Are the REL's of today only REL by name and not what REL used to be with Mr Lord at the helm? The studio sub was eye candy to me back in the day. Then again the whole REL range were the mutts nuts when it came to bass, bass and more bass. Not heard any of the new breed of subs from REL though.
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
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
- ...
- 82 posts total
- 82 posts total