REL No. 25 versus G1 MkII, versus 212SE...

SCAudiophile

SCAudiophile

Active member
Joined
Nov 16, 2017
Messages
826
Location
Greenville SC
My great experiences with REL for 2-channel and home-theater is more than a bit dated given ownership of B1 Britannia(s) preceded by Stadium and Stentor.

Other than what I've found online in terms of the obvious "RTFM" differences in low-frequency specs., amplification differences and WiFi (No. 25 and 212SE),
what would those of you with experience with these 3 models have to say about the No. 25, G1 and 212SE performance for a full-range 2-channel only
setup that is used to play everything from pipe organ, taiko drumming, jazz, classical, new age, fusion, R&B, Techno, Rock, Prog-Rock, etc...i.e. the
full spectrum sans Rap and Country? Speakers and system overall are in my signature and posted elsewhere on this forum.

How close in particular is the performance of the 212SE to the No. 25 for 2-channel listening only?

Does the use of the classic REL Class AB amplification (which I always loved in my B1 and prior models) give a more musical response than their
newer Class D designs and is it worth grabbing a G1 for my purposes and living without LongBow/WiFi?

There are also a couple of 9/10 condition B1 Britannia still available out there; that sub excelled (at least for me and my system at the time) at
2-channel as well as standing tall in a HT installation. I'm tempted to grab the B1(or plural) and go with what worked well for me before but I
do see differences in the latest offerings that has my attention. The 13 Hz +/- 6db spec and real-life performance of the B1 was a hard act
to follow so I'm looking to make the best choice possible to firmly tap the region of sub-bass from 21-23 Hz on down to pipe organ and synth
foundation frequencies....

***I have always loved the high-level 100K ohm input method REL pioneered and think it is superior for 2-channel blending.
Many others favor low/line-level input subs with DRO and other forms of digital integration (Velodyne, JL, etc...). Not meaning
to start a philosophical or audio-religious bonfire here, but to all of your minds and ears out there,....does REL still stand up
as one of the best in 2-channel subwoofer integration and musical quality? Any other brands I should be considering?

Thanks in advance for the help!
 
IMHO, I would go No. 25 or 212SE. No. 25 is on my short list.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
SCAudiophile said:
Thanks....can you let me know your reasons for these over the G1 Mk2 for 2-channel?
Click to expand...

The No. 25 offers a faster Class D amp, and for subs, that’s my preference.

When I tried to integrate the G1 mk2 with the fast Magico’s, it was difficult.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I have the 212 SEs here in my demo room in the Atlanta area. Can't imagine better performance. Well I CAN imagine it, but I haven't heard it, nor have the RoomPlay Reference visitors who've heard the 212 SEs.

I have not heard the Magico subs, however.
 
Mike said:
The No. 25 offers a faster Class D amp, and for subs, that’s my preference.

When I tried to integrate the G1 mk2 with the fast Magico’s, it was difficult.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Thank you for this,....I'm on the road tomorrow all day down to the Atlanta area. I'll give you a call to talk more in-depth towards end of the week!
Looks like the same generation of amp design that is in the No. 25 also made it into the 212SE....the big difference seems to be power handling
and low frequency spec. (+/- 6db at 14 Hz versus 19 Hz respectively).

I heard a set of M3s last week when I was up north paired with a Magico Q-Subs...quite nice overall but frankly even though the blending was
done meticulously for the speakers and the room, I turned the Q-Sub off after about an hour and spent the next 2+ hours much happier surprisingly
enough. The M3s have a bottom register that is very impressive...
 
Jim Smith said:
I have the 212 SEs here in my demo room in the Atlanta area. Can't imagine better performance. Well I CAN imagine it, but I haven't heard it, nor have the RoomPlay Reference visitors who've heard the 212 SEs.

I have not heard the Magico subs, however.
Click to expand...

Jim,

Thank you! Your reputation for speaker integration, room-tuning, placement, etc...is well known. I may ask you to come by and render your opinion at some point in the future for this house or for the next house likely to be built next year if we can pull off a move we have in mind up north into the NC mountains.

FWIW...I heard a set of Magico M3s last week when I was up north paired with a Magico Q-Subs...quite nice overall but frankly even though the blending was
done meticulously for the speakers and the room, I turned the Q-Sub off after about an hour and spent the next 2+ hours much happier surprisingly
enough. The M3s have a bottom register that is very impressive...The Q-Sub was a fine unit, no complaints,...something about the M3s said 'play
me without a subwoofer!'...
 
I have two G1's with my magicos and it seems to depend on the type of music I play. with more modern music ie hip hop, pop, alternative, & electronic they are dialed in well. when i play jazz and classical I have to retune them.
 
drabbish said:
I have two G1's with my magicos and it seems to depend on the type of music I play. with more modern music ie hip hop, pop, alternative, & electronic they are dialed in well. when i play jazz and classical I have to retune them.
Click to expand...

Thank you very much...
 
There is so much that I could say, speaking from the experience of successfully voicing over 300 systems-with-subs to rooms, especially about the need (or not) to change the subs' settings for certain types of music.

Perhaps this 7-part series on subwoofers from Copper e-mag will offer some insights for those who have the time & interest:


Subwoofery: Trick Or Treat?

http://www.psaudio.com/article/subwoofery-trick-or-treat/


Subwoofery: Trick or Treat? - part 2

http://www.psaudio.com/article/trick-or-treat/


Wait A Minute!

http://www.psaudio.com/article/wait-a-minute/


Subwoofery: Smooth Operator?


http://www.psaudio.com/article/smooth-operator/

Subwoofery: Location, Location, Location


http://www.psaudio.com/article/location-location-location/


Subwoofery: The Basics

http://www.psaudio.com/article/38363/


Subwoofery: The Finale

http://www.psaudio.com/article/subwoofery-the-finale/
 
After reading some of the articles they are very informative. I not gonna lie but most of my settings are by ear. And I agree the the “taste” section. When I play modern music the bass is set to my liking. But with classical and jazz I have specific setting I dial in to my “taste”
 
IME & IMO, - and that's all it is - not presented as some absolute fact:

If you have to adjust the subs for different types of music, you have a bit more work to do.

Anytime that you are aware of them, there is still some integration to be done.

I am referring to "full-range" speakers & subs, not satellites & subs.

Often, it's because we forget that when we raise or lower the level slightly, we need to adjust the xover freq in the other direction. Otherwise, raising the sub volume level with RELs will always raise the xover frequency, same applies for reducing the sub volume level always lowering the xover freq.

Of course, this applies more obviously when the first aspect of any set-up is achieved - locate the best listening position in the room (for smoothest bass) for the main speakers. In general, the speakers shouldn't get any meaningful adjustment until the anchor point (listening position) is located.
 
I agree with Jim. It's been my experience also. Once setup a sub's settings should not need to be adjusted.


Jim Smith said:
IME & IMO, - and that's all it is - not presented as some absolute fact:

If you have to adjust the subs for different types of music, you have a bit more work to do.

Anytime that you are aware of them, there is still some integration to be done.

I am referring to "full-range" speakers & subs, not satellites & subs.

Often, it's because we forget that when we raise or lower the level slightly, we need to adjust the xover freq in the other direction. Otherwise, raising the sub volume level with RELs will always raise the xover frequency, same applies for reducing the sub volume level always lowering the xover freq.

Of course, this applies more obviously when the first aspect of any set-up is achieved - locate the best listening position in the room (for smoothest bass) for the main speakers. In general, the speakers shouldn't get any meaningful adjustment until the anchor point (listening position) is located.
Click to expand...
 
SCAudiophile said:
My great experiences with REL for 2-channel and home-theater is more than a bit dated given ownership of B1 Britannia(s) preceded by Stadium and Stentor.

Other than what I've found online in terms of the obvious "RTFM" differences in low-frequency specs., amplification differences and WiFi (No. 25 and 212SE),
what would those of you with experience with these 3 models have to say about the No. 25, G1 and 212SE performance for a full-range 2-channel only
setup that is used to play everything from pipe organ, taiko drumming, jazz, classical, new age, fusion, R&B, Techno, Rock, Prog-Rock, etc...i.e. the
full spectrum sans Rap and Country? Speakers and system overall are in my signature and posted elsewhere on this forum.

How close in particular is the performance of the 212SE to the No. 25 for 2-channel listening only?

Does the use of the classic REL Class AB amplification (which I always loved in my B1 and prior models) give a more musical response than their
newer Class D designs and is it worth grabbing a G1 for my purposes and living without LongBow/WiFi?

There are also a couple of 9/10 condition B1 Britannia still available out there; that sub excelled (at least for me and my system at the time) at
2-channel as well as standing tall in a HT installation. I'm tempted to grab the B1(or plural) and go with what worked well for me before but I
do see differences in the latest offerings that has my attention. The 13 Hz +/- 6db spec and real-life performance of the B1 was a hard act
to follow so I'm looking to make the best choice possible to firmly tap the region of sub-bass from 21-23 Hz on down to pipe organ and synth
foundation frequencies....

***I have always loved the high-level 100K ohm input method REL pioneered and think it is superior for 2-channel blending.
Many others favor low/line-level input subs with DRO and other forms of digital integration (Velodyne, JL, etc...). Not meaning
to start a philosophical or audio-religious bonfire here, but to all of your minds and ears out there,....does REL still stand up
as one of the best in 2-channel subwoofer integration and musical quality? Any other brands I should be considering?

Thanks in advance for the help!
Click to expand...


Hi, did u find out which is better the 212 or the G1MKii?
 
Jim Smith said:
IME & IMO, the 212SE is the best REL sub I have heard or worked with.
Click to expand...

Hi Jim,


The G1MKii has AB amp, while it is a reference model for REL. at the same time their other reference the No25 has class D amp!! To me this is confusing. Why would they use 2 different technologies at the same reference level?! This makes me feel that the 212 is better than the G1Mkii because it shares the sane technology as the No25.

2 more questions plz:
Can you tell me how the S5 sounds compared to the 212?
Could you please share with me why you prefer the 212 over the G1MKii?

I am sure that you realize that the G1 has carbon driver and sealed box design with no passive drivers. This makes me feel that it is faster and more tight due to the lack of the passive drivers.
 
Sanbobo said:
Hi Jim,


The G1MKii has AB amp, while it is a reference model for REL. at the same time their other reference the No25 has class D amp!! To me this is confusing. Why would they use 2 different technologies at the same reference level?! This makes me feel that the 212 is better than the G1Mkii because it shares the sane technology as the No25.

2 more questions plz:
Can you tell me how the S5 sounds compared to the 212?
Click to expand...

Closer to to the 212SE than other models in the S Range. Agile & tuneful.

Sanbobo said:
Could you please share with me why you prefer the 212 over the G1MKii?
Click to expand...

Less thick, more agile, tuneful, and alive, yet with better control..

Sanbobo said:
I am sure that you realize that the G1 has carbon driver and sealed box design with no passive drivers. This makes me feel that it is faster and more tight due to the lack of the passive drivers.
Click to expand...

My opinion comes from in-depth experience with the various models. It could be flawed and could have had more to do do with the rooms. I have no idea as to why, except to recount my actual experience with a dozen or so installations with these units.

Re the S5, it is an exceptional value, IMO.
 
Jim Smith said:
Closer to to the 212SE than other models in the S Range. Agile & tuneful.



Less thick, more agile, tuneful, and alive, yet with better control..



My opinion comes from in-depth experience with the various models. It could be flawed and could have had more to do do with the rooms. I have no idea as to why, except to recount my actual experience with a dozen or so installations with these units.

Re the S5, it is an exceptional value, IMO.
Click to expand...

My room is 23 x 15 and do have a pair of S5. But would like to upgrade to the 212 or G1Mkii
Why upgrade?
My goal is to achieve a big orchestral atmosphere. I need something better and faster than the S5. I am limited to REL subwoofers, this is why I am between the 212 snd G1
Your advice?
 
Sanbobo said:
My room is 23 x 15 and do have a pair of S5. But would like to upgrade to the 212 or G1Mkii
Why upgrade?
My goal is to achieve a big orchestral atmosphere. I need something better and faster than the S5. I am limited to REL subwoofers, this is why I am between the 212 snd G1
Your advice?
Click to expand...


Did you upgrade your REL’s? I have a similar size room. Wondering how it turned out for you ....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top