Revel F208 Tower Speaker Review

[Absolute]

I'm looking only at the frequencies above 1khz. I would expect the bumps around 1 khz and 3 khz to be present in the MMM. And it was. Good stuff!

 

[detlev24]

Is that uncorrected measurement done with MMM RTA pink noise?

No; I made a single position measurement with these adjustments in REW + levels of 90 dB SPL, instead of standard 75 dB SPL. Furthermore, there was no reflecting surface in close proximity to the microphone, which includes myself [minimum distance to the next reflecting surface, sloped walls left and right, was ~5.3 feet = ~1.6 meters].

However, the result looks very similar to the 9 averaged position measurements in my Dirac Live Calibration Tool v1.x [miniDSP]; which I took over a listening area of 3 seats. Differences amongst those measurements are mainly due to room modes.

 

[QMuse]

No; I made a single position measurement with these adjustments in REW + levels of 90 dB SPL, instead of standard 75 dB SPL. Furthermore, there was no reflecting surface in close proximity to the microphone, which includes myself [minimum distance to the next reflecting surface, sloped walls left and right, was ~5.3 feet = ~1.6 meters].

However, the result looks very similar to the 9 averaged position measurements in my Dirac Live Calibration Tool v1.x [miniDSP]; which I took over a listening area of 3 seats. Differences amongst those measurements are mainly due to room modes.

Well, it looks good, but here we are looking at something else.

 

[BYRTT]

If I'm seeing right in your simulation PIR's slope indeed increases with distance. Is that correct?

Coffee verse whisky can change how we really see ..

Here are normal verse the two exstremes and yes PIR increase relative there with distance and curves start stumple upon each other (corelate) from 500Hz-4kHz area:

 

[vavan]

Rename extension to ".txt"

Or better zip it as I did with my f208 measurements here

 

[QMuse]

Or better zip it as I did with my f208 measurements here

He used Dropbox, which is even better.

 

[vavan]

By the way I thought that an Hypex NC500 dual mono amp was more than enough for them but it seems that they would appreciate a bit more juice

Ouch, I thought that even my parasound hint is enough to drive those

 

[carlob]

Ok, showing graph of Dirac EQ full range:

I attach the link to mdat with:

1) Baseline L+R
2) MMM L+R @1,5m
3) MMM L+R @2,3m (main LP)
4) MMM L+R @4,0m
5) Dirac EQ full range L+R
6) Dirac EQ below 400Hz L+R

Have fun!

 

[BYRTT]

@BYRTT Can you plz post those 7 PIR's from your simulation on a separate graph so it is visibe how they relate to ecah other?

Overlaid PIR's plus on-axis:

 

[QMuse]

PIR (red) vs 2.3m MMM:

Plz note that y-scale is 2dB!

 

[QMuse]

MMM; 1.5m (cyan) vs 2.3m (blue) vs 4m (green):

 

[QMuse]

Ok, showing graph of Dirac EQ full range:

View attachment 63753

I attach the link to mdat with:

1) Baseline L+R
2) MMM L+R @1,5m
3) MMM L+R @2,3m (main LP)
4) MMM L+R @4,0m
5) Dirac EQ full range L+R
6) Dirac EQ below 400Hz L+R

Have fun!

That looks very good!

I would maybe think of correcting the Dirac's target curve in this region for 2-3dB:

 

[QMuse]

Dirac did a good job correcting time domain.

Phase:

Left speaker (green) position is not that optimal as right.

Step response:

 

[carlob]

That looks very good!

I would maybe think of correcting the Dirac's target curve in this region for 2-3dB:

View attachment 63761

Yes, that is the next step and also need to save a preset for listening at low volume, any suggestion on the shape? was thinking kind of a U curve with boosted bass and high

 

[QMuse]

Yes, that is the next step and also need to save a preset for listening at low volume, any suggestion on the shape? was thinking kind of a U curve with boosted bass and high

Here's the shape I'm using:

 

[vavan]

my recent mmm and amateur correction

 

[carlob]

my recent mmm and amateur correctionView attachment 63770View attachment 63771

Looks very good, nice bass extension.

 

[Soundstage]

Dirac did a good job correcting time domain.

Phase:

Left speaker (green) position is not that optimal as right.

View attachment 63765

Step response:

View attachment 63768

How did the phase and the step looked like before correction?
thanks

 

[QMuse]

How did the phase and the step looked like before correction?
thanks

I would use the word "typical".

Phase:

Step:

 

[aarons915]

You can't EQ LW without EQ-ing on-axis, ER and SP. You can only choose which one you want to linearize, but they will all be affected.

My take is you should always EQ for smooth PIR. If you listen nearfield PIR will be dominated by LW, if you listen farfield it will be dominated by ER and eventually even by SP. As you can see on Byrtt's spinorama above PIR is little lower than ER.

Right that's why you have to make sure the directivity is good, if it is you can safely EQ the LW and it will be beneficial to the ER and SP curves as well. EQ'ing based on a MMM technique looks like it will be pretty similar though, I know in my room the same peaks from the Spin are evident in the room curve. I still don't think it's quite as good as just using the LW and ER curves from the Spin but if you know your ideal slope in your room and don't have access to a CTA-2034 measurement, it looks like it will get you close enough.