Is The Revel Ultima Salon2 STILL the State Of The Art?

[Matias]

I have included a REW frequency response measurement of left and right channels at my listening position. The mains are integrated with JL Fathom f113v2 subs.

Try the frequency response graph in standard 50 dB range on the Y axis, and yeah, real world rooms are nasty (mine included).

 

[Matias]

So since I agree with you, instead of talking about why the salon2 is not SOTA, what are some examples of speakers that qualify as such? What’s it gonna cost me?

Better and for less, Ascend ELX.
Way better and similar price, KEF Blade 2 Meta.

 

[MarkS]

SOTA depends on which measurements you prioritize, but the Genelec 8361A has to be a contender.

 

[bigguyca]

Agreed that the salon2 especially when integrated with the JL subs using the CR-1, probably is good enough for 99% of the people out there. I have something similar. Bass is thundering and the never fatiguing smooth but detailed sound…can just listen for hours and hours.

But when we are talking about SOTA how does the salon2s compare with ultra expensive speakers like the Magico M7 or even the updated Perlisten S7 black edition? How about the new active speakers that can do things that passive speakers are unable to

The salon2 was years ahead of its time when it first came out and the design is so sound, that it’s still relevant today but not sure about state of the art. And while not SOTA, the salon2 is tough to replace as it does so many things right and looks great in the process.

Lots of subjective opinions in many posts above, not just the above one responded to. It seems that this is ASR except when it isn't. For those proposing speakers such as Magico M7 or Perlisten S7 black edition as the new state of the art please provide detailed measurements at least up to Stereophile level and preferably ASR level.

 

[Lsc]

Lots of subjective opinions in many posts above, not just the above one responded to. It seems that this is ASR except when it isn't. For those proposing speakers such as Magico M7 or Perlisten S7 black edition as the new state of the art please provide detailed measurements at least up to Stereophile level and preferably ASR level.

These two speakers define SOTA for me. The M7 is not obtainable, while the Perlisten is more reasonable. Having said that, whether anyone else here at ASR agrees or not, I’m not here to convince. I don’t work for either company nor do I have any detailed measurements. Feel free to ask Alon or Dan .

 

[Lsc]

Better and for less, Ascend ELX.
Way better and similar price, KEF Blade 2 Meta.

These are two good examples but it’s hard for me to consider the Ascend ELX a SOTA speaker. Maybe they will be at Axpona so I can check it out since I can’t go see em at a dealer.

The KEF Blades are very interesting and I always thought they sounded really good. They have been around for a while if I remember but still look state of the art.

 

[kyuu]

As I pointed out earlier, measurements of the Salon 2 are nowhere close to SOTA.

Y'all are fully entitled to your subjective opinions of its sound, but some of us still believe that this is Audio Science Review.

Without defining "SOTA" or having a complete Spinorama for the Salon 2, declaring the Salon 2 to be "nowhere close to SOTA" is not a scientific statement. Just looking at the on-axis response not being perfectly flat and stopping there is a pretty fundamental misunderstanding of how to interpret measurements, seems to me.

 

[Matias]

or having a complete Spinorama for the Salon 2,

But we do have. And it's not as flat and nice as the 2 I mentioned above.

Measurements for speaker Revel Ultima2 Salon2

www.spinorama.org

 

[jhaider]

Timbre matching is a regular term for people who are into this.

So are "break in" and “biwiring.” The audiophool community has a lot of “regular terms” that are complete BS but appeal to the eyes or to human gullibility. “Timbre matching” is a great example of both! It's facile marketing twaddle whipped up to move crappy center channels. It should be called “timber matching” because the only thing actually matched is the finish.

The Revel Ultima2 line is discontinued. Plus their original surround speaker (Gem2) was a patch job and do not match the other speakers in the ultima2 line aesthetically. You can look this up if you feel like.

I’m well aware of Gem2. For a "patch job" they are extraordinary performers, and IMO they look great on the (wickedly overpriced, but pretty) pedestal stands.

I have 2 systems where my much lower end man cave’s 5.1 system is more immersive than my main system because all of my speakers are from the Revel Concerta line (F12, C12 and S12) with the JL F113 sub.

This sentence was fine until "because." After that it devolved into speculation. Have you tried moving the man cave speakers into the main room, or the main room speakers into the man cave? What you're reacting to is more likely than not related to the room and placement rather than use of different loudspeakers at the side and rear positions. But you're glomming on the "mismatch" because you see it.

Versus my family room where my Salon2, Voice2 are paired with mismatching F12 for surround (yes I have 2 pair). The sound is close but I can tell the difference when sound pans from front and back and it’s not ideal. I thought about getting a pair of studio2 for the surrounds but there really isn’t much room behind the couch so having wall mounted speakers would be better.

IME the big issue with sides and to lesser extent rears is that sound can kind of "collect" at them, due to the often shorter listening distance as and the greater difference between them with head movements because they’re at the sides. Have you read Chapter 8.5.4 (A "Physics" Problem with Side Surrounds) of the current edition of Sound Reproduction? If not, you should.

FWIW before immersive my practice was to use coaxes pointed up for sides and rears. That seemed to avoid the most of the problems. With a height layer that approach seems problematic though. About 4 years ago, following guidance from Dr. Toole’s work (see supra, see also Chapter 12.2.4) I look a flyer on CBT line arrays for side and rear, and find they work really well! You want “mismatched” speakers, try 8” 2-ways with 17mm exit compression drivers and constant horizontal directivity from ca 2kHz up front, and lines of 2” wideband drivers on the side and behind! It worked so brilliantly that in the current home I specified the same, though I went with the 1m tall versions all around this time instead of using the 50cm versions for sides as before, both for looks and because I thought with Dirac ART on the horizon more headroom would only be a benefit

Still, if I stick with these speakers, since my son is graduating from college in the spring that drained me for over $200k, I should be able to pick up a pair of studio2 for about $6k used and rearrange my sectional. My wife should understand that we have some “extra cash flow” after January.

Congrats to your son -- and your bank account for being done with that!

This is the reason why I would consider parting with my beloved Revel salon2 and the near matching voice2. Did you know that the voice2 is a 3-way speaker that has the same drivers as the studio2 and actually doesn’t have the same performance as the salon2 which is a 4 way speaker? I know this because that’s what’s in my family room and I hear it daily. It’s not theory. Having studio2 for the fronts would actually make for a better surround sound system.

I agree that Studio2 for the fronts (i.e. LCR) would be a better foundation than Salon2+Voice2.

Your assertion that the Perlisten center doesn’t match their other speakers is literally preposterous.

The whole thing about Perlisten's design approach is that they control vertical directivity with the woofer spacing and horizontal directivity with the tweeter array. (One can argue the benefit of that design approach; personally I've been a bit underwhelmed by them every time I've heard them, which has only been a couple times. But lots of smart people with great ears love them.) But if you rotate the woofers to be horizontal...you get neither constant vertical directivity nor smooth horizontal directivity. What you get is instead a dispersion disruption in the horizontal plane because the three tweeters can't go low enough to match the narrow directivity of the wide woofer array, and wide dispersion in the vertical plane until the tweeter array takes over. L

Timber matching, yes. Timbre matching, lol. If you do have to flip a speaker on its side, an coax or an MT array with a 4"+ woofer is better, because the mid can play low enough to keep the side woofers from needing to play high enough for the array directivity to be a major factor. .

If you have actually watched a movie with the Perlisten system, there is no way you would actually be claiming this.

Movies are poor source material for evaluating sound quality. Given the dominance of the visual, as long as the audio it's kind of OK, gets loud, and doesn't actively get in the way (e.g. subs flapping, or a harsh edge at high volumes) it's generally fine. IMO music benefits immensely from immersive, and even more so from properly set up systems with identical LCR, multiple subs with appropriate correction software, etc. That includes stereo recordings, thanks to Auromatic.

The Perlisten center channel has the same DPC array as their mains and should actually match better than what I have.

That's not the way physics works.

All horizontal centers are a compromise…but my system is in my family room and the center is under my LG 83G4. I can’t do same 3 speakers across…figured I’d throw this in, just in case you make other weird assumptions .

You can - if you care to! Just move the screen up a little bit. It looks like that screen is under 45" tall, so even if your ceilings are 8' high you can still fit that screen and a 50" tall loudspeaker. Now, if sound quality is not the priority then do whatever. But in that case this is all pretty expensive audio gear.

 

[farakji]

Agreed that the salon2 especially when integrated with the JL subs using the CR-1, probably is good enough for 99% of the people out there. I have something similar. Bass is thundering and the never fatiguing smooth but detailed sound…can just listen for hours and hours.

But when we are talking about SOTA how does the salon2s compare with ultra expensive speakers like the Magico M7 or even the updated Perlisten S7 black edition? How about the new active speakers that can do things that passive speakers are unable to

The salon2 was years ahead of its time when it first came out and the design is so sound, that it’s still relevant today but not sure about state of the art. And while not SOTA, the salon2 is tough to replace as it does so many things right and looks great in the process.

That’s fair, and I’m in that 99%. I care more about how a system works in a normal room than about pushing absolute limits.

Many of the gains from ultra-high-end speakers show up mostly in highly treated dedicated rooms. The Salon2 is very forgiving in a typical family room. Magico tends to need more ideal conditions, while Perlisten might behave differently though I haven’t experienced that personally.

For reference, I followed the FR graph style and scale demonstrated by Tom Martin in his YouTube video Building/Tuning Listening Rooms: Audio Set‑Up Series – Tour and Learn.
In that video, the speakers he uses are Perlisten, which have also been reviewed by The Absolute Sound (Tom Martin called the S7t a “very special speaker”) and he demonstrates how they behave in a fully treated, purpose-built listening room:

A screenshot of the Perlisten S7 frequency response in his dedicated listening room is also attached.

In my family room, I used the same FR graph style and scale as Tom Martin demonstrates to present my measurements. In that measurement, with my 70 Hz crossover, the Salon2 delivers nearly flat response down to where the subs take over, providing a very balanced performance in a real-world environment compared with the +10 dB peak seen in the Perlisten measurement.

Even SOTA speakers aren’t isolated from the room. In a fully treated, dedicated listening space, speaker design and frequency response can still create peaks or dips that affect tonal balance, which is why real-world performance often differs from ideal measurements.

Price is also part of the context. Not everyone is building a six-figure system in a highly treated room.

 

[Lsc]

So are "break in" and “biwiring.” The audiophool community has a lot of “regular terms” that are complete BS but appeal to the eyes or to human gullibility. “Timbre matching” is a great example of both! It's facile marketing twaddle whipped up to move crappy center channels. It should be called “timber matching” because the only thing actually matched is the finish.



I’m well aware of Gem2. For a "patch job" they are extraordinary performers, and IMO they look great on the (wickedly overpriced, but pretty) pedestal stands.



This sentence was fine until "because." After that it devolved into speculation. Have you tried moving the man cave speakers into the main room, or the main room speakers into the man cave? What you're reacting to is more likely than not related to the room and placement rather than use of different loudspeakers at the side and rear positions. But you're glomming on the "mismatch" because you see it.



IME the big issue with sides and to lesser extent rears is that sound can kind of "collect" at them, due to the often shorter listening distance as and the greater difference between them with head movements because they’re at the sides. Have you read Chapter 8.5.4 (A "Physics" Problem with Side Surrounds) of the current edition of Sound Reproduction? If not, you should.

FWIW before immersive my practice was to use coaxes pointed up for sides and rears. That seemed to avoid the most of the problems. With a height layer that approach seems problematic though. About 4 years ago, following guidance from Dr. Toole’s work (see supra, see also Chapter 12.2.4) I look a flyer on CBT line arrays for side and rear, and find they work really well! You want “mismatched” speakers, try 8” 2-ways with 17mm exit compression drivers and constant horizontal directivity from ca 2kHz up front, and lines of 2” wideband drivers on the side and behind! It worked so brilliantly that in the current home I specified the same, though I went with the 1m tall versions all around this time instead of using the 50cm versions for sides as before, both for looks and because I thought with Dirac ART on the horizon more headroom would only be a benefit



Congrats to your son -- and your bank account for being done with that!


I agree that Studio2 for the fronts (i.e. LCR) would be a better foundation than Salon2+Voice2.



The whole thing about Perlisten's design approach is that they control vertical directivity with the woofer spacing and horizontal directivity with the tweeter array. (One can argue the benefit of that design approach; personally I've been a bit underwhelmed by them every time I've heard them, which has only been a couple times. But lots of smart people with great ears love them.) But if you rotate the woofers to be horizontal...you get neither constant vertical directivity nor smooth horizontal directivity. What you get is instead a dispersion disruption in the horizontal plane because the three tweeters can't go low enough to match the narrow directivity of the wide woofer array, and wide dispersion in the vertical plane until the tweeter array takes over. L

Timber matching, yes. Timbre matching, lol. If you do have to flip a speaker on its side, an coax or an MT array with a 4"+ woofer is better, because the mid can play low enough to keep the side woofers from needing to play high enough for the array directivity to be a major factor. .



Movies are poor source material for evaluating sound quality. Given the dominance of the visual, as long as the audio it's kind of OK, gets loud, and doesn't actively get in the way (e.g. subs flapping, or a harsh edge at high volumes) it's generally fine. IMO music benefits immensely from immersive, and even more so from properly set up systems with identical LCR, multiple subs with appropriate correction software, etc. That includes stereo recordings, thanks to Auromatic.



That's not the way physics works.



You can - if you care to! Just move the screen up a little bit. It looks like that screen is under 45" tall, so even if your ceilings are 8' high you can still fit that screen and a 50" tall loudspeaker. Now, if sound quality is not the priority then do whatever. But in that case this is all pretty expensive audio gear.

I think it’s safe to say we disagree on many aspects.

Good feedback thanks!

 

[Lsc]

That’s fair, and I’m in that 99%. I care more about how a system works in a normal room than about pushing absolute limits.

Many of the gains from ultra-high-end speakers show up mostly in highly treated dedicated rooms. The Salon2 is very forgiving in a typical family room. Magico tends to need more ideal conditions, while Perlisten might behave differently though I haven’t experienced that personally.

For reference, I followed the FR graph style and scale demonstrated by Tom Martin in his YouTube video Building/Tuning Listening Rooms: Audio Set‑Up Series – Tour and Learn.
In that video, the speakers he uses are Perlisten, which have also been reviewed by The Absolute Sound (Tom Martin called the S7t a “very special speaker”) and he demonstrates how they behave in a fully treated, purpose-built listening room:

A screenshot of the Perlisten S7 frequency response in his dedicated listening room is also attached.

In my family room, I used the same FR graph style and scale as Tom Martin demonstrates to present my measurements. In that measurement, with my 70 Hz crossover, the Salon2 delivers nearly flat response down to where the subs take over, providing a very balanced performance in a real-world environment compared with the +10 dB peak seen in the Perlisten measurement.

Even SOTA speakers aren’t isolated from the room. In a fully treated, dedicated listening space, speaker design and frequency response can still create peaks or dips that affect tonal balance, which is why real-world performance often differs from ideal measurements.

Price is also part of the context. Not everyone is building a six-figure system in a highly treated room.

It’s probably safe to say that you are very happy with your system. I am also. I’d actually prefer your F113v2 to my Gotham (G213v1). My subs are very heavy, unwieldy and take up too much space so placement options are limited. I’ll watch the video.

Did you use the JL TuN program to phase align the subs?

Magico is a pipe dream anyway, but the lower priced A3 lost to Revels.

 

[Milt]

Better and for less, Ascend ELX.
Way better and similar price, KEF Blade 2 Meta.

Salon2s can easily be had for $10k.
Last I looked the KEFs were $28k

 

[farakji]

It’s probably safe to say that you are very happy with your system. I am also. I’d actually prefer your F113v2 to my Gotham (G213v1). My subs are very heavy, unwieldy and take up too much space so placement options are limited. I’ll watch the video.

Did you use the JL TuN program to phase align the subs?

Magico is a pipe dream anyway, but the lower priced A3 lost to Revels.

It’s probably safe to say that you are very happy with your system. I am also. I’d actually prefer your F113v2 to my Gotham (G213v1). My subs are very heavy, unwieldy and take up too much space so placement options are limited. I’ll watch the video.

Did you use the JL TuN program to phase align the subs?

Magico is a pipe dream anyway, but the lower priced A3 lost to Revels.

I’m very happy indeed. I’ve tried many settings and crossover points, using all the tools including the JL, to get the best bass I’ve ever had in my room.
The Salon2 remains impressively clean and low in distortion at those low frequencies, even compared with the F113v2.

 

[Matias]

Speaking of state of the art, please see here:

AsciLab speakers are about to launch

Is there a grill cover for the C8C? And any indication of whether the S8C will be worth double the cost/measure significantly better for having the purifi drivers?

www.audiosciencereview.com

 

[Vacceo]

Hi

SOTA is measurable, the Salon 2 is;. What are today's speakers (non Active), that surpass or approach the Salon 2 measurements? I sincerely do not know, but It seems to still shine after all these years...
Lusting after a pair.
Endgame.

We can argue that Perlisten is up there

 

[daniboun]

But we do have. And it's not as flat and nice as the 2 I mentioned above.

Measurements for speaker Revel Ultima2 Salon2

www.spinorama.org

Keep in mind :

 

[traind]

Salon2s can easily be had for $10k.
Last I looked the KEFs were $28k

But if you buy the Kefs used like the Salon 2s are, you can get them for less than but still close to $20k. That narrows the gap some.

 

[traind]

That’s fair, and I’m in that 99%. I care more about how a system works in a normal room than about pushing absolute limits.

Many of the gains from ultra-high-end speakers show up mostly in highly treated dedicated rooms. The Salon2 is very forgiving in a typical family room. Magico tends to need more ideal conditions, while Perlisten might behave differently though I haven’t experienced that personally.

For reference, I followed the FR graph style and scale demonstrated by Tom Martin in his YouTube video Building/Tuning Listening Rooms: Audio Set‑Up Series – Tour and Learn.
In that video, the speakers he uses are Perlisten, which have also been reviewed by The Absolute Sound (Tom Martin called the S7t a “very special speaker”) and he demonstrates how they behave in a fully treated, purpose-built listening room:

A screenshot of the Perlisten S7 frequency response in his dedicated listening room is also attached.

In my family room, I used the same FR graph style and scale as Tom Martin demonstrates to present my measurements. In that measurement, with my 70 Hz crossover, the Salon2 delivers nearly flat response down to where the subs take over, providing a very balanced performance in a real-world environment compared with the +10 dB peak seen in the Perlisten measurement.

Even SOTA speakers aren’t isolated from the room. In a fully treated, dedicated listening space, speaker design and frequency response can still create peaks or dips that affect tonal balance, which is why real-world performance often differs from ideal measurements.

Price is also part of the context. Not everyone is building a six-figure system in a highly treated room.

I am sure your system sounds awesome! However, most people prefer that low frequency bump in room. See this post: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...he-harman-loudspeaker-preference-curve.50602/

Of course personal preferences can vary substantially and it seems like you've expertly adjusted your system to get what you want.

 

[Lsc]

Keep in mind :

View attachment 497940

So what is the verdict?

Some think salon2 is still SOTA while others do not?

I’m very comfortable with saying a near 20 year design is no longer SOTA but surprisingly and this may speak towards how much the industry have actually improved loudspeakers in the last 20 years, the salon after all this time is still working well in some of our systems.

It’s the position that I’ve taken from the start and doesn’t offend me at all and my grandpa salon2 concurs .

I’d love the measurements guys to come and listen to my system ie come back to real life please.