Radiant Acoustics Clarity 66 Speaker Review

[Wolfram98]

Revel Salon 2 list price was around $22K. The end of life sale got it down much lower but that was not its normal cost.

was it 22k for a single speaker or a pair?
the 2024 sale out seemed to be close to 15k for 2pcs?

 

[amirm]

was it 22k for a single speaker or a pair?

A pair.

 

[amirm]

the 2024 sale out seemed to be close to 15k for 2pcs?

I didn't keep track but thought some dealers were dropping their shorts and selling them for $12K or something.

Funny thing is, I just asked Google AI and it says toward the very end, these went for over list at $23K to $25k!!!

 

[Wolfram98]

A pair.

seems comparable for the 66 also costing 20k for a pair (10k each).
or was the 10k price per pair?

 

[amirm]

But no, they are not Revel Salon 2 level. They are a clear step below but could beat the Be series.

 

[gorb]

seems comparable for the 66 also costing 20k for a pair (10k each).
or was the 10k price per pair?

The radiant clarity 66 are 10k/pair

 

[amirm]

seems comparable for the 66 also costing 20k for a pair (10k each).
or was the 10k price per pair?

A pair. I will put that in the review.

 

[Wolfram98]

if i were to stack these up against Genelecs 8361
would the genelecs sound better, or would these speakers sound too different since genelec seems to be point source sound, and in the 66s the sound source is vertically spread out?

 

[markk]

While the price seems high, you are paying for Purifi and AMT (Mundorf? I'm not sure) as well as the design expertise of Radiant Acoustics. These drivers are a step above a high end Scan, Seas IMHO. Not that systems with Scan's or Seas aren't great. Because they are as well. But you do have to pay a price premium for a product with these drivers. The cost of the drivers alone approach $3k if I were to buy them. Add to that the cost of a WG design, cabinet, and cover. Then typically double it.

The speakers may or may not be your cup of tea, but they are indeed priced appropriately.

This of course is a separate question from, "can I get a loudspeaker that has flat FR, great directivity and great low end extension for less." Sd tends to trump even the most advanced motor design. So, as brilliant as Purifi are, throw enough Sd into an active three way and good design and you could get a technically better system. But it will be an entirely different system...

 

[kemmler3D]

if i were to stack these up against Genelecs 8361
would the genelecs sound better, or would these speakers sound too different since genelec seems to be point source sound, and in the 66s the sound source is vertically spread out?

Too many variables to answer this question properly but the Genelec directivity is better, Radiant distortion is better. What sounds better depends on your room and your personal preferences.

 

[amirm]

if i were to stack these up against Genelecs 8361
would the genelecs sound better, or would these speakers sound too different since genelec seems to be point source sound, and in the 66s the sound source is vertically spread out?

The Genelec's excellent directivity makes it easier to get good sound out it in real rooms. Its drawback, reinforced with visual bias, is that it sounds kind of small. At least it did relative to my much taller Salon 2. The 66 did not portray a large image around it either so I would say they (Genelec and Clarity) are similar in that regard.

The main reason to get the Clarity is that it looks a lot better in a home.

I wish I had the 8361a here to do a side by side. All of this is from memory and subjective impression.

 

[beeface]

Woohoo, thanks for a new loudspeaker review, they're my favourite

 

[xanalog]

Thank you for this review,

Despite its size, speaker is 2-way which I much prefer to 2.5 way we typically see.

Would you care to explain the reasons why?

 

[AudioJester]

Thanks for the review Amir. Are you a fan of the AMT tweeter?
Would love to hear these some day.

 

[jhaider]

To be fair, I'd rather a flat baffle than a badly designed WG and all the lovely diffraction effects they can cause...

A flat baffle IS a badly designed WG…

 

[jhaider]

The general market for active speakers in hi-fi is indeed, quite a bit smaller. However, the market size portion among the people who care about this technology, i.e. us, , is a lot bigger.

IMO the issue is sticking the amps in the speaker cabinets. Active with remote amplification is just more user friendly. I get that on a desktop or in a secondary system having fewer boxes may make the trade off worth it. But for serious stuff I think amp-in-the-speaker cabinet is a mistake.

But as for this speaker, it seems like a very well optimized design given the constraints of its tweeter geometry. Can’t personally vote better than “fine” due to those constraints though. A standard tweeter in a good waveguide would be better, but this is not that speaker.

 

[PristineSound]

would be nice but active speakers are sadly not an easy sell to the hifi market. they eliminate expensive cables and several other electronics boxes. somehow consumers don’t value all the electronics inside active speakers

I'm one of them but for different reasons. I just don't like to have all the electronics inside a speaker due to servicing and being future proof.

 

[amirm]

IMO the issue is sticking the amps in the speaker cabinets. Active with remote amplification is just more user friendly. I get that on a desktop or in a secondary system having fewer boxes may make the trade off worth it. But for serious stuff I think amp-in-the-speaker cabinet is a mistake.

You can always make the amp+DSP external.

 

[PristineSound]

You can always make the amp+DSP external.

That would be my ideal speaker.

External electronics with one amp to control one drive, all orchestrated and controlled by an DSP.

 

[a|F]

Similar price range as CLC65, tough price point to compete at.

That's a fun looking speaker. Send it in and let's compare to the KH420