Would someone care to interprate Amir's measurements/reviews here? Revel v Wharfedale.

[Robbo99999]

Cheers, that’s appreciated. I’ve been accessing this on my phone, and navigation of that database is far easier on a PC.

Just for clarity, I don’t have £1k. The M16s can be had for £500-£550 in the UK at the moment, which is far more of a ballpark top end.

I’ll check out the list a little later.

Thanks again.

You're welcome, but I think you're wrong about the M16, they're currently at £500 for just a single speaker, please show a link where you can get a pair for £500.

(If you want to make quick decisions to create a short list then that list I showed you is a valuable tool & likely the first thing you would look at to narrow things down).

 

[tw 2022]

In the listings I can find the DBR 62, and yes that seems pretty solid and for the money, but can't find the other two you mentioned. But yeah, I think we agree there are some better options for performance value than what the OP is currently considering, and I'm quite certain there are some outright better speakers than the Revels for £1000 a pair.

EDIT: I went through that speaker listing and the DBR 62 seems to be highest Preference Score for less than $1000 per pair.

Ascend isn't widely sold overseas ( outside the u.s.) and Philharmonic is Dennis Murphy products that are North American/ Asian limited... Erin has done klippel/reviews of both...

 

[PyramidElectric]

You're welcome, but I think you're wrong about the M16, they're currently at £500 for just a single speaker, please show a link where you can get a pair for £500.

(If you want to make quick decisions to create a short list then that list I showed you is a valuable tool & likely the first thing you would look at to narrow things down).

Nintronics have them at £500 for a pair (you can tell it's a pair by the listed RRP), and also there's new ones on ebay at £540.

 

[tw 2022]

There’s no such thing as over-thinking.

There is such a thing as limited potential to audition, so wanting to gather as much information as possible.

I agree, but don't get stuck going in circles... Look up the ascend Sierra 1 v2 .. And the Philharmonic ceramic mini... Both of those have been reviewed by Erin...

 

[Yorkshire Mouth]

You're welcome, but I think you're wrong about the M16, they're currently at £500 for just a single speaker, please show a link where you can get a pair for £500.

(If you want to make quick decisions to create a short list then that list I showed you is a valuable tool & likely the first thing you would look at to narrow things down).

Revel Concerta2 M16 White (Pair) https://amzn.eu/d/cDuCUk2

 

[terryforsythe]

To me, the Revel objectively performs quite a bit better,. The horizontal reflectivity and predicted in-room response look very good.

But, the Revels are twice the price, $346.50 each ($693/pair) currently at Crutchfield. The Wharfedales are $299/pair.

So, it really comes down to budget. Are the Revel's twice as good? Probably not. But, if I were making judgement without the benefit of being able to hear them in person, I would choose the Revels because to me the added cost is worth the added performance. Nonetheless, I would not fault anyone for saving money and choosing the Wharfedales.

 

[tw 2022]

@Yorkshire Mouth ... My bad, I'm over here recc'ing US speakers , revel, maybe jbl , wharfedale are probably your best bets...lol...idk why i don't look at location banners, I'm braindead that way sometimes..

 

[tw 2022]

To me, the Revel objectively performs quite a bit better,. The horizontal reflectivity and predicted in-room response look very good.

But, the Revels are twice the price, $346.50 each ($693/pair) currently at Crutchfield. The Wharfedales are $299/pair.

So, it really comes down to budget. Are the Revel's twice as good? Probably not. But, if I were making judgement without the benefit of being able to hear them in person, I would choose the Revels because to me the added cost is worth the added performance. Nonetheless, I would not fault anyone for saving money and choosing the Wharfedales.

I'd look at the jbl studio series as well providing it fits the space allowed..

 

[terryforsythe]

I'd look at the jbl studio series as well providing it fits the space allowed..

I was only addressing the OP's specific question on the Revels vs Wharfedales. But, there are a lot of other good speakers in those price ranges.

 

[tw 2022]

I was only addressing the OP's specific question on the Revels vs Wharfedales. But, there are a lot of other good speakers in those price ranges.

sorry , i didn't mean to suggest otherwise , i was just "thinking out loud" in type... once again apologies...

 

[terryforsythe]

sorry , i didn't mean to suggest otherwise , i was just "thinking out loud" in type... once again apologies...

No apologies necessary, but thank you.

 

[Alice of Old Vincennes]

That's a bit of semantics IMO...the decreasing slope from low frequencies absolutely is from the natural in-room response of an anechoically flat speaker. Notice that only inexperienced listeners generally preferred an actual boost above the natural response, more experienced listeners tend to prefer the natural response.

I guess Revel was aiming for inexperienced users. Come on. General public has never heard of either of these brands. Both made choices. Both are good

You’ve hit on all sorts of issues which I’ve been considering.

The very general point - go for the best - that’s my thinking, too.

But at the same time, looking at the measurements (and remembering that we’re at an objectivist community), I’m not sure there’s a lot of difference, if any. If the 12.1s were also £1,000 rrp, I think we’d be saying there are differences but you pay your money and take your choice.

I’m attracted to the Revels, but am I attracted to them being better, or to them being more expensive?

One of the reasons I’ve been looking at the JBLs is their near field ability, given that I’m going to be listening nearfield. And I then have to tie this into the whole philosophy of nearfield (more speaker, less room), which negates the small issues the 12.1s have against the Revels; for clarity, the Revels have fewer issues with the room, but nearfield listening negates many room issues.

In other words, the Revel’s one advantage (not huge in the first place) over the 12.1s disappears in a nearfield set up.

But the reason I’ve asked the question here is that I’m aware of confirmation bias. And I’m not sure that has the effect with me of going for the cheaper option. Or that if has the effect of being biased to the more expensive option.

Just one more thing. We’ve talkked about price as £250 vs £1,000, but this is partly informed by living in the UK. For a kick off it’s £250 vs £900. Then the current UK price is £250 vs £500. And in the original price of the 12.1s was almost double what it was in the UK.

Just go for the Revels. Look at Amir's review of m106 again. Quit over thinking.

 

[Alice of Old Vincennes]

To me, the Revel objectively performs quite a bit better,. The horizontal reflectivity and predicted in-room response look very good.

But, the Revels are twice the price, $346.50 each ($693/pair) currently at Crutchfield. The Wharfedales are $299/pair.

So, it really comes down to budget. Are the Revel's twice as good? Probably not. But, if I were making judgement without the benefit of being able to hear them in person, I would choose the Revels because to me the added cost is worth the added performance. Nonetheless, I would not fault anyone for saving money and choosing the Wharfedales.

Don't think diminishing returns applies at this price level. Revel is twice as good.

 

[Yorkshire Mouth]

I guess Revel was aiming for inexperienced users. Come on. General public has never heard of either of these brands. Both made choices. Both are good

Just go for the Revels. Look at Amir's review of m106 again. Quit over thinking.

The M16s and M106 are in altogether different price categories.

May I also add that so far this thread has been excellent, friendly and helpful. Please don’t steer it away from that by suggesting…no actually instructing me to ‘quit overthinking’.

No offence intended - thanks for your input.

 

[Yorkshire Mouth]

Don't think diminishing returns applies at this price level. Revel is twice as good.

Amir:

“The M16 has a boosted upper bass and this was quite audible, creating a warmer, albeit slightly muddy sound without correction for my room mode which it activates. The M16 retails for double the price but you can get it for less discounted. Still, I didn't feel that it provided much of any advantage over Wharfedale 12.1 in this quick comparison.”

I don’t think that fits, or implies, or even leaves the remotest possibility of the Revels being ‘twice as good’, or even close.

 

[Yorkshire Mouth]

To me, the Revel objectively performs quite a bit better,. The horizontal reflectivity and predicted in-room response look very good.

But, the Revels are twice the price, $346.50 each ($693/pair) currently at Crutchfield. The Wharfedales are $299/pair.

Thanks for the input.

Just to reiterate where I am.

Firstly, I’m only comparing the two because Amir said they came so close.

Secondly, usage would be pretty much nearfield, which largely negates any advantage the Revels have if it comes down to the effects of in room reflectivity. I’ve noted this 2 or 3 times now, and no one appears to be disagreeing on that point, or pointing out any other advantages the Revels have. But I’m more than happy to hear such points.

Thirdly, I can afford the Revels. Push comes to shove, I can afford both, and trust me, I’m still considering that.

This is me trying to be pure objectivist. If the Revels are going to be no better for me, then I’m an idiot and/or hypocrite if I think of myself as an objectivist but still buy the Revels just because “they’re more expensive, so must be better.”

I’m not having a go at anyone else with any of these points.

 

[HarmonicTHD]

Thanks for the input.

Just to reiterate where I am.

Firstly, I’m only comparing the two because Amir said they came so close.

Secondly, usage would be pretty much nearfield, which largely negates any advantage the Revels have if it comes down to the effects of in room reflectivity. I’ve noted this 2 or 3 times now, and no one appears to be disagreeing on that point, or pointing out any other advantages the Revels have. But I’m more than happy to hear such points.

Thirdly, I can afford the Revels. Push comes to shove, I can afford both, and trust me, I’m still considering that.

This is me trying to be pure objectivist. If the Revels are going to be no better for me, then I’m an idiot and/or hypocrite if I think of myself as an objectivist but still buy the Revels just because “they’re more expensive, so must be better.”

I’m not having a go at anyone else with any of these points.

What about opening the option space to let’s say KEF R3 or Genelec or Neumann eg KH120ii or KH150 actives. Did you rule them out already? Not fitting the budget? Sorry if I missed it as I didn’t follow all the posts.

 

[Yorkshire Mouth]

Way out of budget, but thanks for the suggestion.

 

[dominikz]

Thanks for the input.

Just to reiterate where I am.

Firstly, I’m only comparing the two because Amir said they came so close.

Secondly, usage would be pretty much nearfield, which largely negates any advantage the Revels have if it comes down to the effects of in room reflectivity. I’ve noted this 2 or 3 times now, and no one appears to be disagreeing on that point, or pointing out any other advantages the Revels have. But I’m more than happy to hear such points.

Thirdly, I can afford the Revels. Push comes to shove, I can afford both, and trust me, I’m still considering that.

This is me trying to be pure objectivist. If the Revels are going to be no better for me, then I’m an idiot and/or hypocrite if I think of myself as an objectivist but still buy the Revels just because “they’re more expensive, so must be better.”

I’m not having a go at anyone else with any of these points.

At 1,5m listening distance in a relatively small room I'd say directivity should still come into play, and this is where Revel seems to be better / more uniform. But Wharfedale is not bad either, so the resulting audible differences might not be very big. If you want to tweak tonality via EQ later, Revel should have a slight upper hand due to better directivity.

As stated before, the bass bump in the Revels shouldn't be a concern if you use room EQ (which is always recommended anyway). Otherwise tonality looks pretty good on both so I'm not surprised to read Amir's subjective evaluation is similarly positive.

Revel might also play louder, but you said that is not a concern.

There's also the looks; Revel has a more expensive looking cabinet and finish, but which design you prefer comes down to personal taste.

Last thing is the price - I also doubt Revel sounds twice as good as Wharfedale, so if none of the above considerations come into play in your case Wharfedale indeed seems like better value for money.

 

[ZolaIII]

Way out of budget, but thanks for the suggestion.

What's the budget exactly?
You won't find Revels in UK under 750 pounds and foren unavailable offers don't really count in, future more you should avoid buying like that for a valid warranty.
Revels have cabinet refractions problem and Diamonds instead have a deep in cross region, neither can play loud without compression and woffer getting over exited. Ideal crossover point are about 120 Hz for Revels and 135 Hz for Wharfedale's (woffer only phase/impedance cross).
Well I am disappointed with Wharfedale UK prices. If you have money and space to put them I would go with Wharfedale Linton's of course if you have budget for them. They are 1100 pounds at Peter (and cuple other places) with stands. As stands are about 350 but you won't find speakers alone probably that makes price of speakers alone same as M16's and Linton's are way better and ideal crossover is at 80 Hz (so you can get things great even with one or more sub's in 2.1 setup). Tho those may pass even without sub's if any with solid output down to 40 Hz.
It doesn't matter if you listen to them on mid to close range and they are capable passing far field 4 m calibration point if you ever get a need for it. Of course they will do lower SPL very smooth and with very, very little THD. It's budget dependent but I am certain you could rearrange the budget a bit and spit a little more on speakers and less on amp and cetera.