The RSL Sub Sat System Speaker System Delivers Big Sound with a Small Footprint

gene

gene

Audioholics Master Chief
Administrator
RSL, a boutique loudspeaker manufacturer out of California, has a patented system that promises to deliver real world punch out of small-sized speakers with an astonishingly low price point. We've seen many such systems (and promises) fail miserably. We took the RSL CG24/CG4 subwoofer-satellite system with the Speedwoofer 10 providing the bottom end for an extended review. Were these RSL speakers a major disappointment or a super surprise?

Check out our in depth review and YouTube video for all the details.


Read: RSL CG4,CG24 and Speedwoofer 10 Loudspeaker Review
 
Last edited:
anamorphic96

anamorphic96

Audioholic General
This review does not surprise me at all. I have very fond memories spending time in a couple of RSL stores. All of the RSL speakers where impressive. Especially the CG series. Which is what these speakers seem to be based on. I hope I get a chance to hear these some day.
 
A

AJ71Ranchero

Audiophyte
Price aside, I would like to see a head to head with this system and the svs prime sat system with either the PB1000 or SB2000 subwoofer. Being as both the CG4 and the Prime Sat are the same basic layout/design it would be interesting to see the pro's and con's of either set up. Thanks, AJ
 
BoredSysAdmin

BoredSysAdmin

Audioholic Slumlord
It think closest competition would come from NHT's Absolute Zero with PB1000 sub
 
A

AJ71Ranchero

Audiophyte
But the problem there is going to a bigger woofer, different speaker cab design (sealed/ported) and a different brand sub than what the manufacturer offers. Maybe do a Abs Zero with the nht B-12d vs RSL CG4 and the sub they offer vs SVS Prime Sat SB2000???
 
JPyman325

JPyman325

Enthusiast
I just ordered my system and can't wait and will post a complete review
 
KEW

KEW

Audioholic Overlord
RSL has a product comparison page on their website. It is quite refreshing in that it does nothing to hype their own product or to deminish their competition. They use Sound & Vision for their info (but are not selective about it).
In other words, if you are looking for a quality HT system with high WAF, you should start here:
https://rslspeakers.com/product-compare/

Not all are so compact as the RSL, but they are all based on bookshelf speakers.

In the measurement section, Gene wrote:
The CG4 measured a nominal 8 ohms just like RSL states, never dropping below 7 ohms (6.4 ohm min per IEC requirement). However you can see the box is a little too small for the driver with the asymmetric peaks between the saddle point. To RSL's credit, didn't hear any ill effects in bass. However, in my opinion, a speaker this small should be sealed since a port can't do a whole lot in this scenario.
Did either of you try sealing the port to see if it affected the sound quality? That would be interesting to establish since the port is designed to reduce resonance rather than be a source of added sound (as I understand it).
 
JPyman325

JPyman325

Enthusiast
One the big reason I chose to start with RSL is based on the reviews and an interview I heard on HT Guys with the Roger & Joe this is a passion. They also have no problem with competition. I narrowed my search down to Fluance, SVS Prime & then add RSL after hearing the interview and seeing the review here. Fluance couldn't answer my questions very well but offered me an additional discount. I had a good call with SVS felt like I was being up sold more than what I wanted. When I called RSL, Joe (he and his father Roger own the company) answered and he reminded me of my old buddy at the local HT BM store that I would hang out at and would give me advice based on my needs and desires. He also tried to down sell me (at the end I didn't let him ;-) even though he knew my budget. When I told him the other systems I was looking at (and unlike all others) he told me I was in a win-win situation as all of these system where great and would do a great job in my theater. I chose RSL because of that and the pre-sales customer service Joe has given.

I ended up going with the CG24 for LCR, CG4 for Rear and the speed woofer - it was $135 more than 4 CG4's. At the end of the day if they don't impress me over my current 12 year old Mirage Omni-Stats then I can return for a full refund so there is no cost to me unless I decide to keep them (which will probably happen)

I will play with the port once I receive the speakers next week. Merry Christmas to me.
 
JPyman325

JPyman325

Enthusiast
So my biggest issue is that I set up the CG4's in the bedroom with my mirage sub to help the break in for the rears and my wife won't let me take them back she is enjoying the music so much. The previous speakers in there were Mission 771 bookshelf with a rear port which sounded really nice but no where near these
 
theJman

theJman

Audioholic Chief
So my biggest issue is that I set up the CG4's in the bedroom with my mirage sub to help the break in for the rears and my wife won't let me take them back she is enjoying the music so much. The previous speakers in there were Mission 771 bookshelf with a rear port which sounded really nice but no where near these
Somehow I'm not surprised by your wife's reaction - the RSL's are some very impressive speakers.
 
KEW

KEW

Audioholic Overlord
So my biggest issue is that I set up the CG4's in the bedroom with my mirage sub to help the break in for the rears and my wife won't let me take them back she is enjoying the music so much. The previous speakers in there were Mission 771 bookshelf with a rear port which sounded really nice but no where near these
That's not a problem, just tell her Merry Christmas and order another round! Having great sound in your bedroom is not an issue and she can hardly complain about your audio expenditure if she wants the speakers you ordered. Be thankful you have a wife who "gets it"!
Now quit whining and start playing with the (or should I say "her") ports!!!:D
 
JPyman325

JPyman325

Enthusiast
I'm not complaining but you always have to have your pro's and con's. The funny thing is she usually doesn't get the audio stuff (a little hard of hearing I think).

I'm truly enjoying playing with the ports ;-)

Lastly, the sub rocks it is rocking the whole house!
 
ski2xblack

ski2xblack

Audioholic Field Marshall
In the measurement section, Gene wrote:

The CG4 measured a nominal 8 ohms just like RSL states, never dropping below 7 ohms (6.4 ohm min per IEC requirement). However you can see the box is a little too small for the driver with the asymmetric peaks between the saddle point. To RSL's credit, didn't hear any ill effects in bass. However, in my opinion, a speaker this small should be sealed since a port can't do a whole lot in this scenario.

Did either of you try sealing the port to see if it affected the sound quality? That would be interesting to establish since the port is designed to reduce resonance rather than be a source of added sound (as I understand it).
That impedance curve looks a bit like that of a speaker with an aperiodic port that needs a bit more stuffing. Those rsl cabs are interesting. They remind me somewhat of Atlantic Technology's HPAS cabs. Although AT's goal was extension, both have unconventional enclosures that feature some sort of novel hybrid/truncated/reverse taper transmission lines with side chamber, and from the looks of it they must damp the active driver a bit differently than by-the-numbers bass reflex. I would actually have been surprised to see the classic symmetric impedance peaks Gene expected.
 
TLS Guy

TLS Guy

Seriously, I have no life.
That impedance curve looks a bit like that of a speaker with an aperiodic port that needs a bit more stuffing. Those rsl cabs are interesting. They remind me somewhat of Atlantic Technology's HPAS cabs. Although AT's goal was extension, both have unconventional enclosures that feature some sort of novel hybrid/truncated/reverse taper transmission lines with side chamber, and from the looks of it they must damp the active driver a bit differently than by-the-numbers bass reflex. I would actually have been surprised to see the classic symmetric impedance peaks Gene expected.
I have been looking at this. It is not a reverse taper TL. If it were the start of the pipe would be widest. It is more like a horn that is too short. There is an expansion box, throat, and another expansion, just like a horn would have. Then there is that port.

The impedance curve looks like a that of an incorrectly tuned QB4 box. The 3 db point is around 100 Hz and the roll off is fourth order like a ported box would.

I'm not at all convinced that internal contributes anything but bracing. I would like to see the comparison of the same drivers and crossover in a properly deigned QB4 box. My feeling is it would be superior.

The speaker sounds good because the crossover seems spot on and the drivers are perfectly integrated.

As for the bass loading, it seems a mish mash of a too short TL with expansion and taper of a horn and then an attempt as mass loading with a port. Pending further information and data from the company, I'm not impressed with this loading arrangement.

The Speedwoofer on the other hand at first glance looks more promising. Although F3 is fairly high, it is rolling off second order, like a TL would.

I would like to see more measurements of that, and details.

I have tried various configurations over the years to try and reduce the real estate of TLs, including mass loading them with ABRs. The only ones any good were labyrinths. I suspect if that GL4 where a labyrinth it would be much more promising as far as the low end is concerned.
The price would be higher as there would be a lot more internals. However I think the 3db point would be lower and roll off second order, with more low bass, and low Q to boot.
 
TLS Guy

TLS Guy

Seriously, I have no life.
That impedance curve looks a bit like that of a speaker with an aperiodic port that needs a bit more stuffing. Those rsl cabs are interesting. They remind me somewhat of Atlantic Technology's HPAS cabs. Although AT's goal was extension, both have unconventional enclosures that feature some sort of novel hybrid/truncated/reverse taper transmission lines with side chamber, and from the looks of it they must damp the active driver a bit differently than by-the-numbers bass reflex. I would actually have been surprised to see the classic symmetric impedance peaks Gene expected.
I have been looking at this. It is not a reverse taper TL. If it were the start of the pipe would be widest. It is more like a horn that is too short. There is an expansion box, throat, and another expansion, just like a horn would have. Then there is that port.

The impedance curve looks like a that of an incorrectly tuned QB4 box. The 3 db point is around 100 Hz and the roll off is fourth order like a ported box would.

I'm not at all convinced that internal contributes anything but bracing. I would like to see the comparison of the same drivers and crossover in a properly deigned QB4 box. My feeling is it would be superior.

The speaker sounds good because the crossover seems spot on and the drivers are perfectly integrated.

As for the bass loading, it seems a mish mash of a too short TL with expansion and taper of a horn and then an attempt as mass loading with a port. Pending further information and data from the company, I'm not impressed with this loading arrangement.

The Speedwoofer on the other hand at first glance looks more promising. Although F3 is fairly high, it is rolling off second order, like a TL would.

I would like to see more measurements of that, and details.

I have tried various configurations over the years to try and reduce the real estate of TLs, including mass loading them with ABRs. The only ones any good were labyrinths. I suspect if that GL4 where a labyrinth it would be much more promising as far as the low end is concerned.
The price would be higher as there would be a lot more internals. However I think the 3db point would be lower and roll off second order, with more low bass, and low Q to boot.
 
JPyman325

JPyman325

Enthusiast
I would suggest giving RSL a call and talk to either Joe or his dad Roger who designed the speakers. These are one the best speakers I have heard in a long time even off-axis listening as in my bedroom with bookshelf. One of the most impressive is how good these speakers sound at each volume level. My old Def Tech's (1990's) needed power and volume to really come a live. My Mirage's also had their sweet spot. I have not found a volume that these don't sound good but loud is always better.

The speed woofer is amazing a good tight bass for music and with enough power to feel the movie throughout my house. My HT is upstairs above the garage and my wife feels the vibration in our bedroom - other side of the house downstairs and our house is not small (nor large unless you live in New York).
 
JPyman325

JPyman325

Enthusiast
An update on this amazing systems sub woofer. Last night while watching fireworks with our neighbors we were making sure that neither of could hear our outdoor speakers. He says the only thing he can hear is the neighbor on our other side son playing his new bass. Well its actually my sub watching movies. My HT is upstairs over the garage and there is probably 50 feet between our house and theres -
 
newsletter

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