RevelStudio2 really special or I need to hear more

The Revel Studio 2 is truly a great speaker. I went from Quad ESL 63'a to Wilson 5.1's. The Quad was smooth, transparent, had great imaging and resolved low level detail even at low volumes. The Wilson was vastly superior in dynamics and slam, but ultimately was musically unacceptable as it focused on the flaws in the recording and not the music.

The Revel is close to the best qualities of the Quad with the dynamics and slam of the Wilson. In short, the best of both worlds. I suggest a high current amp that doubles it's output from 8 to 4 to 2 ohms. The Studio 2 likes lots of power. I've been an audiophile a long time and can say without reservation the Revel Studio 2 can to toe to toe with ANY speaker except for output below 30hz.

Comparing speakers of this quality by listening in a showroom is nearly worthless. You must listen with your equipment in your room. That said, if the feed the Studio 2 enough juice, experiment with placement and treat the room as needed, it will shock you. The way the drivers blend together into one equals a very large sweet spot. Live music doesn't force you to sit in one narrow position to enjoy it and neither does the Revel. The tweeter is revealing and glare free.

Read the review of the Salon 2 in the Absolute Sound. Other than a bit less very low bass, that is what I hear with the Studio 2. If you have a big room and want to flap your pants with a low C organ note, get the Salon 2. Otherwise, the Studio 2 is the one to get. I continue to be amazed that I hear detail in my reference recordings I've never noticed before, while at the same time I can listen to lessor recordings that formerly drove me from the room. The tweeter is magic.

To add to what Egrady said, the Studio 2 is down about 5db at 20hz but most average sized rooms add 3-5db from 20-40hz. I would expect the Studios to be flat at 20hz and spiked at 60-80hz in most rooms. If you target the 80hz hump with bass traps you should get pretty good flat bass out of the Studio 2. I do however find downward ports to be the trickiest to place in rooms. They seem more sensitive to side wall placement than rear ported and sealed speaker YMMV. You would think it would make placement easier because of the consistent loading from the floor but....

Here is Stereophile in room measurements to back up my comments about the bass.

Egrady, do you feel the directionality of the upper highs to be and issue of for soundstage and liveliness? I still have not gotten out and demoed the Studio 2 but the narrow dispersion of the highs are my only real concern. I think they are going to need a good bit of toe in because of it. My room has wall to wall curtains with carpet (theater style) and I think they might be a little to soft in the highs in my room for my tastes (hard rock, etc). I have a demo for the Salons in a few week so I guess I will see soon enough.

As Yyz has stated the Thiel 3.7 would be worth a demo. I have demoed about 10 different pairs of speakers in the last year from 10-30k and the 3.7 have been the shining star regardless of price. They made many high-end speakers sound unintegrated and dynamically compressed. Some times when I listen to speakers like the 3.7s it make me sad because this hobby (the search) might really be over for me. Nothing under 30k was a better fit for me and I will never spend more thank that. It is hard to get into gear the is double the price or more and is simply different, not better. Anyway the Studio 2 is the last speaker on my list before I buy my next speakers.

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.