Revel M16 Speaker Review

[thewas]

The M105 have the advantage of a smaller midwoofer which blends better with the directivity of their waveguide.

 

[Johan Liebert]

The M105 have the advantage of a smaller midwoofer which blends better with the directivity of their waveguide.

Also seems like a better passive option for my computer speakers than the M16 if I decide to go that route.

 

[iLoveCats]

Just for fun I made a Dirac curve for the projected in room response of the M16 and applied it to my Magnepan super MMG's. I don't hate it.

 

[Laserjock]

These are all Harman spins, of the Revel M105, M126Be, and Gem2. I think at least based on the Spins you could argue the M105 is actually the best measuring speaker.

Wonder if the newer method of testing would change any/much with the older models vs M126Be ?

 

[edechamps]

This conversation did give me the idea of adding a feature to Loudspeaker Explorer where you can see all responses at all angles used for LW in a single graph. That might provide the best of both worlds: full spatial information and no averaging.

I went ahead with that idea. The new chart is available in Loudspeaker Explorer right now.

And boy… I'm glad I did. I went back and looked at the results for previous measurements. I was shocked at the vast differences in listening window consistency between speakers. I'm sure @QMuse will love this.

Here are a few interesting examples.

The museum of horrors

The CMT-340 is especially interesting here. See how the (relatively) flat LW average hides absolutely horrendous behaviour at specific angles.

The odd angle

I wouldn't recommend listening to a Harbeth Monitor 30 at a -10° vertical angle!

"Toe-in as tone control"

The consistent ones

 

[QMuse]

I went ahead with that idea. The new chart is available in Loudspeaker Explorer right now.

And boy… I'm glad I did. I went back and looked at the results for previous measurements. I was shocked at the vast differences in listening window consistency between speakers. I'm sure @QMuse will love this.

Here are a few interesting examples.

The museum of horrors

View attachment 54254

The CMT-340 is especially interesting here. See how the (relatively) flat LW average hides absolutely horrendous behaviour at specific angles.

The odd angle

I wouldn't recommend listening to a Harbeth Monitor 30 at a -10° vertical angle!

View attachment 54255

"Toe-in as tone control"

View attachment 54256

The consistent ones

View attachment 54257

Wow, brilliant - your tool really enables an amazing insight!

 

[AVKS]

The 'toe in as tone control' is something I employ with my setup (M16s, F35s) since my left speaker is along a wall but right side opens into my room. I get a full slate of reflections on the left, so that speaker faces the MLP directly and my right is toed in around 15 degrees or so, but not pointed directly at MLP, to match the tonality of the left.

 

[BDWoody]

I went ahead with that idea. The new chart is available in Loudspeaker Explorer right now.

And boy… I'm glad I did. I went back and looked at the results for previous measurements. I was shocked at the vast differences in listening window consistency between speakers. I'm sure @QMuse will love this.

Here are a few interesting examples.

The museum of horrors

View attachment 54254

The CMT-340 is especially interesting here. See how the (relatively) flat LW average hides absolutely horrendous behaviour at specific angles.

The odd angle

I wouldn't recommend listening to a Harbeth Monitor 30 at a -10° vertical angle!

View attachment 54255

"Toe-in as tone control"

View attachment 54256

The consistent ones

View attachment 54257

That's awesome... Thank you for working so consistently on refining all of this.

 

[stunta]

I snagged a demo pair of M16s for a very good price. Have them now in place of the JBL 305P mk2 pair in the living room. What a difference. The clarity is simply amazing and the price becomes almost irrelevant. Too bad I need external amps. WAF is lower but I hoping I can get away with it. Thanks @amirm for the measurements; I just re-read your listening impressions and I am happy to say they reflect mine. Its great to see measurements and listening tests support one's conclusions. Obviously the review should be biasing me, but the difference with the JBLs is glaringly obvious.

 

[Bear123]

I snagged a demo pair of M16s for a very good price. Have them now in place of the JBL 305P mk2 pair in the living room. What a difference. The clarity is simply amazing and the price becomes almost irrelevant. Too bad I need external amps. WAF is lower but I hoping I can get away with it. Thanks @amirm for the measurements; I just re-read your listening impressions and I am happy to say they reflect mine. Its great to see measurements and listening tests support one's conclusions. Obviously the review should be biasing me, but the difference with the JBLs is glaringly obvious.

Question. Why would the WAF be lower for what is arguably a more aesthetic, furniture grade small bookshelf speaker(M16) compared to a "plasticy" looking shiny black speaker without a grille? Is it the extra electronics needed that has the low WAF? How about something like the Yamaha WXA-50 that measures well and even has sub outs? Less obtrusive than a full sized AVR.

Also, interesting but a little surprising that you find the M16 *that* big of an improvement over the 305P. Glad that it turned out that way for you, to be sure! Congrats. Just surprised you found such a difference.

 

[stunta]

Question. Why would the WAF be lower for what is arguably a more aesthetic, furniture grade small bookshelf speaker(M16) compared to a "plasticy" looking shiny black speaker without a grille? Is it the extra electronics needed that has the low WAF? How about something like the Yamaha WXA-50 that measures well and even has sub outs? Less obtrusive than a full sized AVR.

Also, interesting but a little surprising that you find the M16 *that* big of an improvement over the 305P. Glad that it turned out that way for you, to be sure! Congrats. Just surprised you found such a difference.

WAF is lower due to the larger size and more shiny surfaces.

I am surprised by the difference too, given I am all for active speakers with DSP. This is subjective, so I wouldn't trust even if it is my own opinion

 

[Sancus]

Question. Why would the WAF be lower for what is arguably a more aesthetic, furniture grade

WAF is just the aesthetic preferences of a different person, one should remember. There's absolutely no general preference that applies to everyone. I've (non-scientifically) polled a number of people, male and female, about the appearance of the Genelecs I've been planning to buy, and you'd be surprised how wide ranging the answers are about whether they look good in a living room or not.

But almost no matter what you're buying, you can always improve the answers *from everybody* by matching colors appropriately

 

[BDWoody]

But almost no matter what you're buying, you can always improve the answers *from everybody* by matching colors appropriately

I think mine would have to be behind a screen before they'd get a positive esthetic vote...

 

[Jon AA]

I think mine would have to be behind a screen before they'd get a positive esthetic vote...

That's my plan for the new house. If it's hidden behind cloth, it can be as ugly as sin!

 

[hardisj]

Personally speaking, I don’t like having any visible speakers in a home theater. An acoustically transparent screen is what I use to place my speakers behind and give it a more “theater” feel. Which works out well because all my DIY speakers are ugly as sin. I don’t have patience for finishing work.

 

[VMAT4]

Personally speaking, I don’t like having any visible speakers in a home theater. An acoustically transparent screen is what I use to place my speakers behind and give it a more “theater” feel. Which works out well because all my DIY speakers are ugly as sin. I don’t have patience for finishing work.

At least you have the tools, space, and energy for all but the finishing. I'll bet you just don't have the particulate free filtered air type room for finishing!

 

[Alice of Old Vincennes]

Personally speaking, I don’t like having any visible speakers in a home theater. An acoustically transparent screen is what I use to place my speakers behind and give it a more “theater” feel. Which works out well because all my DIY speakers are ugly as sin. I don’t have patience for finishing work.

How do you hide your ugly surrounds?

 

[hardisj]

How do you hide your ugly surrounds?

I close my eyes.

 

[QMuse]

How do you hide your ugly surrounds?

He doesn't look back. Screen is anyway in front of you so if your eyes are wondering around you should look for a better movie instead of hiding your speakers.

 

[GXAlan]

I don't think they are similar at all. That said, I have purchased its tower version so we will see.

I tried PM’ing you, amirm. I would like to send in a JBL XPL-90 to see how a classic design compares to modern speakers? Same tweeter and 6.5” mid bass as the XPL-200. (No titanium midrange or woofer.)