2. speakers
  3. 1261972876

REL B3 and monitors vs full-range

I moved to a loft where my Dynaudio 1.3SEs sounded a little lost, and shopped around for a good pair of full-range speakers. It seemed like I would have to spend $6k to get the detail I like of the 1.3SE in something with loft-scale bass. In the end I just ended up adding a sub, a REL britannia B3. It's been six months and I'm still astonished when I listen. I don't really notice the sub directly, there's just way more there there. What am I missing with the monitors+sub combination that I'd have gotten with a good fullrange pair?
alloyd
stanwal's avatar
stanwal
3,147 posts
 
I do as you do most of the time, using monitors with a pair of REL Stadium subs. Lately I have been using my Spendor S 100s, which are a full range system and am still using the subs with them. I think you would have to go above $15000 [new] to get a speaker that gives an advantage over monitors and subs. There you would probably get a more coherent sound due to the system being simpler, however the main speakers would have to be quite large and might not work in a small room, it is easier to make the monitor/sub system work in these cases.
tom_hankins
928 posts
 
I went from Thiels CS7.2 full range speakers to Harbeth SHL5s & REL R505 sub. Been using this combo for almost a year now, and think I will be sticking with monitors/sub for quite awhile.
tpreaves's avatar
tpreaves
2,687 posts
 
You have hit on a combination that is,evidently,great for your listening habits.Why bother with success?It takes some people years to find this.Just a thought.
More to discover