RevelStudio2 really special or I need to hear more

your ears are correct, they are very good speakers, and to imagine that they were designed with actual science, instead of marketing bs . I would take them over all most any speaker I have heard, including much more expensive ones, aka [wilson]. happy listening.

Good and really special for sure

The Thiel 3.7 is very a interesting speaker, though I think the use of 1st-order crossovers is an old-fashioned marketing gimmick, and their use results in some rather difficult to resolve design compromises.

The fit and finish of the Thiels are equal to the best on the market, and significantly better than the Revels, IMO. Like the Revel they use purpose-built drivers. I like that; it's a sign of more complete engineering, especially with that crossover strategy.

When I listened to the 3.7s I came away with two impressions relative to the Revels: the highs weren't as good, as in not as realistic, and the bass lacked dynamic range. If you listen to vinyl or at relatively low levels the 3.7 is probably just fine in the bass, but for digital like I listen to I found them wanting, compared to several other speakers. Some people would say these aren't speakers for rock or organ, or perhaps even for contemporary jazz.

Since I listened to the 3.7s at a dealer (I've heard the Studio 2 in a home) it's difficult to compare exactly, but I thought the Revels threw a better image.

Of course, if memory serves, the 3.7s are 20% less expensive than the Revels.

James63,

Directionality doesn't come into play nearly as much in live music as it does at home. So, to me, a speaker that isn't directional is closer to what we're all trying to recreate. Driver integration is important and the Studio 2 is truly special in this aspect.

In my room it all came together with toe in just a bit less than recommended by Revel, placement using the 1/5 rule and spiking the speakers. I didn't spike the speakers until I had the position zeroed in. I was worried up to that point because the low end was poor. But once I spiked them, well all I can say is the difference shocked me.

The toe in didn't make the highs directional, just the opposite. The highs aren't recessed, all that is missing is grit and glare. It takes some getting used to, but you'll soon realize all the music is there without the artificial sizzle.

Since all recordings are different, some need a bit of high end boost and some need less. That is another advantage of the Studio 2. You can dial in a plus/minus of the high and low end to deal with room and recording issues.

Thank you all for sharing your own experience/comments. Perhaps it's really time I move back to cone speakers, if only I can get over the look of the Revel.