REL 3D Audio with multiple subs

Rickover

Novice Member
Joined
Nov 19, 2020
Messages
3
Reaction score
1
Points
2
Age
44
Location
Philadelphia
Hello folks. I came across this article from REL's site: Adding 3D to Theater Part 1 | REL Acoustics

In it they say that you should connect a sub to your center channel and a sub to your surrounds using their high level connections. Does anyone have experience with this? Has anyone tried this using a subwoofer of a different brand that has speaker wire terminals?
 
I am building up to this, so very interested in replies. Currently use 2x S5sho but have my eye on 2x s510. As I have atmos too, I probably need a 5th.... 😳
what are your thoughts So,far?
 
Hello folks. I came across this article from REL's site: Adding 3D to Theater Part 1 | REL Acoustics

In it they say that you should connect a sub to your center channel and a sub to your surrounds using their high level connections. Does anyone have experience with this? Has anyone tried this using a subwoofer of a different brand that has speaker wire terminals?

I initially built my system around what some REL people call "the ultimate setup" which goes with the theory of all five channels being full range down to sub-bass frequency. So, they are all on high level connections.
Don't get me wrong it sounded great HOWEVER my AV receiver you then set to say no subwoofer. It then sends the LFE channel to the MAINS ONLY and not shared to all channels. That was issue number one. Issue number two was then I could not adjust the LFE level! Some films I watched were disappointing, would have normally turned up the LFE. Then, for example, watched Aquaman and it blew our heads off but couldn't turn the LFE down... As you will see in my other posts, I have gone back to the drawing board on how to connect up six subs.
 
It sounds like a very expensive and impractical way to get full range channels. Plus why would the surrounds only need a single sub between them, wouldn't that ruin the surround effect?

If you're running an AVR then just use the line level connection and redirect all bass to your subs below the various crossovers. And then also send the LFE to the subs.

@Christian1975, are all your subs independently located, or are any of them colocated?
Your best bet is likely a minidsp and an UMIK1. If you genuinely need six outputs then a 4x10HD would do you, otherwise a 2x4HD is the commonly preferred device.

If you have at least two pairs of subs that measure the same (in terms of response and phase) then you can run them on a single output with a splitter cable.
 
Hi Conrad, I'm still "developing the plan"... eventual layout now will be two low level connected Stratas in front corners, two lo level Storms in rear corners (hence why I'll be selling the Stadium). Then, for music only in DIrect mode, two Quakes "inbetween" the front main speakers on high level connection. Home cinema, I will filter the fronts so that the Quakes do nothing.
So none are colocated.
But hence my question here:
I'm going to set this all up (hope done sometime January) and then will report back at my original post where I asked for advice:
Thanks again for your help.
 
I saw that post. You'll be fine connecting two subs to a single AVR out, but you'll lose the ability to trim and time align them. Better to go one out to a minidsp and then all the subs hang off that.

I would use room sim to determine the best location for the subs. Near the mains isn't always the right place, and there's no need to pair a sub on each of the L and R channels. Bass isn't stereo so you can redirect the bass from the mains to the main subs and it should still sound cohesive.

The quakes aren't going to add that much to your Kefs, in all honesty. If you have the cables though, it doesn't hurt to try.

I would hook up the two quakes in the way you describe (high level), tune them to the rolloff of the kefs and see how it sounds. Without a mic it's hard to know what's going on. Calibrating six subs without measurement equipment is hard.

You could run Audyssey sweeps with each of the other four subs connected, one at a time, and compare the responses. If your subs that are in the front corners measure the same then you can EQ them as a single sub. Same for the back ones. If you do that you now have four "virtual" subs that you can use a minidsp to present back to the AVR as a single sub.
 
Thank you Conrad. Now I'm going to make myself unpopular (if I haven't already) on this site because...
I can hear the direction of bass. I can locate it by direction until about 30Hz. Then to be honest, I can only hear (from testing) to between 20 and 25Hz. Below that, yes I can feel it but not hear it, I know the subs are still doing it because I've had many other people in the house (before COVID) that could hear it! Younger people ;o)
Anyway, for me, for music, they must be stereo... and the high level music QUakes will be set up with my ears which is how I set up the high level ones I have currently. Of course, I will be unpopular again now sorry... I use a 5Hz frequency test thing. I hear the KEFs falling off at about 50Hz, even though KEF quote them to well below this. When I've used AUdyssey on them, it says well below this too. BUT, that probably means that my ears are sh*t at that level, so I tune the high level subs to give as flat a response as the bass falls off with the KEFs to my ears. Probably means loads of younger people come in the lounge with music on and think there is a horrible peak! But that doesn't matter as I'm setting the music up for me selfishly ;o)
But thanks for the great tips on the low level connected subs, we'll see how it goes and I will report back. Hopefully when it is all sorted, I can start selling some of the stuff below and paying back what I've spent haha!
You've worried me now about the Quakes but I'm hoping they will sound great, bought them and thanks from @AndreNewman on this site, they turn up today!
 
Now I'm going to make myself unpopular

Not at all :)

At the end of the day it has to work for you in your room. The approach that I usually recommend works for a wide range of people and situations and is often a very successful approach. In no way does that mean it's the only way or the "right" way. Just read any post about cables or power conditioners - there's no "right way". I'm still experimenting and learning myself. I've always held the opinion that, even with floorstanders, running them with subs for music was the right approach. I'm currently testing that view and it's not as clear cut as I thought. Maybe one day I'll even like high level!

It sounds like you're actually setting up two systems, one for music and one for AV. The hardest thing for you to solve is that you'll be running full range speakers and subs. It will likely mean that you'll have phase cancellations somewhere in the range.

What about running the quakes on high level with the Kefs as full range for stereo, but then for multichannel run the Kefs as small with the two strata and two storm connected using low/line level? You wouldn't even have to touch the quakes then, they won't be getting any signal if the Kefs are set to small.

That way you have a stereo pair for music and four more capable subs for HT. Plus, with them being distributed around the room that should help with the directionality issue and you might be able to put them in the ideal locations to give a better response. Even if you can hear stereo bass, I would guess that that's less of an issue with movie content where the stereo image isn't as strong.
 
Not at all :)

At the end of the day it has to work for you in your room. The approach that I usually recommend works for a wide range of people and situations and is often a very successful approach. In no way does that mean it's the only way or the "right" way. Just read any post about cables or power conditioners - there's no "right way". I'm still experimenting and learning myself. I've always held the opinion that, even with floorstanders, running them with subs for music was the right approach. I'm currently testing that view and it's not as clear cut as I thought. Maybe one day I'll even like high level!

It sounds like you're actually setting up two systems, one for music and one for AV. The hardest thing for you to solve is that you'll be running full range speakers and subs. It will likely mean that you'll have phase cancellations somewhere in the range.

What about running the quakes on high level with the Kefs as full range for stereo, but then for multichannel run the Kefs as small with the two strata and two storm connected using low/line level? You wouldn't even have to touch the quakes then, they won't be getting any signal if the Kefs are set to small.

That way you have a stereo pair for music and four more capable subs for HT. Plus, with them being distributed around the room that should help with the directionality issue and you might be able to put them in the ideal locations to give a better response. Even if you can hear stereo bass, I would guess that that's less of an issue with movie content where the stereo image isn't as strong.



Hiya, haha that's what I said about an hour ago is what I'm doing...

" Then, for music only in DIrect mode, two Quakes "inbetween" the front main speakers on high level connection. Home cinema, I will filter the fronts so that the Quakes do nothing. "

Great minds think alike ;o)

My entire new plan is based around the advice lots of people on this forum and at Audyssey and at THX etc all give... for home cinema, I'll set all to small and filter fronts probably at 80Hz, surrounds the same but then a pain as the centre has to filter at 100Hz (as it's pathetic!).

For me, a lot of it is a big compromise between music and home cinema. For me, "direct" on the amp is the only option for music! The Rotel power amp I have is great for that as well, as with two channels driven it's been tested to have power well above the rated (the rated power interestingly roughly equates to all five channels being driven - unlike AV amp manufacturers who lie to us!). It never runs out of power and I love the sound. Just need to get it repaired as it buzzes on three of the channels!

Anyway, thank you again... will report back as things develop ;o)
 
This week has been busy, I have put in a Rel 3D system in my cinema. I already had two S5sho, paired to L&R and that was the best upgrade I have ever done. Next lovical (🤣) step was 3D. So I bought two S510 units and put with the centre and the rear.
much much fiddling I think I am there.
yes, bass is directional despite what people say. Spend some time moving the sub SLIGHTLY and you can tell.
all subs set up one at a time following the Rel guides.
LFE is now in my seat with me, not just in front of the screen. A much more discernible ‘thump’ is felt when big things fall over.
very good indeed 😎
bloody expensive, but good.
 

Attachments

  • 72045D11-9A39-4237-B239-98559AB80F7D.jpeg
    72045D11-9A39-4237-B239-98559AB80F7D.jpeg
    375.1 KB · Views: 469
  • EFD20B43-DB76-4C39-973A-41D0992A506B.jpeg
    EFD20B43-DB76-4C39-973A-41D0992A506B.jpeg
    305.6 KB · Views: 677
Wow! Don't get me wrong, when I tried this theory, the cost of my components was nothing like this! One of the best scenes to demonstrate is in Toy Story when that big concrete tube falls of the truck! I had stereo front and rear subs and it rolls right across the room...
I find that Disney films seem to put the most low bass into the normal (not .1) channels... don't know why this is. Problem I had (as I said earlier) is that not enough other films seemed to do this. But hope that you get on well with it.
You're making me doubt my multi-sub setup now, so I'm thinking do I try and do it all high level again... arg... no Christian you must leave things alone ;o)
 
Ok, the obsession continues. I have had the 3D set up for some time and loved it. Everything is in the middle of the room and sounding great. It’s been an itch in my brain to stack them as an array. Rel say not to do this as they can’t be clamped together and the S5’s have larger drivers than the s10’s. So I did it anyway. S5 with an s10 on top of it, one stack on each side.
this is amazing! The soundstage is massively wide and new details being discovered in music playback as well as good movieness.
however….I miss my 3D overall sound and I want both! The thing I actually miss is the centre sub , there is a lot of information to be had there. My centre speaker is quite good, but a sub adds more. So now I am wondering what subs to use without breaking the bank. Money no object I would get two more s510’s to replace the S5’s in the stack and use the S5’s on centre and rear. But that’s another £4K! Or more… so what to use from the ‘old’ range? An s2 for centre? a HT1205 for the rears?
has anyone put a Rel on the atmos channel? If so, what size?
the obsession is real 🤣
59B94C30-FA71-490C-BC45-074B4526500B.jpeg
 
I have only just read about REL 3D and I am intrigued
so I thought I would give this a bump
has anyone other than @Lensman5d tried it?
 
I have only just read about REL 3D and I am intrigued
so I thought I would give this a bump
has anyone other than @Lensman5d tried it?

Feels more of marketing trick to sell more products with high level connection which are overpriced in first place (S-serie) at least if considering them purely for HT use. If the REL 3D would be something ground breaking you would think other manufacturers would copy it and do their own version version with sugary marketing claims? They aren´t for a reason. Clearly REL needs to stand out somehow doing things differently (the same with not opting for DSP even if 99% other manufacturers has it) cause they really aren´t taken serious in the home theater circles. REL has always been more toward 2ch audiophiles with those small units. The new HT/1510 is step in right direction and no doubt great product, but it won´t hold a candle for your 2S at nearly same price and at US market you can get better performing high quality sealed sub for 900$ less so they have hard competition. S/812 costs 2800£ / Carbon special 3500£ which are 12"+12" PR designs and adding multiple of those for 3D.. I hope you aren´t seriously considering this.
 
yeah it's a backwards step, sending full range to speakers and sub then using subs crossover. So amp is working harder, speakers attempting to play full range when they're not capable. No time alighment of speakers and sub.

Usual Rel old school stupidity when it comes to bass

If the Rel's had variable high pass that might work but you'd still have issues of time alignment.
 
Feels more of marketing trick to sell more products with high level connection which are overpriced in first place (S-serie) at least if considering them purely for HT use. If the REL 3D would be something ground breaking you would think other manufacturers would copy it and do their own version version with sugary marketing claims? They aren´t for a reason. Clearly REL needs to stand out somehow doing things differently (the same with not opting for DSP even if 99% other manufacturers has it) cause they really aren´t taken serious in the home theater circles. REL has always been more toward 2ch audiophiles with those small units. The new HT/1510 is step in right direction and no doubt great product, but it won´t hold a candle for your 2S at nearly same price and at US market you can get better performing high quality sealed sub for 900$ less so they have hard competition. S/812 costs 2800£ / Carbon special 3500£ which are 12"+12" PR designs and adding multiple of those for 3D.. I hope you aren´t seriously considering this.
Hi guys thanks for replies

I had a REL Storm back in the day,way longer than I care to remember,but that was when REL was probably king (see what I did there) as far as subwoofers were concerned
things have moved on and your comments are all valid

I agree, you have to be careful of marketing and snake oil, more so with YouTube influencers pushing products to generate commision
which was the main reason for my OP
has anyone actually heard a demo of REL3D?
you have to keep an open mind

I was an early adopter of Dolby Atmos when everyone was saying the same thing and even now thats not for everybody

so I am not seriously considering REL, but I would like to test the theory using a Arendal 1723 1S integrated with my Centre to make it full range with no LFE
if it doesnt work out the Arendal wont be wasted
 
A couple of points.

@Gasp3621, there's nothing that says the "Rel 3D" idea has to be performed with Rel subs. You could use any subs you liked. And in fact Lyngdorf do the same thing with their LFE vs sub out/stereo subs idea. So @Lesmor could do it with his Arendals, and I could do it with my PSAs.

The issue of time alignment is interesting.

Usually, you align all subs as one and then integrate that combined response with the mains. using the Rel 3D approach, you have n subs which you will time align strangely. If you time align them as a group (and this is very possible with either the sub distance in the AVR, the phase control on the sub, or some outboard processor like the minidsp) then you'll be affecting their integration with the mains. If you don't time align and leave their alignment at 0 (which would be aligned with their corresponding main as they're located together) them then the likelihood of getting a good LFE response is low.

When you time align the subs and have both LFE and redirected bass going to all subs, there's nothing to align between those two (LFE and redirected) as the phase responses are identical. When you only use one of the subs from the group for redirected at the same time as the LFE you might get odd results.

I guess if the Rel sub's time/phase alignment only affects the low level connection then it might work, but you'd need to do quite a lot of manual work. And as soon as the AVR delays the sub/LFE channel then that'll change everything.
 
One method would be if Rel had their own AVR or seperate bass managment box.
Something like a Digital /analogue Outlaw ICBM-1 but outputs for left bass, right bass, which are all time aligned, bass managed, and room EQ'd in their own 3D bass system.

With the issue with HDMI audio probably, master volume/control, multi-channel decoding, analogue-to-digital conversion then back to analogue, best just to have their own AVR/AV pre amp.

A Outlaw ICBM-1 high pass then onto six subs, inbetween pre and power doesn't sort out time alignment.
 
A couple of points.

@Gasp3621, there's nothing that says the "Rel 3D" idea has to be performed with Rel subs. You could use any subs you liked. And in fact Lyngdorf do the same thing with their LFE vs sub out/stereo subs idea. So @Lesmor could do it with his Arendals, and I could do it with my PSAs.

The issue of time alignment is interesting.

Usually, you align all subs as one and then integrate that combined response with the mains. using the Rel 3D approach, you have n subs which you will time align strangely. If you time align them as a group (and this is very possible with either the sub distance in the AVR, the phase control on the sub, or some outboard processor like the minidsp) then you'll be affecting their integration with the mains. If you don't time align and leave their alignment at 0 (which would be aligned with their corresponding main as they're located together) them then the likelihood of getting a good LFE response is low.

When you time align the subs and have both LFE and redirected bass going to all subs, there's nothing to align between those two (LFE and redirected) as the phase responses are identical. When you only use one of the subs from the group for redirected at the same time as the LFE you might get odd results.

I guess if the Rel sub's time/phase alignment only affects the low level connection then it might work, but you'd need to do quite a lot of manual work. And as soon as the AVR delays the sub/LFE channel then that'll change everything.

I can see the same issues with timing using Trinnovs redirected BM
i.e taking a speaker thats only good down to 120Hz and redirecting it to a more capable speaker which is then bass managed
whats your thoughts on this Trinnov feature?
 
Basically you want a combination of

Outlaw ICBM-1, analogue and digital inputs
Minidsp (for time alignment)
Room EQ
Multiple left, right subwoofer outputs, individually and array controlled in volume and timing, with "master bass" volume adjustment
Auto distance setup with mic
DSP for decoding

Rather than having a seperate box to do this, probably best to release their own "Rel" AV pre amp, with all the usual AV pre amp features but with three left sub, three right sub pre outs.
 

Attachments

  • outlaw.jpg
    outlaw.jpg
    87.7 KB · Views: 95
I can see the same issues with timing using Trinnovs redirected BM
i.e taking a speaker thats only good down to 120Hz and redirecting it to a more capable speaker which is then bass managed
whats your thoughts on this Trinnov feature?
The difference with the trinnov is that it aligns all speakers anyway. This is why it doesn't set crossovers (or one of the reasons). If you look at the phase alignment of the speakers before and after the optimiser, they're all pretty much in phase, which means you can align them how you like.

So it would probably work with a trinnov. Or at least that would have the best chance of working.

Instead of the redirected bass you might want to consider using the multiway speaker option as well, but that might be better on the trinnov thread.
 
Basically you want a combination of

Outlaw ICBM-1, analogue and digital inputs
Minidsp (for time alignment)
Room EQ
Multiple left, right subwoofer outputs, individually and array controlled in volume and timing, with "master bass" volume adjustment
Auto distance setup with mic
DSP for decoding

Rather than having a seperate box to do this, probably best to release their own "Rel" AV pre amp, with all the usual AV pre amp features but with three left sub, three right sub pre outs.
Routing the signal isn't the issue.
It's about the timing between redirected and mains, vs all subs for LFE and mains. If you affect one you'll likely throw the others out.

Let's say you have a 5.5 system. You align each sub with their respective main. The odds of LFE working well from all subs is now quite low.

I guess the exception might be if you align subs 1 and 2 with L and R, and then turn LFE off as well (or set subs to None) so that LFE is redirected to the mains, which will then play from the now full range L+R and their subs. But you're not using 3 subs for LFE now, which is a bit wasteful.

There's also an assumption that the subs next to L/R will give a good response both individually and when sent a mono signal to both at the same time. Weirdly you're kind of giving up the benefits of multiple subs, yet you have more subs!
 
has anyone other than @Lensman5d tried it?

Yes, I have (to a certain extent).

I reached a stage where I had a subwoofer in each corner and they were high level connection to FL, FR, SL, SR in a 5 floor speaker setup. No connection to the AVR for the LFE channel. So, the LFE was being sent by the AVR to FL/FR. And the centre speaker crossover information (set at 60Hz) was being sent to the FL/FR.

One of the biggest (practical) disadvantages here being that the LFE channel then becomes unadjustable for level or FR tweaks.

How did it sound? Well, there is some source material that makes more use than others of low frequencies in the floor domain (not LFE). Good example, Toy Story scene where the fuel tanker loses the big container off the trailer. It rolls across the room. Totally awesome and sounds no where near as good in a system with 80Hz crossovers and a mono subwoofer channel taking the low end slack. (To my ears).

Of course, the actual LFE channel is mono. Therefore, the potential advantages of this are restricted and apply more in some source films than others. A good majority of films only send LF to floor speakers in music. Which, I guess makes sense, since LFE is "low frequency effects"!

The appeal of the integration of a subwoofer into an AVR/AVPs systems and EQ was too great for me and I was sold - that's what I've done since. Although, I do still use two subs to reduce localisation and to make a "wave" or "field" of bass...

However, one thing I have a strong opinion about. I do put importance on the direction of the low frequencies. But, this doesn't need to be down to ~15Hz. I have repeatedly played between 80Hz and 60Hz for the crossovers of my FL, FR, SL, SR. With my current speakers/set-up, 60Hz gives me better movement of bass sounds but it loses some impact in the front soundstage (where the subs are better at this than the FL/FR speakers).

Next few years, planning a new lounge iteration. Decoration etc. And system setup. This will be around the idea of larger more capable speakers for the five floor. And crossovers will be lower. This is where, personally, I find a preference. I just need my LCR to be up to the job. But, each to his own. :)
 
Yes, I have (to a certain extent).

I reached a stage where I had a subwoofer in each corner and they were high level connection to FL, FR, SL, SR in a 5 floor speaker setup. No connection to the AVR for the LFE channel. So, the LFE was being sent by the AVR to FL/FR. And the centre speaker crossover information (set at 60Hz) was being sent to the FL/FR.

One of the biggest (practical) disadvantages here being that the LFE channel then becomes unadjustable for level or FR tweaks.

How did it sound? Well, there is some source material that makes more use than others of low frequencies in the floor domain (not LFE). Good example, Toy Story scene where the fuel tanker loses the big container off the trailer. It rolls across the room. Totally awesome and sounds no where near as good in a system with 80Hz crossovers and a mono subwoofer channel taking the low end slack. (To my ears).

Of course, the actual LFE channel is mono. Therefore, the potential advantages of this are restricted and apply more in some source films than others. A good majority of films only send LF to floor speakers in music. Which, I guess makes sense, since LFE is "low frequency effects"!

The appeal of the integration of a subwoofer into an AVR/AVPs systems and EQ was too great for me and I was sold - that's what I've done since. Although, I do still use two subs to reduce localisation and to make a "wave" or "field" of bass...

However, one thing I have a strong opinion about. I do put importance on the direction of the low frequencies. But, this doesn't need to be down to ~15Hz. I have repeatedly played between 80Hz and 60Hz for the crossovers of my FL, FR, SL, SR. With my current speakers/set-up, 60Hz gives me better movement of bass sounds but it loses some impact in the front soundstage (where the subs are better at this than the FL/FR speakers).

Next few years, planning a new lounge iteration. Decoration etc. And system setup. This will be around the idea of larger more capable speakers for the five floor. And crossovers will be lower. This is where, personally, I find a preference. I just need my LCR to be up to the job. But, each to his own. :)
Thanks for your insight its appreciated

I must confess to being brainwashed into having my crossovers at 80Hz and direct the rest to my subs where the bass from 15 speakers is all mixed together +LFE

yesterday I changed XO's on some speakers that should be good down to 60Hz, its early days but it does seem to sound better

once my new more capable L/R speakers arrive I am going to experiment a bit more
 
I think for me the problem I have with believing REL is their insistence that their filter is the best thing since sliced bread because it's analogue and the delay as a result is only 8ms (4ms for reference subs like G25).
They're quick to cite that DSP based subs are much slower than 8ms and that's why REL is so much better to integrate....
.....but from figures I've found and SVS has a 6ms delay, Arendal at 8ms, and the Dynaudio 18S/Sub6 is only 2.5ms! So, errr, it looks very much like REL's T and S series subs are actually slower!!

I would be very interested to know if REL's HT series is different from 8ms or not?

And all said and done this makes me want a pair of Dynaudio 18S now!
 

The latest video from AVForums

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