Revel F206 Tower Speaker Review

[mj30250]

The bass wasn't the problem. Most modern Revel and KEF floor standers have shelved bass. The staff thought the KEF R7 would make a fairer comparison, and the result would have been the same. I don't want to bang on about this, as I hope this review will help the shop sell the speakers.
The problem was that the upper mid was too grating, and I just didn't want to listen to them any longer than I had to. It could be my hearing, as I seem to have developed a susceptibility and intolerance of screechy sounds, and the Revels set it off, and KEFs didn't. Having said that, my son was of the same opinion. I did ask to come back and listen to the Revel Ultima Studio 2 in the entrance that I was drooling over, which another customer had traded in.

So this was pestering me somewhat as the F226Bes had, subjectively speaking, what I would describe as the "smoothest" midrange / lower treble I've ever heard in a speaker that I've owned.

Another member already mentioned the increase in edge reflections / sound power with the F206 around the crossover:

It looks like there is about a 2dB bump in off-axis energy above 0 degrees there. I then checked Erin's data for the F226Be that he measured (Klippel-generated but predates his NFS). A similar bump is there (the cabinet is the same size/shape), but it's at a much lower amplitude, about .5dB:

Perhaps this was contributing to what you heard.

 

[welwynnick]

So this was pestering me somewhat as the F226Bes had, subjectively speaking, what I would describe as the "smoothest" midrange / lower treble I've ever heard in a speaker that I've owned.

Another member already mentioned the increase in edge reflections / sound power with the F206 around the crossover:

It looks like there is about a 2dB bump in off-axis energy above 0 degrees there. I then checked Erin's data for the F226Be that he measured (Klippel-generated but predates his NFS). A similar bump is there (the cabinet is the same size/shape), but it's at a much lower amplitude, about .5dB:

Perhaps this was contributing to what you heard.

The Revels weren't turned in very much. Left to my own devices I would have turned them more, and as it happens that might have made things better.

I think it's quite clear that the F226Be and F228Be are more refined, and the latter is probably what I'm after.

 

[CapMan]

I have mine toed in so a line from the tweeter, perpendicular to the speaker baffle hits my ear (ish) - so pretty much pointed at me.

No harshness, but they are not warm speakers either. I imagine if the lower frequencies / mid bass were missing it could tip from clear to bright sounding.

 

[Robbo99999]

It was a stereo demonstration with no room EQ.
The staff went to considerable effort to get the speakers in the best position.
The dedicated listening room had reflection absorbing panels on the walls and the ceiling.
The speakers and the listening position (just as important) were all well away from the walls.
The KEFs sounded good in the same position, and both have very good off-axis response.
It was a clear and conclusive demonstration that didn't need any comparison whatsoever.
I'm just going to have to dig a bit deeper.....

I think it's hard to have a totally valid listening comparison if the frequency response isn't the same for each speaker - I mean in terms of optimising the bass curve (RoomEQ), so I still think a large part of your enjoyment of either speaker could have been influenced by that. I would think it's really quite rare that you can listen to demos of properly setup speakers (and additionally level matched), so the way I see it it's more effective to buy based on measurements (ie Amir ASR), set them up properly in your home (along with RoomEQ, etc), and then just have confidence in that. I can see many pitfalls when it comes to listening to speaker demonstrations in stores, I think it could send a person down the wrong path choice, too many variables that aren't ironed out in the demonstration.

 

[Tim Link]

Well, my son and I have just come back from the shop in question, Nintronics, which is a great place. Lots of really luscious HiFi, I was like a kid in a sweet shop.
We listened to the F206 in the acoustically treated demo room, expecting to be impressed and to enjoy the experience, but it didn't really happen like that. We listen to a variety of tracks, but often found them slightly pinched, sharp, grating and uncomfortable. When we turned the Michi amplifier up it made me cringe slightly, and we were discouraged from more listening and more volume. I fully expected to get my credit card out there and then, but it was disappointing and I didn't get the much anticipated feeling of wanting to own them. And this was an isolated test without any other comparisons at all. I saw a pair of Kef R11 meta a few feet away and asked to hear those (mindful of the similarly positive test here a few days ago). They're obviously bigger and more expensive, but I didn't expect there to be that much difference. It was quite the opposite, the Kef's were wonderful, more of everything, pleasurable to listen to, and we wanted to keep listening. Strings sounded like strings, and it felt like listening to music instead of listening to speakers. I really wasn't expecting this. My son thought just the same, even on the youngsters stuff that he chose to listen to. Much to my surprise, we left empty handed.

Nick

I have listened to the F206. I got to set them up myself and try them with different amps, spent a lot of time trying different setups. They're not my thing. I wish I understood, but every time I set them up I was surprised at my inability to really enjoy them. I also do not love the M105. The one I liked was the F35 with a subwoofer. Every time I set those up it made me happy. I wouldn't say any of these speakers sound bad, and I can hear things that I would objectively describe as better about the F206 than the F35. But, despite that I like the F35 better. Similarly, the M105 is no doubt a better speaker than the Sony SSCS5. But, I'd rather listen to the Sony. Our preferences are what they are. Interestingly, others at the shop agreed with me about the F35 being more enjoyable. It may just be the specific room/speaker interaction.

My take on the KEFs from trade show experiences is that their bookshelf speakers are great nearfield. I wasn't blown away by the big blades, although they sounded very good to me. There were two rooms with them at the last PAS, and one got very good bass response to happen. One thing I will say is that coaxial mid/tweeter has the same signature across the board. It comes across as slightly too bright to me, but not so much as to make me dislike it. I don't hear any specific magic from it. I love the coaxial concept, but to my ears a well matched midrange and tweeter in separate waveguide seem to do just as well.

 

[amper42]

From my experience, a relatively flat FR speaker can sound great if you have an RME ADI-2 DAC FS and know how to use the software based EQ and loudness control. Initially, I was using the ADI-2 with the default flat settings. I would listen to my BMR Monitors after listening to the Revel F328Be in the other room and think they weren't as exciting as the F328Be.

Later, I installed the ADI-2 Remote software on my MacBook Pro and learned how to use the software to dial in the Loudness curve on the BMR to closely match the engaging sound I was looking for. After doing this on a few speaker systems I was amazed at the change in sound. Reading posts from people about how this speaker or that speaker doesn't do it for them tells me they don't know about the secret of the RME software remote.

Rather than spend tons of time and money looking for end game speakers, you may be surprised how the RME Remote software can make your existing speakers sound better than you ever expected. And if you want to try something different that's easily done with the push of the remote. Before you decide this or that speaker doesn't work for me, I would strongly suggest trying the RME ADI-2 software remote. It can make a great speaker sound better and wake up a blah sounding speaker to the point you want to get up and dance.

 

[Tim Link]

From my experience, a relatively flat FR speaker can sound great if you have an RME ADI-2 DAC FS and know how to use the software based EQ and loudness control. Initially, I was using the ADI-2 with the default flat settings. I would listen to my BMR Monitors after listening to the Revel F328Be in the other room and think they weren't as exciting as the F328Be.

Later, I installed the ADI-2 Remote software on my MacBook Pro and learned how to use the software to dial in the Loudness curve on the BMR to closely match the engaging sound I was looking for. After doing this on a few speaker systems I was amazed at the change in sound. Reading posts from people about how this speaker or that speaker doesn't do it for them tells me they don't know about the secret of the RME software remote.

Rather than spend tons of time and money looking for end game speakers, you may be surprised how the RME Remote software can make your existing speakers sound better than you ever expected. And if you want to try something different that's easily done with the push of the remote. Before you decide this or that speaker doesn't work for me, I would strongly suggest trying the RME ADI-2 software remote. It can make a great speaker sound better and wake up a blah sounding speaker to the point you want to get up and dance.


View attachment 363517

I've been a big fan of EQ for a long time. My first experience with digital EQ was a Behringer 2496. That thing showed me all the different kinds of sound I could get out of my speakers. There's a limit to it, but I agree that often a lesser speaker with some EQ will end up being more likeable than a more expensive speaker without. Sometimes though you can find an inexpensive speaker that just does it for you, doesn't need any EQ. I couldn't get EQ to help with the Sonys at all. I still liked them. I couldn't get EQ to help with the M105s either. I didn't like them no matter what. At least not as I had them set up in my room at the time.

 

[amper42]

I've been a big fan of EQ for a long time. My first experience with digital EQ was a Behringer 2496. That thing showed me all the different kinds of sound I could get out of my speakers. There's a limit to it, but I agree that often a lesser speaker with some EQ will end up being more likeable than a more expensive speaker without. Sometimes though you can find an inexpensive speaker that just does it for you, doesn't need any EQ. I couldn't get EQ to help with the Sonys at all. I still liked them. I couldn't get EQ to help with the M105s either. I didn't like them no matter what. At least not as I had them set up in my room at the time.

I bought the M105 based on the ASR rating. Lots of people love them but the weak low end below 100Hz is a turn off and the small bass driver limits the room size they can support. However, many listeners are happy with the M105 and a quality sub crossed at 100Hz. It either fits your need or it doesn't. Nothing wrong with that.

 

[IamJF]

Perhaps this was contributing to what you heard.

It's a very sensitive area of our ear and I'm sure I would need some EQ for these speakers.
With a home cinema setup and some room tuning I'm also sure these can shine.

 

[Ageve]

It's a very sensitive area of our ear and I'm sure I would need some EQ for these speakers.

F206:

F208:

Both are excellent.

When it comes to subjective opinions, I have compared F208 and KEF R5 several times, and I think I know why some may find the KEF R series more appealing at first.

The F208 is a more dynamic speaker, while the R5 sounds nice and ”polite” but a bit compressed in comparison. It also lacks the big, wide soundstage from the F208.

 

[welwynnick]

I think KEFs do tend to sound polite, Amir said of the R11M "the stock tuning is designed to not remotely offend" - that's not really what I look for, I usually prefer to hear everything, warts and all.
HiFi tends to try and achieve two things - avoid errors of omission, and avoid errors of addition, and I think maybe KEF err towards the former.
In the frequency domain, I suppose that errors of addition are upward peaks, and errors of omission are downward dips.

 

[IamJF]

F206:
View attachment 363897

F208:
View attachment 363898

Both are excellent.

When it comes to subjective opinions, I have compared F208 and KEF R5 several times, and I think I know why some may find the KEF R series more appealing at first.

The F208 is a more dynamic speaker, while the R5 sounds nice and ”polite” but a bit compressed in comparison. It also lacks the big, wide soundstage from the F208.

When you tilt the arrow of the F206 a little more you see the pronaunciation between 3-5kHz better, compared to a dip from 1-2kHz and lower level >7kHz. In addition you have a bump at 120Hz and going down under 60Hz ... that's an octave too high, bump at 120Hz is bookshelf speaker behaviour.
60Hz needs the bump (bass drum area), 120Hz should not be boomy! (but you often have SBIR in this frequency area - so a lot of room influence there)

F208 goes deeper, bass peak still too high. There is still a little peak at 2,8kHz but the rest is way more linear.

When going after this curve and my listening habits - I would need EQ with both. But I also don't like the warm setup of the KEF, too forgiving and muddens things up.
And after all that's just charts reading ... let's put them in YOUR room and get a measurement. Or maybe even listen to them ...

 

[CapMan]

This is a screen shot from Dirac of my F206 measured response before correction with the tight 9 point pattern. It’s pretty obvious where my horrible asymmetric smallish room takes over at 400 Hz! Above that I’d say they are pretty linear and well
Behaved.

This measurement is with the speakers directed at my listening spot (on axis).

I played with toe in again last night and at 20 degrees off axis the presentation softened somewhat without eroding any detail. I’m going to leave it there for a while to see how I like it.

Agree that the F206 in room line as plotted looks too shallow and if steepened downwards a little you’d see a shelf between 3-6KHz.

All that said , I’m very happy.

 

[Ageve]

And after all that's just charts reading ... let's put them in YOUR room and get a measurement. Or maybe even listen to them ...

I don’t have to put them in my room, as I already own a pair of F208. My brother has both KEF R5 and F208.

He used to be happy with R5 until he listened to my speakers.

This was measured in my untreated living room, at listening position (4m from the left speaker). The mic was pointing straight forward. That's probably why the treble is a bit rolled off. I don't see any reason for using EQ above 800Hz (a slight dip or peak may be gone when moving the mic 10cm...) Below 800Hz is another story because of the room...

(calibrated UMIK-2, REW V5.30.5)

As you can see, it follows the estimated in-room response above 800Hz:

Average of 10 measurements around the listening position:

 

[SPFC]

Another great review Amir, thank you!

Interesting that the Revel F35 has been mentioned by another member. I am thinking about getting tower speakers for a music/HT setup and have considered the F206, the F35 and the JBL Studio 698. Does anyone have any recommendations or experiences with these speakers. After reading so many of Amir's excellent reviews, I always come back to the issue of putting more weight on flat frequency response and even horizontal dispersion, vs. dynamic capabilities and lack of distortion. I have been very impressed by horn speakers in how dynamic and realistic they can sound, and it seems like there are a few horn speakers that have seriously surprised Amir in how much he liked them, even if the graphs and data werent' very impressive. The JBL 4349 and JBL 4309 come to mind, but there are others.

 

[lessthanjoey]

This is pretty tempting at current US pricing (likely even a little better than the advertised prices if you talk to some dealers directly).

I have 3 M105s as LCR and some blah Emotiva surrounds. I'm strongly considering moving 2 of the M105s to surround and picking up a pair of F206s.

EDIT: ...and done

 

[ed308]

I have a pair for of F206 speakers that I used in my home theater before buying a pair of F208 at a great price. This review is spot on IMO. The F206 are pretty close to the sound of the F208.

 

[uwotm8]

Do you KNOW KH150s? Have you ever listened to them in the environment you describe?

No. I'm using Adam T5Vs on my table now and had a set of Dynaudio 5s + sub (also Dyn) before. In short, both are great in creating illusion of big sound in the very nearfield, spacious and immersive cloud of sound. BUT once you step away and try to listen from, say, 2 meters - both magically turn into pumpkins. Yeah, sure, 6.5" Neumann are indeed totally different, they can do more than a pair of 5" and a decent fast-firing 10" sub playing from 30 Hz Oh wait, I just don't think so.

The other good experience of comparing small and big speakers were - yep, Dynaudio again. A42, Focus 110/140/220 and C1 in the same demo room. The overall winner for audiophool would be C1 easily. 5" A42 and F110 both no contest to bigger models, neither sound signature or scale. 6.5" F140 - well, okay for the price. But then comes F220, 2x6.5 tower and yep, that's it. A bigger speaker with a bigger sound. Like a naturally big guy against cranked up manlets (which were all mentioned standmounts in comparison)

P.S. As old joke says, there's basically two types of speakers: good ones and standmounts.
At the same time, 5'-on-the-desk are absolutely fine for me - I just find it laughable to compare it to decent tower speakers.
Oh wait, I think my Adams play bass as deep as Revels due to FR graph. And with EQ they beat Revels by score. What a bang for bucks euros

And we didn't even mention iLoud Micro, 3.5" totally linear from 50 Hz and up. T - Techology.

I should be less sarcastic maybe

 

[mj30250]

No. I'm using Adam T5Vs on my table now and had a set of Dynaudio 5s + sub (also Dyn) before. In short, both are great in creating illusion of big sound in the very nearfield, spacious and immersive cloud of sound. BUT once you step away and try to listen from, say, 2 meters - both magically turn into pumpkins.

If you aren't compensating for the increased listening distance by spacing out the speakers further, this isn't surprising.

 

[uwotm8]

If you aren't compensating for the increased listening distance by spacing out the speakers further, this isn't surprising.

I tried actually and was hugely disappointed. I think 1...1.5m triangle is their sweet zone and they really shine when used properly.
At longer distance that illusion of big sound disappears.

KH 150’s amplifiers deliver up to 145 W to the 6.5” woofer and 100 W to the 1” tweeter

That's definitely better than 50-70W in my case but sub was 100W and still it was a very good compact system pretending to sound big.
No way it fills a large room like a pair of towers, even mid-sized ones as we discuss here.