Short answer: the Revel F228Be, for consistency at high volume. Its essentially flat on-axis response and very nice directivity hold up, even though it dips to 3.4 ohms and wants an amplifier comfortable with a demanding load. The Polk Audio Reserve R700’s three-way, dual 8” layout is bigger, but high-frequency compression rises sharply between 96dB and 102dB, a clear step down from pricier towers.
Buy the Revel F228Be when sound quality outweighs the price for you, and the Polk Audio Reserve R700 when the price outweighs sound quality instead.
Want more options? Browse the full Passive Home rankings.
Specifications Side By Side
| Revel F228Be | Polk Audio Reserve R700 | |
|---|---|---|
| Price | $9,000 per pair | $2,398 per pair |
| Ranked | #17 of 74 in Large Size Floorstanding Speakers | #33 of 74 in Large Size Floorstanding Speakers |
| Bass Extension (-10dB) | 25Hz (measured, Audio Science Review) | 31Hz (measured, Erin’s Audio Corner) |
| Bass Extension (-3dB) | 61Hz (measured, Audio Science Review) | 40Hz (measured, Erin’s Audio Corner) |
| Dimensions | 50.9”H x 13.5”W x 17.6”D (1292.9 x 342.9 x 447 mm) | 45”H x 12.6”W x 16.9”D (1143.8 x 320.7 x 428.3 mm) |
| Impedance | 8 ohms | 4 ohms nominal, 3.5 ohms minimum (measured above 80Hz, Erin’s Audio Corner) |
| Drivers | Dual 8” (200mm) Deep Ceramic Composite aluminum cones, with cast frames woofers, 5-1/4” (130mm) Deep Ceramic Composite aluminum cone, with cast frame midrange, 1” (25mm) Beryllium dome, with acoustic lens waveguide tweeter | 2x 8” polypropylene cone woofers, 1x 6.5” turbine cone midrange, 1x 1” Pinnacle ring radiator tweeter |
| Sensitivity | 89.3dB (300Hz-3kHz @ 2.83V/1m, measured by Audio Science Review; 90dB manufacturer specified) | 87.5dB (measured average 300Hz-3kHz @ 2.83V/1m, Erin’s Audio Corner) |
| Weight | 112.4 lbs (51 kg) each | 102.1 lbs (46.3 kg) |
| Woofer Cabinet | ported, front | ported, down-firing |
| Spinorama Preference Score | 6.01 | 6.38 |
| Spinorama Preference Score with Perfect Sub | 7.51 | 7.83 |
| DIY Kit | No | No |
Related Speaker Comparisons
More worthwhile head-to-heads for Revel F228Be:
- KEF Blade Two Meta vs Revel F228Be
- MoFi SourcePoint V10 Master Edition vs Revel F228Be
- MoFi SourcePoint 888 vs Revel F228Be
- Revel F228Be vs Revel F328Be
- Radiant Acoustics Clarity 66 vs Revel F228Be
Prices on this page were last checked October 2, 2026 at 10:18 PM UTC. Product prices and availability are accurate as of that date/time and are subject to change; the price and availability shown on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply to the purchase of this product.
As an eBay Partner, we may be compensated if you make a purchase.
The Two Speakers In Full
Revel F228Be: $9,000 per pair Crutchfield eBay
Older model: the Revel F208 (ranked higher, rated 4.5/5).
Pros: CEA2034 spinorama shows an essentially flat on-axis response with very nice directivity. Predicted in-room response is nearly perfect, with a smooth slope down from bass to treble. Horizontal beamwidth of about ±70 degrees is wide and holds up well until narrowing above 8kHz. Vertical directivity offers more degrees of listening-height freedom than a typical bookshelf design, a benefit of this tower’s driver layout. Distortion is extremely low across the full audio range at 86dB SPL/1m and stays comfortable even at 96dB SPL/1m. Near-field measurements of the individual drivers show nice, well-integrated crossover behavior with only low-level resonances. Measured bass extension of 61Hz (-3dB), with a measured sensitivity of 89.3dB.
Cons: Minimum impedance dips to 3.4 ohms with a secondary rise around 2kHz, calling for an amplifier comfortable with a demanding load. Very expensive and very heavy (51 kg each).
Full Revel F228Be review and specifications →
| Bass Extension (-10dB) | 25Hz (measured, Audio Science Review) |
|---|---|
| Bass Extension (-3dB) | 61Hz (measured, Audio Science Review) |
| DIY Kit | No |
| Dimensions | 50.9”H x 13.5”W x 17.6”D (1292.9 x 342.9 x 447 mm) |
| Drivers | Dual 8” (200mm) Deep Ceramic Composite aluminum cones, with cast frames woofers, 5-1/4” (130mm) Deep Ceramic Composite aluminum cone, with cast frame midrange, 1” (25mm) Beryllium dome, with acoustic lens waveguide tweeter |
| Impedance | 8 ohms |
| Sensitivity | 89.3dB (300Hz-3kHz @ 2.83V/1m, measured by Audio Science Review; 90dB manufacturer specified) |
| Spinorama Preference Score | 6.01 |
| Spinorama Preference Score with Perfect Sub | 7.51 |
| Weight | 112.4 lbs (51 kg) each |
| Woofer Cabinet | ported, front |
- Links
- Reviews, Comparisons and Sound Samples
- Head-to-Head Comparisons
Polk Audio Reserve R700: $2,398 per pair Amazon eBay
Pros: Three-way design with a 1” ring radiator tweeter, 6.5” mid-range, and dual 8” mid-bass drivers in a ported, down-firing cabinet. On-axis frequency response holds within about ±2dB across most of its range, with genuinely deep bass extension (F3 40Hz) reaching into the mid-30s Hz in-room. Wide horizontal radiation of about ±70°, giving a strong, enveloping stereo width and stage-extension effect on well-recorded tracks. Good low-level dynamics: solid bass thump at quiet listening volumes without over-accentuation. Strong distortion and compression control through the bass and midrange. Real nominal impedance closer to 4 ohms than the marketed 8 ohms, so with the right amplifier it can be driven hard: a $3,000 two-channel integrated brought out significantly more life than a budget $300 unit could. Excellent value at its roughly $1199/pair, ranking among the reviewer’s top picks under $2,500; outperforms the similarly-priced Klipsch RP-8000F II in bass extension and overall smoothness. Measured bass extension of 40Hz (-3dB), with a measured sensitivity of 87.5dB.
Cons: Compression in the high frequencies rises sharply between 96dB and 102dB output: a real limitation only at very high volumes (around 100dB at 3 meters), but a clear step down from pricier ($5,000+) towers. Horizontal directivity mismatch around 4-5kHz, where the tweeter flares wider than the midrange, can sound a bit forward, especially noticeable when toed out further into the room; sidewall absorption or curtains help tame it. Harmonic distortion crosses the reviewer’s 3% threshold around 7kHz at 96dB output, possibly contributing to that same forward quality at high volume. Narrow vertical sweet spot (about ±15° from the tweeter axis), typical of non-coaxial tower designs: more of a consideration for multi-row home theater seating than single-row listening. The ring-radiator tweeter narrows noticeably above about 7-8kHz, and toeing the speaker out more than about 20° causes the top end to fall off quickly. Needs at least 2 feet of clearance from the rear wall to avoid boomy, exaggerated bass, since it lacks the bass-shelf tuning some rivals use to allow closer wall placement. Compared to the pricier KEF R5 Meta, has narrower horizontal (and much narrower vertical) directivity, so seating flexibility is more limited.
Full Polk Audio Reserve R700 review and specifications →
| Bass Extension (-10dB) | 31Hz (measured, Erin’s Audio Corner) |
|---|---|
| Bass Extension (-3dB) | 40Hz (measured, Erin’s Audio Corner) |
| DIY Kit | No |
| Dimensions | 45”H x 12.6”W x 16.9”D (1143.8 x 320.7 x 428.3 mm) |
| Drivers | 2x 8” polypropylene cone woofers, 1x 6.5” turbine cone midrange, 1x 1” Pinnacle ring radiator tweeter |
| Impedance | 4 ohms nominal, 3.5 ohms minimum (measured above 80Hz, Erin’s Audio Corner) |
| Sensitivity | 87.5dB (measured average 300Hz-3kHz @ 2.83V/1m, Erin’s Audio Corner) |
| Spinorama Preference Score | 6.38 |
| Spinorama Preference Score with Perfect Sub | 7.83 |
| Weight | 102.1 lbs (46.3 kg) |
| Woofer Cabinet | ported, down-firing |
- Links
- Reviews, Comparisons and Sound Samples
- Head-to-Head Comparisons
- Polk Audio Reserve R700 vs PSB Imagine T65
- Polk Audio Reserve R700 vs Emotiva Airmotiv T2+
- Polk Audio Reserve R700 vs JBL HDI-3600
- Polk Audio Reserve R700 vs ELAC Debut 3.0 DF63
- Polk Audio Reserve R700 vs JBL Studio 698
- Polk Audio Reserve R700 vs Polk Reserve R500
- Polk Audio Reserve R700 vs KEF R11 Meta
- Polk Audio Reserve R700 vs Infinity Primus 360
- See all 45 comparisons