Unfortunately, this forum doesn't lend itself to out-of-band discussion from the review section since I didn't receive any replies to my techtalk post about the Hales. Oh well...
This is a followup now that I have fully assembled my audio/HT system. In particular I would like to comment on some of the less than emphatic reviews posted here. I would like to second Sherif's comments about the necessity of an amplifier with a robust power supply.

At any rate, Brian from Washington DC posted a rather critical review of this speaker regarding its bass performance. For people who claim that the bass is not sufficient, I can suggest these things:

1) Your speakers are not broken in
2) Your amplifier is not sufficient to drive a tough load (although a Classe should be able to do this)
3) Your bass requirements exceed that which is accurate and faithful to the recording

Unless you actually take warble test tones and EQ your room and make some measurements, I find it difficult to believe your claims about the Hales. Yes, the bass is sufficient. However it is only present if it's present in the recording.

I took the Stereophile test CD with some test tones and made some crude measurments from my seating position. The results were that I had a little bit of suckout in the 100Hz region down to about 60Hz. I was nice and flat from there until I hit a major room node of 40Hz. I was solid down to 30Hz and 2dB down at 25Hz. Given my crappy room constraints, I consider this to be pretty reasonable.

FYI, I'm using the TA-E9000ES preamp and a Perreaux PMF-2150B (200x2 8ohm). This should be similar in capability to your Classe amp give or take some. You insist that your speakers give you "bone-rattling bass". My guess based on your statement is that you prefer "over the top" or "exaggerated" bass rather than something that is true to the music. Acoustic suspension speakers may
not be for you (assuming the Definitive Tech is vented).

In it's price class, the Hales is a 5-star speaker.

-Clint

P.P.P.S.
Well, as a blind pig's luck would have it, I stumbled on to a fourth of July blowout sale at my local audio emporium, found a Rel Strata II subwoofer at an excellent price, and slapped it on to the R-3s. Velly interesting. After listening to it boom for a while, I got sensible and began working with it. Optimum results with the R-3s, in my room, was crossing it over at 30 HZ (12db/oct and a later sharper drop built in) and placing the level at about 10:30. In addition to recovering the bottom end, the three quickly more obvious differences were, more specific imaging, wider sound stage, and a much deeper sound stage. At 30 HZ, which is where the R-3s take a nose dive, they do so very greacefully, I might add, rolling off sharply and getting out of the way of the subwoofer. Higher crossover points with the R-3s can 'rattle the timbers' (as such smaller subwoofers go), but do so at the expense of the other virtues I mentioned.

The R-3s and a Rel Strata II can out do an allful lot of more expensive stuff, if set up right. 30 Hz is the lowest crossover point you can get on the Rel Strata II, but it is just fine and is better than 33, 36 or 39 Hz, the next choices up. It is a truly great match with the R-3s.

Also, I should mention, I use the JPS Labs Superconductor cables and interconnects throughout, EXCEPT for a one foot length of MSB (Brasfield) coaxial DAC cable between the Linn Karik table and the Audio Logic M-34 DAC. Using voice and piano as the reference, I have searched wide and far for something that can beat it, but I have failed at every price point, and I have been though virtually everything.

Very recommended, but don't use the JPS Superconductor DAC interconnect. The MSB is very superior to anything I have ever heard. I used it and an AudioTruth Diamond to pick out a DAC. The MSB DAC cable also sounds the best on the Theta DACs too. Don't ask me to explain.

Kim Corson

Nope. This speaker is just not right. Lacks bottom, period. Not very dynamic. However, I did come to appreciate the upper mids and highs at my third attempt listening of these speakers. But, the lack of bass output made the speaker very unbalanced or forward. Actually, I thought they sounded better off axis when some of the mid and highs dropped off. Built solid as a rock. Made sure they got the set up right this time. Classe 200 and Wadia CD/preamp.

As an audiophile for more than thrity years, I sense something odd going on in regard to this thread. The slammers of the R-3s must I surmise have one of four problems: unbroken in speakers, amplification that cannot deliver serious current and power into 2 ohm loads in the mid and upper bass, ears unaccustomed to much live instrumental (unamplified) and voice music or, finally, an axe to grind or a hidden agenda. These speakers are phenomenal for the price and, in regard to what they do, do it very superbly. They don't screw up much at all and their sins are ones of ommission, rather than commision. They sacrifice the very extremes of the audio spectrum at each end and a small degree of macro dynamics, but get everything else virtualy right and with amazing coherency, not virvaled by anything in the B&W line at any price (except the mini monitor which does not try to do too much). The R-3s are more balanced and coherent than its bigger brothers in the transendent line. I have A-B this situation. Another virtue of the R-3s is they are room size insensitive, within a broad range. I have hear them in four rooms, ranging in size from medium/small to very large. In regard to their bass performance, with proper amplication (e.g., from the Classe 150 or Krell integrated up to the Levinson 20.6 monoblocks) there really and truly is no problem in virtually any reasonable position in virtually any room, except from the sacrifice of a portion of the bottom octave, in which there is little music. They do not analytically hyper resolve detail, but are balanced to live and natural music in a most non-fatiguing way. They are serious neutral and inobtrusive. Their coherency, within the range of what they attempt to do, is simply unsurpassed, regrettably even by their bigger brothers and many very much more expensive speakers. I have done the A-B test here in a large room with Krell amplification and the results torpedoed the B&W line and the larger Hales overall, all things considered. Large ambitious speaker systems do several things better, but also make many more big mistakes that can really irritate after awhile. The bigger the system, the larger tend to be the errors and the better the things done right. The R-3s are Joe Dimaggio speakers, not Mark McGuire speakers. Effortless and very natural at what they do -- which is considerable -- is the R-3s hallmark. They are hard to beat in this regard at any price, without the necessity of living with some analomlies and mistakes, but with some enhanced virtues as well. The transendent series has a more open and extended top, but problems in the all important upper bass and lower midrange area where many fundamental notes of import are generated. Get them wrong and their upper harmonic structure is destroyed to one degree or another. The bass of the R-3 is more than just sufficient. Once broken in and with proper amplification, it is excellent, and this comes from some one who lived for 15 years with high output tower subwoofers crossed over at 25 Hz. Real house movers in the rare instances they had something to do. I sense there are some with an axe to grind on this tread, because they are simply too far off the mark and the break in and amplification requirements are too well known and publicized. The R-3s are unsurpassed bang per buck and rival many much more expensive systems, all things considered, except price. They are a break through product, just like the Krell and Classe integrateds. They are also cabable of substantial dynamics and output, complete with viseral slam to a considerable degree, but surpassed here by the higher priced spreads ($5000 and up )and the Celestion A-3s which have a small tendency to a hi-fi sound, good for rock and rollers and Mahler fans, but not lovers of string quartets. Hales has out done himself on the R-3s and is having trouble clean sweeping them with his higher priced efforts. The broad spectrum coherency and non fatiguing quality of the R-3s is a real trick to master at any price, and expensive speakers have a hard time matching them in this quarter. Such speakers can do some things better, but fare less well in other quarters, especially seemless coherency. At $2100 to $2200, the R-3s are a staggering achievement Hales has yet to approximate in his other efforts, nor has anyone else except possible the better NHTs and the Celestions A-3s for the rock and roll and heavy orchestra crowds. There is too much amiss on this thread from the slammers. Clearly 5 stars, regardless of price. Hours spent listening without fatigue proves it.

P.P.S.such witlessness, and

the better Essence power cord
and a Blue Circle line conditioner, using only the parallel
circuits for the DAC only -- nothing directly plugged into it.

These speakers are the hottest selling in the 2000$ to 6000$ range.Once they are properly broken in, they are hard to beat.

Its hard to keep them in stock. 90% of people who audition them end up
buying a pair. Tremedous bargain.

Tip: with the Bybee Quantum Speaker filters you don't need mega watts
to drive them. Any quality 60Watt Tube or SS amp will do the job.
We do it all the time.

Some background: This review is made after listening to Legacy Focus and Whisper (Elite DVD and CD Player - forgot model #, with Legacy monoblocks), Martin-Logan Aerius and SL3 (Marantz Receiver and CD Player, forgot amp and DVD player), Hales Revelation 3 and Transcendence 3 (Rotel Amp and CD Player), NHT 2.5i (Rotel Amp and CD Player), 2.9, and 3.3 (Sony 355ES CD Player and Sony TA9000ES amplifier stereo mode), Definitive Technologies BP2000, and BP3000 (Sony 355ES CD Player and Sony TA9000ES amplifier stereo mode), PSB Stratus Silver-i (Rotel Receiver + Amp, Denon DVD Player, and another config which is Bryston amp + Rotel CD Player + forgot what preamp), DynAudio Audience 40 (Krell CD Player and Receiver), Snell (forgot what model, but it's $1400 a pair with McIntosh amp + Sony 5 CD changer player), McIntosh ML4C (Marantz DVD Player with all McIntosh amp/receivers). See my other reviews on these speakers for a perspective of what I want in sound.
All the speakers above I've heard in different places/room/situations/conditions and might affect the judgement of that particular speaker, so take this with a grain of salt, and more importantly, LISTEN to them if you are interested. This is just an OPINION of mine of those speakers I've heard. Full disclosure: I haven't bought any of these speakers, but right now I'm leaning toward the NHT 3.3, since I can buy them (1 year old) at around $2500. All the speakers I've heard will either get 3 to 5 stars, since I don't believe any speakers at this price range is capable of getting 1 star (If they do, how many star is my $10 computer speaker? If it's also 1, I'm sure the speaker reviewed will be a LOT better than my $10 computer speaker). A 5 can only be awarded to live performance, and so far I haven't heard anything that sounded like live performance (meaning you can't distinguish whether an instrument sound came out of a real instrument or a speaker).

I want to be fair in this, so the store attendant did say that it needs a more powerful amplifier for this pair to 'open up' more. That said, with the 200W/ch Rotel amp driving it, the base in this pair is lacking. It doesn't go as deep as the NHT 2.5i even. The mids seems to appear more than the other sounds. Vocals seems to be more upfront than the instrument sounds, and on a lot of materials. Didn't try DVD material with this pair since no DVD player is hooked up to here. It might be the equipment, but since the dominance of mids is very palpable, I should say I don't like this set. The same equipment was used to drive the NHT 2.5i, and it sounded better there. The Trancendence 3 (see my review there as well) behaves very similarly, but was more enveloping than the Rev. 3. My gripes in a sentence: lack of base, and very forward in serving the music.

I have owned the Hales for almost a year, and they are very involving--that, I think, is this foremost among this speakers many strengths. At this price point I have heard more articulate speakers (Thiel 1.5) and I have seen better looking speakers, but I have not encountered any speakers that comes close to doing so many things so well.
The Thiel, for example, is more detailed, more life-like, but it lacks the Rev. 3's bass, which I find very accurate, nicely balanced, quick, tight, and more than sufficient. And I found the Thiels vaguely unmusical--with the Hales I am much more involved in the music.

That said, they aren't euphonic or colored. They are exceptionally nuetral--a bad recording still sound lousy. Most digital music (oxymoron?) still sounds bright and harsh.

In short, the Hales are quick, detailed, accurate, and involving. What they do, they do exceedingly well--importantly, they do no harm.

Be forewarned: they take at least four hundred hours to completely break in.

At this price point they are an astounding product.

Used with:
Plinius 8150 (integrated--the best bargain in high end audio, in my opinion)
Rega Planar 3 w/ Grado Reference Platinum
Adcom GCD-750
XLO interconnects and cables

With the Hales this is an excellent "bargain" system.

I wanted to share my thoughts regarding the Rev 3s a month ago but have been unable to because I returned the speakers to Hales for service. Here is where my story takes a turn for the better.

I purchased the Rev 3s used via the net and was unfortunate in that they were damaged. Not realizing the problem initialy I worked with Pete Rose from Hales Design Group over the phone, after I indicated my disatisfaction with the speakers performance, and performed some simple trouble shooting. It was decided I would be better served if the speakers went back to Hales.

To make a long story short I had told Pete that the sound was horrible, no base, lacking emotion, etc..

What Hales found after some testing and inspection was a pair of speakers that were damaged by over driving, resulting in damaged crossover and drivers. Addtionaly there were minor signs of damage to the baffels from shipping etc... The speakers were out of warrenty so I thought I really was screwed since I was not the original owner.
Here's the best part. Because Hales feels so strongly about their products and want to make their customers happy they have basicly rebuilt the speakers for next to nothing!!! New cross over components, drivers, and even baffels. If you include the labor I'm sure my repairs could of exceeded $500.

The bottom line is this. I have never been treated so well by a manufacturer. These guys are a class act all the way and stand firmly behind their products.

The speakers should arrive at my house next week and I can't wait to incorporate them into my system. I will follow up with my thoughts in a few weeks regarding their performance.

The breif time I had with the speakers BEFORE I sent them to Hales for repair indicated they required a little more attention to positioning, e.g. closer to the back wall and corners. Once place in such a location the base became much more pronounced and the sound staging was impressive. I suspect people who experience the lack of base performance should try repositioning their speakers.

If you ever have a problem with a speaker from Hales call Pete Rose at Hales and tell him you read this review from one happy customer named Greg.

Awesome Bass

Cabinet colors

No Contest. This speaker is just right. Has bottom end, period. Very dynamic. I come to appreciate the upper mids and highs at my first listening of these speakers. Built solid as a rock. Make sure you got them set up right.
Takes about 300 hours to break in.

Similar Products Used:

Canton,Nht,Vandersteen