Revel F228Be Review (Speaker)

[RB Dennis 57]

Is anyone powering their 228s with a Benchmark AHB2? I am hoping one will be sufficient vs having to buy two and use them as monoblocks. I don't listen loud as this is a 2.1 audio system in my living room.

One is most efficient. Yes, you can monoblock, but I can't justify.

 

[MoreWatts]

A person in Arizona (USA) has 2 silver F228Be and a F426Be center listed for $7500 for the trio. He's not sure if his original boxes are in usable condition, however. Someone should jump on this....

The listing is on the AVSForums Marketplace, Audio Gear subforum. Here's a link (will remove if that's a no-no), otherwise just type 'Revel' into the search at their 'Marketplace.'

I lurk a bit at AVSForums. They may have some membership-length requirements to use their 'Marketplace.' I'm not sure. This is just an FYI post for a nice deal. I have no affiliations.

 

[Oddball]

A person in Arizona (USA) has 2 silver F228Be and a F426Be center listed for $7500 for the trio. He's not sure if his original boxes are in usable condition, however. Someone should jump on this....

The listing is on the AVSForums Marketplace, Audio Gear subforum. Here's a link (will remove if that's a no-no), otherwise just type 'Revel' into the search at their 'Marketplace.'

I lurk a bit at AVSForums. They may have some membership-length requirements to use their 'Marketplace.' I'm not sure. This is just an FYI post for a nice deal. I have no affiliations.

Now that's a great deal if gear is in solid condition. If I did not have LCR covered, would seriously consider this.

 

[Jack B]

Revel recommends using the upper (high-frequency) terminals on the F228Be for single-wire amplifier connections primarily for practical reasons related to signal path and crossover design. When connecting via a single speaker cable (with the factory-installed shorting straps in place), using the high-frequency terminals ensures the signal first travels through the high-frequency section of the crossover network. The low-frequency section is then fed via the shorting straps, resulting in optimal integration between drivers and potentially minimizing any losses or degradation that can occur if the signal travels in the opposite direction.

While the speaker will function properly if connected to either set of terminals, Revel’s advice to use the upper (high-frequency) terminals is intended to ensure the most direct and cleanest signal path for the sensitive high-frequency drivers - as they can be impacted by small losses or changes in signal quality.

I tried it both ways and decided Revel knew what they were talking about.

I know this (upper vs. lower speaker terminals) is an old topic (May of this year), but it's been eating at me, so here goes:

SIGNAL PROPAGATION DELAY: At the speed of light, the signal will travel at about 0.98 feet per NANOSECOND, so if the jumper is a bit under 6 inches, the propogation delay is about half a nanosecond. Double this for the comparison between connecting the signal to mid/tweeter via the upper terminals directly, vs. through the jumper from the lower terminals. This means a total distance between the two connection choices is about a nanosecond.

JUMPER RESISTANCE: [Using a Hewlett-Packard current source at 1.00 amp, through a 0.5 ohm swamping resistor in series with the jumper, measuring the voltage drop across the jumper with a Fluke 8060A in high-impedance mode], I see a resistance across the jumper of about 130 micro-ohms. This may not be precisely accurate, but should be well within an order of magnitude.

The other three properties that could come into play here are inductance, capacitance, and imagination. I vote for imagination, and would love to see a qualified person conduct a double-blind test! Maybe there's a big hole in my logic here?

 

[Oddball]

I know this (upper vs. lower speaker terminals) is an old topic (May of this year), but it's been eating at me, so here goes:

SIGNAL PROPAGATION DELAY: At the speed of light, the signal will travel at about 0.98 feet per NANOSECOND, so if the jumper is a bit under 6 inches, the propogation delay is about half a nanosecond. Double this for the comparison between connecting the signal to mid/tweeter via the upper terminals directly, vs. through the jumper from the lower terminals. This means a total distance between the two connection choices is about a nanosecond.

JUMPER RESISTANCE: [Using a Hewlett-Packard current source at 1.00 amp, through a 0.5 ohm swamping resistor in series with the jumper, measuring the voltage drop across the jumper with a Fluke 8060A in high-impedance mode], I see a resistance across the jumper of about 130 micro-ohms. This may not be precisely accurate, but should be well within an order of magnitude.

The other three properties that could come into play here are inductance, capacitance, and imagination. I vote for imagination, and would love to see a qualified person conduct a double-blind test! Maybe there's a big hole in my logic here?

Well not sure as I can't really get the point. Don't think that people will really dig in deep. Give them a headline and conclusion.

 

[bmc0]

I know this (upper vs. lower speaker terminals) is an old topic (May of this year), but it's been eating at me, so here goes

My guess is that Revel put that in to reduce inane support questions about which ones to use. Some people don't like to accept "it basically doesn't matter" as an answer...

 

[amper42]

When you connect the amp to the Revel F228Be HF top posts with the Revel factory jumpers in place, the tweeter/mid network sees the amplifier output through a direct, low‑impedance path, while the woofer section is fed through the short jumper down to the LF posts. This arrangement slightly reduces any extra resistance or contact imperfections between amp and the more sensitive high‑frequency network, which is where small losses and noise can be most audible.

If you instead connect the amp to the Low Frequency lower posts, the high‑frequency drivers receive power passing through the jumper up to the HF posts. The tweeter signal passes through an extra mechanical connection compared to the woofers. In practice the difference is usually small, but it can marginally increase contact resistance and potential micro‑variations in the HF feed. Preserving the cleanest path for the tweeter/mid network is the obective for using the upper speaker connectors.

From a circuit standpoint, the straps and posts form a simple series/parallel network. Each strap adds a tiny series resistance and contact impedance. Where you inject the amplifier output changes which branch sees that extra bit of resistance first. Because high‑frequency drivers operate at lower currents they are more sensitive to small changes.

 

[bmc0]

When you connect the amp to the Revel F228Be HF top posts [...]

Yes, there's a technically a difference electrically. No, it doesn't matter at all in practice unless something is loose or broken.

 

[Chanur]

What's the build quality like on the Revels these days? I've seen a few people commenting they are not good and have cardboard in them. They are fairly expensive so would like to know it's a quality product.

Also for people sensitive to harsh horns/aluminum tweeters be okay with the BEs?

 

[kyuu]

What's the build quality like on the Revels these days? I've seen a few people commenting they are not good and have cardboard in them. They are fairly expensive so would like to know it's a quality product.

I can only personally speak to the build quality on the B10 subwoofer, but from what I'm looking at it's impeccable.

Also for people sensitive to harsh horns/aluminum tweeters be okay with the BEs?

I don't believe anyone is "sensitive" to metal tweeters, but beryllium tweeters push the resonance even further out of the audible band so you should be even more okay.

 

[amper42]

What's the build quality like on the Revels these days? I've seen a few people commenting they are not good and have cardboard in them. They are fairly expensive so would like to know it's a quality product.

Also for people sensitive to harsh horns/aluminum tweeters be okay with the BEs?

My Revel F228Be and F328Be speakers are fantastic. The build is quality construction. Much higher grade than my other speakers. The ports are not cardboard. You can place fingers inside them and feel they are very sturdy. The binding posts are some of the best quality builds I have seen and the cabinet design and finish is beautiful with a curved presentation far superior to the monkey coffin designs available from most other brands. I wouldn't hesitate to buy another pair as the sound quality is simply unbelievably good.

I have directly compared them to BMR and Ascend speakers with the RAAL Tweeter and in my comparison the Revel Be tweeter is smoother and more satisfying. The RAAL isn't bad but it lacks the vertical dispersion available from the Revel Be tweeter and in some cases it seems a bit more aggressive in texture. Usually, when someone complains of a harsh tweeter it's typically related to the crossover design providing elevated treble. The Revel 228/328Be have a classic slightly downward sloping frequency response toward the high end. Even sensitive listeners will not suffer from harsh treble with these speakers.

As far as value, if you can find the Revel F228Be on sale for $6,000 a pair it's an amazing value hard to duplicate in any new speaker today. The low end on the F228Be is powerful and deep. While the midrange and treble are rich and articulate. It offers a level of music reproduction that the discerning listener will appreciate. Speaker choices are always personal, but after years of listening to other brands, I still prefer the Revel F228Be and F328Be based on price to performance.

 

[ahofer]

I own the F228Bes for some years now. I see no defects or problems other than the original lettering mistake (in “performa, the R is tilted) that made them less expensive for me in the first place.

The whole metal tweeter=harsh thing seems like a myth created by fanciful sighted listening. I’m sure if they made a wood tweeter it would have a ‘woody’ sound.

 

[RB Dennis 57]

My Revel F228Be and F328Be speakers are fantastic. The build is quality construction. Much higher grade than my other speakers. The ports are not cardboard. You can place fingers inside them and feel they are very sturdy. The binding posts are some of the best quality builds I have seen and the cabinet design and finish is beautiful with a curved presentation far superior to the monkey coffin designs available from most other brands. I wouldn't hesitate to buy another pair as the sound quality is simply unbelievably good.

I have directly compared them to BMR and Ascend speakers with the RAAL Tweeter and in my comparison the Revel Be tweeter is smoother and more satisfying. The RAAL isn't bad but it lacks the vertical dispersion available from the Revel Be tweeter and in some cases it seems a bit more aggressive in texture. Usually, when someone complains of a harsh tweeter it's typically related to the crossover design providing elevated treble. The Revel 228/328Be have a classic slightly downward sloping frequency response toward the high end. Even sensitive listeners will not suffer from harsh treble with these speakers.

As far as value, if you can find the Revel F228Be on sale for $6,000 a pair it's an amazing value hard to duplicate in any new speaker today. The low end on the F228Be is powerful and deep. While the midrange and treble are rich and articulate. It offers a level of music reproduction that the discerning listener will appreciate. Speaker choices are always personal, but after years of listening to other brands, I still prefer the Revel F228Be and F328Be based on price to performance.

I was fortunate to get a pair of the 228's on sale N.I.B. shipped from a dealer for $6400. I had been looking to upgrade from my M106 stand mounts but could not warrant the 10-11k MSRP. In response to the comment, Revel speakers are the only speakers I've ever owned where I've never experience ear fatigue. And there's been many brands I've owned in 45 years.

 

[Mort]

What's the build quality like on the Revels these days? I've seen a few people commenting they are not good and have cardboard in them. They are fairly expensive so would like to know it's a quality product.

Also for people sensitive to harsh horns/aluminum tweeters be okay with the BEs?

No go with the philharmonic audio?

 

[Chanur]

No go with the philharmonic audio?

I'm still leaning that way. I'll probably have to buy a new AVR with the Philharmonic which ads to the cost as mine currently only does 6 or 8 ohm. I'm just using the next week or so to keep exploring options. My wife is very sensitive to tweeters so I'm still a bit hesitant with the Philharmonic since I have not heard them.

I know the Revels very popular here so doing my due diligence.

 

[Mort]

I'm still leaning that way. I'll probably have to buy a new AVR with the Philharmonic which ads to the cost as mine currently only does 6 or 8 ohm. I'm just using the next week or so to keep exploring options. My wife is very sensitive to tweeters so I'm still a bit hesitant with the Philharmonic since I have not heard them.

I know the Revels very popular here so doing my due diligence.

Do you know what she's sensitive to exactly? Can you give an example of a tweeter she likes?

Revels are very good. They will generally be wider in directivity and more reverberant much like the Philharmonic audio family. Often ribbon tweeters are used which have a particular, pleasant open, acoustic sound. Have you heard one?

By contrast KEF and especially monitors like Genelec present a more focused, less reverberant sound in the medium range. And horns are super narrow.

I prefer my genelecs. My wife prefers the wide philharmonic audio HTs over the genelec 8361a monitors in a/b. Often those listening primarily to accoustic prefer wider directivity like revel or pa.

 

[Chanur]

Do you know what she's sensitive to exactly? Can you give an example of a tweeter she likes?

Revels are very good. They will generally be wider in directivity and more reverberant much like the Philharmonic audio family. Often ribbon tweeters are used which have a particular, pleasant open, acoustic sound. Have you heard one?

By contrast KEF and especially monitors like Genelec present a more focused, less reverberant sound in the medium range. And horns are super narrow.

I prefer my genelecs. My wife prefers the wide philharmonic audio HTs over the genelec 8361a monitors in a/b. Often those listening primarily to accoustic prefer wider directivity like revel or pa.

So my old Klipsch Reference Premiere 260Fs give her a fork on teeth feeling when listening to them. Ringing in the ears. So does the KLH Model 5 unfortunately. I noticed it has an aluminum dome tweeter. She listened to the KEF R7 and it bothered her ears too.

She listened to the JBL HDI3600 but only for a short time. She said it didn't hurt her ears but the base was to "thick".

She also listened to some Dali Oberon and those were no go too. I think she listened to some Martin Logan XTs but I cannot remember how she responded now.

 

[Jack B]

I own the F228Bes for some years now. I see no defects or problems other than the original lettering mistake (in “performa, the R is tilted) that made them less expensive for me in the first place.

The whole metal tweeter=harsh thing seems like a myth created by fanciful sighted listening. I’m sure if they made a wood tweeter it would have a ‘woody’ sound.

Wooden't ya know it!

 

[Jack B]

So my old Klipsch Reference Premiere 260Fs give her a fork on teeth feeling when listening to them. Ringing in the ears. So does the KLH Model 5 unfortunately. I noticed it has an aluminum dome tweeter. She listened to the KEF R7 and it bothered her ears too.

She listened to the JBL HDI3600 but only for a short time. She said it didn't hurt her ears but the base was to "thick".

She also listened to some Dali Oberon and those were no go too. I think she listened to some Martin Logan XTs but I cannot remember how she responded now.

I believe the (Electrovoice?) tweeter in the Klipschorn is pretty ragged, would need to re-read Erin's review. Old-school JBLs had very ear-burning tweeters; such was the norm for "West-Coast sound". Excellent build quality, but not smooth frequency response.

 

[Jack B]

I believe the (Electrovoice?) tweeter in the Klipschorn is pretty ragged, would need to re-read Erin's review. Old-school JBLs had very ear-burning tweeters; such was the norm for "West-Coast sound". Excellent build quality, but not smooth frequency response.

Sorry, I mis-spoke. Erin did not review the Klipschorn, as far as I can see.