• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

BMR Tower vs Revel F328Be Compared

amper42

Major Contributor
Joined
Dec 21, 2020
Messages
1,582
Likes
2,284
I have been listening to the Revel F328Be as my main stereo system for the last 10 months. They are amazing. Recently I had the opportunity to try them side by side with the BMR Towers and thought a comparison might be fun.

F326-BMR Tower image2.png

Specification/Price differences:
1. The BMR Tower and the Revel F328Be are closer in size than I imagined. The BMR is almost 7" shorter with a flat top while the F328Be has a curved top. The depth and width on the BMR Tower is just a little smaller than the F328Be. But when placed side by side they look very close with both having a pear shaped design with the rear of the box being narrower than the front and each having rounded corners. Next to each other they look like cousins with both in black.
F328BE - 50.9" H x 13.5" W x 17.6" D, BMR Tower - 44" H x 12" W x 15-1/2" D.
2. BMR is rated at 6 ohms with a sensitivity of 86 dB (2.83v/1M).
3. F328Be is rated at 8 ohms with a sensitivity of 91 dB (2.83v/1M).
(With REW pink noise a minimum of 6 dB extra gain is required of RME ADI-2 for the BMR Tower to level match with F328Be.)
4. Drivers
F328Be - Three 8" Ceramic Composite aluminum cones, Midrange 5-1/4" Ceramic Composite aluminum cone, Tweeter - 1" Beryllium dome, with acoustic lens waveguide.
BMR Tower - One ScanSpeak 22W/8851T-00 Revelator 8" cone, Midrange two Tectonic Balanced Mode Radiator 2.5", RAAL 64-10X tweeter.
5. Ports - F328Be - Dual Rear Facing 2.75" Bass-reflex Flared Ports.
BMR Tower - Front facing 3" flared Mass Loaded Transmission Line Port.
6. Crossover - BMR Towers
Linkwitz-Riley 2nd Order Acoustic at 850 Hz,
Linkwitz-Riley 4th Order Acoustic at 3,800 Hz
Crossover - Revel F328Be
240Hz; 2.1kHz High-order 24 dB/octave Crossovers with Film Capacitors and Air Core Inductors
7. Binding Posts - F328BE - Two pair of gold plated binding posts with conductive bar linking two posts together. Top set recommended for non-biamp use. BMR Tower - single set of binding posts mounted vertically.
8. Weight - F328BE - 112 lbs, BMR Tower - 72 lbs
9. Price - F328Be - $17,600, BMR Tower $3700 plus shipping.
10. BMR bass range 5Hz lower to 23Hz vs 28Hz with these in room measurements.
11. Slower roll-off above 8k with BMR Tower RAAL tweeter.
12. Too early for subjective comments as my ears have been trained to love the sound of F328Be. Will take an extended period of time comparing both before commenting subjectively. :D

REW in Room Measurements Without EQ F328Be (Green) vs BMR Tower (Red)
BMR Towers vs F328Be REW 12feet(couch).png




 
Last edited:

TurtlePaul

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
May 19, 2020
Messages
631
Likes
1,027
Location
New York
It is surprising that Revel doesn’t tune 3x 8” woofers per side to a lower falloff. I would wonder if the 2-3 khz range will be the main differentiator or if the wideness of the Raal will be your main subjective difference. I feel for you with that 40 hz dip. Thanks for posting this, I look forward to your impressions.

edit: Perhaps the Revels may separate themselves with better bass distortion at volume given the huge cone area advantage.
 

bunkbail

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 27, 2018
Messages
520
Likes
662
How is the vertical dispersion for the BMRs?
 

DanielT

Major Contributor
Joined
Oct 10, 2020
Messages
4,751
Likes
4,633
Location
Sweden - Слава Україні
If you think dispersion of the two is equally good then try to see which ones you can listen to at high volume for a long time without getting "tired in the ears" that is, those with the lowest distortion. Choose the ones with the lowest distortion, after that EQa, if you feel like it.Maybe EQ and then listen and see which one you can listen to at the highest volume, for the longest time that is.:)

Edit:
Or you do not analyze at all, but let the subconscious control completely. The ones you listen to the most are the ones you keep.Just a suggestion,
if you feel like doing so.:)
 
Last edited:

CDMC

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Sep 4, 2019
Messages
1,172
Likes
2,321
I have the smaller from each brand. Like both.
 

Dennis Murphy

Major Contributor
Technical Expert
Joined
Mar 17, 2020
Messages
1,071
Likes
4,535
The Revel should be able to play louder.
i think that goes without saying. The BMR towers were not designed as volume contenders. There are plenty of speakers out there that can play really loud on end-of-the-world or end-of-the-dinosaur movies. The towers were designed for dedicated music playback without a sub at loud, but not deafening, levels.
 

DanielT

Major Contributor
Joined
Oct 10, 2020
Messages
4,751
Likes
4,633
Location
Sweden - Слава Україні
i think that goes without saying. The BMR towers were not designed as volume contenders. There are plenty of speakers out there that can play really loud on end-of-the-world or end-of-the-dinosaur movies. The towers were designed for dedicated music playback without a sub at loud, but not deafening, levels.
Okay, but so good and "equal" speakers how to evaluate them? FR can be filed with EQ, according to your own wishes and tastes. Remains then directivity and you can not advise on that, other than to perhaps say that most people seem to appreciate X such, but it is ultimately individual what one appreciates. :)
Distortion, on the other hand, I have a hard time believing that anyone likes it. Distortion that is more easily detected at higher volumes.

Wouldn't it have been more rewarding to try something else, say a couple of good electrostatic speakers, dipoles? If you have not already tested such before, that is. That type of construction seems to be a watershed, some really like it others not at all.:)

Edit:
In addition to the above: the placement of the speakers in the listening room, how much furniture and carpets there is in the room, reverbation time, type of recording of the music and so on so there are a lot of factors to consider. Which is both fun and a challenge.:)
 
Last edited:

thorvat

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 9, 2021
Messages
323
Likes
386
I have been listening to the Revel F328Be as my main stereo system for the last 10 months. They are amazing. Recently I had the opportunity to try them side by side with the BMR Towers and thought a comparison might be fun.

View attachment 187890

Specification/Price differences:
1. The BMR Tower and the Revel F328Be are closer in size than I imagined. The BMR is almost 7" shorter with a flat top while the F328Be has a curved top. The depth and width on the BMR Tower is just a little smaller than the F328Be. But when placed side by side they look very close with both having a pear shaped design with the rear of the box being narrower than the front and each having rounded corners. Next to each other they look like cousins with both in black.
F328BE - 50.9" H x 13.5" W x 17.6" D, BMR Tower - 44" H x 12" W x 15-1/2" D.
2. BMR is rated at 6 ohms with a sensitivity of 86 dB (2.83v/1M).
3. F328Be is rated at 8 ohms with a sensitivity of 91 dB (2.83v/1M).
(With REW pink noise a minimum of 6 dB extra gain is required of RME ADI-2 for the BMR Tower to level match with F328Be.)
4. Drivers
F328Be - Three 8" Ceramic Composite aluminum cones, Midrange 5-1/4" Ceramic Composite aluminum cone, Tweeter - 1" Beryllium dome, with acoustic lens waveguide.
BMR Tower - One ScanSpeak 22W/8851T-00 Revelator 8" cone, Midrange two Tectonic Balanced Mode Radiator 2.5", RAAL 64-10X tweeter.
5. Ports - F328Be - Dual Rear Facing 2.75" Bass-reflex Flared Ports.
BMR Tower - Front facing 3" flared Mass Loaded Transmission Line Port.
6. Crossover - BMR Towers
Linkwitz-Riley 2nd Order Acoustic at 850 Hz,
Linkwitz-Riley 4th Order Acoustic at 3,800 Hz
Crossover - Revel F328Be
240Hz; 2.1kHz High-order 24 dB/octave Crossovers with Film Capacitors and Air Core Inductors
7. Binding Posts - F328BE - Two pair of gold plated binding posts with conductive bar linking two posts together. Top set recommended for non-biamp use. BMR Tower - single set of binding posts mounted vertically.
8. Weight - F328BE - 112 lbs, BMR Tower - 72 lbs
9. Price - F328Be - $17,600, BMR Tower $3700 plus shipping.
10. BMR bass range 5Hz lower to 23Hz vs 28Hz with these in room measurements.
11. Slower roll-off above 8k with BMR Tower RAAL tweeter.
12. Too early for subjective comments as my ears have been trained to love the sound of F328Be. Will take an extended period of time comparing both before commenting subjectively. :D

REW in Room Measurements Without EQ F328Be (Green) vs BMR Tower (Red)
View attachment 187895




Very intgeresting. Can you please specify how exactly did you perform the measurements? Was it a single sweep or you moved mic while pink noise was playing? What was the distance, mic height and mic orientation?

Can you also please post the REW file?
 

thewas

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 15, 2020
Messages
6,747
Likes
16,179
REW in Room Measurements Without EQ F328Be (Green) vs BMR Tower (Red)
Thank you, could you maybe do them also with the MMM method (RTA and pink noise generator in REW) in a sphere of approximately half meter diameter around your listening position and post them with 1/12 octave smoothing?
 
OP
A

amper42

Major Contributor
Joined
Dec 21, 2020
Messages
1,582
Likes
2,284
Very intgeresting. Can you please specify how exactly did you perform the measurements? Was it a single sweep or you moved mic while pink noise was playing? What was the distance, mic height and mic orientation?

Can you also please post the REW file?

REW measurement was created placing the UMiK-1 on a stand located at ear height, 12' away from the speaker at the listening position. This was done with the stand mounted immediately behind the couch and UMiK-1 tip extended to where the ear would be located with the uMIK pointed toward speaker. The intent was not to EQ the room but simply measure differences in speaker response at LP. This is a single measurement. I will try the MMM method the next time I have the UMIK out. Thank you.

Attached is the REW file.
 

Attachments

  • BMRTower-F328Be-12ft.mdat.zip
    2.7 MB · Views: 107
Last edited:

thorvat

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 9, 2021
Messages
323
Likes
386
Here are both graphs with Psychoacoustic smoothing, which I consider to be optimal way of comparing speaker's in-room measurements.

While it can be said that both speakers do a very good job here, F328Be still has noticeably smoother response throughout the entire range and especially in the region above 900Hz where room doesn't come to play at all.

As for room EQ, with F328Be measuring like this I wouldn't bother with room EQ et all. If I would be in the hair splitting mood I would reduce that peak at app 105Hz for 2 dB, and that's it.

P.S. And no, your room is quite "normal" and certainly doesn't have "acoustics of the kitchen". But even if it would have "acoustics of the kitchen" one wouldn't be able to tell it from the measurement you posted.


Capture.JPG
 
Last edited:

Jdunk54nl

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Aug 5, 2020
Messages
968
Likes
1,048
Location
Arizona
I just took delivery of some bmr towers too, and they sound amazing.
Let's take a moment to realize that these are competing in this against revels top of the line speaker and a $14,000 difference in price!

DEC7A68B-5868-4ED7-AF5E-FBE1F7CD3D23.jpeg
 

Juhazi

Major Contributor
Joined
Sep 15, 2018
Messages
1,717
Likes
2,897
Location
Finland
amper42's REW data in various views

Remember these are at-spot measurements, so
- response is "room curve" representing total radiated sound power, and showing room modes
- mic was close to the chair, so rather many nearfield reflections in upper freq range

Issues
- Revel impulse has strong interference, but BMR is flat at 2,8ms - what is causing that?
- spl level is too low to show difference in distortion
- BMR shows very uneven response above 1kHz
--- was mic height inappropriate for MTM xo summation, or did tweeter have wrong polarity? More quasi-anechoid measurements needed!
---short gate response, clarity and EDT hint to MT crossover summation problems too

amper disto step rt edt-tile.jpgamper spl impulse-tile.jpg
 

TurtlePaul

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
May 19, 2020
Messages
631
Likes
1,027
Location
New York
- BMR shows very uneven response above 1kHz
--- was mic height inappropriate for MTM xo summation, or did tweeter have wrong polarity?
I would expect a bigger null near 3.5 khz if the tweeter had reversed polarity. I agree that the pattern of dips every 5 khz (2 khz, 7 khz, 12 khz, 17 khz) points to some kind of interference pattern at this measurement position. I wonder how much changing position would bring up the 2-3 khz dip, which I would expect this be the most audible characteristic.
 

TurtlePaul

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
May 19, 2020
Messages
631
Likes
1,027
Location
New York
just checked the price of both, it seems that the BMR are the gold to take, man that price diff with similar performance!
That is a little unfair to Revel. The BMRs look like really good speakers, but it isnt like Revel doesnt also sell speakers in this price bracket. The fair comparison would be the F206.

Part of what you are getting with the F328Be is all those woofers. The pair of 8” woofers on the BMR tower have an effective total cone area somewhere between a 10” and 12” sub. The effective cone area of the six 8” woofers on the pair of Revel is slightly more cone area than an 18” woofer. As Dennis said, the BMR towers are not meant to push the highest SPLs, but I think the 328Be would be happier to oblige (at a cost).

With the Revel, you are also getting beryllium tweeters and ceramic woofers. On the BMR you are also getting non-traditional drivers with the BMRs and the ribbon. The cost of “exotica” drivers is hard to compare (but BMR midranges are inexpensive), are included in the cost of the speakers, and almost never show up in the frequency response plot.

edit:

The Revels are also their current top-of-the-line. For some reason, this is the point where price and performance are decoupled (a lot of manufacturers seem to do this). For example, the F328Be pricing makes no sense relative to the F228Be.
 
Last edited:

YSC

Major Contributor
Joined
Dec 31, 2019
Messages
3,194
Likes
2,570
That is a little unfair to Revel. The BMRs look like really good speakers, but it isnt like Revel doesnt also sell speakers in this price bracket. The fair comparison would be the F206 or F208.

Part of what you are getting with the F328Be is all those woofers. The pair of 8” woofers on the BMR tower have an effective total cone area somewhere between a 10” and 12” sub. The effective cone area of the six 8” woofers on the pair of Revel is slightly more cone area than an 18” woofer. As Dennis said, the BMR towers are not meant to push the highest SPLs, but I think the 328Be would be happier to oblige (at a cost).

With the Revel, you are also getting beryllium tweeters and ceramic woofers. On the BMR you are also getting non-traditional drivers with the BMRs and the ribbon. The cost of “exotica” drivers is hard to compare (but BMR midranges are inexpensive), are included in the cost of the speakers, and almost never show up in the frequency response plot.
Sure, I feel it's like camera lens or cars, the BMR is kind of more budget concious buyer's choice, but the Revel Be is the money no object crowd for tiny improvement in practice.
 
Top Bottom