• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required as is 20 years of participation in forums (not all true). Come here to have fun, be ready to be teased and not take online life too seriously. We now measure and review equipment for free! Click here for details.

Has anyone heard speakers with a wider soundstage than Revel's?

nerdoldnerdith

Active Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2020
Messages
224
Likes
265
From someone who owns Revel bookshelf, owned and sold Revel F226be, own BMR bookshelf and Philharmonic BMR Towers I can definitely say that the BMRs have the biggest sound stage. The towers sound huge and go low.
Cool. This is the first I've seen these in the wild. How do you like them vs. the F226Be?
 

blestin

Member
Joined
Jan 17, 2021
Messages
89
Likes
74
I like them more than the F226be, no contest for me personally. I don’t have the F226be to compared to side by side.

But I can confidently say that if they were compared against each other without a subwoofer the BMR Tower would win easily. It goes to 25hz flat in my room, has impact, sounds huge, crystal clear highs and a beautiful midrange.

With subwoofers their probably much closer, but I would probably still prefer the BMR Tower. I am biased since I preffered the BMR bookshelf slightly to the Revel F226be. I think that it is slightly due to how they sound in this particular room, as I loved the Revels in other rooms and preferred them half the time.

The Revel’s have a different sound signature that some may prefer, slightly shelved up response from 4k. I thought they were phenomenal during for movies.
 

Chromatischism

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 5, 2020
Messages
2,466
Likes
1,847
Vertical surfaces mess with the vertical image causing what I call "drift" when sounds move from driver to driver and around the directivity errors present in the speakers. (you can here this great in guitar parts, where the guitar seems to float up and down!)
Interesting point. A spinorama doesn't contain spatial information, that is, "where on the speaker is the sound coming from". I've heard mention of this before with a crossover that can split up the vocal range between different drivers, which is a benefit of a 2-way over a 3-way.
 

mononoaware

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Apr 6, 2021
Messages
761
Likes
544
These are designed to fill an auditorium with sound. They will direct sound straight at an audience and keep it from ceilings and floors and provide a lot of coverage deep into a very big room at very high volumes. Aside from the looks, not really appropriate for a living room unless you want the loudest home stereo in your town.

Thanks. I noticed due to their narrow vertical dispersion they usually have about 3 or 4 stacked on top of each other. So maybe 1 will not exactly give an ideal listening experience.
 

preload

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 19, 2020
Messages
1,060
Likes
1,196
Location
California
1631335453394.png
 

Chromatischism

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 5, 2020
Messages
2,466
Likes
1,847
Thanks. I noticed due to their narrow vertical dispersion they usually have about 3 or 4 stacked on top of each other. So maybe 1 will not exactly give an ideal listening experience.
That's for beam steering. Look up "line array speaker".
 

LTig

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 27, 2019
Messages
3,533
Likes
5,655
Location
Europe
Thanks. I noticed due to their narrow vertical dispersion they usually have about 3 or 4 stacked on top of each other. So maybe 1 will not exactly give an ideal listening experience.
For a few listeners 1 would be perfekt. But most of them don't play bass, and they are designed to be used in multiples where the number of units and the angle for each depends on the distribution of the audience (distance and height from the array).
 

mononoaware

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Apr 6, 2021
Messages
761
Likes
544
For a few listeners 1 would be perfekt. But most of them don't play bass, and they are designed to be used in multiples where the number of units and the angle for each depends on the distribution of the audience (distance and height from the array).

I think the idea I had was stretching the functionality and just rewarding the novelty.
I understand they are built and designed for a specific professional use and not optimal for consumers using just 2x units.

(-3dB) 48 Hz – 18 kHz frequency response is quite ordinary not impressive but not terrible, I was thinking with some EQ in the digital realm (low-pass) one could get a usable 30hz low-frequency extension at decent SPL.
 
Last edited:

mononoaware

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Apr 6, 2021
Messages
761
Likes
544
That's for beam steering. Look up "line array speaker".

I recall Amir reviewing the JBL CBT speaker (CBT 70J-1). Looking at the jblprocom product page the first line says this:
"Asymmetrical vertical coverage sends more sound toward far area of room to make front-to-back sound levels more consistent."

So in effect this CBT line-array can widen the sweet spot on the horizontal plane from front to back walls of the room, giving "clear" audio reproduction to a larger area of the room (in crowd applications).
And the Presonus CDL12P is essentially a "modular" version of the CBT line-array which can be stacked and scaled to the area dimensions.
 

tuga

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 5, 2020
Messages
2,706
Likes
2,707
Location
Oxford, England
Let's say under $3k. I've heard a good number of speakers but Revel's had the biggest soundstage and was curious if anyone has heard something that had a noticeably wider soundstage?

The price is a bit tight but perhaps you could try some omnis?
Duevel, German Physics, Ohm, Shahinian...
 

LTig

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 27, 2019
Messages
3,533
Likes
5,655
Location
Europe
With good use of EQ you can get an even mediocre set of loudspeakers to supply spaciousness. If you take several measurements (one enclosure at a time), mostly off axis (to 10, 20, 30 degrees both ways at least and maybe one at 45 degrees between the pair), and average the responses ... killing any major peaks in each loudspeaker, you'll eventually get a nice smooth reflective response that will match the on axis response (in shape) pretty well. The coloration pretty much goes away (the 45 degree shot between the pair will reveal this). This works well in reflective rooms. Ultimately, your on axis response may not be exactly flat anymore but the overall in room response will be real close. As a last measurement, I'll take one where the loudspeakers responses cross (mic pointed at the front wall). You should see a nice downward trend in both left/right responses as well as the combined L/R response.

Takes a little time but IMO it's worth it. You'll be able to hear the same tonal response no matter where you are in front of the pair.
I don't think that the tonal response at the LP will be similar to that of a speaker with flat on axis FR. As I understand Floyd Toole's book the sound quality one experiences is defined by the first wave front reaching our ears, hence flat on axis FR is important. If on axis FR is not flat one should EQ it to be flat. EQing the room response is rather a recipe for disaster.
 

Chromatischism

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 5, 2020
Messages
2,466
Likes
1,847
I don't think that the tonal response at the LP will be similar to that of a speaker with flat on axis FR. As I understand Floyd Toole's book the sound quality one experiences is defined by the first wave front reaching our ears, hence flat on axis FR is important. If on axis FR is not flat one should EQ it to be flat. EQing the room response is rather a recipe for disaster.
*Listening Window
 

puppet

Active Member
Joined
Dec 23, 2020
Messages
149
Likes
104
*Listening Window
Right. Tuning for flat on axis will pretty much guarantee poorer off axis response in a typical room. The converse is also true. A happy medium between the two is what you can shoot for. JBL engineers did some papers on this back in the '80's. They could predict, given a loudspeakers dispersion character, what flat on axis looked like off axis and vice versa.
 

LTig

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 27, 2019
Messages
3,533
Likes
5,655
Location
Europe
Right. Tuning for flat on axis will pretty much guarantee poorer off axis response in a typical room. The converse is also true. A happy medium between the two is what you can shoot for. JBL engineers did some papers on this back in the '80's. They could predict, given a loudspeakers dispersion character, what flat on axis looked like off axis and vice versa.
Sorry, I didn't make my self clear enough. With "If on axis FR is not flat one should EQ it to be flat" I meant to use EQ to make it flat in an anechoic room. You need the measured FR, of course, not what a mic would measure in the user's room.
 

Duke

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Manufacturer
Forum Donor
Joined
Apr 22, 2016
Messages
797
Likes
1,791
Location
Princeton, Texas
(-3dB) 48 Hz – 18 kHz frequency response is quite ordinary not impressive but not terrible, I was thinking with some EQ in the digital realm (low-pass) one could get a usable 30hz low-frequency extension at decent SPL.

If the woofer is in a sealed box, maybe. But sealed boxes are at a disadvantage in a sound reinforcement application from both an SPL/weight/cost standpoint AND a heat-management standpoint, the exception to the latter being if the motor is on the outside of the enclosure. Otherwise the air trapped inside the enclosure just gets hotter and hotter, whereas a ported enclosure has an exchange of air with the outside world and is more likely to reach an equilibrium temperature and stop getting hotter. So the enclosure is unlikely to be a sealed box.

If the woofer is in a ported box, no way. 30 Hz is guaranteed to be well below the tuning frequency of a prosound ported box which is -3 dB @ 48 Hz and -10 dB @ 42 Hz, and strong bass boost below the tuning frequency will cause the woofer to bottom out long before you attain a satisfactory sound pressure level.
 

Chromatischism

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 5, 2020
Messages
2,466
Likes
1,847
Sorry, I didn't make my self clear enough. With "If on axis FR is not flat one should EQ it to be flat" I meant to use EQ to make it flat in an anechoic room. You need the measured FR, of course, not what a mic would measure in the user's room.
What we are getting at is the listening window (an average of anechoic measurements) is a better indication of what we will hear and is better to EQ than the on-axis (0°) sound.
 

nerdoldnerdith

Active Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2020
Messages
224
Likes
265
What we are getting at is the listening window (an average of anechoic measurements) is a better indication of what we will hear and is better to EQ than the on-axis (0°) sound.
Most room correction software has you take measurements at several listening positions and equalizes the average. This is the best way to go unless you're in a heavily treated studio.
 

ArtDJ

Member
Joined
Apr 18, 2021
Messages
11
Likes
9
My vintage AR-LSTs have the widest sound stage of any speaker I've heard. I've spent time listening to all of the Revels on the flagship store's showroom floor in NYC, and while they are wonderful speakers they're in a different category altogether, especially wrt the expansiveness of the sound stage.
 

nerdoldnerdith

Active Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2020
Messages
224
Likes
265
My vintage AR-LSTs have the widest sound stage of any speaker I've heard. I've spent time listening to all of the Revels on the flagship store's showroom floor in NYC, and while they are wonderful speakers they're in a different category altogether, especially wrt the expansiveness of the sound stage.

Is this thing going to eat me?
 

Attachments

  • 3e5af6f0114fcf4818bf79c930f4b99a--surround-sound-the-pioneer.jpg
    3e5af6f0114fcf4818bf79c930f4b99a--surround-sound-the-pioneer.jpg
    48.5 KB · Views: 26
Top Bottom