Discussion in 'Subwoofers' started by eddiea, Aug 25, 2002.
I know Uncle Eric has heard one, has anyone else got any opinions of the new Rel Quake?
Having recently posted some comments about the Pro 50 subwoofer from M J Acoustics I received a request for question about using either the Quake or Pro 50. The chap had got 2 Kefs he was not happy with and wanted to upgrade. You may find my respponce of some interest.
Sorry to here that you have had such a problem with your setup. To be honest I thought long and hard about who to support when I bought my subs. What swayed me was the ethos behind those guys at MJA who seem to have been on our side of the fence for the most part. Anyway there really is only 2 manufacturers to choose from. They be REL and MJ Acoustics. Both are British companies and both specialise in Subwoofers. Not jack of all trades like the others perhaps thats why the Kefs dont perform.
The setting up of my 2 Pro 50s was a breeze. I used the High Level input to connect each sub on its own to the amplifier output on the speaker terminals. One for left and one for right. Then with only one turned on at a time I played a track I was familiar with and tweaked the controls until the sub was just coming into play. I did the same with the other channel. Once this was done you can turn them both on and they are just about right. Theres never been any hint of boom from the Pro50s so you will not have this to deal with. I also use the 2 Pro 50s with my cinema setup. In this case I use the Low level lead and take the output from the sub out on the Sony amp I have and feed it to the 2 subs. The great thing is that the High and Low level inputs can be connected at the same time and only the gain controls need to be altered. It really is a simple as that.
For the record I have seen and heard a Quake which has just been launched and yet to be reviewed. It is almost 1kg lighter than the Pro 50 and so I do not think as well made. It seems strange that they release a smaller and cheaper model only after the Pro 50 has been on the market. For my personal taste I dont think the Quake is as good. Certainly there is less connectivity as it only has one phono input and one high level input. Also the adjustments for the crossover are by switches and not the smooth infinitely adjustable control the pro 50 has.
Hope this helps and good luck."
Hope this is of some use.
I've got one and my initial feelings are positive, however I've had to 'cement' the thing with paving slabs and blu tak to get the best out of it - it's very light for a sub. It does go low - think of it as a bargain Q200 and you should be OK (unless you didn't like the Q200 !)
I've yet to set it up properly for movies so I will post back in a couple of days
Just had a quick look at the specs for the Quake - REL quote (in their naughty +/-6dB way) a lower frequency limit of 23Hz so, in real terms, there's probably not a lot going on below 30Hz which, arguably, is not low enough to pick up all the LFE effects when listening to movies.
Mind you, if REL are bad for quoting +/-6dB figures then what about MJ Acoustics - they quote a frequency range of 15Hz - 240Hz for the Pro 50 but don't quantify it at all! Come on MJ Acoustics - 15Hz from a 50 watt 8" sub in a small sealed cabinet - who are you trying to kid?
I was a little confused by the Quake used in the What Hi Fi 5 star review - the model pictured had a ground switch which the production Quake does not have - any ideas ? could this be a 'special' review model (wink wink)
The picture of the Quake on the Rel website shows a ground switch.
I've now got a Veneered Quake on demo in my listening room, and Common you are right, this one has no ground switch and the manual says it does not, but the one on their website does!
Anyway, I dont think it needs one, it certainly does not hum on slam or depth setting.
This Quake has an earth lift switch
How you getting on with your Rel Quake? I'm hoping to demo the REL and an MJA Pro 50 in the next couple of days.
I dont like it at all, its going back.
However some may like it because it is quite powerful for its size but IMO it's too fierce and uncontrolled, my listening room is quite small.
I've tried the MJA Pro 50 and IMO it is better sounding than the Quake but the paper cone put me off.
I am currently trying a Yamaha YST and I must say I quite like it and its half the price of the Rels and MJA, I got it for HT use but I am pleasantly surprised the way it sounds with music with just the LFE connected.
I think the Quake is great - it does require careful setting up though- i've just about got mine right now but a fraction to much on the volume and it can overpower. As I've mentioned before I have added about 40kg of paving slabs under and on top of the sub with blutak and it's transformed the sound, very tight with music and movies
My Quake is 6 years old, now coupled with my Denon AVR-3808a. Tested it with Casino Royale opening B&W sequence. Not too overpowering. Want to get a 2nd 1, just need to convince the wife. mentioned it the other day, then said she could get a new Prada handbag too.
Denon AVR-3808a, Sky+HD,Panasonic 42" Plasma Panel, Rel Quake (Sub)+ Monitor Audio Fronts & Backs = 6.1, Samsung BD-P1400
Do yourself a favour, sell the Quake you have and just buy one slightly larger far more capable subwoofer. The likes of BK XLS-200 will outperform an armful of Quakes.
Don't sell it! It's the best little sub money can buy. I've got two of them plus a REL Storm 5. Place the Quake in the corner of the room, and set the filter to the 41Hz slope setting (about 12 o'clock on the 'slope' dial). Then make sure you have set the Mode to '1'. (This engages the filter). Then turn the low-level volume up to about the 1st quarter. Adjust your processor sub sensitivity until you get the right level.
I pair mine with a REL Storm 5 which has a sub line-out phono socket.
Together they produce deep, powerful and seamless bass. And the Quake can go very low indeed.
The other thing about all the "Richard Lord" era REL subwoofers is that he never cut any corners in his products. They were certainly not the cheapest, but you got what you paid for -- nothing less. (I paid £1,000 for my REL Storm 5, and worth every penny.)
Fast-forward to today, and I see there is a huge following for the BK range of low-cost subs. This company evidently is eager to fill the void (but at a lower price point) after the ‘original' REL was bought out by its new owner.
Regarding BK, I will not blindly follow the herd, unlike many others here. My RELs have given me years of sterling service. RELs are flexible and fully tuneable – both for high-level (Neutrik connector) and low-level LFE input(s). Moreover, unlike BK, on the RELs these inputs can be mixed simultaneously. If you know how to position them, and tune them, RELs sound amazing. Or rather, the overall result sounds amazing. They don't advertise themselves. It's only when you turn them off and the bottom falls out of the sound that you realise – whether during music or films – what they have been contributing to the whole.
Reading through the many BK 'fanboy' threads I note they are prone to sudden overload / destruction if you inadvertently get some settings wrong, or if your Audissey eq boosts some frequencies by a bit too much. No such worry with RELs with their “Safe-set” excursion protection technology, and also heat-sensitive auto-shutdown protection (saved my subs on a few occasions, when they could otherwise have fatally overheated).
Not sure if this helps at all but every hi fi shop I have been to has said that althought the quake is a cracking little sub you will be better off upping the budget a bit a going for the T series or something, I would though rather suggest something bigger like the BK XLS200
f.w.i.w. I have 2 Quakes + Storm 5
One Quake is in the bedroom where it is perfectly powerful enough for my 'mini' system.
In the living room, the other Quake nicely supplements the Storm, and I tune the Quake to fill in any gaps in the bass spectrum -- depending on the music/film. i.e. sometimes I take the filter off to blend more of the mid-bass from the from the centre & surrounds (from my Onkyo/Integra PR-SC886 processor's bass-management redirect). Other times I put the Quake's low-pass filter on to just boost the LFE's 20-30Hz range.
Altogther I've got a combined 300 Watts RMS (600W peak-to-peak) of quality mosfet power spread over a larger combined cone area (i.e. two separate drivers) that I'd get with one 300W sub. Also 2 medium-sized cones with separate drivers give better control than one big one.
mine is in the attic after I spent £500 or so on a SVS PC12-NSD
now im going to have to go up there, dig it out and see if I can intergrate it along with my new sub
any suggestions on how best to use it with the svs
Total and utter cobblers on so many levels, it actually hard to know where to start, but I'll point this out first; All subs have their strengths and weaknesses. The interesting bit about running multiple subs is that the weakness of one sub will dilute the strength of the other, thus you get the worst of both, not the best. This is subwoofer 101 stuff BTW.
Nobody is questioning the build of REL subs, which always has been and remains of the highest order and some of their subs are superb examples of their types, but there are some points you should note in you headlong rush to promote the products you bought:
1. With the exception of the Monolith, all BKs have dual simultaneous high/low level inputs exactly as per REL. As indeed to MJ Acoustics subs too
2. All of the early Richard Lord era RELs (including all of the Q Series) were manufactured for REL by BK, so who's build quality are you commenting on? Indeed RL received more than a bit of design input from BK along the way. BTW, did you know that BK used to flog Quake drivers for under £30.
3. All BKs have Mosfet powered amps that they actually manufacture themselves. I'm not sure why you think Mosfet Watts are any better than any other sort though.
4. There are no RELs this side of a Stadium (and even then) or B1 that are remotely capable of even approaching the SPLs at the frequencies at which the Monolith can run into trouble. Certainly 2 Quakes plus a Storm (of any era) can't.
5. In a sealed sub, the driver is protected against over excursion by the air it has to compress in the cabinet. If the amplifier of a sealed sub is activating thermal protection in order to save itself, its under spec'd.
A lot of the members on here who own BK or SVS subs have previously owned, or worked with REL subs, so do not assume that they bought what they did from a position of ignorance. Indeed, a lot of the early SVS personal imports were REL owners taking the risk at their own personal expense to see what the fuss was about and sharing their experiences with others.
So please don't invoke terms like 'fanboy'. Not only is it offensive, but it is only factually correct when referring to someone who bangs on about the superiority of a product, without actually having tried the alternatives he puts down.
I have an SVS, after moving on from a Rel. The Rel was musically excellent, just didnt have enough grunt. So when I came to replace it I wanted oodles of grunt to make up for having to be careful watching films all these years, but I had to have a sub that would at least be a good as the old Rel was with music.
You have my choice below, and I spent over 12 months looking for the perfect replacement. I also originally had reservations on following the SVS heard, I'm glad I sorted my head out!!
Old sub above, new one below
Nothing wrong with REL, I love REL subs, but for the budget I had I couldnt have got a Rel anywhere near as good!
I stopped reading after that comment, did he have anything to contribute or was he just trolling?
He was blindly defending REL
Man I love this forum
I have to laugh when I look at your system. Firstly, you have to admit, your sub is not pretty (I could use stronger terminology). Secondly I see you've chosen Radius for your mains! Gotta laugh again there. No offence mate, but you definitely need a giant sub to make up for what your Radius (or should I say Radii) lack. And their positoning -- one of them next to the TV and muffled by the curtains!
Also, your room does not have anywhere near the size to realise deep bass. When I took my REL subs from my old place (similar size to your living room) to my new abode -- a with much bigger room, I was suddenly hearing bass going much deeper than before. The bigger the room, the more bass without changing anything else. In fact, there is now so much bass, that I don't need any more.
You simply cannot cover all bases with one sub. There's lots of info on this! Use Google.
I was referring to the Monolith.
So REL's 'Safe-Set' is a load of b**locks? I think not.
It's only happened twice hundreds of hours of use. But that saved the sub.
Whereas there are numerous reports of blown BKs.
You are making assumptions about the Storm 5. Which I bet you have never heard. It is quite different to Storm III (bigger dimensions, heavier, and more powerful amp. And excellent connectivity. Also has remote ctrl.
Please document the numerous blown BKs you have heard of.
As an aside: I counted five personal insults hurled at Moonfly from you in one post.
If you have a valid point to make then maybe you should try an approach that doesn't have TROLL written all over it.
Just a thought...
Laugh away, but at your own expense. I love the way youve judged a system off a few pictures, thats really a quality way to review for start .
First of the curtains dont usually cover the speakers, and I'd have thought that was a given. There is no muffled sound trust me. Their position is chosen due to the fact music is at least as important to me as movies, probably more. Also they perform better positioned further apart but I'll forgive this oversight as it wouldnt be common knowledge to non owners.
Next is room size. Are you seriously suggesting moving house with a bigger room is preferable and more cost effective than getting a better sub . Thats my room and that what I have to work with. If you doubt my sub gives decent bass then feel free to come listen, thats all I need to say about that. I really dont like real wood finishes either and there is nothing wrong with the way a matt black Ultra looks (although I wish I'd got the gloss black to match the speakers), that is simple a matter of personal taste and has nothing to do with sound. If you feel you must poke fun to try gain some credibility then I've heard Bebo is the place to 'hang out'. Put your money where your mouth is and post your own setup pics!, for me my sub looks fine and I wouldn't swap it for any real wood finished sub period
If you doubt my room can realise deep bass I suggest you take a gander at this thread. You also contradict yourself again as, SQ aside, REL subs are regularly left short of depth compared to the best equally priced competition and also distort more lower down. REL strive for musicality first and this shows lower down their range. That said, if you search my posting history you'll find many a thread where I defend Rel quite vigorously, and one or two members may even remember and confirm it.
My speakers where chosen as a style option, but in the thread I've already linked you can see how capable they are and you obviously arent speaking from experience with your views. A recent visit to mine by another forum member left him quite suprised on how good they were for a style option.
On the size, there are 3 main factors to look at when buying a sub, budget, style (size) and performance and you can only pick 2. If you want a sub within your budget that gives best performance for your budget then you have to give on size, I.E it wont be compact. Smaller either means more money or less performance and if your as educated on subs are you obviously think you are then you know this already. The size doesnt bother me, I can accommodate it, and I'll bet good money on it winning in a room filling contest against your REL in gradually increasing sizes of room. I simply chose best performance for my budget, which as it happens includes a budget a fair bit higher.
I chose a higher performing sub intentionally to make up any gap in speaker performance. I can accommodate a large sub but when I bought the speakers I couldnt accommodate larger ones. My choices are very deliberate, and anyone who knows anyting about all thing AV understands about system matching. I can now accommodate larger speakers and will be upgrading as soon as Ive made sure my children are fed, watered, and have somewhere secure to live first
You seem to have taken some offence at my comment, but your the one who claimed many people following a certain brand are blind, but in doing so started to blindly defend your chosen brand. You simply stated all of RELs good points as you see them and 'tried' to point out BK failings, and only that, hardly an impartial comparison. Not only this but your information suffered from continuity issues as Russ pointed out.
I think you need to take a good look at how you see things, and do a little homework before you come onto an established forum with some very knowledgeable members and start accusing people of being 'blind', or as in my case, mocking peoples choices when you openly seem to have no idea as to why these choices are made.
My wife says that it's not what it looks like or how big it is or how much it cost but how it performs that is the most important.
And yes, I was talking about subwoofers.
Separate names with a comma.