Revel M106 vs. stock Linn Katan

[richard12511]

Side note, to my untrained ear, the M106 sounds like a slightly refined version of the Infinity IL10 I’ve had for 2 decades.

Sounds about right. I've got the M105 and P152 here and it's the same thing. If you like the neutral sound, Infinity speakers get you most of the way there. From that point on it's just slightly more refinement and more extension.

 

[mgood]

Try the Majik 109s and see what you think. They’re a substantial upgrade from the Katans in all areas except the bass region. From the looks of it, you have a good sub to help with that.

 

[f1shb0n3]

Is the Niles SI-275 amplifier sufficient to drive the Revels with 70W at 8ohms?

 

[SEKLEM]

Is the Niles SI-275 amplifier sufficient to drive the Revels with 70W at 8ohms?

I believe it is. I'm using a Yamaha RX-V659 to power them now.

 

[ctrl]

That’s the conundrum here. The peaky sounding speakers are the Revel M106s. It’s annoyingly peaky with certain material.

Your hearing impression is not completely surprising if you are sensitive to the frequency range 2-4kHz. Because in this range, the M106 emits too much "sound power".
This can also be seen in the sound power directivity index, in the range 2-4kHz the radiation is clearly widened.


If you look at the hor and ver normalized frequency responses, hor and ver the range around 3kHz is particularly problematic.


To counteract this, the axis frequency response must have a corresponding dip in this range. The dip should be so pronounced that the sound power curve shows no increase (especialy no abrupt increase) in the 2-4 kHz range - which is not the case.

The on-axis frequency response shows a slight dip in the mentioned frequency range, but this is by far not enough when the speaker is played in a "normal" listening room.
The PIR also shows a bit too much "sound energy" around 3kHz and around 5kHz, which could already sound a bit aggressive for many listeners.

 

[f1shb0n3]

When I eventually A/B test speakers to replace my Elac DBR-62 I would EQ them first to the same target using REW or Dirac Live so I can compare them at equal terms exactly as I would listen to them. In addition to room correction under 500Hz this would smoothen the frequency response of the speakers eliminating peaks and dips. I would suggest you try that if you can, curious what your impressions would be then.

 

[Koeitje]

VERY INTERESTING. I had a pair of the m126be's (m106 successor), and I also found that I preferred the sound from my B&W 802D's floorstanders, which ALSO have a BBC dip around 2-4khz. There's something about that dip that has merit, although there are a lot of Revel revelers who will overinterpret Harman research and dismiss it.

That is just because of more bass.

 

[preload]

That is just because of more bass.

Nope. I mainly used vocals for comparison purposes. But you can believe what you want if it makes you feel better.

 

[SEKLEM]

Nope. I mainly used vocals for comparison purposes. But you can believe what you want if it makes you feel better.

Tried to create my own BBC dip, didn't work out the way I wanted. I don't have all the measurement equipment, knowledge, and patience.

 

[FrantzM]

Hi

I had a look at the FR graphs of the Linn Katan posted here... I know where my money would have gone.

 

[Tangband]

Hi

I had a look at the FR graphs of the Linn Katan posted here... I know where my money would have gone.

Hmm… the non - flat response on axis with Linn katan is probably a symptom of bad directivity. For the sound to be neutral, they had to compensate on axis to get the power-response right. So its not as bad as it looks, soundwise.

 

[Tangband]

VERY INTERESTING. I had a pair of the m126be's (m106 successor), and I also found that I preferred the sound from my B&W 802D's floorstanders, which ALSO have a BBC dip around 2-4khz. There's something about that dip that has merit, although there are a lot of Revel revelers who will overinterpret Harman research and dismiss it.

The BBC dip is mainly about trying to compensate the on axis response with a dip to get the power response right because of a loudspeaker that has bad directivity , such as B&W 802D ( an otherwise excellent loudspeaker ).

In my opinion , one doesnt need a dip at all, on axis, if the directivity in the crossover region is good. The solution for a 2-way loudspeaker is the use of a waveguide for the tweeter.

The whole idea with the BBC dip came alive in the seventies when no loudspeaker manufacturer knew anything about the importance of good directivity.

 

[NiagaraPete]

Box up the Linns, listen to the Revels exclusively for a couple months, then take out the Linns again. You may be surprised what you think after having your ears adjust to the Revels.

This is good advice as you can't really demo speakers with inert ones in the same room. The inert drivers resonate.

 

[DSJR]

I sold the Tukan and replacement Katan way back and found both a touch 'muted' in passive form which may well be a result of the responses shown.
Going active (aktiv) with them used to help a lot and apart from the more expensive floor standing Ninka, which was quite good in passive form I remember, most of the others were, in my opinion, active models hobbled with passive crossovers (the actives HAD to be better to justify the expense of extra amps and in Linn's case, active crossover cards which were fitted inside their amps at this time. I hadn't suffered the repeated ear infections back then.

Don't flame me, but I heard one of Revel's 'cheaper' floorstanding models (around £/$2k) and I suspect it's easy to get them to sound cold and uninvolving. No idea how the stand mounted models would compare.

 

[NiagaraPete]

I sold the Tukan and replacement Katan way back and found both a touch 'muted' in passive form which may well be a result of the responses shown.
Going active (aktiv) with them used to help a lot and apart from the more expensive floor standing Ninka, which was quite good in passive form I remember, most of the others were, in my opinion, active models hobbled with passive crossovers (the actives HAD to be better to justify the expense of extra amps and in Linn's case, active crossover cards which were fitted inside their amps at this time. I hadn't suffered the repeated ear infections back then.

Don't flame me, but I heard one of Revel's 'cheaper' floorstanding models (around £/$2k) and I suspect it's easy to get them to sound cold and uninvolving. No idea how the stand mounted models would compare.

I have active Ninka's with the kustone bases. I was ready to sell the lot but instead started testing other front ends and I'm back in love.

 

[SEKLEM]

This is good advice as you can't really demo speakers with inert ones in the same room. The inert drivers resonate.

This is the funniest thing I’ve read today.

 

[NiagaraPete]

This is the funniest thing I’ve read today.

Have you touched the drivers that aren't being driven when playing music?

 

[MarkS]

Completely inaudible effect. Everything in the room is vibrating.

 

[NiagaraPete]

Completely inaudible effect. Everything in the room is vibrating.

I say your logic is faulty. Could amirm test this please.

 

[Thomas_A]

The BBC dip is mainly about trying to compensate the on axis response with a dip to get the power response right because of a loudspeaker that has bad directivity , such as B&W 802D ( an otherwise excellent loudspeaker ).

In my opinion , one doesnt need a dip at all, on axis, if the directivity in the crossover region is good. The solution for a 2-way loudspeaker is the use of a waveguide for the tweeter.

The whole idea with the BBC dip came alive in the seventies when no loudspeaker manufacturer knew anything about the importance of good directivity.

There are numerous explanations of the "BBC" dip but the most likely explanation, IMO, comes from Alan Shaw (found in a thread on DIYAudio):

A very interesting thread this, so here are the facts for your
consideration:

Many years ago I asked Dudley Harwood, my predecessor about the 'BBC dip' or
to be fair 'The Gundry Dip'.

(Gundry senior worked at the BBC but passed away some years ago: Gundry
'junior' works or worked for Dolby Labs)

First take a look at the 'How we hear' pages on the Harbeth web site. Yes,
incomplete but note the huge boost in the ear's *sensitivity* centred around
3.5kHz.

Next, consider that all Harbeth (and probably the vast majority of other
speakers crossover at 3kHz-ish ...... that's a most unfortunate choice of
frequency unless your are *extremely* careful in blending the midrange and
tweeter .... seems that we are, hence the 'Harbeth sound'.

Then, as Harwood stated, there was significant colouration in the 'presence
region' with early conventional plastics ... so reducing the energy in this
high-sensitivity region partly masked the colouration ... and finally ...

BBC monitors were designed for virtually near field use i.e. you could
(probably) reach out and touch them from the studio managers position at the
desk. A little depression in the 1-4kHz region pushed the stereo image
backwards, subjectively, (i.e. the performers seemed to recede a little into
the cabinets) and made the speaker less oppressive to work with. (As a side
issue this image positioning is why a speaker designer should *never* design
a new model as a single, mono speaker and then clone into stereo. I know,
because it is one of the first traps I fell into as a novice some 20 years
ago ... mercifully the product never went into production. Do all the
listening tests in stereo right from the very start of the design coming
together.)

That's the whole story. Anything else you may hear is, I'm sorry to say, not
factual.

Alan Shaw
Harbeth