• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. 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!

Revel C783 In-Ceiling Speaker Review

Rate this speaker:

  • 1. Poor (headless panther)

    Votes: 11 10.2%
  • 2. Not terrible (postman panther)

    Votes: 41 38.0%
  • 3. Fine (happy panther)

    Votes: 51 47.2%
  • 4. Great (golfing panther)

    Votes: 5 4.6%

  • Total voters
    108

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
45,238
Likes
247,919
Location
Seattle Area
This is a review and detailed measurements of the Revel C783 in-ceiling speaker. Was kindly sent to me new by a member and costs US $ 660 each.
Revel C783 In-wall in-ceiling speaker review.jpg

You are seeing the speaker as mounted in my temporary MDF baffle for measurements. There are two switches to control level of bass and treble (I measured the former). It said tweeter is adjustable but I did not try and tested it head on.

Usually the mounting screws are threaded to the tab behind so relatively easy to tighten. Not here. They were thread forming (into plastic) so took fair bit of power to screw them in. That by itself is not a big deal but there is always the danger of the screwdriver slipping and tearing up the woofer. And it is not fun doing this on while working on the ceiling., I had to find the right phillips screwdriver so that it would not slip. Otherwise, speaker seems well made and comes with magnetic grills.

Making anechoic measurements requires special mode of Klippel NFS system where the back wave and boundary response of the artificial baffle are excluded. System only accepts the center as the reference so that is what I picked (of the woofer) as opposed to the tweeter that I normally pick. Fortunately they are close enough to each other than measurement accuracy was pretty high. Note that all axis are referencing the speaker being vertical as you see in the picture as opposed to its normal mounting position of on ceiling. So you have to perform some mental gymnastics to understand the measurements.

NOTE: Our company Madrona Digital is a dealer for Revel speakers and we likely have installed a lot of these in custom installations. My measurements are not subject to bias as they are standardized but you may feel fee to read such into my subjective remarks.

Revel C783 Speaker Measurements
As usual we start with our anechoic response of the speaker. I chose to not use the grill (impact is usually fairly small). I started measuring with the boundary compensation on thinking that meant it is mounted on-wall which it is. But the manual talked about proximity to a "wall." Not sure what that meant as speaker is always on a wall but I assume they mean a secondary boundary. For that reason I made the anechoic measurements with boundary compensation turned off:
Revel C783 In-wall in-ceiling speaker Frequency Response measurement.png


Speaker is doing well until about 700 Hz where it experiences wide dip. Near-field measurement seems to indicate that tweeter is crossed too high:
Revel C783 In-wall in-ceiling speaker near-field Frequency Response measurement.png

I can't imagine a company like Revel making a simple mistake here. I looked up company spinorama and it mirrors mine (but with lower resolution) so this is what it is meant to be. Why, I don't know.

Our models of reflections don't work for in-ceiling speakers but they do indicate the level of "goodness" in speaker off-axis response:
Revel C783 In-wall in-ceiling speaker early window Frequency Response measurement.png


The averaging works here to smooth out the curve and we are just left with some shortfall in energy from 1 to 1.8 kHz. A single PEQ filter should fill that in at the potential cost of more distortion (woofer is unhappy in that region). Here is our predicted-in-room response which again doesn't apply to this class of speakers:
Revel C783 In-wall in-ceiling speaker predicted in-room Frequency Response measurement.png


Directivity narrows so point the tweeter at your listening position as company recommends:
Revel C783 In-wall in-ceiling speaker Horizontal Beamwidth measurement.png

Revel C783 In-wall in-ceiling speaker Horizontal directivity measurement.png


Revel C783 In-wall in-ceiling speaker Vertical directivity measurement.png


Power handling is very good at 86 dBSPL:
Revel C783 In-wall in-ceiling speaker THD Distortino Relative measurement.png


Revel C783 In-wall in-ceiling speaker THD Distortion measurement.png


Above I have shown the effect of the boundary compensation which cuts the bass. Turning it on lowers the distortion in bass naturally.

Note that both of these measurements are made with the backside open.

Waterfall shows resonances some of which I am sure is from the woofer but there may be some magnifications of it due to my baffle that is standing on its edge:
Revel C783 In-wall in-ceiling speaker csd waterfall measurement.png


Finally, the step response shows two disjointed responses from woofer and tweeter which is odd:
Revel C783 In-wall in-ceiling speaker Step Response measurement.png


I don't have a ceiling to put the speaker in so no listening tests.

Conclusions
Compared to some of the other in-ceiling speakers we have measured with angled drivers and such, the C783's standard configuration actually does much better with far less interference between drivers. The only odd thing about its design is the crossover region where the two drivers don't seem to meet.

Since I can't listen to the Revel C783, I don't have a recommendation one way or the other forum. Personally I would choose it though over some of the other funky configurations if I had to live with in-ceiling speaker and would take a shot at modifying the crossover.

General Specifications​

HeightCutout dimensions (dia.) 9.6" (24.4 cm) Square grille finished Height 10.7" (27.2 cm)
WidthSquare grille finished Width 10.7" (27.2 cm)
DepthMounting depth 5.2" (13.2 cm)
WeightWeight 3.1 lb (1.4 kg) / Shipping weight 4.1 lb (1.9 kg)
FeaturesIncludes both round and square zero-bezel magnetic grilles • Round grille finished dimension (dia.) 10.7" (27.2 cm)
High Frequency Driver Components1" aluminum dome swiveling high-output tweeter with waveguide
Low Frequency ExtensionHigh Frequency Extension 3-position HF level control / Low Frequency Extension LF boundary compensation
Low Frequency Driver Components8" Micro-Ceramic Composite (MCC) Cone, Cast-Aluminum Frame High-Output Woofer
MountingC-2 fastening mechanism • Compatible with wall material thickness range 0.5" – 2.0" (1.3 cm – 5.0 cm)
Recommended Amplifier Power10 - 150 Watts RMS

-----------
As always, questions, comments, recommendations, etc. are welcome.

Any donations are much appreciated using: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/how-to-support-audio-science-review.8150/
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Seems like there is no right way to do these things.
 
I have a question about wall and ceiling mounted speakers, since there is no cabinet, wouldn't it sound different depending how it's installed?

And wouldn't it measure differently depending if they are free standing and how they are installed?
 
Seems like there is no right way to do these things.
Lets wait to see what Perlisten's THX Dominus rated ceiling speakers measure. Klipsch also has a few THX ceiling speakers. There all angled speakers compared to the KEF THX in ceiling Coaxials. THX Certified HT Speakers tend to have fairly good response and the higher up it goes the lower the distortion and higher the output.

Historically Perlisten speakers have measured near perfect and I'm sure they have access to their own NFS~ Hopefully someone is willing to send to Amir tho~

Perlisten R3ic
1695417953476.png


Perlisten R2ic

1695417992761.png

Perslisten S3ic

1695418084364.png
 
Looks pretty good on axis, but is not designed for use 45 degrees off axis. So unless you mount it on an angled baffle I don’t see how this would be a good option for top/front atmos speakers. A new speaker that would be interesting to see would be the new C128BE but it too has that limitation.
 
Lets wait to see what Perlisten's THX Dominus rated ceiling speakers measure. Klipsch also has a few THX ceiling speakers. There all angled speakers compared to the KEF THX in ceiling Coaxials. THX Certified HT Speakers tend to have fairly good response and the higher up it goes the lower the distortion and higher the output.

Historically Perlisten speakers have measured near perfect and I'm sure they have access to their own NFS~ Hopefully someone is willing to send to Amir tho~

Perlisten R3ic
View attachment 313943

Perlisten R2ic

View attachment 313944

Perslisten S3ic

View attachment 313945
Saw those too. Looks like an interesting waveguide which may work quite well.
 
I just don’t understand how they can’t build and design a half way decent ceiling speaker? Where a minor Train Wreck is considered not bad. Thanks for the Review and work Amir. Someday you are going to give one of these speakers your approval. I just hope to live long enough to be here for it! ;)
 
If you mounted a baffle around something like a Revel M106 and tested it the same way what would the results turn out to be? I'm assuming someone could take the spin-o-rama and show such a result. It wouldn't be very hard to mount such a speaker in the ceiling and cover it with some cloth.
 
There is not enough room typically in the wall cavity to mount a speaker like M106. These need to be 4 to 6 inches deep.
There is in many ceilings. Which is where I thought these would go.
 
If you mounted a baffle around something like a Revel M106 and tested it the same way what would the results turn out to be? I'm assuming someone could take the spin-o-rama and show such a result. It wouldn't be very hard to mount such a speaker in the ceiling and cover it with some cloth.

I'd pick a speaker with a front port, not a rear port like the M106. You'd lose the benefit of the port in the listening room AND catch a whole lot of spiders, bugs and maybe a rat or two would make a nice nest in the speaker. It'd be a perfect nesting box for creatures.

1695432873263.png
 
I'd pick a speaker with a front port, not a rear port like the M106. You'd lose the benefit of the port in the listening room AND catch a whole lot of spiders, bugs and maybe a rat or two would make a nice nest in the speaker. It'd be a perfect nesting box for creatures.

View attachment 313975
You are right about that. Wasn't thinking of the port. So I'd still like to see what to expect of a small ceiling mounted 2 way either sealed or with a front port.

Usually ceiling joists are at least 2x8 so 7.5 inches of space. If a one story structure then effectively unlimited space above the ceiling.
 
Off topic, apologies. I have an Airbnb above my garage and never a problem with rodents ever but one day the Polk soundbar and wireless sub stopped working. I figured it was just because it was Polk junk but since I like to take things apart and there are amps in there I bust through all the molded plastic and lo and behold it didn't work because a few signal wires were chewed and it otherwise weighed an extra 10 pounds because of all the hemlock and maple seeds I dumped out of it - full to the ports.

So @restorer-john has a valid point.
;)
 
Thanks for another good review. Postman panther?
Actually I would say happy panther. Needing one filter to fill in that hole is not a big deal.
 
So a sealed bookshelf in the ceiling. Difficult to mount and would look stupid. With the sparse info sent to ceiling speakers, I am resigned to cheapos. Probably couldn't tell the difference anyway.
 
Back
Top Bottom