REL S/510 Subwoofer Review & Comments

Conrad.

Well-known Member
I disagree, even if I had the funds, there’s no reason to pay more money for something that doesn’t perform at its price point.

It’s about looking at what’s on offer, and evaluating whether the price is justified. In this case, as we have seen, a similarly performing Bk alternative can be had for 1400 less. It appears in this case you are paying for appearance and badge.
And handles. Don’t forget the handles.
 

milano j

Active Member
I disagree, even if I had the funds, there’s no reason to pay more money for something that doesn’t perform at its price point.

It’s about looking at what’s on offer, and evaluating whether the price is justified. In this case, as we have seen, a similarly performing Bk alternative can be had for 1400 less. It appears in this case you are paying for appearance and badge.
As l said buy what you can afford with a Rel your buying into build quality and aesthetics,you only get what you pay for in life ...its not like they dont perform 9/10 says the review go figure
 

Conrad.

Well-known Member
I think you're missing the point though. You refer back to the performance being 9/10 but everyone here is saying you can get equal or better performance for significantly better value.

If the look meets your needs and that's what you prioritise then great. I think a lot of others here value performance over the style, or would prefer the look of something like a wood finish BK with the same performance for a large saving.
 

Coulson

Well-known Member
In my experience the reason people who think any product is overpriced is because it's out of their budget...
There is some element of truth to that.
but then again the only way really to find out is via purchasing that product you think is overpriced...only then can you make a proper judgement
This is where you go wrong. It is possible to rationally rate value for money based on the value proposition. Subjectively you can like the style and manufacturer reputation. Nothing wrong with that. But objectively this product does not have a compelling value proposition when compared to competing products up and down the price scale.
 

hestepare

Member
Well, objectively, subjective aspects are part of the value proposition of a thing. Money wouldn't be objectively valuable unless it was subjectively perceived as such.
 

Coulson

Well-known Member
Well, objectively, subjective aspects are part of the value proposition of a thing.
True, and...
Money wouldn't be objectively valuable unless it was subjectively perceived as such.
so what?...lol

By this I mean you've just stated the obvious. Factoring in what you've said makes no difference to the value proposition. If someone values form over function and value for money, then they might go for the REL. If not they probably won't. You could posit the argument that value for money is relative, but that's just another obvious statement which doesn't change the basic formula. Effectively all you are saying is that components of that formula are variables and not static.
 
Last edited:

Liammonty123

Well-known Member
As l said buy what you can afford with a Rel your buying into build quality and aesthetics,you only get what you pay for in life ...its not like they dont perform 9/10 says the review go figure
Missed the point. I didn’t say they didn’t perform, they likely perform great like the review says, but if I had the money to spend, I still wouldn’t when similar performance can be had for much less. The only real reason I can see to spend this much is if aesthetics are of the upmost importance, and you have money to throw!
 

hestepare

Member
By this I mean you've just stated the obvious. Factoring in what you've said makes no difference to the value proposition. If someone values form over function and value for money, then they might go for the REL. If not they probably won't. You could posit the argument that value for money is relative, but that's just another obvious statement which doesn't change the basic formula. Effectively all you are saying is that components of that formula are variables and not static.
It's this statement I take issue with:

objectively this product does not have a compelling value proposition when compared to competing products up and down the price scale
To me, who am not in the market for a new sub at the moment, the REL has an immensely more compelling value proposition even when compared to competing products up and down the price scale, because they look good and I believe that they are decent products. The value of good looks and pedigree make them compelling to me.

Point is, you can't say that there is an objective value to a thing, as the thing will have other properties to it that the subject will find more or less compelling. Money has an agreed-upon value (i.e. we agree that a pound is a pound), but the value of a pound depends on someone's current economical situation, wants, needs and so on.

It comes down to the objective-subjective distinction, which I find is not particularly useful in questions of value. "But what does 'objective' and 'subjective' really mean?" is of course the correct response and many books have been written on the basis of that question. If 'objective' is the state of reality when it isn't being observed, I'm siding with those who say that what is by definition unknowable, we can't know. And if we only can know what we can know, we can't avoid putting our perceptions, biases, values, ethics and so on into the mix, making objectivity at least somewhat subjective.

But maybe this is a little off-topic…
 

Coulson

Well-known Member
It's this statement I take issue with:



To me, who am not in the market for a new sub at the moment, the REL has an immensely more compelling value proposition even when compared to competing products up and down the price scale, because they look good and I believe that they are decent products. The value of good looks and pedigree make them compelling to me.

Point is, you can't say that there is an objective value to a thing, as the thing will have other properties to it that the subject will find more or less compelling. Money has an agreed-upon value (i.e. we agree that a pound is a pound), but the value of a pound depends on someone's current economical situation, wants, needs and so on.

It comes down to the objective-subjective distinction, which I find is not particularly useful in questions of value. "But what does 'objective' and 'subjective' really mean?" is of course the correct response and many books have been written on the basis of that question. If 'objective' is the state of reality when it isn't being observed, I'm siding with those who say that what is by definition unknowable, we can't know. And if we only can know what we can know, we can't avoid putting our perceptions, biases, values, ethics and so on into the mix, making objectivity at least somewhat subjective.

But maybe this is a little off-topic…
Ahhh. I haven't read your comments yet but as soon as I re-read my initial statement, I realised that my analysis of your statements were correct, but by that same analysis, my initial statement was not. By my own argument, people have different value markers and ratios which of course is obvious. So I will still argue that "rationally speaking" the value proposition is a poor one, but that the value proposition is not always rational.

*edit*
OK just read your comments and you've basically taken the scenic route ;)
Thinking about it some more, the notion of rationality in this context is arguable but I would stand by it.

This is fun but I agree we should probably get back on topic. Which is of course why BK subs are better than RELs :p
 
Last edited:

hestepare

Member
Ahhh. I haven't read your comments yet but as soon as I re-read my initial statement, I realised that my analysis of your statements were correct, but by that same analysis, my initial statement was not. By my own argument, people have different value markers and ratios which of course is obvious. So I will still argue that "rationally speaking" the value proposition is a poor one, but that the value proposition is not always rational.

*edit*
OK just read your comments and you've basically taken the scenic route ;)
Thinking about it some more, the notion of rationality in this context is arguable but I would stand by it.

This is fun but I agree we should probably get back on topic. Which is of course why BK subs are better than RELs :p
I always prefer the scenic route :p

I'd go as far as to say that a value proposition can't only be rational, but that would only introduce the question of what rationality is. And as you say, we should rather get back on track and discuss why pretty things are better than bland things :rotfl:
 

rccarguy

Active Member
In my experience the reason people who think any product is overpriced is because it's out of their budget but then again the only way really to find out is via purchasing that product you think is overpriced...only then can you make a proper judgement

Not really.

Brand a sub, named brand. 12" cheap driver, 300w amp
Brand b sub. Internet direct High end 12" driver , 1000w amp with automatic room correction

Both are the same price. What do you buy?
 

rccarguy

Active Member
As l said buy what you can afford with a Rel your buying into build quality and aesthetics,you only get what you pay for in life ...its not like they dont perform 9/10 says the review go figure
Sure if anyone but rel made cabs out of 1mm balsa and left plate amp live so all owners are electrocuted.. however rel aren't making subs that are either better value for money or stonking good that warrant the price.
 

neo_2009

Well-known Member
The Rels ... sound very fast and musical...
Given that they have almost no output below 30Hz, i bet they sound fast and musical :)
Just put a HPF around 30Hz to any subwoofer, and it will sound the same ...

For the money, a PSA 15" with the new B&C drivers will be way "faster" and "musical".
 

milano j

Active Member
Given that they have almost no output below 30Hz, i bet they sound fast and musical :)
Just put a HPF around 30Hz to any subwoofer, and it will sound the same ...

For the money, a PSA 15" with the new B&C drivers will be way "faster" and "musical".
Your "number wagging" l have a ht1508 and that can actually move some of the furniture in my room if l choose it too but it's not that good with music...you need to buy one of the T / S serie subs for musicality and the T/S serie subs are a pain in the arse to locate properly in a room....the HT series can be put anywhere,but combing both a HT and a S or T serie sub together in a system makes more sense than combining 2 of the same as your getting the best of both worlds ie music and movies. but l do find the T7i l have at the moment just lacks that little bit of presence when playing music,so this S/510 would be a real upgrade and l aint that frivolous with my money to pay list price for any Rel Sub
 

Liammonty123

Well-known Member
Your "number wagging" l have a ht1508 and that can actually move some of the furniture in my room if l choose it too but it's not that good with music...you need to buy one of the T / S serie subs for musicality and the T/S serie subs are a pain in the arse to locate properly in a room....the HT series can be put anywhere,but combing both a HT and a S or T serie sub together in a system makes more sense than combining 2 of the same as your getting the best of both worlds ie music and movies. but l do find the T7i l have at the moment just lacks that little bit of presence when playing music,so this S/510 would be a real upgrade and l aint that frivolous with my money to pay list price for any Rel Sub
He’s not number wagging at all. He’s not buying into audiophile ‘musicality’ nonsense, and using knowledge of components used, knowledge of the perception of frequency response to determine the better sub.
 

Dolus

Active Member
Hmm which would I buy?
Well the BK comes in white like the REL and I could buy some chrome handles from a DIY store and probably something to use or make the skids from, Sorted it's the BK for me. :)
 

Conrad.

Well-known Member
the T/S serie subs are a pain in the arse to locate properly in a room....the HT series can be put anywhere
Have you measured this? I'm surprised as I always thought (and it's always been my experience) that putting different subs in the same place in the same room would give the same response until roll off. The response is a function of the frequency, the location of the signal source and the listening position within a room.

That's backed up by the behaviour of REWs room sim as well.
 

neo_2009

Well-known Member
I'm not playing with numbers, its just how physics work.

"Subwoofers" with 8", 10", "12" "audiophile" drivers, will always seem "fast", "accurate", and "musical", as they have limited extension bellow 30Hz.

This is always a good read (data-bass.com Bass Myths):

The Audio Science Review forum is also an amazing resource to check how "good" the boutique brands are in designing technically competent electronics:
 

neo_2009

Well-known Member
... putting different subs in the same place in the same room would give the same response until roll off. The response is a function of the frequency, the location of the signal source and the listening position within a room.

That's backed up by the behaviour of REWs room sim as well.
Here a real example, 3 completely different subs, placed in the exact same position:

- BK XLS200: Sealed 12" driver
- SVS PB1000: Ported 10" driver
- DIY 18" (BMS 18N862) : Sealed 18" long stroke pro-driver



You can see the room affects all subwoofers in the same way.

Regarding "musicality", "accuracy", "speed", the 18" trumps all :)
 

Liammonty123

Well-known Member
I'm not playing with numbers, its just how physics work.

"Subwoofers" with 8", 10", "12" "audiophile" drivers, will always seem "fast", "accurate", and "musical", as they have limited extension bellow 30Hz.

This is always a good read (data-bass.com Bass Myths):

The Audio Science Review forum is also an amazing resource to check how "good" the boutique brands are in designing technically competent electronics:
Agreed, an absence of bass below 30hz gives the impression of ’tighter’ bass.

FWIW, I absolutely hate the terms musicality and tight, what do they even mean???
 

jrv902

Standard Member
Hi all, @Steve Withers, @Phil Hinton

I’ve recently purchased a REL S/510 subwoofer. I used my previous sub Dail Ikon Mk2 as part of a trade-in.

I been very happy with this upgrade, however I have a few questions as to basic setup.

I am using the High Level Neutrik Speakon cable provided and combining it with a QED Reference sub cable to LFE connector on the REL.

1. Crossover/Sub Settings - Denon X7200WA

Setup>Audio> Subwoofer Level Adjust : ON (or should this be OFF) Level : 0.0db

Set L/R Speakers to Large (instead of small) as using High Level. As per REL info.
I’ve set the crossover for Left and Right at 60Hz (even though Audyssey set them at 40Hz)

Speakers>Manual Setup>Bass> Subwoofer Mode : LFE+Main
LPF for LFE 120Hz

Speakers/2 ch Playback:
SW Mode : LFE+Main
Crossover 60Hz

2. Back panel of REL :
LFE Crossover 120Hz (or should it be matching the 2 ch Setting?)

I’m aware I can adjust the gain for both the LFE and High Level Signal, but can anyone advise if I have the basic settings on the Denon AVR & REL Sub correct.

I appreciate any advise the forum can provide on the above subject.


Stay safe everyone!
 
Last edited:

KrellFan1

Standard Member
I have to say I used to own an a massive SVS subwoofwer, and then a compact KEF R sub, but for the last few years have been rocking 2 x Rel T7i subs.

The Rels are far better made and sound very fast and musical... Which I think is preferable to anything else.

These subs are a lot more expensive than my T7i's were, so it's a harder sell..But Rel are a bit like the Miele (white goods) of subwoofwers... You get a quality, reliable product.
Speaking as a person who presently has both a Rel SHO S/5 AND a JL Audio F112 v2 in his system I can share my view. I have the Rel in the front row of my HT system and the JL Audio in the rear. The JL Audio sleighs this Rel For HT as a stand alone unit but introducing ./LFE from my Rel renders this a moot issue. Plenty of slam. That said, IMHO, nobody has mastered music as has Rel with their high level connection. This week I pulled the trigger on the new 212/SX which will replace them S/5, amd I am super excited to deploy this beast! My system consists of the two subs mentioned here, and a Lyngdorf MP-60, PS Audio DSD DAC, Bryston BP-17 cubed Preamp (HT bypass mode), Krell Duo XD, Krell Chorus 5200 XD, OPPO 205, Mac Mini for music server and PS Audio DMP transport.
 

Attachments

floatingkiwi

Active Member
Given that they have almost no output below 30Hz, i bet they sound fast and musical :)
Just put a HPF around 30Hz to any subwoofer, and it will sound the same ...

For the money, a PSA 15" with the new B&C drivers will be way "faster" and "musical".
No output below 30Hz you say??

Check this graph out. My old REL Storm 5 (10" DF sub), vrs my new dual XXLS-400's (12" FF) with one of the xxls400's in the exact same place as the old REL.

Conclusions? The dual 12's of course kick ass for HT. Straightaway however I want to put the REL back in for music only. It just integrates better.
 

Attachments

Conrad.

Well-known Member
That’s a different sub though? We’ve already established that this sub likely has a -3 point in the mid to high 20Hz range.

also, looking at your responses, they’re basically the same from 60Hz up which is where the integration would occur, assuming an 80Hz crossover. Maybe you’re having phase issues moving from a single sub to duals?

Have you tried the distance tweak? Post up your mdat if you want a hand.
 

Similar threads

The latest video from AVForums

Podcast: LCD TVs for Movies, Physical Discs?, RIP Ennio Morricone, AV & Movie news, B+W Matt Damon

Trending threads

Latest News

AVForums Podcast: 12th July 2020
  • By Phil Hinton
  • Published
QDC Blue Dragon earphones on sale in UK
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
TV licence fee now applies to over 75s from 1st Aug
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
New H.266 video codec promises 50 percent data saving
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Toshiba launches UL20 4K HDR TVs from £299
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Top Bottom