2. amps-preamps
  3. 1072918514

Revel Studio speaker w/Music Reference RM-200 amp?

Thanks to all of you tube-o-philes who responded to my earlier post!!!

I think some of your suggestions were right on the money. However, in speaking to my wife, she, (very unreasonably to my way of thinking!), wants me to pay off the new bedroom furniture and recarpet the house before I spend any more money on my stereo. Therefore, instead of having up to $5K to spend on a tube amp, I only have $2K (which is what I think I can get for my Mark Levinson No. 23). Therefore, I have looked around and have revised (downward, unfortunately) my budget for this new amp. The amp I figure might work best is the Music Reference RM-200. It has the bare minimum power (100W/ch.), and unfortunately has bias to set, however, it appears that the tubes are relatively few so this should be fairly easy to do. In addition, the tubes are relatively cheap and reputedly last quite awhile.

Therefore, my new question is:

Have any of you Revel Studio owners tried to use the Music Reference RM-200 amp?

(My Mark Levinson No. 23 has 200W/ch. and I am not sure if the 100W/ch. RM-200 will be enough amp for these speakers.)

If so, did it have enough power to really get to realistic sound levels? (I like to listen loud sometimes).

How was the sound? (Was the soundstaging and imaging tight?)

How was the bass response? (Did it get deep and tight enough?)

Again, thanks for your input! (It is so nice having the Audiogon members to discuss this with. Whatever did we do before Audiogon?!)
kurt_tank
zaikesman
3,017 posts
 
To answer your question about required power level meaningfully, you should also inform anyone familiar with your proposed combo about your tastes in music and especially the dimensions of your listening room.
kurt_tank OP
1,189 posts
 
Ok, here are the answers to your questions, Zaikesman.

Musical tastes are mostly rock (75%), but I like jazz as well (20%).
(Also orchestral music (5%), but not a lot.)

Listening room is 24'x16'x8'. I have the speakers on the long wall. The room is carpeted as well. I would say it was an average room as far as being "live" or "dead", accoustically.

Hopefully this will provide you, and others, with the information you need.

Thanks!
kurt_tank OP
1,189 posts
 
The more I investigate this though, the more I am convinced that I really need 200W/ch. @ 4 Ohms. In reading a review of the Studios, the reviewer said his VTL 100's did not quite cut it, as it did not have enough "head room". (He said that his 145W/ch. amp was better, and his 400W/ch. was best.)
Also, using the graphs in Robert Harley's Book, "The Complete Guide to High End Audio", I have calculated that 100W/ch. @ 8 ohms is just barely enough. My speakers have a average impedence of 4 ohms, (& a sensitively of 87db), so I really think I need the 200W/ch @ 4 ohms.

Oh well, back to the drawing board. Now I need to find a really good tube amp with 200W/ch. (Which is possible, but just not with my budget of $2K.)

If anyone has any differing thoughts or actual experience with the RM-200 with the Studios, I would still love to hear from you.
mickey13
24 posts
 
Kurt tank, Though I can't comment on the match with your particular speakers, you match my musical taste +/- 10% and approx room dimensions 26x18x10 with rugs and the same sonic properties. Speakers are also on the long wall. I run the RM-200 with ProAc Response 3's, at realistic sound levels at times also.

Now to try to answer your questions: (with my speakers)
As far as power, For my speakers ~86-88 efficient The RM-200 has no problem driving them at realistic sound levels, (loud).

Soundstaging and Imaging. Well, this is one of the things about this amp,that really turn me on. Soundstaging is well beyond the boundaries of the speakers at times, as much as 90 degrees, and even more with certain DVD music concerts. Depth on certain recordings, seems endless.
And imaging is upfront and personal on female voices.

NOTE: This I only achieved, after I replaced the 6550's with KT88's, after speaking with Roger Mojeski himself, in a phone conversation.

As far as the Bass getting deep and tight enough you ask? Well, it didn't have the Slam my Krell use to have.. BUT it bettered my lower end CJ's and AR's I've had and heard in the past. Yes it goes deep, to the point were you can feel it, and tight, on a scale of 1-10, my ex Krell being a 10, the RM-200 would be a strong 7-8 IMHO.

There are a lot of other things to take into account, namly the front end.. CD player, Preamp, Cables, etc.
My post to you is based on my system, taste, and ears.

So I hope this helps you out to some degree or another, with that said.. I wish you the best of luck in the New Year and hope you come to a Sonic Conclusion soon.

P.S. Let us know how you make out.
More to discover