Is REL being more 'musical' than SVS a myth, or is there some real science behind this?

[Willem]

I think there are two points one can argue about:
1 value for money.
2 sound quality, and the REL preference for high level connection in particular.

As for 1), I think the outcome is obvious, although REL subwoofers are admittedly good looking and that is a legitimate argument
As for 2) I think in the early days of subwoofers the high level connection was an interesting practical way to connect a sub to a stereo amplifier without a line level output and without any high pass filter. From my own experience this is quite easy to implement. The claim that this is also sonically superior is bonkers, of course. The biggest downside is that the main speakers and power amplifier still have to do a lot of the heavy lifting.

 

[warpdrive]

In my experience, when "audiophiles" talk about tight bass, the component usually has some lack of bass quantity. Small bookshelf speakers have tight bass when pulled out into the room. For headphones, headphones with tight bass usually they fall short of the Harman target in the low end.

For speakers, if a speaker has limited low frequency extension, it's less likely to excite room modes or show its resonances and thus is "tight".

For subs, REL subs I've seen measured tend to have the natural response of the drivers instead of a DSP tuned flat response. A steady roll off in the upper and lower ranges due to sealed alignment. Also they are easy to integrate because I believe they recommend just dropping in the sub, keep turning up the bass volume until it adds a bit of heft to the sound, and you are done....it's musical because you probably are just turning it up bit by bit while keeping the bass quantity low so the bass modes are minimized.

I have an older SVS SB12Plus and it has a room compensation switch which allows you to roll off the lower bass earlier to account for room gain. With my room I have some peaks, and using this switch alone without any EQ does a good job of reducing the obnoxious peak I have at 40-50Hz. It sounds more musical.

Personally I would like to see what Rel is doing with that high level input. This would be a good project for somebody to figure out. Why do they suggest hooking up the high level input AND a low level input? Are they doing any kind of processing where if the content has a lot of higher frequency content, they reduce the bass output to prevent masking? Is that how they get their subs to be "musical"? I've never owned one but I'm curious whether there is anything to their claims

 

[bodhi]

Personally I would like to see what Rel is doing with that high level input. This would be a good project for somebody to figure out. Why do they suggest hooking up the high level input AND a low level input? Are they doing any kind of processing where if the content has a lot of higher frequency content, they reduce the bass output to prevent masking? Is that how they get their subs to be "musical"?

I would like a blind test with a REL T/7x against comparable "unmusical boombox" such as SVS SB-1000 with ham-fisted room correction applied such as Audyssey XT32, no fine tuning.

 

[Pritaudio]

Has anyone here experience with servo subwoofers.?
how about open baffle subwoofers?

 

[sweetchaos]

Thoughts:
We can finally definitively say that REL subs are mediocre performers and completely overpriced against the competitors.
Something we (the community) already suspected for a long time, but it's nice to see confirmation with CEA-2010 data.
In other words, there's dozens of better-performing subs for your money.

I'm glad we're able to compare REL subs vs the competition, because of the availability of such data.

I think the *community backlash* comes from the fact that REL makes all these *so called claims* that show their subwoofers are x,y,z, without any 3rd party verification. That's the definition of snake oil.

If they charged a premium for their subs, by saying things like "Our subs aren't the cheapest, but we do offer a variety of nice finishes, that you won't get from from others", then I would be okay with that marketing and wouldn't fault them for this. In fact, I would likely encourage subs with a nice finish, depending on the user's needs. But as it stands right now, REL's current marketing strategy is not something I agree with.

Interesting that no other subwoofer company gets this kind of feedback...

Shameless Plug: See my 'subwoofer comparison' if you want to see the CEA-2010 data on subs.

 

[DonH56]

Has anyone here experience with servo subwoofers.?
how about open baffle subwoofers?

Yes, why?

I currently use commercial servo subs, from Rythmik, similar in design to my DIY servo ca. 1979. It is one way to solve certain problems including some like voice coil heating not readily handled by other means.

I am not a fan of open-baffle designs. By and large the ones I have designed and heard sound "boomy" and exhibit (much) higher distortion than sealed or ported designs.

YMMV - Don

 

[goat76]

The same friend of mine was jumping on the sofa when he first heard T/9x in my setup, and I never really enjoyed his SVS SB-2000, he kept changing the phase from the app and bumping the gain up and down, what else, moving physical location, and then finally switching it off saying his system sounds better without the SVS, etc.

A subwoofer will never be better than how well you manage to integrate it with the rest of the system, and in particularly the main speakers. It's clear to me that your friend never got that right with the constant twiddling with the settings and the positioning.

Of course, there's no magic with subwoofers from REL, they are just easier for most regular people to get them to integrate fairly well into the sound system without a deeper knowledge of how to get it right with, otherwise, active crossover settings.

The trade-off with the “REL-way” of just taking over the bass duties where the main speakers don't reach further is of course obvious, you still put the same strain on the main speakers and the amp. But what you get is an almost instant decent result if you just follow RELs setup guide, with just some minor tweaking to fine-tune the settings for a couple of days. After that, you will most likely never feel any need to reach for the setup knobs anymore (like you and many others already have found out).

 

[FeddyLost]

Finally found review of REL HT/1510 Predator with measurements ...
Actually, at least this model have really low GD through full FR.
And no processing latency like with DSP subs.
Low order crossover slope.
That may explain why they blend better with passive stereo pairs than some other models. Maybe it's true.
Don't know about high level connection, does it matter or not.

And yes, high gloss adds +35 to musicality, as usual.

 

[warpdrive]

The whole schtick of catering to audiophiles works for them I think. If you want to drop in a sub that integrates with your 2 channel system, you buy a REL. I heard that time and time again talking to other people at audio show. They may not be as dumb as we think. They can point to the low group delay and say "see? we don't sacrifice musicality for distortion. We have the fastest tightest bass"

 

[nerdoldnerdith]

The whole schtick of catering to audiophiles works for them I think. If you want to drop in a sub that integrates with your 2 channel system, you buy a REL. I heard that time and time again talking to other people at audio show. They may not be as dumb as we think. They can point to the low group delay and say "see? we don't sacrifice musicality for distortion. We have the fastest tightest bass"

Rel isn't dumb. Their target audience is just uninformed when it comes to audio and buys into their marketing nonsense. For what it's worth, their subwoofers aren't that bad even if they aren't the best. The HT subwoofers are a decent value for the money, and the higher end subwoofers are beautiful and are built with a lot of craftsmanship. A lot of audiophiles use then simply because they look so nice.

 

[morpheusX]

Finally found review of REL HT/1510 Predator with measurements ...

Care to share?

 

[jsilvela]

I'm a sub newbie and sprung for a T/5x, before learning about ASR and calibration mics + a REW.
I'm learning a lot.
One thing: even the premise. What the heck is *musical*?
Also, for a newb, seeing some of the numbers in sweetchaos's chart may mean little.
If you don't know about Fletcher-Munson, reading that a sub can't do 100dB at 30Hz may not mean much.
BTW keep in mind that in the EU the American brands are more expensive, and REL doesn't get the same price hike.

 

[warpdrive]

Rel isn't dumb. Their target audience is just uninformed when it comes to audio and buys into their marketing nonsense. For what it's worth, their subwoofers aren't that bad even if they aren't the best. The HT subwoofers are a decent value for the money, and the higher end subwoofers are beautiful and are built with a lot of craftsmanship. A lot of audiophiles use then simply because they look so nice.

I don't think there is anything wrong with buying a REL. They may be the right solution in some cases.

I was looking at a small 8 inch sealed sub to fill in some lower bass with my desktop speakers, and the REL T series seems in-line with the KEF Qube line (I need high level inputs, so I limited my choice to those subs). Maybe not the best value in terms of performance, but I think it would work fine. I like that the drivers are bottom firing so it would survive an accidental kick under my desk.

 

[fpitas]

Has anyone here experience with servo subwoofers.?
how about open baffle subwoofers?

You're fighting the laws of physics with open baffle subwoofers. Sure, you can EQ the cr*p out of it to get somewhere near flat response, but the driver cone will be moving enormous distances to keep up.

 

[jsilvela]

Personally I would like to see what Rel is doing with that high level input. This would be a good project for somebody to figure out. Why do they suggest hooking up the high level input AND a low level input? Are they doing any kind of processing where if the content has a lot of higher frequency content, they reduce the bass output to prevent masking? Is that how they get their subs to be "musical"? I've never owned one but I'm curious whether there is anything to their claims

I cannot tell you about circuitry and internals.
The high-level and low-level inputs are functionally identical. (At least the current T series has an RCA "Low-Level" input. Can't comment on other models).
They high-level and low-level go through the same filter/phase/gain circuitry.
The emphasis on high-level is very canny IMO. For lots of people with an amp without a sub-out, this will save them from having to ditch their stuff or get extra stuff.
E.g. if you have preamp-outs, those are Right - Left, and only one channel will feed your sub. The high-level combines those.

The LFE connector on the REL (not to be confused with the low-level) bypasses the filter and phase controls, and has a separate gain knob to drive it.
I can speculate that the REL guys don't want an AVR to muck with their filters, and hence keep advocating to leave speakers set as Large to bypass AVR xovers.
For LFE, I imagine, they care less as it's "all about Booms" and such.

You've been mentioning this. I think the REL marketing is quite canny and thought out not to alienate people telling them their beloved amp is "legacy".

 

[Willem]

It is, of course, possible to connect a line level subwoofer to the speaker level output by using an attenuation cable. However, in that case you are still missing a high pass filter, so crossing over at much lower frequencies remains necessary. The missing high pas filter in many integrated stereo amplifiers is a real problem.

 

[Willem]

the REL T series seems in-line with the KEF Qube line

I have a KEF Kube 8b and it is not only a good and good looking small subwoofer, but also rather cheaper than the REL offerings (at least here in the Netherlands). I compared it to an older REL Quake ii and the latter was little more than a farting box compared to the Kef.

 

[jsilvela]

I would like a blind test with a REL T/7x against comparable "unmusical boombox" such as SVS SB-1000 with ham-fisted room correction applied such as Audyssey XT32, no fine tuning.

That would be super interesting.
And that is an angle I find missing in much of the sub debate. I.e. for a small room do I really need XYZ levels at frequencies ABC? Can I do with less?
Blind test the hell out of that!!

I can tell you that I did the setup "the REL way" by ear to the track they recommend (from the soundtrack of Sneakers.)
After I got a UMIK and REW and started measuring, I realized that a room mode at 39Hz was dominating my bass perception.
That room mode was excited by my right bookshelf speaker, not the sub!
I have ended up turning the gain knob on the REL up 10 "clicks".

I've recently tried to EQ with a Denon (w/ Audissey MultiEQ, not the newer XT32).
The results of that were *horrible*. I did much better without EQ and level matching with REW.

 

[bodhi]

That would be super interesting.
And that is an angle I find missing in much of the sub debate. I.e. for a small room do I really need XYZ levels at frequencies ABC? Can I do with less?
Blind test the hell out of that!!

That is pretty simple: you need all the extension you can get. The room size and your listening preferences define how much SPL you need.

Rel T7x is rated -6dB@30Hz while for example half the price Rhytmik LV12M is rated -6db@12hz. For small rooms REL is OK for music, not so with movies whereas Rhytmik does both very well.

So, the listening test would tell us if there is some magic in REL that makes it sound better even if it seriously underperforms in specs.

I've recently tried to EQ with a Denon (w/ Audissey MultiEQ, not the newer XT32).
The results of that were *horrible*. I did much better without EQ and level matching with REW.

That's the catch with Audyssey: the cheaper versions don't work very well at all with subs but XT32 is usually almost as good as it gets. With good placement and/or two subs all it has to do is to pull down peaks and there you have it.

 

[jsilvela]

That is pretty simple: you need all the extension you can get. The room size and your listening preferences define how much SPL you need.

That's kind of the gap I keep seeing in this kind of discussion.
We get into the whole "I only listen to classical music, no damn movies/hip-hop/name-your-nemesis ..."
And it does not take into account for instance the boundary gain you will get from corner/wall placement. For a small room, you may have powerful room modes giving you plenty of bass (although boomy).
Being able to translate your SPL requirements into wattage/driver size is not at all obvious. Outside LF you'd look at the speaker efficiency, distance from listening position, and you could do some math.

And to people who have felt good about their 100watt amp for years, reading that the entry level SVS has 325watt... it just requires a bit of a gear shift.
That's why I liked the blind test idea to settle that kind of debate.

Would be very curious for blind tests to settle the "musicality" thing, definitely.