Do you think the $16,000 S7t would outperform the $5500 Revel F208 in blind testing? I wouldn't bet on it. We're talking two speakers with basically idential F10 and listener preference scores. Additionally, the 1W/1m spl (not 2.83V) is essentially the same and the swept volume of the woofers is probably the same. So where's the added value in the S7t?
The Perlisten probably has the edge - the directivity is more uniform and the frequency response is smoother. Additionally it probably has better thermal compression properties. But even if it does perform better, how much better would it be? Would blind listeners say one speaker is worth 3x the other? I seriously doubt it.
Hi
Interesting argument.
....
A personal observation, a hunch, perhaps data can back it up , too lazy to dig for it. It seems to me that whenever advices for speakers are asked for , we see mentioned, in this order: Genelec, Neuman, Revel/Kef... then ... "Other"... Louspeakers with serious performances are often ignored by us, yours very truly included. I admit preferring active to passive, but...
Those speakers, the Revel F208 and the Philharmonic Audio BMR are stellar performer, they would own their own against almost anything, passive or active, in a medium size room. It is true they require amplification but, the price of transparent, very high SINAD amplification is today low with 200 wpc amplifier around $500 or lower, and the better AVR are able to provide 100 clean watts per channel. These speakers represent a very, very compelling choice for many, I included.
I don't think the BMR Philharmonic Tower have been reviewed here at ASR.
Their smaller brother was reviewed by
@hardisj, if (speculative but based on pedigree) the designer being the same) the tower have that kind of performance, they must be strongly considered at $3700.oo. They are on my short list for if-ever-I-feel-the-need-to-upgrade...
Peace