REL Studio III vs. JL Audio Fathom 113


Anyone have real listening experience and advice for this comparison and final decision? I will be using two subs in a two channel system that includes the Hovland HP200, Pass Labs X350.5 and Sonus Faber Amati Anniversario. Room size is 20' by 15'. Looking for increased bass speed, slam, detail and recorded ambience.

I like the REL system connections to amplifier terminals and the dial up frequency cut off or filter features of the REL in that no cross over is necessary. Use what you need. After having heard these subs in two systems, I would like a little more of all the variables mentioned above. Seems a little slow and rich even when properly set up by trained installers.

I like the digital amp design for the JL Audio and the master/slave configuration. I also like the user friendly integrated set up process and microphone system. Though I have not heard these subs yet, I have been told that they can provide impressive speed, slam, detail and a tight bass that can compare to anything in the market. I don't like the need (recommended) for a crossover and the potential integration problems for best sound. I like the price. If the sound assumptions are true, it would be great if I could dial in a cut off frequency like the REL and without a crossover.

Any comments?
128x128audiothunder

Showing 1 response by peter_s

I've currently got one Fathom 113 and love it. It was a breeze to set up and integrate. Although the manually says an external Xover is better, I do use the HF trim and cut it off around 40 hz with very good success with my Avalon Indras. I also remove some of the lowest bass frequencies as it can overwhelm my 14x18.5 room. I don't know how much better it would be with an external Xover, but it integrates perfectly with my Indras without one.