RSL CG4, CG24, and Speedwoofer 10 Conclusion
I guess at the end I’ve finally learned my lesson. The RSL speakers are a David among Goliaths. Don’t judge these RSL speakers by their small size. Be amazed at their big sound. I’ve conceded that these are just some of the best darn speakers I’ve heard in this price range. They are probably the best speakers for their footprint. The overall performance you get for $1,250 in a 2.1 setup and $2,075 for a 5.1 with the CG4s is simply mind-blowing.
As I write these final words to the review, I’m sitting here just staring at the RSL CG4 and Speedwoofer at the front of my listening room. I stop. I laugh to myself. I then laugh out loud shaking my head. Never in my wildest imagination would I have thought that such a tiny, Smurf-sized set of speakers could be so engaging and thoroughly enjoyable. These aren’t junky HTIB speakers. The CG4/24 and Speedwoofer combo is serious gear for the discerning yet frugal audiophile.
Only those wanting visceral impact in subterranean bass depths will be left slightly disappointed by the overall performance of this system. Regardless, at the end of this review period not only can I say highly recommended, I’m also going say that this setup is worthy of receiving our Audioholics Top Pick as the 2015 winner of the high performance compact 5.1 home theater system.
RSL CG4 Speaker YouTube Review
Review Addendum
Following the review and my conclusions, Howard and Joe Rodgers wanted me to try out a second Speedwoofer 10 in my room to compare the difference. I happily obliged. If you can afford it, here at Audioholics we always recommend multiple subs, especially in larger spaces. Simply put, more subs equal better bass; it’s proven science (see our article: Are two subwoofers better than one?
As you might imagine, adding the second Speedwoofer 10 gave the LFE channel the visceral gut-punch, depth, authority, and a more true-to-life cinematic experience in my larger room vs. the single Speedwoofer 10. Any hesitancy I had about the Speedwoofer 10’s performance within its specified frequency range disappeared with the introduction of the second subwoofer. If you have a medium or large room, then I’d say a second Speedwoofer 10 is a must to realize this system's best performance.
RSL Speakers Systems
a Division of Rogersound Labs, LLC
26500 West Agoura Road, Suite 571
Calabasas, California 91302
800-905-5485
The Score Card
The scoring below is based on each piece of equipment doing the duty it is designed for. The numbers are weighed heavily with respect to the individual cost of each unit, thus giving a rating roughly equal to:
Performance × Price Factor/Value = Rating
Audioholics.com note: The ratings indicated below are based on subjective listening and objective testing of the product in question. The rating scale is based on performance/value ratio. If you notice better performing products in future reviews that have lower numbers in certain areas, be aware that the value factor is most likely the culprit. Other Audioholics reviewers may rate products solely based on performance, and each reviewer has his/her own system for ratings.
Audioholics Rating Scale
— Excellent
- — Very Good
- — Good
- — Fair
- — Poor
| Metric | Rating |
|---|---|
| Build Quality | |
| Appearance | |
| Treble Extension | |
| Treble Smoothness | |
| Midrange Accuracy | |
| Bass Extension | |
| Bass Accuracy | |
| Imaging | |
| Soundstage | |
| Dynamic Range | |
| Fit and Finish | |
| Performance | |
| Value | |
See also:
About the author:
Theo is a serious audiophile and home theater enthusiast—a passion he's enjoyed for over 20 years. He heads up many of our speaker system and receiver reviews as well as covering the latest in streaming technologies and Ultra HD video.
View full profileConfused about what AV Gear to buy or how to set it up? Join our Exclusive Audioholics E-Book Membership Program!
Recent Forum Posts:
The speed woofer is amazing a good tight bass for music and with enough power to feel the movie throughout my house. My HT is upstairs above the garage and my wife feels the vibration in our bedroom - other side of the house downstairs and our house is not small (nor large unless you live in New York).
ski2xblack, post: 1111009, member: 9107
That impedance curve looks a bit like that of a speaker with an aperiodic port that needs a bit more stuffing. Those rsl cabs are interesting. They remind me somewhat of Atlantic Technology's HPAS cabs. Although AT's goal was extension, both have unconventional enclosures that feature some sort of novel hybrid/truncated/reverse taper transmission lines with side chamber, and from the looks of it they must damp the active driver a bit differently than by-the-numbers bass reflex. I would actually have been surprised to see the classic symmetric impedance peaks Gene expected.
I have been looking at this. It is not a reverse taper TL. If it were the start of the pipe would be widest. It is more like a horn that is too short. There is an expansion box, throat, and another expansion, just like a horn would have. Then there is that port.
The impedance curve looks like a that of an incorrectly tuned QB4 box. The 3 db point is around 100 Hz and the roll off is fourth order like a ported box would.
I'm not at all convinced that internal contributes anything but bracing. I would like to see the comparison of the same drivers and crossover in a properly deigned QB4 box. My feeling is it would be superior.
The speaker sounds good because the crossover seems spot on and the drivers are perfectly integrated.
As for the bass loading, it seems a mish mash of a too short TL with expansion and taper of a horn and then an attempt as mass loading with a port. Pending further information and data from the company, I'm not impressed with this loading arrangement.
The Speedwoofer on the other hand at first glance looks more promising. Although F3 is fairly high, it is rolling off second order, like a TL would.
I would like to see more measurements of that, and details.
I have tried various configurations over the years to try and reduce the real estate of TLs, including mass loading them with ABRs. The only ones any good were labyrinths. I suspect if that GL4 where a labyrinth it would be much more promising as far as the low end is concerned.
The price would be higher as there would be a lot more internals. However I think the 3db point would be lower and roll off second order, with more low bass, and low Q to boot.
ski2xblack, post: 1111009, member: 9107
That impedance curve looks a bit like that of a speaker with an aperiodic port that needs a bit more stuffing. Those rsl cabs are interesting. They remind me somewhat of Atlantic Technology's HPAS cabs. Although AT's goal was extension, both have unconventional enclosures that feature some sort of novel hybrid/truncated/reverse taper transmission lines with side chamber, and from the looks of it they must damp the active driver a bit differently than by-the-numbers bass reflex. I would actually have been surprised to see the classic symmetric impedance peaks Gene expected.
I have been looking at this. It is not a reverse taper TL. If it were the start of the pipe would be widest. It is more like a horn that is too short. There is an expansion box, throat, and another expansion, just like a horn would have. Then there is that port.
The impedance curve looks like a that of an incorrectly tuned QB4 box. The 3 db point is around 100 Hz and the roll off is fourth order like a ported box would.
I'm not at all convinced that internal contributes anything but bracing. I would like to see the comparison of the same drivers and crossover in a properly deigned QB4 box. My feeling is it would be superior.
The speaker sounds good because the crossover seems spot on and the drivers are perfectly integrated.
As for the bass loading, it seems a mish mash of a too short TL with expansion and taper of a horn and then an attempt as mass loading with a port. Pending further information and data from the company, I'm not impressed with this loading arrangement.
The Speedwoofer on the other hand at first glance looks more promising. Although F3 is fairly high, it is rolling off second order, like a TL would.
I would like to see more measurements of that, and details.
I have tried various configurations over the years to try and reduce the real estate of TLs, including mass loading them with ABRs. The only ones any good were labyrinths. I suspect if that GL4 where a labyrinth it would be much more promising as far as the low end is concerned.
The price would be higher as there would be a lot more internals. However I think the 3db point would be lower and roll off second order, with more low bass, and low Q to boot.
KEW, post: 1108809, member: 41838
In the measurement section, Gene wrote:
The CG4 measured a nominal 8 ohms just like RSL states, never dropping below 7 ohms (6.4 ohm min per IEC requirement). However you can see the box is a little too small for the driver with the asymmetric peaks between the saddle point. To RSL's credit, didn't hear any ill effects in bass. However, in my opinion, a speaker this small should be sealed since a port can't do a whole lot in this scenario.
Did either of you try sealing the port to see if it affected the sound quality? That would be interesting to establish since the port is designed to reduce resonance rather than be a source of added sound (as I understand it).
That impedance curve looks a bit like that of a speaker with an aperiodic port that needs a bit more stuffing. Those rsl cabs are interesting. They remind me somewhat of Atlantic Technology's HPAS cabs. Although AT's goal was extension, both have unconventional enclosures that feature some sort of novel hybrid/truncated/reverse taper transmission lines with side chamber, and from the looks of it they must damp the active driver a bit differently than by-the-numbers bass reflex. I would actually have been surprised to see the classic symmetric impedance peaks Gene expected.
Subscribe to our newsletter