New Revel Performa4 / Arcam Radia speaker line-up -- with Anechoic EQ

[amper42]

If you do a Google search for AEQ you get a variety of topics, from a UK vaping brand to a system to eliminate chronic pain and improve emotional maturity.

Perhaps, Revel needs a better acronym for this speaker function?
Or at least someone who reviews what else uses the same name?
These speakers look like old tech from Paradigm to me.
Not my Revels.

 

[John Schuermann]

You need to remember that Revel isn't only about neutral response, it's about what is preferred in blind listening sessions. It's possible that listeners thought the M145 sounded too thin without the extra bass bump, and preferred the extra bottom (even at the expense of some accuracy in the measurements).

And as others have pointed out, it's easy enough to EQ out, or pair them with a sub, calibrate and you're done.

One of the things we've done here at TSR is do blind and sighted comparisons between speakers that all measure very well - Perlisten, JBL, Revel. What's interesting is how much more spacious the Revels sound than, say, Perlisten. The Perlisten models are hyper-focused, hyper-detailed. But play a track like this:

...and when the full string section comes in at about 1:40, it literally sounds about 3" wide on the Perlistens. It's room filling on the Revels (for reference, we are usually comparing the Perlisten S7t with the Revel F328Be). We've had tons of people compare these two excellent speakers side by side and all of them hear the same thing, and often agonize over which they prefer. With Revel you give up some hyper-detail for the sense of spaciousness, with Perlisten you get hyper-detail but lose a sense of acoustic "size."

KEF is another brand that has that pinpoint focus, and similarly, instruments sound more "narrow" while Revel models sound wide open.

Which is better? Depends on personal preference and the specific recording. Interesting that the JBL models kinda split the difference, depending on the particular waveguide in use.

Point being that the Spinoramas are great for narrowing down the list of speakers to audition, but based on 9 years of us doing blind, sighted and double blind tests of top measuring models, it's still really helpful to give all these speakers a listen - preferably side by side and level matched.

Another quick recording to audition:

When the solo piano comes in at 1:36, note how "wide" the piano sounds on your own system. Again, with the Perlisten S7t that piano sounds 3" wide, floating right in the middle of the room. With the F328Be, you get a more believable piano sound, but you lose a tiny bit of the hyperdetail on the percussion.

Fascinating stuff.

 

[amirm]

FYI, I saw and heard a pair at the show:

Couldn't get anyone interested in having them reviewed. They would look at me like, "why would anyone want a review sample?"

The playlist was the old one from years ago that Kevin used to use. So they hadn't even bothered to bring new music.

The room next door with the new JBL Summit was so much better done. Really enjoyed that room.

They Revels did sound good though. Look wise, they remind me of the JBL HDI, with some refinements.

 

[tineared]

FYI, I saw and heard a pair at the show:
View attachment 524023

Couldn't get anyone interested in having them reviewed. They would look at me like, "why would anyone want a review sample?"

The playlist was the old one from years ago that Kevin used to use. So they hadn't even bothered to bring new music.

The room next door with the new JBL Summit was so much better done. Really enjoyed that room.

They Revels did sound good though. Look wise, they remind me of the JBL HDI, with some refinements.

Directivity aside, I wonder how they compare to the KEF R11?

 

[thewas]

You need to remember that Revel isn't only about neutral response, it's about what is preferred in blind listening sessions. It's possible that listeners thought the M145 sounded too thin without the extra bass bump, and preferred the extra bottom (even at the expense of some accuracy in the measurements).

I also wanted to write that, it should be said though also that these results would depend also a lot on the placement and room acoustics, for example in the past loudspeakers were tuned with richer bass for US market due to the typically larger living rooms and more bass absorbing less rigid walls.

In the end we have also to differentiate between the usage scenario, with or without room correction, for the second case often an anechoic bass shelve tuning can lead to a smoother room response than an anechoic flat response.

 

[Imakeller]

You need to remember that Revel isn't only about neutral response, it's about what is preferred in blind listening sessions. It's possible that listeners thought the M145 sounded too thin without the extra bass bump, and preferred the extra bottom (even at the expense of some accuracy in the measurements).

And as others have pointed out, it's easy enough to EQ out, or pair them with a sub, calibrate and you're done.

One of the things we've done here at TSR is do blind and sighted comparisons between speakers that all measure very well - Perlisten, JBL, Revel. What's interesting is how much more spacious the Revels sound than, say, Perlisten. The Perlisten models are hyper-focused, hyper-detailed. But play a track like this:

...and when the full string section comes in at about 1:40, it literally sounds about 3" wide on the Perlistens. It's room filling on the Revels (for reference, we are usually comparing the Perlisten S7t with the Revel F328Be). We've had tons of people compare these two excellent speakers side by side and all of them hear the same thing, and often agonize over which they prefer. With Revel you give up some hyper-detail for the sense of spaciousness, with Perlisten you get hyper-detail but lose a sense of acoustic "size."

KEF is another brand that has that pinpoint focus, and similarly, instruments sound more "narrow" while Revel models sound wide open.

Which is better? Depends on personal preference and the specific recording. Interesting that the JBL models kinda split the difference, depending on the particular waveguide in use.

Point being that the Spinoramas are great for narrowing down the list of speakers to audition, but based on 9 years of us doing blind, sighted and double blind tests of top measuring models, it's still really helpful to give all these speakers a listen - preferably side by side and level matched.

Another quick recording to audition:

When the solo piano comes in at 1:36, note how "wide" the piano sounds on your own system. Again, with the Perlisten S7t that piano sounds 3" wide, floating right in the middle of the room. With the F328Be, you get a more believable piano sound, but you lose a tiny bit of the hyperdetail on the percussion.

Fascinating stuff.

Fascinating post! Measurements and detailed graphs are great, but like any good thing, they can be taken too far. How does it sound to a particular person in their particular room? Or, as Revel seems to be currently considering, how does it sound in blind tests to a series of individuals in a particular room?

 

[Buckchester]

You need to remember that Revel isn't only about neutral response, it's about what is preferred in blind listening sessions. It's possible that listeners thought the M145 sounded too thin without the extra bass bump, and preferred the extra bottom (even at the expense of some accuracy in the measurements).

And as others have pointed out, it's easy enough to EQ out, or pair them with a sub, calibrate and you're done.

One of the things we've done here at TSR is do blind and sighted comparisons between speakers that all measure very well - Perlisten, JBL, Revel. What's interesting is how much more spacious the Revels sound than, say, Perlisten. The Perlisten models are hyper-focused, hyper-detailed. But play a track like this:

...and when the full string section comes in at about 1:40, it literally sounds about 3" wide on the Perlistens. It's room filling on the Revels (for reference, we are usually comparing the Perlisten S7t with the Revel F328Be). We've had tons of people compare these two excellent speakers side by side and all of them hear the same thing, and often agonize over which they prefer. With Revel you give up some hyper-detail for the sense of spaciousness, with Perlisten you get hyper-detail but lose a sense of acoustic "size."

KEF is another brand that has that pinpoint focus, and similarly, instruments sound more "narrow" while Revel models sound wide open.

Which is better? Depends on personal preference and the specific recording. Interesting that the JBL models kinda split the difference, depending on the particular waveguide in use.

Point being that the Spinoramas are great for narrowing down the list of speakers to audition, but based on 9 years of us doing blind, sighted and double blind tests of top measuring models, it's still really helpful to give all these speakers a listen - preferably side by side and level matched.

Another quick recording to audition:

When the solo piano comes in at 1:36, note how "wide" the piano sounds on your own system. Again, with the Perlisten S7t that piano sounds 3" wide, floating right in the middle of the room. With the F328Be, you get a more believable piano sound, but you lose a tiny bit of the hyperdetail on the percussion.

Fascinating stuff.

Thanks for this post, it’s very informative.

Another difference that I have seen stated online is that the Perlisten speakers are capable of playing much louder before the onset of significant distortion than then 328be. In your experience, is there truth to this?

 

[Imakeller]

That C245 center channel seems like a big miss for the Performa4 line. I’m sure it’s very good, but there should be a step up. It doesn’t project that Revel was serious about the higher end HT consumers with flat panels. Revel should have listened to @Rex Anderson on that one. People with a AT projection screen can obviously go with 3 towers for L/C/R. Those with flat panels could go with a C426Be center (excellent, but pricey) or track down an Ultima Voice2 on the secondary market. While not exact matches, they’d be much better than the C245.

 

[Oddball]

That C245 center channel seems like a big miss for the Performa4 line. I’m sure it’s very good, but there should be a step up. It doesn’t project that Revel was serious about the higher end HT consumers with flat panels. Revel should have listened to @Rex Anderson on that one. People with a AT projection screen can obviously go with 3 towers for L/C/R. Those with flat panels could go with a C426Be center (excellent, but pricey) or track down an Ultima Voice2 on the secondary market. While not exact matches, they’d be much better than the C245.

I always liked Revels and wish them good luck with their new lineup.

But this new line just screams "stereo". No big center, no slim bookshelves many like for surrounds, and absolutely nothing for Atmos. And the sub is a different story. It defies the logic of pricing beyond Perlisten, which are probably way better.

A curious decision IMO. I can't see any of these making their way into my room.

 

[Mort]

You need to remember that Revel isn't only about neutral response, it's about what is preferred in blind listening sessions. It's possible that listeners thought the M145 sounded too thin without the extra bass bump, and preferred the extra bottom (even at the expense of some accuracy in the measurements).

And as others have pointed out, it's easy enough to EQ out, or pair them with a sub, calibrate and you're done.

One of the things we've done here at TSR is do blind and sighted comparisons between speakers that all measure very well - Perlisten, JBL, Revel. What's interesting is how much more spacious the Revels sound than, say, Perlisten. The Perlisten models are hyper-focused, hyper-detailed. But play a track like this:

...and when the full string section comes in at about 1:40, it literally sounds about 3" wide on the Perlistens. It's room filling on the Revels (for reference, we are usually comparing the Perlisten S7t with the Revel F328Be). We've had tons of people compare these two excellent speakers side by side and all of them hear the same thing, and often agonize over which they prefer. With Revel you give up some hyper-detail for the sense of spaciousness, with Perlisten you get hyper-detail but lose a sense of acoustic "size."

KEF is another brand that has that pinpoint focus, and similarly, instruments sound more "narrow" while Revel models sound wide open.

Which is better? Depends on personal preference and the specific recording. Interesting that the JBL models kinda split the difference, depending on the particular waveguide in use.

Point being that the Spinoramas are great for narrowing down the list of speakers to audition, but based on 9 years of us doing blind, sighted and double blind tests of top measuring models, it's still really helpful to give all these speakers a listen - preferably side by side and level matched.

Another quick recording to audition:

When the solo piano comes in at 1:36, note how "wide" the piano sounds on your own system. Again, with the Perlisten S7t that piano sounds 3" wide, floating right in the middle of the room. With the F328Be, you get a more believable piano sound, but you lose a tiny bit of the hyperdetail on the percussion.

Fascinating stuff.

Good post. Your descriptions match and can mostly be attributed to differences in directivity/dispersion between the brands. Revel tend to be wider, a less common and sometimes sought after presentation.

I would argue that the alternative isn't hyper detail, both are equally detailed. But the presentation on the sound stage is more precise and fixed in space. Revels will be more spacious and open at a cost of sound stage precision not detail in frequency response.

 

[Imakeller]

I always liked Revels and wish them good luck with their new lineup.

But this new line just screams "stereo". No big center, no slim bookshelves many like for surrounds, and absolutely nothing for Atmos. And the sub is a different story. It defies the logic of pricing beyond Perlisten, which are probably way better.

A curious decision IMO. I can't see any of these making their way into my room.

Revel is a fantastic brand, but the competition is fierce. If someone can do bed layer towers, Performa4 is definitely worth consideration. I don’t know what the Atmos recommendation will be for Performa4 buyers? Revel has a bunch of in-ceiling options, but how seamless will they be with the new line? The Performa4 sub seems like a-swing-and-a-miss for enthusiasts.

 

[Imakeller]

Thanks for this post, it’s very informative.

Another difference that I have seen stated online is that the Perlisten speakers are capable of playing much louder before the onset of significant distortion than then 328be. In your experience, is there truth to this?

I’m looking forward to @John Schuermann ’s take on your question. They’ve done a lot of in-person speaker shootouts and he should have a great perspective.

High sensitivity and SPL are hallmarks of compression drivers. They’re generally much less demanding with amplifiers too. How much SPL do we really need though? 105dB peaks is reference level, so comparing distortion at that level seems like a fair datapoint. However, at “normal” listening levels, Revel’s Be domes are really pleasing to my ears. Maybe it’s the soundstage as @Mort theorizes.

 

[Oddball]

I’m looking forward to @John Schuermann ’s take on your question. They’ve done a lot of in-person speaker shootouts and he should have a great perspective.

High sensitivity and SPL are hallmarks of compression drivers. They’re generally much less demanding with amplifiers too. How much SPL do we really need though? 105dB peaks is reference level, so comparing distortion at that level seems like a fair datapoint. However, at “normal” listening levels, Revel’s Be domes are really pleasing to my ears. Maybe it’s the soundstage as @Mort theorizes.

We all need different SPL for sure. But if aiming at reference at MLP and say modest +5 low end shelf, you are talking about 116dB at 1 m (105+5+6 db for say 3m distance). This ain't happening below 100hz (just being generous) at any decent distortion, so sub up for the reference, as going to 6.5" drivers points the way. Since this line screams stereo, and given the price, would be surprised if they go this loud.

 

[tineared]

As my beloved main speakers are over 30 years old, Revel 228Be or 328Be speakers have been on my list of possible replacements, should the need arise.
The new Performa4 line will not be on that list. Unless testing proves otherwise, I do not have confidence that they will play clean at higher volumes

 

[Oddball]

As my beloved main speakers are over 30 years old, Revel 228Be or 328Be speakers have been on my list of possible replacements, should the need arise.
The new Performa4 line will not be on that list. Unless testing proves otherwise, I do not have confidence that they will play clean at higher volumes

I am also thinking of stocking 328be while still available even if my towers are fairly new. I could set them up in another room just for stereo, which is where I am currently leaning.

 

[tineared]

I am also thinking of stocking 328be while still available even if my towers are fairly new. I could set them up in another room just for stereo, which is where I am currently leaning.

I wish I had that luxury. I already have 8 pairs of towers and 8 pairs of bookshelves in a 3 bedroom house. And a wife...
Oops, I got carried away. I only have 4 pair of bookshelves...

 

[Oddball]

I wish I had that luxury. I already have 8 pairs of towers and 8 pairs of bookshelves in a 3 bedroom house. And a wife...

Oh gee - that's a bummer. I have only a spare center, so I guess I need to stock up . Wife does not really care, as long as she gets her allowance and sees that my investment account is doing decent.

 

[Imakeller]

As my beloved main speakers are over 30 years old, Revel 228Be or 328Be speakers have been on my list of possible replacements, should the need arise.
The new Performa4 line will not be on that list. Unless testing proves otherwise, I do not have confidence that they will play clean at higher volumes

Those 328Be’s are nice …

 

[Vergiliusma]

Thanks for sharing here, Rex.

I'll repeat my question (befuddlement?) from AVS: What's up with the giant hump in the midbass for the M145? It's even still there after EQ.

It's a common technique that's been used for decades to compensate when the parameters & box size don't allow for a lower cutoff frequency. Look at the M146 which has about double the internal volume. The top of the knee is around 60Hz. For the M145 it's around 100Hz. If it was tuned flattish, it would sound thin in-room.

 

[MarkS]

So now "showroom sound" is acceptable (even good, actually!) when Revel does it?