This is a good point. There is really not enough data at this point to make a conclusion based on some macro photographs and a few facebook posts. Would be nice to hear from Revel but my guess is we will not...I dunno... it's all a one-sided story at this point. Maybe if we heard the Revel side of the story it would reflect poorly elsewhere. Point is, we don't know the details. Don't think we ever will. And without more information, there's nothing left but speculation. I'm ready for the next topic.
Oh... for those who aren’t part of my Facebook group, you might want to join. (If you don’t “do” Facebook, you don’t have to announce it to us)
View attachment 83364View attachment 83365
According to former SB people Revel now use SB copies in their designs. Probably equally good though. Maybe its more to the story also.....
View attachment 83384
Yikes. That's a great way to get a massive lawsuit from a large company - talk about internal affairs.
I think Revel can withstand this onslaught, assuming they really did use genuine SB drivers initially. If you then outsource drivers that look pretty much identical to SB Acoustic ceramics, you should expect that might get out. Most of us smaller speaker "companies" are very up front about the heritage of our drivers.
Read post #489, The revel PerformaBe drivers are not "clones"Future test - no one better than Erin to test both Revel SB acoustics, Performa3, PerformaBe/Chinese clone, and for good measure, Infinity R263 woofers - that I really would like to see. Super shootout!
No no no! Can I send you an iron? Easy peezy..really! Nothing should get hurt. It's no worse than removing from the cabinet..They'd have to be de-soldered. I don't want to go through that
No no no! Can I send you an iron? Easy peezy..really!
Can I like it here, and be entered? Oops never mind I read the last sentence in the post. Awesome contest, and congrats to the winner!
Yep. I will never do Facebook. Not another penny to Zuckerberg. Ever.do we have to do it on Facebook?
So, with all respect, and absolutely no intent to flame or otherwise cause a problem - we forgo perhaps extremely interesting tests because the sponsor might be unhappy?I don't want to do that. Especially since the plan is for them to send me some more stuff to review
So, with all respect, and absolutely no intent to flame or otherwise cause a problem - we forgo perhaps extremely interesting tests because the sponsor might be unhappy?
I'm reminded of amir's earlier Schitt reviews. Eventually, Schitt took the negatives and learned from them. Product improved.
Could this not be the case with Revel?
You tests are the most comprehensive, thorough, and informative of any driver tests. Period. Why not give Revel the benefit of them?