After much reading my local dealer finally got in a pair of Revel F208 speakers to audition. After playing my usual demo songs I was sorely disappointed with the sound. They simply had no life. The strings that sparkled on other systems sounded like cardboard (ok, bad description but you get my point). They bass did not move me at all.
Was it because: 1) I wouldn't know good music if it slapped my in the face? 2) I was actually auditioning the electronics more that the speakers? 3) I've become a music snob and only the best will do? 4) They are not properly broken in? 5) The speakers really are cr@p?
After reading that 3 different reviewers use the performa's (f206 or f208) as their reference speakers, it's really hard for me to believe number 5 - that the speakers suck
I've been a severe critic of bad sound and a conosour of fine music my whole life so I hope number 1 isn't true:(
The sound from my main system is breathtakingly beautiful. It consists of a Metrum Hex Dac, Benchmark DAC2 Pre preamp, Bryston 3B Sst2 power amp, PMC 22 speakers flanked by 2 Rythmik F12 Subs. The DAC is very rich and analog sounding and the rest of the system is very transparent. Stunning sound. So I have very high standards to reference these speakers against. Maybe I am just expecting too much from the Revels? So number 3 might be somewhat true???
The F208 speakers where being fed by an arcam CD player and an arcam a39 integrated amp. Perhaps this can not compete with my home system? Is number 2 correct and I am really just auditioning the electronics?
Break in can make a big difference in speakers. Maybe they need hundreds of more hours through them? I need to check on number 4.
Or maybe they really are that bad and everyone who has reviewed them is a big fat liar?
Owning the F208, the first two things to review is the bass and treble compensation switched. With varying rooms and speaker placement within in the room, they aid in helping the speaker work a bit better in many situations.
The Arcam in question certainly has me quite curios on how they achieve a class A operation output of 20W until it switches over. My own Pass X250.5 used to power the Revel's hit about 15wpc before going A/B, and are far heftier and run decently warm from the get go. The Arcam appears very light for running that many watts in class A, which often requires plenty of heat dissipation.
As for the F208 sound, its a very good speaker and does greatly benefit from proper setup. If you like a speaker that has a very forward sound, they may not be best suited to your preferences. While certainly not reticent, it plays a balance that is just slightly stepped back than some. To me, its a little more livable and doesn't really ever get fatiguing. On the other hand, other speakers I have owned and listened to have offered more immediate vocal performances with well recorded material. Few loudspeakers will be better all around and a large part has to do with how a recording was mastered. Its very important to use your own music to evaluate and take your time and get a sense of what they do with them differently.
During my experiments, they offer the best balance when directly pointed at the listening spot and like most speakers, prefer some distance to surrounding objects and walls.
I was severely disappointed w/ both Revel and Aerial demoes over the years. After reading so much positive reviews in the usual Audio rags- I did/do not understand all of the "fluff". My reference loudspeaker is THIEL. IME, these models do everything right- consider an audition soon. Keep me posted & Happy Listening!
After reading some positive reviews about the Revels, I was underwhelmed when I auditioned the F208. They were being driven by an NAD Master Series amp.
I ended up buying a pair of Harbeth SHL5+, which I found to be far more musical and enjoyable. The Harbeth were driven by a Pass Int 150 for their audition.
Kr4, The point I was really trying to make is that Revels and Bryston speakers are often compared to each other and they seem very close in comparison based on what I have read. Yet to my ears, the Bryston speaker audition trumped the Revels in every way. It just didn't make sense to me. I expected them to be very close. Of course no break in on the Revels is one considerable factor, IMO.
Have you now heard the Revel speakers? Do you think the Revels rival the Brystons?
Earlxtr wrote: Kr4: maybe I misquoted that as the reviewer said that his friend really loved the F208 speakers, but he had not heard them. I assumed that this was relative to the Brystons but may have been inncorrect in that assessment.
Thanks. Speaking as the reviewer of the Bryston, I was referring to the reviewer of the Revel.
Kr4: maybe I misquoted that as the reviewer said that his friend really loved the F208 speakers, but he had not heard them. I assumed that this was relative to the Brystons but may have been inncorrect in that assessment.
BTW, I found out that the dealer did no burn in on these speakers whatsoever. He just pulled them out of the box and had me come over to hear them. Definitely part of the problem!!!
Shakeydeal: My experience is that Bryston neither adds to takes away from source it is being fed. Use a rich sounding DAC like my Metrum Hex and it sounds rich (fantastic really). Feed it with an analytical DAC like my Benchmark DAC2 and it sounds analytical. Feed it with garbage...well you get my point. To my ears it's super transparent...it all comes down to your source. You obviously have not heard what I've heard or you'd be trying to sell one of your kidneys to get one:)))))))
Analogluvr, thanks for your comment. I too tend to generally prefer amplifiers which don't employ negative feedback, in part because it may be an indication that the intrinsic quality of the design is sufficiently good that it doesn't need to employ it. But on the other hand there are certainly some excellent amplifiers which do use light to moderate amounts of feedback, many ARC amps being examples.
My point regarding the A39, though, is that its exceptionally low harmonic distortion spec is strongly suggestive of the use of LARGE amounts of feedback, with all of its potential downsides, perhaps most notably Transient Intermodulation Distortion (which is not normally specified and for which I believe measurement standards do not exist). And it is also suggestive of the possibility that the quality of the design is such that, as you put it, a Band-Aid is necessary.
On another note: Bombaywalla, your comment is intriguing, and prompts me to ask for whatever elaboration you may deem appropriate to provide :-)
Feedback can lower distortion which is generally considered an undesirable effect. Like so many things the key thing about feedback is how it's used. For instance, if you're night time cruising down Hwy 101, then feedback is havin' fun, havin' fun.
The other thing to remember is that your system at home with ample power and 2 subs dialed in is going to sound richer than most anything you compare it to. Arcam always struck me as a fuzzy warm sounding company but I guess not in class G. (I don't know what class G is actually)??
When I auditioned the Bryston Mini T speakers driven by Bryston electronics they sounded fantastic. The Stereofile reviewer said he liked these even more than the Bryston speakers he compared them to. To me, the Bryston speakers sounded a little hyped and I can understand these being more neutral, buy would still expect them to sound very good. I'm expecting my electronics to make a significant difference...
04-15-15: Almarg The "class G" design of the Arcam A39, as explained here, is radically different than the designs of most amplifiers having high end aspirations.
OMG!!! this technique by Arcam has hit very close to home!!! ;-)
IMHO, I think it was a combination of the wrong electronics and the speakers weren't broken-in yet. These will take several hundred hours to be fully operational and sound good.
I've never really been a fan of the Revel stuff, but I know they can sound very good.
I agree with Almarg. The part that confuses me is the comment about negative feedback. So many designers always say negative feedback is not bad if it is used properly. This goes against my personal experience in which I have always preferred amplifiers without negative feedback. My understanding is that negative feedback is a Band-Aid to correct undesirable effects.
I have not heard the F208 but have heard the F206 in 2 different stores. One store had them with the top Parasound Halo Amp & Preamp and I thought they sounded great on all kinds of music. The next store had them with a $1500 Music Hall integrated amp and they didn't sound quite as good but still similar. I preferred them to all other similar priced speakers I compared them to which were B&W CM 9 & 10's, Martin Logan Motion 60XT, Dali, Dynaudio and Ushers. I ordered a pair in fact. I would be interested to hear what you think when hooked up to your Bryston amp.
I agree with the statements made so far. My first thought when listening to the speakers was that that electronics was the issue. When I left we agreed that I needed to bring down my system to drive these speakers. I've got a 4B SST2 to drive these speakers which should provide plenty of power. See how that goes:))))
You can't judge speakers based on hearing them in different rooms. The room/speaker interface has a huge effect on the overall presentation. Or it might be any of the other things you mentioned.
The "class G" design of the Arcam A39, as explained here, is radically different than the designs of most amplifiers having high end aspirations. And despite the high efficiency provided by that kind of design (resulting in reduced size and weight relative to power capability) it doesn't seem encouraging that the A39 weighs a grand total of only 25 pounds. Especially considering that it is a fully integrated amplifier, including even a phono stage as well as preamp and power amp functions. Nor does it seem encouraging that while the impedance of the F208, as shown here, dips below 4 ohms at a number of frequencies, the 240 watt rating of the A39 into 4 ohms is specified on the basis of only one channel being driven (while the 120 watt 8 ohm rating is spec'd for both channels being driven).
Also, the A39's extremely low harmonic distortion rating of 0.001% at 80% power into 8 ohms is suggestive of the possibility that feedback has been applied in, um, a liberal manner in the design, which is also not encouraging with respect to its sonics.
So although a combination of factors may have been involved, given the uncertainties about both the intrinsic sonic characteristics of the amplifier and how good a match it may be for the particular speaker, I doubt that a meaningful conclusion about the speaker can be drawn from this audition.
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
