Yet another Revel F206 thread

[Cadillacofminds]

Aah I had an emoji in the message above that didn't show up,..don't anyone read above like I have a problem with the review

 

[Alice of Old Vincennes]

I didn't write that clearly lol, I was referencing what he mentioned in this review, he was saying that playing some classical music I was having problems tolerating the speaks "couldn't move enough air," this crossed over at 40hz

I have no idea why anyone would cross a 6.5 speaker at 40hz and then complain about lack of air movement.

 

[Cadillacofminds]

I have no idea why anyone would cross a 6.5 speaker at 40hz and then complain about lack of air movement.

I'm pretty sure it was on here, maybe from Mr. Amir, the I think 6.5 in SBacoustics woofer that is assumed or known to be in here was measured, the readings showed high imd, something about asymmetry in the surrounds, Dennis Murphy and others were skeptical of this tho

 

[Cadillacofminds]

As far as the crossover point, the settings I'm using have the crossover centered at maybe 90hz, this is because there's a deep null pretty much right at 100hz at my listening position that I feel the need to be able to equalize out (somewhat at least). The little research my lazy a## did has me guessing this is due to floor bounce interference. I have the base of the speakers resting on the carpet with spikes not at all extended--getting the speakers up like a handful of inches higher (via placing them on say some concrete blocks), that couldn't possibly do much for this null?

I wonder if there's any products designed to allow one to put a high q bump in subwoofer output above the crossover center frequency one would tend to use, to correct for nulls in the bass response from the mains. Not sure how much that would do from an avoiding localization of the subwoofer perspective, but the old rbh subwoofer my pauper a## runs doesn't seem to have the cleanest amp or something, want more of the bass from the f206's

 

[Alice of Old Vincennes]

As far as the crossover point, the settings I'm using have the crossover centered at maybe 90hz, this is because there's a deep null pretty much right at 100hz at my listening position that I feel the need to be able to equalize out (somewhat at least). The little research my lazy a## did has me guessing this is due to floor bounce interference. I have the base of the speakers resting on the carpet with spikes not at all extended--getting the speakers up like a handful of inches higher (via placing them on say some concrete blocks), that couldn't possibly do much for this null?

I wonder if there's any products designed to allow one to put a high q bump in subwoofer output above the crossover center frequency one would tend to use, to correct for nulls in the bass response from the mains. Not sure how much that would do from an avoiding localization of the subwoofer perspective, but the old rbh subwoofer my pauper a## runs doesn't seem to have the cleanest amp or something, want more of the bass from the f206's

Then you need the 208. I use poor man's JBL Sudio 290. I fear JBL and Revel 2.5.

 

[j_j]

I don't see how. I think the clean bass bass is fooling your ears. Revel clean bass doesn't seem as loud.

Clean bass (or clean anything) without distortion will almost always sound less loud (in terms of actual loudness, the sensation level) than a distorted sound, indeed.

"Playing loud", as well, also has been confused between actual loudness (increased sensation level due to spectrum widening) and expectation that distortion means "it's loud" in terms of the listener's experience, that may not actually increase the sensation level. Very clean systems can often be mistaken for "not as loud", until the SPL is measured.

 

[fjhuerta]

I finished setting up my 206s with an M&K MX-125ii sub, crossed over at 50 Hz using a MiniDSP.

To say these are the best speakers I've ever owned would be just about right. My latest ones were Focal 926s. They aren't even close to the Revels. And with the sub, which I got for $200, I don't think I'll be missing the 208s anytime soon

 

[ajd578]

Does someone with f206 (and/or 208) mind measuring exact tweeter height?

I got a pair of m105 (crossed at 120 Hz to an old Polk sub, for now) as my first foray into this hobby. The setup sounds great - old favorites frequently startle me with a feeling of the performers being here next to me. I probably don't need towers because I don't like to listen at high volumes, but I can't help wondering what the three-ways would sound like in comparison. The problem is that my listening chair is only about 1.5m away, and pretty low (34-35"), so I'm worried the towers are a no-go due to tweeter height. The m105s on 2024" monoprice stands are pretty much dead-level.

 

[Steve Dallas]

Does someone with f206 (and/or 208) mind measuring exact tweeter height?

I got a pair of m105 (crossed at 120 Hz to an old Polk sub, for now) as my first foray into this hobby. The setup sounds great - old favorites frequently startle me with a feeling of the performers being here next to me. I probably don't need towers because I don't like to listen at high volumes, but I can't help wondering what the three-ways would sound like in comparison. The problem is that my listening chair is only about 1.5m away, and pretty low (34-35"), so I'm worried the towers are a no-go due to tweeter height. The m105s on 20" monoprice stands are pretty much dead-level.

Tweeter height is about 38" on the F206.

 

[Cadillacofminds]

I probably don't need towers because I don't like to listen at high volumes, but I can't help wondering what the three-ways would sound like in comparison.

At the volume you listen at the 105's can't be crossed lower than 120hz? I was just doing quite a bit of switching between 60 and 70hz on my avr with the 206's, I'm pretty certain the later gave me (more) localization of the subwoofer. (in my small for an american audiophile room, with bass heavy music, turned up a decent amount at moments, I'm pretty sure I can cross over to the 206's at the least at 50hz, it's at 60 due to a pretty deep suckout of their response at like 53hz at my listening position)

 

[Looneybomber]

Does someone with f206 (and/or 208) mind measuring exact tweeter height?

I got a pair of m105 (crossed at 120 Hz to an old Polk sub, for now) as my first foray into this hobby. The setup sounds great - old favorites frequently startle me with a feeling of the performers being here next to me. I probably don't need towers because I don't like to listen at high volumes, but I can't help wondering what the three-ways would sound like in comparison. The problem is that my listening chair is only about 1.5m away, and pretty low (34-35"), so I'm worried the towers are a no-go due to tweeter height. The m105s on 2024" monoprice stands are pretty much dead-level.

More important than tweeter height is the distance from the woofer centers and the tweeter. You’re close enough to notice the separation in sound of a male singer’s voice coming primarily out of the woofers and then the high frequency simbilant sounds coming out of the tweeter. Those acoustic centers are about 15.5” (0.4m) apart. Roughly 15 degrees from your 1.5m seating position.

Now that I’m thinking about it, I have those speakers and I could find a low seat like you mention. It’s been a long time since I’ve done any nearfield listening with towers. I remember it being bad, but it wasn’t with these speakers. However, I vote don’t upgrade - keep what you have.

*edit*
I tried it with some new Leonard Cohen and I can hear the separation of lows/highs, but it’s not nearly as bad as I thought it would.
I still stand behind my vote on keeping the m105s.

 

[ajd578]

At the volume you listen at the 105's can't be crossed lower than 120hz? I was just doing quite a bit of switching between 60 and 70hz on my avr with the 206's, I'm pretty certain the later gave me (more) localization of the subwoofer. (in my small for an american audiophile room, with bass heavy music, turned up a decent amount at moments, I'm pretty sure I can cross over to the 206's at the least at 50hz, it's at 60 due to a pretty deep suckout of their response at like 53hz at my listening position)

Reasons for crossing high are 1) the m105 has a decent amount of distortion above 80 Hz, 2) my crossover slope is only 12 dB, 3) my sub is positioned center front, and 4) sometimes I like to play loud.

 

[ajd578]

More important than tweeter height is the distance from the woofer centers and the tweeter. You’re close enough to notice the separation in sound of a male singer’s voice coming primarily out of the woofers and then the high frequency simbilant sounds coming out of the tweeter. Those acoustic centers are about 15.5” (0.4m) apart. Roughly 15 degrees from your 1.5m seating position.

Now that I’m thinking about it, I have those speakers and I could find a low seat like you mention. It’s been a long time since I’ve done any nearfield listening with towers. I remember it being bad, but it wasn’t with these speakers. However, I vote don’t upgrade - keep what you have.

*edit*
I tried it with some new Leonard Cohen and I can hear the separation of lows/highs, but it’s not nearly as bad as I thought it would.
I still stand behind my vote on keeping the m105s.

That’s interesting - my understanding is that humans rely on spectral information in the tweeter range for vertical sound source localization (> 4 kHz), so I would think a woofer crossed over in the 300-500 Hz range wouldn't be localizable on that axis. But maybe there's enough HF still getting through.

 

[Looneybomber]

That’s interesting - my understanding is that humans rely on spectral information in the tweeter range for vertical sound source localization (> 4 kHz), so I would think a woofer crossed over in the 300-500 Hz range wouldn't be localizable on that axis. But maybe there's enough HF still getting through.

To see if it's something I actually hear or just assume I should hear, I would need to do a blind listening test between the towers and bookshelfs. There's no fair way for me to A/B the F206's with bookshelfs since the location of the bookshelf speaker (to the left or right) vs the tower will be a dead giveaway at that close of a distance...plus they each sound a little different. I think if a person could somehow pull off a kind of Harman listening room where they can switch speakers around in the same location, it would be interesting to see how close listeners could get to each speaker before identifying sound separation issues.

 

[dped90]

Some great news for a change along my rocky perilous speaker hunt!

I was astounded by these reviews, where the F206 is compared to speakers well over 3x their price/pair.
https://www.soundstagehifi.com/index.php/equipment-reviews/766-revel-performa3-f206-loudspeakers
https://6moons.com/audioreviews/revel/1.html

As my budget allows the F226be and maybe even the F228be as front towers in a Revel 5.1 surround system. And the 128be's for the side speakers?

But the big questions is how would my ears would like the beryllium tweeter with the less than pristine 60s pop recordings TV episodes and movies-though mostly pressed on major label CDs, DVDs and BDs?

It shouldn't be too hard audition them with such uncompressed WAV files on my laptop (feeding a good DAC via USB).

But can anyone who may own beryllium Revels, or other brands with such tweeters, offer any such experiences?

 

[dped90]

Also, what is the reason (s) for opting to use the port plug (s) that come with Revels?

 

[Laserjock]

Some great news for a change along my rocky perilous speaker hunt!

I was astounded by these reviews, where the F206 is compared to speakers well over 3x their price/pair.
https://www.soundstagehifi.com/index.php/equipment-reviews/766-revel-performa3-f206-loudspeakers
https://6moons.com/audioreviews/revel/1.html

As my budget allows the F226be and maybe even the F228be as front towers in a Revel 5.1 surround system. And the 128be's for the side speakers?

But the big questions is how would my ears would like the beryllium tweeter with the less than pristine 60s pop recordings TV episodes and movies-though mostly pressed on major label CDs, DVDs and BDs?

It shouldn't be too hard audition them with such uncompressed WAV files on my laptop (feeding a good DAC via USB).

But can anyone who may own beryllium Revels, or other brands with such tweeters, offer any such experiences?

You’ll love the Be version also.
Heard them at the last RMAF

Port plugs in case you need to tame the bass?

 

[ahofer]

But can anyone who may own beryllium Revels, or other brands with such tweeters, offer any such experiences?

I own f228be in one stereo system. They are terrific. The tweeter material won’t mean anything after you hear them. They sound beautiful, all over my large room. My other system has Harbeths, so if anyone should be primed to hear hard treble, it would be me, but I don’t. Great speakers.

 

[Lsc]

Some great news for a change along my rocky perilous speaker hunt!

I was astounded by these reviews, where the F206 is compared to speakers well over 3x their price/pair.
https://www.soundstagehifi.com/index.php/equipment-reviews/766-revel-performa3-f206-loudspeakers
https://6moons.com/audioreviews/revel/1.html

As my budget allows the F226be and maybe even the F228be as front towers in a Revel 5.1 surround system. And the 128be's for the side speakers?

But the big questions is how would my ears would like the beryllium tweeter with the less than pristine 60s pop recordings TV episodes and movies-though mostly pressed on major label CDs, DVDs and BDs?

It shouldn't be too hard audition them with such uncompressed WAV files on my laptop (feeding a good DAC via USB).

But can anyone who may own beryllium Revels, or other brands with such tweeters, offer any such experiences?

The beryllium tweeters are superior and there are no drawbacks. Lower distortion which means less listening fatigue (actually no listening fatigue) and combined with the midrange, the Be speakers are more detailed sounding.

Of course all of this are incremental improvements for those where this matters. If the upgraditis bug doesn’t hit you, the F206 is fine forever imho.

Also the 3x or whatever multiple of its price is what reviewers like to use, it’s worth noting but that’s about it. My old F208 was close to the Studio2 at less than 1/3rd the price. I could have stopped there but since upgraded to the F228Be then the Salon2. Diminishing returns- of course but it was worth the additional expense for me at the time. High end audio and rational thinking seem to be mutually exclusive .

 

[Chromatischism]

Ok, they are more detailed sounding vs F206 – though I thought the spins showed a bit more output in certain areas of midrange or tweeter which would account for that. Could be wrong, don't have them on hand.