I agree with Almarg. The part that confuses me is the comment about negative feedback. So many designers always say negative feedback is not bad if it is used properly. This goes against my personal experience in which I have always preferred amplifiers without negative feedback. My understanding is that negative feedback is a Band-Aid to correct undesirable effects.
Why so underwhelmed by Revel F208 audition???
After much reading my local dealer finally got in a pair of Revel F208 speakers to audition. After playing my usual demo songs I was sorely disappointed with the sound.
They simply had no life. The strings that sparkled on other systems sounded like cardboard (ok, bad description but you get my point). They bass did not move me at all.
Was it because:
1) I wouldn't know good music if it slapped my in the face?
2) I was actually auditioning the electronics more that the speakers?
3) I've become a music snob and only the best will do?
4) They are not properly broken in?
5) The speakers really are cr@p?
After reading that 3 different reviewers use the performa's (f206 or f208) as their reference speakers, it's really hard for me to believe number 5 - that the speakers suck
I've been a severe critic of bad sound and a conosour of fine music my whole life so I hope number 1 isn't true:(
The sound from my main system is breathtakingly beautiful. It consists of a Metrum Hex Dac, Benchmark DAC2 Pre preamp, Bryston 3B Sst2 power amp, PMC 22 speakers flanked by 2 Rythmik F12 Subs. The DAC is very rich and analog sounding and the rest of the system is very transparent. Stunning sound. So I have very high standards to reference these speakers against. Maybe I am just expecting too much from the Revels? So number 3 might be somewhat true???
The F208 speakers where being fed by an arcam CD player and an arcam a39 integrated amp. Perhaps this can not compete with my home system? Is number 2 correct and I am really just auditioning the electronics?
Break in can make a big difference in speakers. Maybe they need hundreds of more hours through them? I need to check on number 4.
Or maybe they really are that bad and everyone who has reviewed them is a big fat liar?
Who has heard these and can make a comment???
They simply had no life. The strings that sparkled on other systems sounded like cardboard (ok, bad description but you get my point). They bass did not move me at all.
Was it because:
1) I wouldn't know good music if it slapped my in the face?
2) I was actually auditioning the electronics more that the speakers?
3) I've become a music snob and only the best will do?
4) They are not properly broken in?
5) The speakers really are cr@p?
After reading that 3 different reviewers use the performa's (f206 or f208) as their reference speakers, it's really hard for me to believe number 5 - that the speakers suck
I've been a severe critic of bad sound and a conosour of fine music my whole life so I hope number 1 isn't true:(
The sound from my main system is breathtakingly beautiful. It consists of a Metrum Hex Dac, Benchmark DAC2 Pre preamp, Bryston 3B Sst2 power amp, PMC 22 speakers flanked by 2 Rythmik F12 Subs. The DAC is very rich and analog sounding and the rest of the system is very transparent. Stunning sound. So I have very high standards to reference these speakers against. Maybe I am just expecting too much from the Revels? So number 3 might be somewhat true???
The F208 speakers where being fed by an arcam CD player and an arcam a39 integrated amp. Perhaps this can not compete with my home system? Is number 2 correct and I am really just auditioning the electronics?
Break in can make a big difference in speakers. Maybe they need hundreds of more hours through them? I need to check on number 4.
Or maybe they really are that bad and everyone who has reviewed them is a big fat liar?
Who has heard these and can make a comment???
- ...
- 79 posts total
- 79 posts total