Revel F206 Tower Speaker Review

[DSJR]

Not terrible, but PLEASE folks, don't underestimate that nasty peak in the mid kHz region, which, if my brief listening memories are right (when it was briefly imported here), gives it an almost clinical, cold and chilly 'tone' in a lively room which may well be extremely clear and 'open mouthed' in high frequency delivery, but not strictly 'accurate' or 'long term pleasurable' by the standards set here, especially in a lively room with bare walls and a floor with barely a rug to its name as is popular these days.

Mind you, two to three grand a pair isn't so much these days and speakers I used to rate at around a grand the pair would be around this price now I suspect and maybe higher.

Do I spy electrolytic caps in the crossover too? That's a bit of a nono these days in 'audiophile' circles is it not? Maybe fine for the first ten years, but these things are going to be around a LOT longer than that I suspect?

Yes, I'm playing devil's advocate here, but just 'cos they're Revels (a little known brand here) doesn't mean they're automatically wonderful and beyond any criticism. Sorry and all that but...

 

[Ze Frog]

Not terrible, but PLEASE folks, don't underestimate that nasty peak in the mid kHz region, which, if my brief listening memories are right (when it was briefly imported here), gives it an almost clinical, cold and chilly 'tone' in a lively room which may well be extremely clear and 'open mouthed' in high frequency delivery, but not strictly 'accurate' or 'long term pleasurable' by the standards set here, especially in a lively room with bare walls and a floor with barely a rug to its name as is popular these days.

Mind you, two to three grand a pair isn't so much these days and speakers I used to rate at around a grand the pair would be around this price now I suspect and maybe higher.

Do I spy electrolytic caps in the crossover too? That's a bit of a nono these days in 'audiophile' circles is it not? Maybe fine for the first ten years, but these things are going to be around a LOT longer than that I suspect?

Yes, I'm playing devil's advocate here, but just 'cos they're Revels (a little known brand here) doesn't mean they're automatically wonderful and beyond any criticism. Sorry and all that but...

Nothing actually wrong with electrolytic caps really, it's all just a lot of audiophile hot air as per. Only negative is they may need replacing every 20 year's, no biggy really.

 

[Music1969]

A thick carpet will absorb/diffuse the F208's floor bounce reflection, which contains that 2kHz dip:
View attachment 362883

But a thick carpet will absorb/diffuse other frequencies too, not just 2kHz ?

 

[Endibol]

A thick carpet will absorb/diffuse the F208's floor bounce reflection, which contains that 2kHz dip:
View attachment 362883

I still don't understand: if you have a dip in the floor bounce at 2 kHz, doesn't this mean that the floor reflects less energy at 2 kHz?
How could a carpet help? Would this dampen the reflections OTHER than the one at 2 kHz, so that the peek disappears relative to these other frequencies? Or in other words, using a carpet you lower the floor bounce for all frequencies, so that the 2 kHz dip won't be "seen" anymore?

 

[xaviescacs]

< 6 score, not impressed

 

[Laserjock]

In the last year of the Rocky Mountain Audio Fest I heard a Revel tower played through Mark Levinson amp and DAC. I must say they were among the best sounding speakers at the show, IMHO. Thus I am not surprised by this review. Those Revels I believe had the ceramic SB Acoustic mid-woofers, and three or four per side, with one tweeter on top. I am not sure if they were a three way or a 2.5, but sound was impeccable.

That was the debut of the F226Be.
I heard them there as well and have to agree on your statement of the show.

F226BE | 3-Way Dual 6" Floorstanding Loudspeaker

The Revel F226Be joins our award-winning PerformaBe series as a compact floorstanding loudspeaker. As part of the PerformaBe loudspeaker line, the F226Be includes a 1-inch (25mm) beryllium tweeter driven by massive 85mm dual ceramic magnets.

www.revelspeakers.com

 

[staticV3]

But a thick carpet will absorb/diffuse other frequencies too, not just 2kHz ?

Yes, of course.

By absorbing the uneven floor reflection, you reduce its impact on the total sound arriving at your ears.

I still don't understand: if you have a dip in the floor bounce at 2 kHz, doesn't this mean that the floor reflects less energy at 2 kHz?
How could a carpet help? Would this dampen the reflections OTHER than the one at 2 kHz, so that the peek disappears relative to these other frequencies? Or in other words, using a carpet you lower the floor bounce for all frequencies, so that the 2 kHz dip won't be "seen" anymore?

Correct.

 

[Endibol]

Yes, of course.

By absorbing the uneven floor reflection, you reduce its impact on the total sound arriving at your ears.


Correct.

But wouldn't that impact the predicted in-room response, so that it will deviate from the graph Amir shows, by showing a small peak at 2 kHz for instance?

 

[staticV3]

But wouldn't that impact the predicted in-room response, so that it will deviate from the graph Amir shows, by showing a small peak at 2 kHz for instance?

No single reflection of the F206 has a 2kHz peak, so no amount of wideband absorption could provoke such a peak.


By absorbing the floor and ceiling reflection, you would instead get rid of the 1-3kHz dip in the EIR:


A ceiling cloud may even improve the treble extension some.

 

[welwynnick]

Not terrible, but PLEASE folks, don't underestimate that nasty peak in the mid kHz region, which, if my brief listening memories are right (when it was briefly imported here), gives it an almost clinical, cold and chilly 'tone' in a lively room which may well be extremely clear and 'open mouthed' in high frequency delivery, but not strictly 'accurate' or 'long term pleasurable' by the standards set here, especially in a lively room with bare walls and a floor with barely a rug to its name as is popular these days.

Amir tried a 2dB cut 4.5k and said after listening with and without EQ:

I suspect in any kind of controlled testing, it would be a draw as to whether EQ or stock sound is better.

Yes, loudspeakers should be perfectly flat by any measure that we throw at them, but these are pretty good, and the in-room response is very good.

 

[Beave]

In the last year of the Rocky Mountain Audio Fest I heard a Revel tower played through Mark Levinson amp and DAC. I must say they were among the best sounding speakers at the show, IMHO. Thus I am not surprised by this review. Those Revels I believe had the ceramic SB Acoustic mid-woofers, and three or four per side, with one tweeter on top. I am not sure if they were a three way or a 2.5, but sound was impeccable.

Those were likely the Revel PerformaBe series, but they do NOT use SB Acoustics ceramic drivers.

 

[Beave]

But a thick carpet will absorb/diffuse other frequencies too, not just 2kHz ?

A thick carpet will absorb/diffuse higher frequencies more than lower frequencies. So it will absorb more above 2kHz than below 2kHz.

 

[Beave]

Not terrible, but PLEASE folks, don't underestimate that nasty peak in the mid kHz region, which, if my brief listening memories are right (when it was briefly imported here), gives it an almost clinical, cold and chilly 'tone' in a lively room which may well be extremely clear and 'open mouthed' in high frequency delivery, but not strictly 'accurate' or 'long term pleasurable' by the standards set here, especially in a lively room with bare walls and a floor with barely a rug to its name as is popular these days.

Mind you, two to three grand a pair isn't so much these days and speakers I used to rate at around a grand the pair would be around this price now I suspect and maybe higher.

Do I spy electrolytic caps in the crossover too? That's a bit of a nono these days in 'audiophile' circles is it not? Maybe fine for the first ten years, but these things are going to be around a LOT longer than that I suspect?

Yes, I'm playing devil's advocate here, but just 'cos they're Revels (a little known brand here) doesn't mean they're automatically wonderful and beyond any criticism. Sorry and all that but...

That "nasty peak" you see in the on-axis response is much smaller in the listening window response, so I doubt it's as audible as one might think.

 

[Beave]

I still don't understand: if you have a dip in the floor bounce at 2 kHz, doesn't this mean that the floor reflects less energy at 2 kHz?
How could a carpet help? Would this dampen the reflections OTHER than the one at 2 kHz, so that the peek disappears relative to these other frequencies? Or in other words, using a carpet you lower the floor bounce for all frequencies, so that the 2 kHz dip won't be "seen" anymore?

The dip in the floor bounce at 2kHz indicates that the downward firing sound from the speaker - pointing toward the floor - has a dip at 2kHz. Now, if the floor acted as a perfect reflector, then yes, the reflection from the floor would also have the same dip at 2kHz. But a floor won't be a perfect reflector. The carpet probably won't really lower the floor bounce for all frequencies equally. Likely it will absorb more above 2kHz and a lot less below 2kHz.

 

[thewas]

That "nasty peak" you see in the on-axis response is much smaller in the listening window response, so I doubt it's as audible as one might think.

Yes, that is not really an audible issue, but rather its sound power bump above 3 kHz:

Revel F206 Tower Speaker Review

This is a review, listening tests, EQ, and detailed measurements of the Revel F206 Floor-standing speaker. It is on kind loan from a member (new) and costs US $1347.50 each. Please excuse the mobile phone picture quality and plastics that are still on the speaker. I try to keep products as...

www.audiosciencereview.com

 

[DSJR]

That "nasty peak" you see in the on-axis response is much smaller in the listening window response, so I doubt it's as audible as one might think.

Oh yes it is - in a less damped room as is fashionable these days - everything sounds 'cold as ice' but 'uber-clear and sharp' in an 'audiophile HiFi' kind of sense - perhaps too much even for me. I have to say, most designers actually prefer to put a gentle dip at those frequencies if they have to (for fifty five years I've read experts suggest a dip is better and less noticeable than a peak)... Okay, not 'Klippel perfect' by any means, but far more pleasurable long term it appears. The suspicious part of me feels that this peak is deliberately left in so punters try the bigger and morte profitable models, where I'm certain looking at the driver responses that just maybe, it could be minimised or gently tweaked out in the crossover without messing up the dispersion/directivity pattern (famous last words here).

 

[CapMan]

Not terrible, but PLEASE folks, don't underestimate that nasty peak in the mid kHz region, which, if my brief listening memories are right (when it was briefly imported here), gives it an almost clinical, cold and chilly 'tone'

I find my F206s to be very neutral. They replaced standard Harbeth P3ESRs ( high passed to a pair of mono subs at 120Hz).

The P3s were never offensive and very easy to listen to, mostly due to a crossover dip in the presence region and a pretty early HF roll off. But - they never excited and the vocals always sounded recessed/behind the speakers. The XD version was too bright and fatiguing in my room, as if the tweeter was turned up too high.

It has taken some time to recalibrate to the more open top end of the F206s and (in the interests of balance) some poor recordings are less easy to listen to.

But - they are more flexible and capable and measure better at the MLP than the P3s. They also handle movie duties with ease.

For money being asked they are a no brainer and are kinda my Goldilocks speaker

 

[Beave]

Oh yes it is - in a less damped room as is fashionable these days - everything sounds 'cold as ice' but 'uber-clear and sharp' in an 'audiophile HiFi' kind of sense - perhaps too much even for me. I have to say, most designers actually prefer to put a gentle dip at those frequencies if they have to (for fifty five years I've read experts suggest a dip is better and less noticeable than a peak)... Okay, not 'Klippel perfect' by any means, but far more pleasurable long term it appears. The suspicious part of me feels that this peak is deliberately left in so punters try the bigger and morte profitable models, where I'm certain looking at the driver responses that just maybe, it could be minimised or gently tweaked out in the crossover without messing up the dispersion/directivity pattern (famous last words here).

A similar on-axis peak occurs in the M105 and the M106, but much less so for the F208. They all use the same tweeter and waveguide but have different baffle widths. So I'd guess it's a diffraction effect. And like I said, it just about vanishes in the listening window response - and it also vanishes in the predicted in-room response.

So I'm sticking with what I wrote above.

 

[Music1969]

A thick carpet will absorb/diffuse higher frequencies more than lower frequencies. So it will absorb more above 2kHz than below 2kHz.

Yes so it will be a non-uniform absorption/diffusion - this is OK ?

 

[Randolf]

As usual a nice, detailed review, thanks! Anyway, I am sometimes still struggling a little bit how these measurements really translate into subjective listening experience in a real listening room:

1. E.g. in the F206 data on axis response I see a 4.5 kHz peak, which I would guess is pretty audible since it is in a sensitive frequency area.
2. However in the estimated in-room response summation it is completely gone.
3. This can probably be explained by the narrow horizontal radiation at 4.5 kHz according to the horizontal directivity graph.
4. Anyway you finally decided to eq it a little bit with 4.5kHz, -2db, Q=4

So my conclusion would be that your listing room frequency response doesn’t not match so well with the estimated in-room response in the 4.5 kHz region. I guess this particular “issue” of the F205 is highly depended on the tilt angle of the speaker, on axis it is probably rather obvious but slightly of axis it disappears (but high frequency starts rolling of a little bit).

I would find it rather interesting to additionally see an in listening room frequency response to see how good it really matches with the estimated response. Of course, due to room modes one would expect huge derivations in the bass region and this measurement is just valid for this particular room.

Another interesting project might be to measure one or a few rather different but widely used speakers with the Klippel NFS and with REW/UMIK-1 in many different real listening rooms to see how much derivation one might expect. Perhaps a little worldwide distributed project of the community (everyone with an UMIK-1 and REW can contribute a measurement in his listening room)?