New Rel Quake, any good?

Waterfalls show the same graphs but in the 3rd dimension of time, so you can see how consistent the results are over a series of sweeps rather than just one, but ive not got into that part of it just yet.

Blind leading the blind or is it the deaf leading the deaf :D

I thought the time dimension in waterfalls was the ringing, reverb at certain frequencies and is shown in REW after just one sweep, if you press the calculate button that is.
 
T
Read it again - at no point does Ilkka mention an LFE crossover, simply the max/min points achievable.

Russell

Wrong. He clearly refers to "crossover settings". Moreover, in the photo he clearly has the jack plugged into the LFE phono input (3rd phono input down), and then he says:-

>> "The maximum crossover setting doesn't go much higher than 60 Hz, . . . The lowest setting offers extremely low ~25 Hz crossover"<<
he says.

On my Storm 5, there is NO max nor min "crossover setting" on the LFE input in his photograph.

so what on earth has he been measuring? Or has he mixed-up the results with those of another sub?
 

Attachments

  • 031.jpg
    031.jpg
    105.3 KB · Views: 554
Last edited:
Blind leading the blind or is it the deaf leading the deaf :D

I thought the time dimension in waterfalls was the ringing, reverb at certain frequencies and is shown in REW after just one sweep, if you press the calculate button that is.
I looked at them but I thought they were being calculated from from a series of sweeps. Ive only had a quick read about them so to be honest your probably right there mate :suicide::D. It makes sense if I think about it, as my sweeps all use different settings, doh! lol.

Ive concentrated all my efforts on the main spl graphs TBH, Ive got a good grip of them, I hope :rotfl:. I can however admit were I get something a bit wrong :smashin:. Time for Russ to jump in on that one I think :clap:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Martin,

When you finally get to hear a truly deep, low distortion sub capable of high SPLs, accurately tuned to a room let me know - it'll be a profound experience for you. Of course that would involve actually bothering to make the effort.

Until then, I'll leave you to it.:rolleyes:

Russell
 
For some there is no help.:suicide:

Deflect the spotlight away from the poor performance of your subs however you want. It's your loss and the rest of the world will continuing moving onward and upward without you.

Russell

Without descending into attempted personal insults, please can you answer the question rationally?

I'll ask you again, since you claim to know so much, what does he mean by "crossover setting"? (if it's not what most human beings would read it to be?)
. . .
 
If the Storm V has a the 4 mode 'switch' (albeit now 'digital') that the Storm III had, then (IIRC) two of those four modes apply the crossover to the low level inputs as well as the high level so you have Mode 1 as 0deg phase + high level, Mode 2 would be 0deg phase + high + low level, etc, etc. Modes 3 & 4 were the same with the phase inverted 180deg.

I would be surprised if the the famed input flexibility of REL took step backwards when moving from the III to the V. That would leave those unable to use the high level inputs with no way of low passing a line level stereo input. Given that Ilkka has clearly measured a max/min crossover response and its available on all the other RELs, it would appear that this is not so.

Russell
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I didn't know there is a new Rel Quake.

A few years ago I bought a Rel Quake and I never want any other than my Quake. It produces a clear bass sound and goes very low.

The name Quake is very well chosen, had to make something clear to my neighbors once, and produced a small earthQUAKE :D
 
A big thanks to Russ for providing me with a seriously entertaining read before bed. It's hard to beat a good ol' 'OWNED' thread on the web.

:thumbsup:
 
If the Storm V has a the 4 mode 'switch' (albeit now 'digital') that the Storm III had, then (IIRC) two of those four modes apply the crossover to the low level inputs as well as the high level so you have Mode 1 as 0deg phase + high level, Mode 2 would be 0deg phase + high + low level, etc, etc. Modes 3 & 4 were the same with the phase inverted 180deg.

I would be surprised if the the famed input flexibility of REL took step backwards when moving from the III to the V. That would leave those unable to use the high level inputs with no way of low passing a line level stereo input. Given that Ilkka has clearly measured a max/min crossover response and its available on all the other RELs, it would appear that this is not so.

Russell

The storm V is totally different to the older Q-series. It does not have the 'mode' functions you refer to. (I'm surprised you did not know this.)
Some would say it is less flexible as a result.

(I can of course change the phase on the LFE 0/180)

But the lack of filtered LFE doesn't bother me, as what goes into it has already been low-pass filtered from the Onkyo (or the Denon BM).

This then still leaves unanswered my question above.
 
Last edited:
Welcome to the Storm 5, a medium-to-a-bit-bigger sized upright sub that stands above the carpet on rubber plinth feet, (spikes supplied) with a characteristic down-firing drive unit. What's cunning is the new control system. First developed in concept for the brand's cheaper range, the remote system allows the user to make the adjustments to the device from a seated position. This is a big help. Crouched next to your sub, twiddling levels up and down or adjusting crossover points, it isn't until you get back on the sofa that you can really appreciate what you have achieved or not.

The enclosure is smart and well made, with an attractive brushed alloy panel bearing a simple blue LED display that gives a slice of 'ooh' factor. The display's brightness can be adjusted to taste, using the only dial on the product, a twist and push control for scrolling through menus. This is one of the few controls not available on the 12-button remote control. The remote control is a tough little spud; with IR pouring out of it like a halogen Maglite.

On the sub's back panel you get Neutrik Speakon plugholes for both unbalanced or balanced speaker level input. Four phono sockets serve the LFE input and daisy chain a full range signal feed input.

As with other RELs, you can connect both speaker and line level at the same time, and each gets its own level control buttons on the remote. A single crossover point is chosen for both with other buttons. You can flip phase and adjust a 'Slam-Depth' control with another pair. The latter is an 80Hz EQ, going from a 9dB cut to a 9dB boost at 80Hz, which serves to lift impact at 9dB/80Hz or lift perceived deep bass with an 80Hz cut. Best of all, as you experiment with settings good for barnstorming actioners, or talky rom-coms, you get four memory settings in the remote control that you can enter for instant recall.
(My bold)

It would appear you change the crossover settings on the 12 button remote, which your manual will presumably confirm :D
 
Last edited:
I have checked the Storm V manual and indeed it's input options are restricted compared to the earlier models. Odd.

In answer to the question (which still won't explain the below average performance of the Storm); As the input sensitivity of the low level input is in the 50mV region and the high level in the 500mV region, it wouldn't be too hard to generate sufficient voltage from a line output of a mixer to generate a signal in the high level input. Remember, the high level input has an input impedance in the order of 10s of kOhms and so draws practically no current - it simply 'reads' the voltage across the terminals much like a voltmeter.

This doesn't tally with the published photo as you are keen to point out, but the photos aren't published as documentary evidence of all the configurations utilized in the testing of each sub. If it's that important to you, use the member search facility on this forum to find the man and ask him directly via PM. I'm sure he would be pleased to point out why any number of excuses won't help the Storm to outperform any number of cheaper alternatives, which is the only real issue under discussion here.

Russell
 
To both Russell and IronGiant,

I've done a bit more investigating.

Although it's not something I'd ever need, two of the phono inputs are 'Line Left' and 'Line Right'.
These are for stereo pre-out connectivity and are routed through the same filter that handles the Hi-Level.

So he could have used one of these.

(But then why didn't he use the unfiltered LFE in his graphs, marked as 'bypass' like he's done with other subs? Or he clearly doesn't understand how to operate this sub properly.)

Regarding the 'scary' hamonic distortion graph mentioned before, since it goes exponentially off-scale long before it gets down to 20Hz, to me he must have been doing something wrong -- like overdriven input etc.

Using the following basic rule:

input*gain=output

So if he hadn't set the gain high enough to start with (and the factory default is a v low '30'), then the input voltage he would have needed to apply would have been be incredibly high in order to reach the amp's max output level for his test.

In my use of the sub, I set the gain to around '60' to get the oomph that I want (regardless of the input). With a 30 setting you could feed whatever you like to the input, and you'd never get the richness & dynamics that I get when the gain is around 60.

The other thing is if you read from the manual, there are many paragraphs on how to position this sub in order to corectly 'pressurise' the room. Move it a couple of feet in the wrong location, and you can lose all the real-sub bass (i.e. 15-20Hz).

Also, since REL's spec makes it absolutely clear that 16Hz is realisable, then that off-scale graph posted earlier must have been caused by something going seriously wrong with his test procedure. Input saturation/overload/clipping, cone flapping, safe-set triggered etc. And certainly there is no room to 'pressurise' at his chosen outdoor testing location -- an important point which the manual goes into great length about. Moreover, it's not just a function of it's sealed cabinet design (as you implied earlier). Rather, 'Zero-Q loading' also involves active intelligent bass circuitry inside to tune the output in realtime.


Anyway, see this:

Quote from review ". . . the REL Storm 5 drops effortlessly past where the PV1 stops . . ."

http://www.homecinemachoice.com/files/reviews/HCC/092_HCC_118.pdf


FWIW, in some cases the cone is hardly moving, but you can feel deep bass all the way across the room. It's uncanny how it manages it, but that's what happens in reality.

In short, there are so many variables at play here (and so much inconsistancy between this test and the ones for other subs) and so little he's stated in the way of test assumptions and nothing about testing methodology! Moreover, if I would have handed in something like this to my engineering professor at Uni, he'd have certainly put a line through the whole thing and required me to re-run and fully document the aforesaid test.
 
Last edited:
Wow! It really actually drops deeper than a PV-1? I take back everything I've said.;)

On a side note; one minute you have classically trained ears, the next you have an engineering professor, so how did your professor let you escape Uni with a), no grasp of the fundamentals of physics and b) such a closed mind?

It's like this; Small box + small driver + low power = Low SPL + limited extension + high distortion.

No manufacturer, regardless of their claims, has yet been able to rewrite the laws of physics and quoting their manual, sales literature or magazine reviews will prove otherwise. Open you mind, step away from the keyboard and go hear some of this stuff. Until you do, only one person is losing out.

Russell
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Wow! It really actually drops deeper than a PV-1? I take back everything I've said.;)

On a side note; one minute you have classically trained ears, the next you have an engineering professor, so how did your professor let you escape Uni with a), so little basic knowledge of bass propogation and b) such a closed mind?

Russell

I haven't had classically trained ears for "one minute". I've had them since I got Grade 8 trumpet aged 15.

But anyway, nice to see you are resorting to typical diversion tactics. Again. :nono:
 
It's like this; Small box + small driver + low power = Low SPL + limited extension + high distortion.

Russell

Yes, "physics". Exactly.

And since you linked to review comparison of the XLS-200.

Here goes:-

Model: XLS200-DF MK2
Dimensions: 340D X 355H x 290W = 35,003,000
Power: 275W RMS
Cone: 10”
Weight: 17.5kg

Model: Storm V
345 x 520 x 370 = 66,378,000
Power: 200W RMS
Cone: 10”
Weight 30kg

Looking at the above, you'll see the Storm V has about twice the volume of the XLS, and about twice the mass (less resonance etc.), and the SAME cone size, and only about 30% RMS power difference.

Go figure. ;)
 
This is an interesting read :D
 
Told you this is becoming interesting haha
 
Yes, "physics". Exactly.

And since you linked to review comparison of the XLS-200.

Here goes:-

Model: XLS200-DF MK2
Dimensions: 340D X 355H x 290W = 35,003,000
Power: 275W RMS
Cone: 10”
Weight: 17.5kg

Model: Storm V
345 x 520 x 370 = 66,378,000
Power: 200W RMS
Cone: 10”
Weight 30kg

Looking at the above, you'll see the Storm V has about twice the volume of the XLS, and about twice the mass (less resonance etc.), and the SAME cone size, and only about 30% RMS power difference.

Go figure. ;)
And you forgot less than 1/3 the price, but higher performing.

Russell
 
Amusing as this thread is .. can we stop the petty bickering :)

By all means keep to topic, but keep the snyde remarks to yourselves please.

Thankyou
 
It's long gone past amusing Paul and certainly past useful.

Russell


It's certainly not useful when you, Russell, the self-proclaimed "Hardware Reviewer" have steadfastly been unable to explain many of the valid points I've put to you. Instead you have preferred to write puerile remarks that add no value whatsoever to the discussion.
 
Russle isnt self proclaimed AVF Hardware Reviewer. He was asked to be a hardware reviewer because of his techincal knowledge on speakers and subwoofers.
 
Let's all take chill pill, a short walk around the block and try again shall we...

For my clarification, does the Storm V have more than one set of phono inputs, one that a crossover can be set for and one that is always un-filtered?

Dave
 

The latest video from AVForums

Is 4K Blu-ray Worth It?
Subscribe to our YouTube channel
Back
Top Bottom