FINALLY - Revel Performa Series 3

[Feanor]

This is just another case of personal preference. RGA clearly prefers a different approach to sound.

That's true about RGA. I'd love to hear the Audio Notes someday just to know what he's fussing about.

One thing's for sure, the AN speakers are an eccentric designs that defy conventional design logic. They might work but it's not because they follow current SOTA practice. By contrast, the Revels are straight out of the Floyd Toole text book.

[Ajani]

That's true about RGA. I'd love to hear the Audio Notes someday just to know what he's fussing about.

One thing's for sure, the AN speakers are an eccentric designs that defy conventional design logic. They might work but it's not because they follow current SOTA practice. By contrast, the Revels are straight out of the Floyd Toole text book.

Yep. I really hope to get hear an all Audio Note System one day - perhaps I'll fall crazy in love with the sound. But AN is a totally different approach to design and sound than Revel.

Also, I'm not surprised that RGA doesn't like the Revel sound. Let's keep in mind that the reason for Audio Note's existence was that Peter Snell died and his replacement at Snell (Kevin Voecks - now Revel) took Snell speakers in a completely different direction. The desire of Peter Q (Audio Note) was to continue (what he believes to be) the spirit of Peter Snell's vision. So we're talking about two completely different design philosophies (and possibly even some rivalry). If Peter Q had been impressed by Kevin Voecks work then I doubt Audio Note would exist.

So as you rightfully said; we're comparing eccentric old school designs to modern SOTA designs. Which will sound better is up to the person doing the auditioning.

I really would love to do a shootout between a Revel/Mark Levinson System and all Audio Note system.

[RGA]

Yep. I really hope to get hear an all Audio Note System one day - perhaps I'll fall crazy in love with the sound. But AN is a totally different approach to design and sound than Revel.

Also, I'm not surprised that RGA doesn't like the Revel sound. Let's keep in mind that the reason for Audio Note's existence was that Peter Snell died and his replacement at Snell (Kevin Voecks - now Revel) took Snell speakers in a completely different direction. The desire of Peter Q (Audio Note) was to continue (what he believes to be) the spirit of Peter Snell's vision. So we're talking about two completely different design philosophies (and possibly even some rivalry). If Peter Q had been impressed by Kevin Voecks work then I doubt Audio Note would exist.

So as you rightfully said; we're comparing eccentric old school designs to modern SOTA designs. Which will sound better is up to the person doing the auditioning.

I really would love to do a shootout between a Revel/Mark Levinson System and all Audio Note system.

It's no secret that Peter didn't like what Voecks did to Snell's speakers - Peter was a Big dealer at the time and was so displeased he sent them all back to Snell (under voecks) and bought all of Snell's cabinets drivers and parts for the previous model).

I've heard a few speakers from Voecks and don't recall liking any of them. Snell went under under his watch and so did another company if memory serves. Peter Snell put Snell on the map - without him - it was mediocre drivel. They got press for some reason - The Snell B-Minor got a class B rating and the Snell A got class A - I think after I auditioned them and Commerical electronics demoed them and we hated them - that was about the time I stopped buying Stereophile. They had no clue I felt - but Dudley wasn't on board and I didn't know that class ratings were the decision of one guy - a guy that obviously liked the speakers that the dealer hated that I hated and the it seems everyone hated since they went belly up!

To me it's all style and using cool drivers and big box syndrome - and it just sounds so bad. Text book design maybe but it's pretty bad when I'd rather read the text book than listen to music on them.

To me the telling factor is always the hard sell on the technology - I always look sideways at something that is selling me with words - lots of words to describe the "tweeter" or the woofer cone material. Or selling me on spec sheets and measurements - if it had quality sound then who the hell cares what the tweeter is or the woofer.

And that's why a boring old rectangle box that was designed by L.L. Beranek (who every textbook on loudspeakers cites heavily) with two relatively basic drivers (air cooled no less), illustrates that pair matching and driver matching trumps diamonds and the like. (a reason they're better suited to dentist drills than loudspeaker tweeters).

I love the hobby but to me it is pretty telling when a boring old two way box with nothing overtly fantastical drivers running off old obsolete SE tube amplifiers and CD players closer in design to the ones that originally hit the market (though they sound nothing alike than goodness), can so easily best systems that advertise the hell out of their space age gimmickry that never sounds as good. It's actually absurd IMO.

Take the massive expensive JM Labs Focal Utopia - is it Focal or JM Labs - whatever they can't seem to decide on what the hell their name is. This is a statement uber speaker - and I am impressed - I was impressed at CES and the dealer that sells it - it's impressive.

The tweeter is amazing - it is open detailed not bright - it is in a word an amazing sounding tweeter. It also has amazing bass - it will blow you into next week - it is fast, clean and mostly free of itself. In every hi-fi way it's a hi-fi speaker - and to a lesser degree so is Revel, So is Paradigm so is B&W among others. And yet whatever magic there is in music has been gutted and minced away.

And it's not noticeable UNTIL you hear something better. There was a time not that long ago when I was ready to buy Bryston/B&W and or PMC. And I would have been in the Revel/JM Labs camp too. There is nothing wrong with the sound until you hear something so much better that you notice what it is about it that isn't doing it right.

And that is what AN does in my view. It is a major step up. So are others but they're even harder to bloody audition - Find a Trenner and Freidl dealer some place - lot's of luck.

The SS and on paper freak accurate speakers to a fault guy says it all General Asylum: REVIEW: Audio Note Level 3 system Other by KevinF

[frenchmon]

That's true about RGA. I'd love to hear the Audio Notes someday just to know what he's fussing about.

One thing's for sure, the AN speakers are an eccentric designs that defy conventional design logic. They might work but it's not because they follow current SOTA practice. By contrast, the Revels are straight out of the Floyd Toole text book.

Speaking of Audio Note....I've often wondered if their is a connection to Blue Note/Gold Note. Their speakers look a lot alike. XS-96

[Ajani]

Speaking of Audio Note....I've often wondered if their is a connection to Blue Note/Gold Note. Their speakers look a lot alike.

To be honest, I think that speaker looks more like Harbeth than Audio Note. Though all of them have the similarity of being wider than deep and requiring a low stand - which is a very old school design.

[frenchmon]

To be honest, I think that speaker looks more like Harbeth than Audio Note. Though all of them have the similarity of being wider than deep and requiring a low stand - which is a very old school design.

Yeah...I wonder if Epos had that same idea in mind when the made the Epic and now the Elan. I must admit...that new Elan stand mount looks very cool on those strands.