Revel Performa M126Be Bookshelf Speaker Review

S

shadyJ

Speaker of the House
Staff member
Revel had a good loudspeaker platform in the Performa3 line. In fact, the basic design was so good that Revel decided to see what happens when that design is pushed to the highest possible performance by using some of the highest-end components available such as air-core inductors, polyfilm capacitors, anodized aluminum woofers, and even a Beryllium tweeter. Today, we review their beefed up bookshelf speaker, the Performa Be M126Be. These are not inexpensive. At $4k a pair they are the latest bookshelf speaker, loaded with cutting-edge technology from one of the most admired engineering teams in the loudspeaker industry. The question is do they live up to these very high expectations? Read our full review to see how much these premium components add to an already solid design.


READ: Revel Performa M126Be Bookshelf Speaker Review
 
Irvrobinson

Irvrobinson

Audioholic Spartan
Nice review. Well done. I guess you liked them. ;)

It is also nice to see that Samsung is still letting Revel be Revel. Some of the other Harman brands seem to be losing weight.
 
B

Beave

Audioholic Chief
Questions:
1. What did you use for your 'on-axis' measurements? The tweeter axis?
2. Do you know what Harman used as the on-axis for their measurements?

Soundstage/NRC recently measured these.

NRC measurements of Revel M126Be

They used a measuring position of 7" above the tweeter dome, per instructions from Harman.

At two meters, that's just a few degrees above the tweeter, but I did find it odd that Harman recommended that as their measuring axis.

And final question: Do you still have access to Philharmonic BMRs? I'd love to read of a comparison of the two side-by-side.
 
Last edited:
S

shadyJ

Speaker of the House
Staff member
Questions:
1. What did you use for your 'on-axis' measurements? The tweeter axis?
2. Do you know what Harman used as the on-axis for their measurements?

Soundstage/NRC recently measured these.

NRC measurements of Revel M126Be

They used a measuring position of 7" above the tweeter dome, per instructions from Harman.

At two meters, that's just a few degrees above the tweeter, but I did find it odd that Harman recommended that as their measuring axis.

And final question: Do you still have access to Philharmonic BMRs? I'd love to read of a comparison of the two side-by-side.
For the 'Spin-O-Rama' graph, I followed Revel's recommended reference axis of 7" above tweeter level. Those were measured at 2 meters. The 7" height did seem a little odd, but it seemed to be where Revel felt that most people would listen relative to the speaker position. That is indeed the reference axis for the graph that they provided, and one reason I did followed their recommendation that was to see how closely I could replicate Revel's measurements.

The waterfall response graphs, on the other hand, were done at 1 meters with mic level with the tweeter. I might have made mention of the differences in measuring conditions between the graphs in the review except the responses were so much alike that it didn't really matter. 7" at 2 meters is significantly less than a 10 degree change in angle. It isn't going to change the sound of the speaker much.

I don't have access to the BMRs. I wish I did- a comparison between these two would be interesting. I think they would sound a lot alike, except that the BMRs have significantly deeper bass extension. Both these and the BMRs are outstanding speakers.
 
B

Beave

Audioholic Chief
Thanks. I agree that the 7" issue wouldn't affect sound or measurements much, but I just found it curious. Most speakers define on-axis as the tweeter axis, or sometimes between the tweeter and midrange. But I think Revel might be right that many people would listen to these with their ears just above the tweeter.

(Now I'm wondering how tall the Revel Performa3 speaker stands are, but I'm too lazy to look it up!)

As for the BMRs, I figured they'd have a little more bass extension than these, and also a little wider dispersion in the mids, but overall I'd guess they'd be more alike than unalike, as you say.
 
ryanosaur

ryanosaur

Audioholic Overlord
After hearing the Salk SS9.5 with its Be Tweeter, I am super intrigued by them. I love my experience with the Raals, but between the two, I can't help but think the potential in the Be is a little greater... especially compared to the Raal 64-10. Perhaps the 70-20 has a better performance level that would equal what I heard from the 9.5....
:) Hard to say.
 
I

ichigo

Full Audioholic
After hearing the Salk SS9.5 with its Be Tweeter, I am super intrigued by them. I love my experience with the Raals, but between the two, I can't help but think the potential in the Be is a little greater... especially compared to the Raal 64-10. Perhaps the 70-20 has a better performance level that would equal what I heard from the 9.5....
:) Hard to say.
My opinion is if you want to integrate the tweeter right, you have to match directivity at the crossover region, otherwise it doesn't really matter how expensive of a tweeter you use, it won't sound like a coherent point source. Revel is doing it correctly with their custom waveguide, a lot of companies throw expensive drivers into a plain box but it doesn't sound coherent because they are effectively skipping the expensive R&D needed for a custom cabinet & waveguide.
 
BoredSysAdmin

BoredSysAdmin

Audioholic Slumlord
I don't know much about Be Twitter, but the Accuton midrange is something else. Simply jaw-dropping.
 
D

D Murphy

Full Audioholic
After hearing the Salk SS9.5 with its Be Tweeter, I am super intrigued by them. I love my experience with the Raals, but between the two, I can't help but think the potential in the Be is a little greater... especially compared to the Raal 64-10. Perhaps the 70-20 has a better performance level that would equal what I heard from the 9.5....
:) Hard to say.
I'm obviously a fan of Be tweeters--I've done several designs for Jim using the SB Acoustics version, including the 9.5. It measures flat as a pancake, can be crossed very low even without a wave guide, and has super low distortion. it would be my tweeter of choice in a 2-way. I haven't heard the 9.5 in stereo, but my single prototype is clear as a bell. On the downside, its horizontal dispersion isn't great at higher frequencies. You can see that if you compare the Spinorama plots for the Revel and the BMR. Of course, part of that difference is due to the Revel's wave guide. Speaking of which, I'm still not convinced wave guides are the best way to go. They almost inevitably narrow dispersion and often cause response irregularities on axis. These usually are smoothed out across the listening window, and that's certainly an important characteristic. However, those plots don't tell you how the brain processes the differences in arrival times and frequency response of direct vs. reflected sound. My experience has been that significant peaks and dips in the direct sound are audible even if later arrivals are smoother.

My best guess is that if you compared stereo pairs of the BMR and Revel, you would notice the latter's on-axis peak at 5 kHz, particularly if they were toed in (I don't remember what Harman's advice is on positioning). I'm also pretty sure there wouldn't be much agreement about which speaker sounded better. A modest peak in that region can add sparkle on some music, and wouldn't be noticed on other program material. The other difference that should show up is in sound staging. I'm sure some people would appreciate the very wide and deep sound stage created by the BMR's broader dispersion, particularly on non-studio recordings in good venues. Others might prefer what I suspect is a more focused sound from the Revel. I could turn conjecture into a more informed opinion if Harman would ship me off a pair of Revels free of charge. I'll get my contact info out to them immediately.
 
Last edited:
Pogre

Pogre

Audioholic Slumlord
Very handsome speakers too. Just looking at them makes me want a pair.
 
Irvrobinson

Irvrobinson

Audioholic Spartan
My best guess is that if you compared stereo pairs of the BMR and Revel, you would notice the latter's on-axis peak at 5 kHz, particularly if they were towed in (I don't remember what Harman's advice is on positioning).
Revel recommends toe-in towards the primary listening position.

Revel_RevelperformaBE_Owner's_Manual_EN.pdf

They recommend toe-in on the Ultima2 line also. In my current room the Salon2s (which use a similar waveguide) measured best above 2KHz with some toe-in, but I'm not looking down the waveguides' throats, so to speak. Of course, the crossovers are different between the two speakers, and it looks like the Be tweeter is substantially different. (The Ultima2 tweeter was introduced in 2007, so perhaps they've made improvements since, or cost cutting.)
 
Last edited:
A

Ashish

Audiophyte
Hi, would you recommend upgrading to the M126Be from the Revel Concerta 2 M16?
 
D

D Murphy

Full Audioholic
After hearing the Salk SS9.5 with its Be Tweeter, I am super intrigued by them. I love my experience with the Raals, but between the two, I can't help but think the potential in the Be is a little greater... especially compared to the Raal 64-10. Perhaps the 70-20 has a better performance level that would equal what I heard from the 9.5....
:) Hard to say.
Where did you hear the 9.5's? At CAS in July?
 
S

shadyJ

Speaker of the House
Staff member
Hi, would you recommend upgrading to the M126Be from the Revel Concerta 2 M16?
The Concerto2 M16s are fine speakers. The M126Bes are better, of course, but they cost for times as much- so are they four times better? I I were you I would listen to them to make that determination before pulling the trigger on that purchase.
 
ryanosaur

ryanosaur

Audioholic Overlord
Where did you hear the 9.5's? At CAS in July?
Yes. I posted a thread of the show here: CAS 2019
It was a cool experience as a first timer going to such an event.
As soon as I walked in to Jim's room, though, I knew that sound: felt right at home! ;) Don't worry, though... not looking to upgrade! :D (At least, not until I can build the upgrade better than your speakers! I'm giving myself 10 years to get there!!!)
 
D

D Murphy

Full Audioholic
Yes. I posted a thread of the show here: CAS 2019
It was a cool experience as a first timer going to such an event.
As soon as I walked in to Jim's room, though, I knew that sound: felt right at home! ;) Don't worry, though... not looking to upgrade! :D (At least, not until I can build the upgrade better than your speakers! I'm giving myself 10 years to get there!!!)
Wow--not sure how I missed that. It must not have been on the Loudspeaker Forum. Anyhow, it was a great read. Thanks for all that effort. I'm glad you liked the 9.5's. Those are all great drivers.
 
ryanosaur

ryanosaur

Audioholic Overlord
Wow--not sure how I missed that. It must not have been on the Loudspeaker Forum. Anyhow, it was a great read. Thanks for all that effort. I'm glad you liked the 9.5's. Those are all great drivers.
I posted it in General AV, because I was expecting to have some fun with some of the Amps, Network Streamers, and *gulp Cables... Alas, it was a little too much overload for me at that point! So I focused on what I knew better about. ;)

Now Dennis, you are too humble! Don't misunderstand. It is appreciated and refreshing. There are more than a few speakers you've got your fingerprints on... and there are a lot of people that couldn't take those same drivers and make them sound half as nice!

Always a pleasure, Dennis. I hope all is going well. ;) I'm eager to get on with my AA+ build... probably another month still. Expect a couple questions in your in-box soon!
Best,
R
 
S

shadyJ

Speaker of the House
Staff member
I'm obviously a fan of Be tweeters--I've done several designs for Jim using the SB Acoustics version, including the 9.5. It measures flat as a pancake, can be crossed very low even without a wave guide, and has super low distortion. it would be my tweeter of choice in a 2-way. I haven't heard the 9.5 in stereo, but my single prototype is clear as a bell. On the downside, its horizontal dispersion isn't great at higher frequencies. You can see that if you compare the Spinorama plots for the Revel and the BMR. Of course, part of that difference is due to the Revel's wave guide. Speaking of which, I'm still not convinced wave guides are the best way to go. They almost inevitably narrow dispersion and often cause response irregularities on axis. These usually are smoothed out across the listening window, and that's certainly an important characteristic. However, those plots don't tell you how the brain processes the differences in arrival times and frequency response of direct vs. reflected sound. My experience has been that significant peaks and dips in the direct sound are audible even if later arrivals are smoother.

My best guess is that if you compared stereo pairs of the BMR and Revel, you would notice the latter's on-axis peak at 5 kHz, particularly if they were toed in (I don't remember what Harman's advice is on positioning). I'm also pretty sure there wouldn't be much agreement about which speaker sounded better. A modest peak in that region can add sparkle on some music, and wouldn't be noticed on other program material. The other difference that should show up is in sound staging. I'm sure some people would appreciate the very wide and deep sound stage created by the BMR's broader dispersion, particularly on non-studio recordings in good venues. Others might prefer what I suspect is a more focused from the Revel. I could turn conjecture into a more informed opinion if Harman would ship me off a pair of Revels free of charge. I'll get my contact info out to them immediately.
Just a couple remarks: not many dome tweeters maintain wide dispersion at high frequencies. That isn't a big deal to me since few people can hear well above 15 kHz nor is there much content up there. Revel actually claims their waveguide broadens dispersion in high treble, but I am guessing that is more due to that acoustic lens thingy. Regarding the on-axis response vs off-axis angles, while the on-axis response on this M126Be is not perfect (it's still pretty good), you could always listen at an off-axis angle which does have a very flat response.
 
I

ichigo

Full Audioholic
The M105 is still Revel's best measuring speaker from what I can see, but doesn't stand as well alone since it's bass extension is much worse, and below average compared many of the new speakers coming out in it's price class.
 
D

D Murphy

Full Audioholic
Just a couple remarks: not many dome tweeters maintain wide dispersion at high frequencies. That isn't a big deal to me since few people can hear well above 15 kHz nor is there much content up there. Revel actually claims their waveguide broadens dispersion in high treble, but I am guessing that is more due to that acoustic lens thingy. Regarding the on-axis response vs off-axis angles, while the on-axis response on this M126Be is not perfect (it's still pretty good),you could always listen at an off-axis angle which does have a very flat response.

While I certainly agree that dispersion patterns above 15 kHz won't matter much to us non-teenagers, the BMR's broader dispersion is evident from around 3 kHz on up based on your lateral response curves. Also, I didn't mean to claim that the Be's dispersion was narrower than other 1" domes--only that it's not as broad as the BMR's tweeter. Finally, as Irvrobinson noted above, Revel recommends that the M12's be toed in toward the listening position. With that placement, it's quite possible that the 5 kHz peak will be audible. Or not. I obviously would have to hear them, preferably next to the BMR's.
 

Latest posts

newsletter

  • RBHsound.com
  • BlueJeansCable.com
  • SVS Sound Subwoofers
  • Experience the Martin Logan Montis
Top