Revel M16 Speaker Review

[dominikz]

I don't think my home office will ever be audiophile nirvana, but the main problem was definitely down to a room mode issue rather than anything specific to these speakers. Just setting -12db at 125hz in Foobar2K's graphic equalizer DSP has tamed the bass that I found so unpleasant on certain tracks. Obviously I'll fiddle and tweak a lot more than that, but I think these are definitely speakers I can live with.

I'd heard about room modes before, but this is the first time I've actually heard the effect they can have. For some reason I had the impression that it was something subtle that you'd only hear when carefully listening, rather than a big change to the volume at certain frequencies.

I think I've been lucky to avoid this before. Maybe having more clutter and less space actually helped to prevent that specific problem? Or maybe the speakers I was using were just so anaemic at those frequencies that I didn't notice.

You were indeed lucky if you were able to avoid unpleasant room mode and room acoustic issues - they are IMHO one of the worst offenders when it comes to sound quality - much more so than any component swaps IME, even speakers, once you get to anything reasonably well-measuring.

Another (probably stupid) question, but would it be a really bad idea to run the M16s upside down, with the tweeter at the bottom?

FYI, I think I have a similar situation as you - Revel M16 sitting close to a wall on a cabinet that is ~1m tall, the tweeter is above ear level (~6-7 degrees, I estimated). And I did just as you proposed a week or so ago - tried to flip the speakers upside down (which brought the tweeter relatively close to ear height) and then did some MMM measurements at MLP (this is with grilles on):

The results didn't seem significantly different so I abandoned the idea, at least for now. The area around 5-6 kHz even seemed a bit worse with the speakers flipped.

 

[SteveJ]

The results didn't seem significantly different so I abandoned the idea, at least for now. The area around 5-6 kHz even seemed a bit worse with the speakers flipped.

I took the rather less scientific approach of flipping them over and listening for a bit before coming to a similar conclusion.

What I have done is tilt them forward a little. My entirely subjective impression is that it was a small improvement. That might just be in my head, but perhaps it's worth trying?

 

[dominikz]

I took the rather less scientific approach of flipping them over and listening for a bit before coming to a similar conclusion.

What I have done is tilt them forward a little. My entirely subjective impression is that it was a small improvement. That might just be in my head, but perhaps it's worth trying?

Thanks for the suggestion!
I did listen to the flipped variant, and also separately tried listening by raising my LP a little to be in line with the tweeter (when the speaker was in upright orientation). In either case the sound seemed similar to me - thought this is practically impossible to directly compare without instantaneous switching. Given inconclusive findings with both listening and measurements, I decided to take Occam's advice and keep the speakers oriented upright, as they were originally

What I'd like to try at some point, just for a test, is to reorient the loudspeakers a bit so that they are positioned more optimally in the room - just to see how much improvement can be had in this room - even if we wont be able to keep this layout long term.

Currently the speakers are close to the long-wall of the room, firing across room width, and standing on a (too high) cabinet. I'd like to put them on stands with tweeter at ear-height, a bit further away from the short wall, placed symmetrically, and firing across the room length. Hopefully I'd be able to compensate for SBIR with my sub and DSP.

If I get no significant improvement that way, I think I'll just stop fiddling with it and enjoy listening as is (maybe)

 

[lordhumungous]

I just listened to these and they are the best speakers Ive heard under 1k , maybe 2k . Very impressed. I like them better than the Kef Ls50's which doesn't have the bass the Revel's have.

 

[ironhorse128]

I just listened to these and they are the best speakers Ive heard under 1k , maybe 2k . Very impressed. I like them better than the Kef Ls50's which doesn't have the bass the Revel's have.

I have to agree. Listening to the m16 right now. Just great speakers. Really enjoy them.

 

[lordhumungous]

I have to agree. Listening to the m16 right now. Just great speakers. Really enjoy them.

It's amazing what you can get for under 1K .

 

[nn_in]

Revel vs Wharfedale compare . Interesting.

 

[sethr]

I really like them as well. I'm using them with a wxa-50 which I think might be underpowered for them. I'd love to hear them with a proper receiver or integrated amp. I'm also using them with a set of monitor stands which allows me to adjust the height; seems to help with the limited vertical dispersion of the speakers. I wish they had a little more mass, though, I bet that would help the bass response.

 

[Ageve]

Revel vs Wharfedale compare . Interesting.

Wow, I don't know where to begin. He is "fixing" the Revel speaker by raising the tweeter level.

 

[Spocko]

Wow, I don't know where to begin. He is "fixing" the Revel speaker by raising the tweeter level.

Just being objective here, if we are truly "objectivists", the 2 relevant questions are

1. Did Revel apply the correct response curve when voicing this speaker for neutrality? They had it pointing down from 800Hz to 15kHz.
2. More importantly, does it sound better making the curve more flat?

So his measurements are pretty consistent with what others have measured previously, like NRC and Audioholics, respectively shown below:

Now overall, I don't object to the measurements as they originally stood before the mods because I understand why they sloped the treble response downward - this is the Harman Curve so to speak, and Revel is a Harman company - this voicing reduces brightness in most rooms. But his mod reverses the Harman curve so it will sound brighter although its "neutral" on paper. Now, you'd probably have to use Dirac to re-apply the Harman Curve to this modified speaker.

 

[Ageve]

Just being objective here, if we are truly "objectivists", the 2 relevant questions are

1. Did Revel apply the correct response curve when voicing this speaker for neutrality? They had it pointing down from 800Hz to 15kHz.
2. More importantly, does it sound better making the curve more flat?

Amir reviewed a speaker kit from this guy, and it measures well considering the low price. The calculated in-room response is nearly identical to Revel speakers, which makes his Revel mod even stranger.

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...esearch-x-ls-encore-kit-speaker-review.14957/

 

[Xyrium]

I'm not sure what the parameters are for his measurements, but if he posts them somewhere, it may be worth a gander. He may also prefer an upward tilt in the HF, perhaps due to hearing loss in that area. Far too many variables to consider in an individual's preference. No distortion measurements, no directivity....possibly areas he's measured but didn't post?

Besides, though I get the family resemblance, the speaker in this thread, vs the one is the video are indeed different. Just sayin'.

Edit: OMG, he closed with the belief that materials sound different. Sorry, with all due respect, now he lost me.

 

[Ageve]

Edit: OMG, he closed with the belief that materials sound different. Sorry, with all due respect, now he lost me.

He's also complaining about the quality of the crossover components, and of course, the cables. The video is misleading, but I guess it's better than his videos about high end power cables...

 

[Xyrium]

It's truly unfortunate, because I had some level of respect for GR, even with my minimal exposure to their products, before t(his) silliness.

 

[Chromatischism]

Amir reviewed a speaker kit from this guy, and it measures well considering the low price. The calculated in-room response is nearly identical to Revel speakers, which makes his Revel mod even stranger.

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...esearch-x-ls-encore-kit-speaker-review.14957/

It's also curious why this sounded really good to Amir (after EQ though) even though it measures worse than the Buchardt S400, which he did not like. I wonder what Danny would think of that one.

I do tend to be of the belief that Danny thinks small mods improve the sound of speakers that either shouldn't make any difference, or simply raise the tweeter slightly, thus causing a bias in perception due to the speaker now being a tiny bit louder. "More detail", as they say...

 

[richard12511]

Honestly, his measurements seem too crude and imprecise to really draw definitive design decisions from. I wouldn't trust his more DIY measurements enough to overrule the fantastic anechoic measurements we have from Harman. We know from the CEA-2034 that these speakers are almost as neutral as it gets. I think it's likely that this crossover makes it less neutral. Not saying this is definitely the case, but I wouldn't trust those really simple measurements enough to screw up a $4,000 speaker.

Thing is, he really should be perfectly capable of doing what @napilopez does, and I'd be much more comfortable trusting measurements of that caliber.

We should have @amirm measure both the modded and stock M126Bes anechoically.

 

[Bren Derlin]

I just listened to these and they are the best speakers Ive heard under 1k , maybe 2k . Very impressed. I like them better than the Kef Ls50's which doesn't have the bass the Revel's have.

I prefer the M16 over the KEF R3 ($2,000/pair), SF Sonetto 1 ($1,800/pair), Vandersteen VLR Wood ($1,600/pair) - and when I say I prefer these over those other speakers, it's not really by a small margin. I could have bought any of these speakers up to $2,000 (my budget), and I'm confidently sticking with with the Revel M16. Absolutely zero buyers remorse.

About a month ago, I paired the M16 with the REL HT1003 Sub, and that just takes overall sound quality to a whole new "wow factor" level. When paired with a good fast sub, and the HT1003 Sub is not sloppy, flabby, or slow by any stretch, it's hard to think there's a better speaker under $4,000-$6,000 that'll out perform this combo by a significantly worthy margin.

 

[lordhumungous]

I prefer the M16 over the KEF R3 ($2,000/pair), SF Sonetto 1 ($1,800/pair), Vandersteen VLR Wood ($1,600/pair) - and when I say I prefer these over those other speakers, it's not really by a small margin. I could have bought any of these speakers up to $2,000 (my budget), and I'm confidently sticking with with the Revel M16. Absolutely zero buyers remorse.

About a month ago, I paired the M16 with the REL HT1003 Sub, and that just takes overall sound quality to a whole new "wow factor" level. When paired with a good fast sub, and the HT1003 Sub is not sloppy, flabby, or slow by any stretch, it's hard to think there's a better speaker under $4,000-$6,000 that'll out perform this combo by a significantly worthy margin.

Yeah you are right. I prefer the M16's to some 3-4.5 k speakers I have and its not close.

 

[Chromatischism]

Yeah you are right. I prefer the M16's to some 3-4.5 k speakers I have and its not close.

Can you name them? I'm sure others will be curious.

 

[Kuppenbender]

Revel are getting harder to get hold of in the UK. Only Superfi out of the national chains seem to stock them (30% off the M16’s at the moment). I bought a pair of ex-display M16‘s from Richer Sounds for £380 ($525) last week. I wasn’t planning to ‘up grade’, but it was way too good a deal to pass up. I was curious to see how they would compare to my PMC Twenty5 21’s (RRP £2000 when they were the current model).

Subjective impressions are as good as I’d hoped. The PMC’s are going!