• Welcome to ASR. 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!

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

dogmamann said:
As per their video, screws screw up the sound. Performa 4 doesn’t have screws to screw up anything. Performa 4 must be better than be. be means nothing other than marketing BS. Beryllium?!! lol! Why would anyone need it!!
Click to expand...
These won't be as good as PerformaBe, but they are being designed for a significantly lower price-point.
 
wine_junkie said:
Love your input and I concur with your findings. Talking to Sean about the Salon 2’s he agreed there was something special and not measurable about the top end. I listened to the Performa 3’s and while I enjoyed them they were neutral and revealing but kind of plain to me…in the sense they were accurate but didn’t have the truly special high end speaker touch. The Salon 2’s in Voecks house and M2’s at Harman were phenomenal. The Salon 2 especially. The M2 was the only horn loaded driver I have enjoyed listening to. Is there another speaker that you have heard with the Salon 2’s magic in the top end? Do I just need to find an Ultima 2 somehow? Thanks!
Click to expand...
I've had a few discussions with Floyd and Sean about the top end of the Salon2. They both agree that it's due to the curved, diffraction reducing cabinet. With the F328Be there is more that sense of the sound coming from the front of the speaker, where with the Salon2 the sound almost seems to "float."

After years and years of doing side by side level matched speaker listening sessions (sometimes blind, sometimes not), we've discovered that one design may not perfectly complement one recording vs. another. For example, Revel speakers tend to have a wide open, spacious sound. With the Salon2, that's taken to a whole other level. Strings in particular sound wide open and "silky." But brass and percussion sound more "diffuse." If we play the same recording on a JBL or a Perlisten, we lose some of that wide open silkiness BUT we gain more of a sense of realism for close mic'd brass and percussion (for example).

Still, the Salon2 has been the best "all around speaker" I've ever heard. The F328Be is terrific, has even better dynamics and "detail," but that openness at the top end isn't quite there.

In our demo system we can switch instantly between the Revel F328Be and the JBL SCL2, and depending on the recording, I may prefer one or the other. Same is true of the Perlisten S7t, though I can't do instantaneous level matched switching with them. Since I listen to a lot of orchestral music, the Perlisten is a hard sell for me because you end up with string sections that literally sound 3" wide. But clarity and detail are off the charts.
 
@John Schuermann ’s perspective on this is “worth its weight in gold!” (or perhaps Beryllium?!)
 
dogmamann said:
What is special about beryl I’m ? Nothing !!
Click to expand...
So why did Revel and Perlisten choose it for their best speakers?

Beryllium – Element 4 on the Periodic Table – is a rare earth metal that is renowned for its remarkable physical properties that make it the ideal material for a high-frequency transducer. Compared to other metal tweeter diaphragms like aluminum and titanium, beryllium offers 4.5 times the stiffness and three times more damping, and does so at only half of the weight. Diamond vapor deposit diaphragms offer similar characteristics for stiffness and damping, but they do so with a weight penalty that limits performance in comparison to beryllium.

It's moot at this point. Beryllium is no longer available in the thickness needed for loudspeaker HF drivers. All brands are working to choose new materials.
 
Last edited:
dogmamann said:
What is special about beryl I’m ? Nothing !!
Click to expand...
If you owned the performa3 for 7 years then upgraded to the PerformaBe then you would know exactly what’s special about Be. But it’s not special for everyone, that I agree with.

It’s a difference between being able to listen to music for hours without fatigue vs having a slight listening fatigue.
 
John Schuermann said:
I've had a few discussions with Floyd and Sean about the top end of the Salon2. They both agree that it's due to the curved, diffraction reducing cabinet. With the F328Be there is more that sense of the sound coming from the front of the speaker, where with the Salon2 the sound almost seems to "float."

After years and years of doing side by side level matched speaker listening sessions (sometimes blind, sometimes not), we've discovered that one design may not perfectly complement one recording vs. another. For example, Revel speakers tend to have a wide open, spacious sound. With the Salon2, that's taken to a whole other level. Strings in particular sound wide open and "silky." But brass and percussion sound more "diffuse." If we play the same recording on a JBL or a Perlisten, we lose some of that wide open silkiness BUT we gain more of a sense of realism for close mic'd brass and percussion (for example).

Still, the Salon2 has been the best "all around speaker" I've ever heard. The F328Be is terrific, has even better dynamics and "detail," but that openness at the top end isn't quite there.

In our demo system we can switch instantly between the Revel F328Be and the JBL SCL2, and depending on the recording, I may prefer one or the other. Same is true of the Perlisten S7t, though I can't do instantaneous level matched switching with them. Since I listen to a lot of orchestral music, the Perlisten is a hard sell for me because you end up with string sections that literally sound 3" wide. But clarity and detail are off the charts.
Click to expand...
Thanks John for this excellent summary. I have been contemplating on moving on to the Perlisten S7t because of the clarity and detail but your summary suggests that as with everything, there are compromises on either side.

I do love my salons and it’s cheaper for me to not do anything. Plus I have them integrated with a pair of JL gothams so the bass response and overall dynamics are as good as I need it to be.
 
Lsc said:
If you owned the performa3 for 7 years then upgraded to the PerformaBe then you would know exactly what’s special about Be. But it’s not special for everyone, that I agree with.

It’s a difference between being able to listen to music for hours without fatigue vs having a slight listening fatigue.
Click to expand...
I owned Performa3 speakers for several years and upgraded to F328Be. Percussion instruments with lots of HF transients like cymbals, triangles, etc sound more like the real thing. I was a recording engineer for over 30 years, I've heard and mic'd lots of instruments up close and have used lots of different loudspeakers.
 
dogmamann said:
What is special about beryl I’m ? Nothing !!
Click to expand...

To expand slightly on the previous replies, Be has a fast decay time with less after ringing compared to other diaphragm materials. So it gives a sense of great “precision”, clarity, and delicacy. It also has a higher FR capability, like a super tweeter, although the benefit of this performance characteristic above the accepted upper limits of human hearing is debatable. It’s a real shame Be usage in speakers seems to be sunsetting due to availability.
 
Rex Anderson said:
So why did Revel and Perlisten choose it for their best speakers?

Beryllium – Element 4 on the Periodic Table – is a rare earth metal that is renowned for its remarkable physical properties that make it the ideal material for a high-frequency transducer. Compared to other metal tweeter diaphragms like aluminum and titanium, beryllium offers 4.5 times the stiffness and three times more damping, and does so at only half of the weight. Diamond vapor deposit diaphragms offer similar characteristics for stiffness and damping, but they do so with a weight penalty that limits performance in comparison to beryllium.

It's moot at this point. Beryllium is no longer available in the thickness needed for loudspeaker HF drivers. All brands are working to choose new materials.
Click to expand...
Really? So the performa be line will soon be discontinued?
 
Buckchester said:
Really? So the performa be line will soon be discontinued?
Click to expand...
Not soon, but some models are already on the "end of life" list. C128Be, C426Be Walnut, and M126Be Walnut are not on the current price list.

On sale now through May 24:

REVF226BEBLK $4,234.95 - $3,799.95
REVF226BEWAL $4,234.95 - $3,799.95
REVM126BEBLK $2,200.00 - $1,900.00
REVF228BEBLK $5,500.00 - $4,500.00
REVF228BEWAL $5,500.00 - $4,500.00
REVC426BEBLK $5,444.95 - $4,499.95
REVC426BEWAL $5,444.95 - $4,499.95

F328Be is not on sale, but I can discount those too. Feel free to contact me if you have questions.
 
Rex Anderson said:
Not soon, but some models are already on the "end of life" list. C128Be, C426Be Walnut, and M126Be Walnut are not on the current price list.

On sale now through May 24:

REVF226BEBLK $4,234.95 - $3,799.95
REVF226BEWAL $4,234.95 - $3,799.95
REVM126BEBLK $2,200.00 - $1,900.00
REVF228BEBLK $5,500.00 - $4,500.00
REVF228BEWAL $5,500.00 - $4,500.00
REVC426BEBLK $5,444.95 - $4,499.95
REVC426BEWAL $5,444.95 - $4,499.95

F328Be is not on sale, but I can discount those too. Feel free to contact me if you have questions.
Click to expand...
That’s too bad to hear that. Do you know why the material no longer available? I wonder what they will turn to to replace it.
 
Buckchester said:
That’s too bad to hear that. Do you know why the material no longer available? I wonder what they will turn to to replace it.
Click to expand...
The government wants all of it. There is a huge amount of it in the James Webb telescope.

Beryllium is the primary material used for the 18 hexagonal mirror segments of the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) because it is lightweight, extremely stiff, and maintains structural stability at cryogenic temperatures (below -400°F). The beryllium mirrors, which are coated in gold to enhance infrared reflection, were chosen because they stop warping below 100 Kelvin, ensuring sharp, consistent, and reliable images.
 
TeXtreme (Thin-Ply Carbon Diaphragm) and Beryllium are both high-end tweeter materials aimed at maximizing stiffness while minimizing mass, with Textreme offering a "warmer," more organic sound compared to Beryllium's extreme, detailed clarity. Textreme acts as a cost-effective, high-performance alternative to Beryllium, offering similar, often better, self-damping properties to reduce harsh break-up modes.

Beryllium Tweeters
  • Performance: Known for extremely light weight and high rigidity, allowing frequency responses to reach well beyond 40,000 Hz.
  • Sound Signature: Highly accurate, detailed, and revealing, often described as fast and transparent.
  • Drawbacks: Beryllium is toxic, brittle, and significantly more expensive.
TeXtreme (Carbon Fiber) Tweeters [1]
  • Performance: Utilizes ultra-thin layers of carbon fiber to create a stiff, lightweight structure. It provides superior damping compared to metal domes, reducing high-frequency ringing.
  • Sound Signature: Often described as smoother and "warmer" than beryllium, while maintaining excellent detail.
  • Drawbacks: Generally slightly less sensitive than Beryllium in some comparisons, though it is rapidly becoming a preferred material for high-end brands.
Key Comparison Summary
  • Sound: Beryllium is often considered more "analytical" or "hard" (in a good way), while Textreme is considered "organic" or "smooth".
  • Cost: Textreme is typically more budget-friendly, often offering similar high-end performance to Beryllium at a better value.
  • Measurements: Both materials offer excellent performance, with Textreme designed to be a competitive alternative in terms of break-up mode control.
 
Interesting, thanks. All else being equal, I’m willing to bet the true audible differences of beryllium are largely negligible anyways. If you had two identical speakers, one with a beryllium tweeter and another with a well designed but much less expensive material, I’m quite skeptical that there would be a meaningful statistical difference in a properly-run double blind test. Then again, I’ve never heard a beryllium speaker so what do I know…
 
Rex Anderson said:
TeXtreme (Thin-Ply Carbon Diaphragm) and Beryllium are both high-end tweeter materials aimed at maximizing stiffness while minimizing mass, with Textreme offering a "warmer," more organic sound compared to Beryllium's extreme, detailed clarity. Textreme acts as a cost-effective, high-performance alternative to Beryllium, offering similar, often better, self-damping properties to reduce harsh break-up modes.

Beryllium Tweeters
  • Performance: Known for extremely light weight and high rigidity, allowing frequency responses to reach well beyond 40,000 Hz.
  • Sound Signature: Highly accurate, detailed, and revealing, often described as fast and transparent.
  • Drawbacks: Beryllium is toxic, brittle, and significantly more expensive.
TeXtreme (Carbon Fiber) Tweeters [1]
  • Performance: Utilizes ultra-thin layers of carbon fiber to create a stiff, lightweight structure. It provides superior damping compared to metal domes, reducing high-frequency ringing.
  • Sound Signature: Often described as smoother and "warmer" than beryllium, while maintaining excellent detail.
  • Drawbacks: Generally slightly less sensitive than Beryllium in some comparisons, though it is rapidly becoming a preferred material for high-end brands.
Key Comparison Summary
  • Sound: Beryllium is often considered more "analytical" or "hard" (in a good way), while Textreme is considered "organic" or "smooth".
  • Cost: Textreme is typically more budget-friendly, often offering similar high-end performance to Beryllium at a better value.
  • Measurements: Both materials offer excellent performance, with Textreme designed to be a competitive alternative in terms of break-up mode control.
Click to expand...

Hi Rex, please specifically state up front when you use AI to write a post for you.

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/official-policy-on-use-of-ai.66323/
 
Buckchester said:
Interesting, thanks. All else being equal, I’m willing to bet the true audible differences of beryllium are largely negligible anyways. If you had two identical speakers, one with a beryllium tweeter and another with a well designed but much less expensive material, I’m quite skeptical that there would be a meaningful statistical difference in a properly-run double blind test. Then again, I’ve never heard a beryllium speaker so what do I know…
Click to expand...
Within the Revel lineup there's an audible difference though. The models beryllium tweeters sound significantly different to the rest of their lineup. But it's only really noticeable if you listen to classical chamber performances on modern recordings. For people who listen to pop/rock music the Concerta2 series are perfect.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom