding speakers are the Revel M106s. It’s annoyingly peaky with certain material.

I was using the Linns briefly in the bedroom and really enjoyed the bass in that arrangement. I had them 3 ft from the back wall and still got reasonable bass output down to the low 40hz region. The bass is also what is commonly referred to as “dry”, there’s no overhang and it’s not emphasized, drawing unnecessary attention to itself. They also general no port noise regardless of frequency. I ran a tone generator thinking I would get port noise at lower frequencies and came up with nothing.

 

[Ageve]

That’s the conundrum here. The peaky sounding speakers are the Revel M106s. It’s annoyingly peaky with certain material.

This is the only measurement I could find, but it seems like Katan is similar to Majik 109, with a large dip at 2-4 kHz. If you are used to this sound, some recordings could sound "peaky" with speakers that have a flat (accurate) frequency response.

https://www.hifiwigwam.com/forum/topic/152361-exakt-filters-for-ow-1-equipped-speakers/

Katan:

Stereophile, Majik 109:
https://www.stereophile.com/content/linn-majik-109-loudspeaker-measurements

 

[MarkS]

I don't know where to go from here.

Box up the Linns, listen to the Revels exclusively for a couple months, then take out the Linns again. You may be surprised what you think after having your ears adjust to the Revels.

 

[SEKLEM]

This is the only measurement I could find, but it seems like Katan is similar to Majik 109, with a large dip at 2-4 kHz. If you are used to this sound, some recordings could sound "peaky" with speakers that have a flat (accurate) frequency response.

https://www.hifiwigwam.com/forum/topic/152361-exakt-filters-for-ow-1-equipped-speakers/

Katan:
View attachment 135392

Stereophile, Majik 109:
https://www.stereophile.com/content/linn-majik-109-loudspeaker-measurements

View attachment 135393

Interestingly he measures it again with the new tweeter (green line) at a different distance and the dip is significantly less dramatic.

I'll sit down and check one of these evenings to see what frequencies I'm considering peaked on the Revels & compare to the Linn's. I'll have to use an SPL meter on my phone and sets of sine tones generated through youtube or something since I don't have a computer, mic, or anything. I could make notes of particular frequencies and their respective decibel levels.

 

[al2002]

That's with Linn DSP

Interestingly he measures it again with the new tweeter (green line) at a different distance and the dip is significantly less dramatic.

I'll sit down and check one of these evenings to see what frequencies I'm considering peaked on the Revels & compare to the Linn's. I'll have to use an SPL meter on my phone and sets of sine tones generated through youtube or something since I don't have a computer, mic, or anything. I could make notes of particular frequencies and their respective decibel levels.

 

[preload]

This is the only measurement I could find, but it seems like Katan is similar to Majik 109, with a large dip at 2-4 kHz. If you are used to this sound, some recordings could sound "peaky" with speakers that have a flat (accurate) frequency response.

VERY INTERESTING. I had a pair of the m126be's (m106 successor), and I also found that I preferred the sound from my B&W 802D's floorstanders, which ALSO have a BBC dip around 2-4khz. There's something about that dip that has merit, although there are a lot of Revel revelers who will overinterpret Harman research and dismiss it.

 

[richard12511]

although there are a lot of Revel revelers

 

[mgood]

Interestingly he measures it again with the new tweeter (green line) at a different distance and the dip is significantly less dramatic.

I'll sit down and check one of these evenings to see what frequencies I'm considering peaked on the Revels & compare to the Linn's. I'll have to use an SPL meter on my phone and sets of sine tones generated through youtube or something since I don't have a computer, mic, or anything. I could make notes of particular frequencies and their respective decibel levels.

I think you're overanalyzing. What compells you to replace the Katans? The annoying buzzing sound, or something else?

 

[SEKLEM]

I think you're overanalyzing. What compells you to replace the Katans? The annoying buzzing sound, or something else?

I've had two sets of Katans and both have a similar tendency to buzz. It's infrequent, but when it happens it's very distracting. I'm not implying they're perfect, but what I want is the Katans, but better.

 

[richard12511]

How long did you listen to the Revels before testing them against the Katans. It may be that your brain didn't have enough time to adjust. Other than 1 little exception (8030c over M105), I've never liked any new speaker better than the speaker it's meant to replace. Even with my current mains, I liked my previous speakers more for the first couple weeks. It took my brain a few weeks to accept the new image/soundstage in that room. Switching back now makes it clear that I do like the new speakers better.

Not saying this is definitely the case here. Some people seem to know right away if they like something more, but I figured I'd share my experience. My usual procedure when a new speaker arrives:

1. Listen to new vs old side by side. Almost always old is still preferred
2. Listen to new on it's own for a few weeks
3. Repeat the comparison. This is usually where my brain starts to notice the flaws with the old that it had simply gotten used to.

May be worth a try.

 

[SEKLEM]

How long did you listen to the Revels before testing them against the Katans. It may be that your brain didn't have enough time to adjust. Other than 1 little exception (8030c over M105), I've never liked any new speaker better than the speaker it's meant to replace. Even with my current mains, I liked my previous speakers more for the first couple weeks. It took my brain a few weeks to accept the new image/soundstage in that room. Switching back now makes it clear that I do like the new speakers better.

Not saying this is definitely the case here. Some people seem to know right away if they like something more, but I figured I'd share my experience. My usual procedure when a new speaker arrives:

1. Listen to new vs old side by side. Almost always old is still preferred
2. Listen to new on it's own for a few weeks
3. Repeat the comparison. This is usually where my brain starts to notice the flaws with the old that it had simply gotten used to.

May be worth a try.

I had the Revels in place of the Linns for over a month before I tried the Linns again. During the comparison I kept thinking the speakers I must be preferring were the Revels, but consistently it was the Linns.

Could it be that the BBC dip is a counter to typical room response? I’ve never read about it.

 

[richard12511]

I had the Revels in place of the Linns for over a month before I tried the Linns again. During the comparison I kept thinking the speakers I must be preferring were the Revels, but consistently it was the Linns.

Could it be that the BBC dip is a counter to typical room response? I’ve never read about it.

I don’t think so, as it’s too high in frequency response. You probably just prefer that BBC dip or something else about the speaker. Maybe try ordering a B&W bookshelf from Crutchield(or somewhere else with a good return policy).

 

[muad]

I had the Revels in place of the Linns for over a month before I tried the Linns again. During the comparison I kept thinking the speakers I must be preferring were the Revels, but consistently it was the Linns.

Could it be that the BBC dip is a counter to typical room response? I’ve never read about it.

I find few newer recording but many older recordings sound peaky. I think many recordings were mixed with older studio monitors had a 2-3khz dip at the crossover. The engineers compensated for the dip. Now when you listen to the same recording on flat speakers there is an emphasis in that region.

I love my speakers. They're linear except through the 2-3 khz region there's a 2.5db dip. Everything sounds good on them

 

[SEKLEM]

I don’t think so, as it’s too high in frequency response. You probably just prefer that BBC dip or something else about the speaker. Maybe try ordering a B&W bookshelf from Crutchield(or somewhere else with a good return policy).

Side note, to my untrained ear, the M106 sounds like a slightly refined version of the Infinity IL10 I’ve had for 2 decades.

 

[SEKLEM]

I find few newer recording but many older recordings sound peaky. I think many recordings were mixed with older studio monitors had a 2-3khz dip at the crossover. The engineers compensated for the dip. Now when you listen to the same recording on flat speakers there is an emphasis in that region.

I love my speakers. They're linear except through the 2-3 khz region there's a 2.5db dip. Everything sounds good on them

The content I’m using is modern (within the last few years).