2. speakers
  3. 130647-2693

Has Rel fallen out of favor with audiophiles?

I own a Rel Storm 3. which I've had for 10 yrs or so. My new hardwood floor has really opened things up, especially in the bass area. much more pronounced bass and excellent sound stage.  I was planning on upgrading my sub after completing the floor. My Rel Storm 3 is pushing at its max to keep up in a 5k+ cu ft  room. Ten yrs ago the Storm 3 was one of the best on the market. It integrates very wall into the 2 channel system. Now, there is SVS, Rhythmic, PSA  etc which have much better specs than the Rels for less $$$. But the question for me is whether they actually integrate with the main speakers as well as the Rel? I use mine  for music 95% of the time. Music doesn't need to plumb the 16hz range as much as HT does. And most of the reviews seem to come from HT sources, IE AVS forum and the various HT magazines. From what I can tell, then Rhythmic seems to cater to the audiophile more than HT. But how about a sealed  SVS ?. And will they both integrate as well as the Rel with the high level speakon input? 

So, for audipophiles, do you sacrifice the ultra low hz for the good integration of the Rel? Or do you go with then SVS, Rhythmic, etc with their lower octave output? IOW, do the integrate as well?
Thanks for your help

arte
128x128artemus_5
artemus_5's avatar
artemus_5 OP
1,969 posts
 

m-db
To be fair the most expensive and finely crafted British made Studio III was the oldest sub in the comparison.

I have considered adding a second Storm 3. However, the price they want is near to what I can buy a new SVS. And, the Storm is now 12-15 yrs old. IOW, its old and ready for service or retirement soon. So I am hesitant. However the storm does integrate very naturally. And I use the high level input as per Rel's advice.


Kennythekey
To deal with a specific issue of lost bass energy due to a large room with open front wall corners, I purchased a pair of semi - DIY GR Research/Rythmik open baffle subs.

Rythmik is one of the contenders in my search. I am a woodworker so the DIY kits are interesting. My only question is whether a kit will be cheaper? IOW, if you count your labor as worth something, can you really save any $$$ over a comparable production Rythmik sub? Often this is not the case unless you don't count your time and labor in the equation.

Oteekeekid.  I read one user review on AVS forum which put the SVS SB 13 against the Rythmik E15 (?). The E15 was more nuanced and detailed than the SB13. The SB13 was no slouch and was considered extremely close in its bass quality

Thanks for your responses
artemus_5's avatar
artemus_5 OP
1,969 posts
 
"REL's top subs" means Studio III, Stentor III, or Stadium III and the current Reference series.
The Storm 3 was quite popular also and part of the ST series. I like the small footprint of the Storm 3. This is a battle I'm now having. Thee Rel reference series are extremely expensive. However, the ease of integration and the natural sense of integration is a necessity which I wonder if the others have. The Rythmik also has a high level input (I think). So it is a contender. However I want 2 subs rather than one since I have alsways heard of the advantage of 2 subs. This calls me to question whether 2 Rel T9' (or Sumiko S9) will work? Or 2 SVS SB2000? Though they only have ,low level input. maybe building my own Rythmik is the answer since they have the high level input. like most things, there is always more to consider than appears on the surface. I can say that SVS return policy is really aluring.
missioncoonery
1,223 posts
 

Rel were among the best in the early days of subwoofers but they don't come to mind even in the top 10 these days IMHO.


Boy,no idea what your listening to but Id be interested in hearing them because IMO your about as wrong as it gets

bdp24's avatar
bdp24
9,821 posts
 

Artemus, there are two reasons some Rythmik customers choose to get a DIY kit version of a sealed or ported sub (ignoring for now the OB/Dipole Sub that Kenny chose, as it is available only as a kit) rather than a factory-finished version.

1- Yep, of course a kit is cheaper than a finished version. The kits come with a driver, plate amp, and acoustic material to stuff the enclosure with---everything but the enclosure. There are detailed diagrams of the suggested enclosure (see No. 2 below), and the user can either make it or have it made by a local cabinet shop. There are also DIY "flat pack" enclosures available from both Parts Express and a Rythmik/GR Research owner who has had 1-1/2" thick (!) MDF panels cut on a CNC machine.

2- The other reason is that the optimum enclosure size for the 15" Rythmik driver is 4cu.ft, but the factory enclosure is only 3cu.ft. Rythmik owner/designer Brian Ding is a rather frugal guy, and wanted to keep the cost to ship reasonable, so decided on the smaller enclosure size. The 4cu.ft allows the DIY Rythmik F15 sub to slightly outperform a factory-finished one, in terms of efficiency/sensitivity and maximum volume.

In addition, speaker designer Jim Salk offers both the Rythmik F12 and F15 subs in his own, custom-made enclosures, finished in beautiful natural wood veneer. They are more expensive, of course, but look really, really good. Jim makes the F15 with a really well-braced 4cu.ft enclosure. Details available on the Salk website.

The Rythmik/GR Research OB/Dipole Sub mentioned above by Kenny and myself is a completely different animal, and a very special, unique design. It’s not for everyone, but is THE sub for planar speakers (ESL, ribbon, magnetic-planar), as well as high-resolution dynamic speakers. Details available on both companies websites (the sub is the result of a collaboration between Brian Ding and GR Research’s Danny Richie), and has been discussed on the AudioCircle GR Research Forum quite a bit.

dlcockrum's avatar
dlcockrum
2,190 posts
 
Hi Arte,

Understand your dilemma. I have two Stadium IIIs and adding the second sub was a nice improvement. Really loads the room. My speakers need no bass supplementation, but the room loading improves imaging and soundstaging when done correctly.

Using a SR Tesla "REL-spec" Hi-level interconnect in place of the mediocre REL-supplied cable was a significant step up in sound quality for me.

As you say, integration is everything. That is where the RELs really shine using the Hi-level input. As you already know, proper placement and phase/crossover/gain settings of the RELs is ultra-important for best performance. I was surprised to read m-db’s statement re: the ease of setup of the Studio III vs the others in his auditions. My experience with RELs has been quite contrary - lots of trial and error necessary to get them optimized and the use of the Hi-Level input a must for proper integration.

The advent of digital room correction in some other brands has leveled the playing field, especially at the lower price points. Less picky in placement too. I will be interested to see where you land and your impressions if you make a change.

Dave

More to discover