Revel Concerta2 M16 Black

Product Information

Some PEQ are vey sharp so they probably better left out in favor of room EQ and the tolerance between the different speakers across the production may render the second EQ useless but I just made it for the fun of it.

At 2.1 kHz the crossover frequency is a little lower than you’d normally expect from a 2-way standmount. I suspect this is down to the waveguide providing a better match with the directivity of the mid/bass driver, blending the sound for a one-source effect – a little like the technique employed by Amphion speakers, if I remember correctly.

Cons

The waveguide acts as physical protection for the tweeter, but its real purpose is to ensure that at the crossover frequency, the off-axis dispersion of the tweeter is similar to that of the off-axis dispersion of the bass/midrange driver. Listen further to material like this and the ‘fingerprint’ of the Revel’s aluminium drivers does make itself felt in some aspects of the tonality. Compared to my resident Acoustic Energy AE1 Classics that really do have a ‘metal’ signature to their performance, it is benign but it is there nonetheless. Listening to the Revel side by side with the Spendor A1 - still one of the most affordable speakers to offer a genuinely ‘Monitor’ performance from 100Hz and up - and the Revel can’t match the effortlessly ‘right’ sense of tonal realism that the Spendor can. How much this is going to bother you is somewhat subjective - I could happily live with it and I suspect that most people could too. The bundled remote can also control the CDS50 CD player and streamer. The remote’s buttons light up and, given slightly darker silver over slightly lighter silver text on the amps’ selection buttons, I found myself keeping that glow-in-the-dark handset close. Arcam CDS50 I spent many evenings listening to the seductive M16s. I often find that a darkened listening space enhances the realism of venue acoustics and transients. So a speaker with the M16’s qualities is perfect for these occasions. Listening to the Concerta2 M16s is a journey of exploration: the more you listen, the more you discover. I put many hours on this pair, and the rewards are significant over time. I found the sound of the Revel Performa3 M106 difficult to describe. No matter what music I played, I could hear no shortcomings—no deviation from neutrality throughout the speaker's extended frequency range, and every recording revealed the review samples to be detailed, dynamic performers with superb soundstaging. So I thought I'd focus on a few aspects of the M106 that particularly impressed me.

The ESS DAC doesn’t upset the overall presentation save for a little bit of tightening up in the lows and low mids and perhaps a more defined leading edge in the upper registers. Applying the filters didn’t alter things that much for us. The SA20’s default is Apodizing – A compromise between phase, frequency response and ringing. Its main advantage is that it removes most of the ringing that has been introduced upstream in the recording process at recording and mastering. Oddly, we found that in most cases, we preferred the Linear phase, Slow Roll Off mode as it seemed to cut down on the processed-ness that some of the other settings possessed. Additionally, thanks to the tweeter’s dispersion, taking the Revel Concerta2 M16 out of the corner of the room pays off and allows them to show what an impressively wide and open sound stage they can produce. The upshot of this is that toeing in appears more to do with personal taste than necessity here. SA10, CDS50, Revel Concerta2 M16 Review Note that the above has 1 degree spatial resolution so much, much more detailed image than what you see even coming out of anechoic chamnbers. Disclaimer: Before I get into this review, and at the risk of stating the obvious, I have a million conflicts of interest here. I am a long time friend and professional colleague with a number of Harman employees (parent company of Revel). I have praised their design and research philosophy countless times. And our company, Madrona Digital is a Harman dealer (although we hardly sell any stereo gear). So read all the bias you want into the review but please don't go posting to complain. Just read the measurements if you are worried and if you don't trust that, just move along. Above data is for a reflection-free room. We can however simulated what happens in a typical room using Predicted in-room response which is right on the money with some bass boost:

If you want to have a taste of what all of Harman research and engineering is about, get a pair of M16s and listen. They are delightful "bookshelf" speakers showing what can be done when you combine serious research with a decent budget for pats and manufacturing. Over 1000 points around the speaker were measured (from 20 to 20 kHz) which resulted in well under 1% error in identification of the sound field across full frequency response of 20 to 20 kHz. Final database of measurements and data is 1.4 Gigabytes in size. As you see below, I also made a scan using 500 points and results were identical, pointing to a well behaved soundfield that is easily to synthesize.

I first started testing the M16 on my desktop in near-field listening, comparing it to cheap Pioneer SB-22 speaker (levels matched, one speaker at a time). The Pioneer just wasn't in the same class. It sounded tinny and small compared to Revel. Pushing the M16 hard, I could get the small woofer to distort. Since this is not a near field monitor, I decided to test it in my 2-channel system as I have tested other hi-fi speakers. Here is what that looks like: Then there’s the authority of the presentation, helped by the Revel’s ability to dig deeply in the bass. These speakers may just be 37cm tall, but close your eyes and you’d swear you were listening to decently sized floorstanders. In parts of the audio industry, there is a belief that all components from wires to electronics to loudspeakers need to “break in.” Out of the box, it is assumed that they will not be performing at their best. Proponents vehemently deny that this process has anything to do with adaptation, writing extensively about changes in performance that they claim are easily audible in several aspects of device performance. Yet, the author is not aware of any controlled test in which any consequential audible differences were found, even in loudspeakers, where there would seem to be some opportunities for material changes. A few years ago, to satisfy a determined marketing person, the research group performed a test using samples of a loudspeaker that was claimed to benefit from “breaking in.” Measurements before and after the recommended break-in showed no differences in frequency response, except a very tiny change around 30–40 Hz in the one area where break-in effects could be expected: woofer compliance. Careful listening tests revealed no audible differences. None of this was surprising to the engineering staff. It is not clear whether the marketing person was satisfied by the finding. To all of us, this has to be very reassuring because it means that the performance of loudspeakers is stable, except for the known small change in woofer compliance caused by exercising the suspension and the deterioration—breaking down—of foam surrounds and some diaphragm materials with time, moisture, and atmospheric pollutants.In terms of music reproduction, I find myself listening more than ever for the “little” things. Low-level resolving power, dynamic gradients, shadings, timbral color and contrasts. Listening to a lot of vocals and solo piano has always helped me recalibrate and nail down what I’m hearing. Tonal neutrality and presence are important to me but small deviations are not disqualifying. But I am quite sensitive to treble over-reach, and find dry, hyper-detailed systems intriguing but inauthentic compared with the concert-going experience. For me, true musicality conveys the cozy warmth of a room with a fireplace not the icy cold of an igloo. I am a huge fan of using MTM center speakers upright for stereo applications because I prefer the visual aesthetics of the taller, slimmer cabinets and symmetrical driver arrangements. Truth to be told, I tried, I really tried to give the M16s the middle of the road award so that I would not be accused of bias. But at the end, I just could not. These are wonderful sounding speakers. It is what "high-end" sound reproduction is about in smaller budget. The combination of measurements and subjective listening impressions left me to no room but to give them my highest award (in the context of a small, lower cost speaker).