Hello Everyone, I am begining my quest to build my own theater/media room. The fist step is purchasing the speakers followed by a pre/pro. I recently heard the JBL Project Array 1400 in 2 channel driven by a Krell KAV2250 and then a Bryston 4B. I thought both of these sounded great and I want to take a closer look at the speakers in a 7.2 set up.

If I were to go with the Project Array 1400 R/L, 880 Center, S2A Surrounds and pair them up with Bryston Amps (3B & 9B my current amps) and an Integra 9.8 Pre/Pro how close or far away would I be from a Synthesis set up? What benefits do the JBL Pre/Pro and EQ provide that I would be missing with the Bryston/Ingegra combo.

Thank You.

the amplifiers will get you there for the amp end. the difference will be the pre-pro and especially the sdec unit. keep in mind that with the sdec, you will have to have a jbl synthesis dealer come out and calibrate the system. you could also use the audyssey eq system biult into the integra and get very excellent results. you can also get an audyssey dealer to calibrate using the onboard eq. you will also need to use 1 or more subwoofers to accommodate the 1400 arrays.

Thanks ifor.

My local dealer can calibrate the Audyssey EQ for me once I have the speakers in place. As for the sub(s) for the time being I'll be using my Def Tech Super Cube 1's. When the time comes for the upgrade I'm leaning towards the Velodyne DD series (18" or 15") so I can take advantage of the built in EQ.

Just curious if you have heard the Array's in a theater set up? I was able to hear the older Synthesis one set up last week and I thought it was a great sounding system. I am also looking at the B&W 802D's and a PMC TB2' for a theater set up.

Not to sound repetitive, but if you want Audyssey, get it in the NAD T175. The sound of their implementation is clearly better to my ears, more robust bass, smoother treble, more natural and involving. The matching amp is a powerhouse as well.

I'd get Revel Gems from Harman over the JBLs personally, the JBLs, while they can sound good subjectively to some people, make my skin crawl when it comes to actual theoretical speaker design. The Gems, on the other hand, couldn't be a better designed speaker. Same company, but like VW vs Bugatti.

sorry alimental, i was giving info to chrisbo as to what he already had in his possesion, ie. the integra receiver. if chrisbo doesnt have the integra yet, then i would agree with you about the nad t175. what really makes the jbl synthesis system is the sdec processor. you may be able to find one on ebay if you dont want to pony up the dough for a new one.

chrisbo, we have a full synthesis array in our theater here in our showroom. we have a pair of htps400 subs in our theater and we have the crossover setting for the mains set lower than 80hz and the subs lower as well. the subs only handle the really low frequencies while the 1400 array's handle the mid to high bass. it does sound nice for theater purposes though. jbl also had the array system at the last cedia in denver.

while the gems are a fantastic speaker, the array system will be more dynamic for a theater setting. if you are playing music alot, then the gem might be an option. but the array's have great performance for music than some of the other synthesis speakers.

I understand, but it seemed like he was thinking of the Integra rather than owning it.

IME, "dynamic" is a very misused term that largely means "colored" in a big, blurry, badass way. Sure, a big horn speaker can play louder, but if a speaker like the Gem2 can make your ears ring and do it with low distortion while better reproducing the signal in both resolution and timbre accuracy, it is actually more "dynamic" in the true sense of the word.

Just another POV and/or idea, not necessarily trying to convince him of changing direction other than maybe continue to experience lots of gear, especially at those kinds of prices.

Well, I think you know what the term dynamic means, so do I. It seams that you are pretty biased against the JBL line of speakers. Keep in mind that the engineers are the same for Revel and JBL.
While I think that the 2 brands are good, they are in no way marketed or designed for the same outcome. The JBL Synthesis is really designed for the theater application than anything else. The Revel's are really something special in there own right but might not be as satisfying compared to a properly installed Synthesis system for theater. For a mixture of music and movies where the placement is optimal for the Revel, go to town. But the JBL system was designed for a theater installation, period. Nevermind the fact that the Revels are harder to power with a 6 ohm load and a low efficiency of 86 db, while the JBL has a nominal 8 ohm load and an efficiency of 89 db. While you may not like horn speakers, I wouldn't clump them altogether in the same pile. Do all cars with 4 cylinder engines perform the same? I don't think so, but ask Porsche.

Well, if you have a 10,000 cubic foot theater, by all means. That's kinda what they're designed for. But it doesn't sound like we have the same definition of dynamic. If two speakers output 10dB less with 1/10th the wattage or 10dB more with 10 times the wattage in a linear fashion, they are equally 'dynamic', regardless of efficiency or volume. Of course, if one plays louder, it plays louder. And as long as you listen at those kind of volumes, it could matter. Most of what people refer to as "dynamic" is an illusion based on colorations, such as that which comes from a horn or the thump that comes from a big midbass peak. GM makes a Corvette and a Silverado. If you want performance, you get a Corvette. If you want to haul lots of heavy things, you get a Silverado. It's not that i dislike JBL so much, it's that I dislike bad speaker design and Revel and JBL are on totally opposite ends of the spectrum. I just brought them up because it's the same parent company. The engineers that work on JBL wouldn't have time to work on Revel or vice versa. It's like saying the engineers that work on a Bugatti also work on the Golf. It doesn't work that way except in very rare instances.

Chris, how big is your theater? That's the real factor in what kind of speaker to get.

Hey Guy's, thanks for the feedback. I did take a look at the NAD unit although, the Integra offers the XLR connection. Now correct me if I'm wrong but the XLR should be give me a little more performnce when I feel the need to crank it up ... right?

As for the Revel's I'll go and take a look a look at them ... this is a rather big investment for me and I don't want to leave too many stones unturned so any recommendations would be great ... To date I have heard the Klipsch Corwall, Mirage OMD-28, Totem Forrest, PMC TB2 and the B&W 802D's ... from this group the Array's sounded the best to my ears.

My current room size is 24'D x 12'W x 8'H. Although, I may be moving into a open concept 1800sq foot loft with in the next year.

Well, keep in mind that this isn't a terribly big room, far too small to *require* big, LOUDspeakers. Very similar to my brother's basement, actually. IMO, the best solution for a room like that is something with reasonably controlled dispersion or with really good side wall treatment. Most high quality speakers can easily fill such a small space and a big speaker may sound great it a big room, then terrible in a smaller one. i would rule out omni/bipole speakers for that kind of room. i'd also much more recommend dropping your budget to half or less for the moment, get something more room appropriate, then work with your dealer on an upgrade *if* you go to a bigger room. For instance, if you can find a special on nht M5 close out, you could get a system optimized for your type of room, then sell it for 80% or more of what you have into it in a year or two. They have targeted dispersion for a narrow room, but they were just discontinued, unfortunately. you're definitely going to need some room correction software with your room dimensions. Consider that your speakers should be 2.5' from your side walls too. That means about 6' apart. Something short enough that you can place a PJ screen above it is a plus if you're going to do that. XLRs aren't an advantage unless you're running really long distances.

My dealer had a similar view point regarding the room size ... he feels that the Array 1000 would be a better match. Although, I am assembling the audio portion of my build in preperation for the larger space rather then building and re building. Once I'm in the new digs I can then think about a nice projector to match up with the audio ;)

Earlier you mentioned that the NAD Audyssey sounded better then the 9.8 ... is there a difference in the software or hardware these two units use?

Have you considered buying a system that you could use in a bedroom or secondary system now?

The NAD has a better, more natural FR target curve with fuller bass and smoother treble. I find the stock curve to be somewhat worse than no correction at all.

sorry alimental, i was giving info to chrisbo as to what he already had in his possesion, ie. the integra receiver. if chrisbo doesnt have the integra yet, then i would agree with you about the nad t175. what really makes the jbl synthesis system is the sdec processor. you may be able to find one on ebay if you dont want to pony up the dough for a new one.

chrisbo, we have a full synthesis array in our theater here in our showroom. we have a pair of htps400 subs in our theater and we have the crossover setting for the mains set lower than 80hz and the subs lower as well. the subs only handle the really low frequencies while the 1400 array's handle the mid to high bass. it does sound nice for theater purposes though. jbl also had the array system at the last cedia in denver.

while the gems are a fantastic speaker, the array system will be more dynamic for a theater setting. if you are playing music alot, then the gem might be an option. but the array's have great performance for music than some of the other synthesis speakers.


hi
do you have some photos of yr showroom with the JBL ARRAY ? :)
what wattage would feed the center and the 1400 for a room say 12x8x21feet, attic ? (it has acoustic ceiling also)

il take some pics for you.

here you go.
http://i232.photobucket.com/albums/ee113/iformorris/theater002.jpg
http://i232.photobucket.com/albums/ee113/iformorris/theater003.jpg
http://i232.photobucket.com/albums/ee113/iformorris/theater005.jpg

Very nice room.

If two speakers output 10dB less with 1/10th the wattage or 10dB more with 10 times the wattage in a linear fashion, they are equally 'dynamic', regardless of efficiency or volume.
The problem is that you are referring to a theoretical interpretation of dynamics. In reality speakers "experience" dynamic compression, so they don't "amplify" in a linear fashion as you describe. Although horns can have their problems, dynamic compression is one form of distortion they clearly lack and it shows in reproduction of sound exemplified by movies with bombastic special effects. So you are doing a disservice to horns when you confound their advantages with their "disadvantages".

A simple example would be to listen to the reproduced sound of a car door closing on your revels vs a good pair of horns. The revels would sound nice, but they would very likely lack the dynamics that give it a sense of realism that many experience when they listen to horns.

YMMV.

Wow that looks great! ifor are you using the S1760 to power all speakers?

We are using the S7150 for the amplification.

thanks
here's one two.
tempted to invest in the 1400 at least.
client fell also in love for these towers. unique design.

Keep in mind that JBL revised the entire Synthesis line after the Array series. JBL also had an Array system for their demo at CEDIA '07 last year in Denver. Large room as well.
I'll try and post a pic of the room.

Here it is,

http://i232.photobucket.com/albums/ee113/iformorris/Picture006.jpg

The web master at lansingheritage, who has listened to gear all over the world, has auditioned the Array prototypes in the home of Greg Timbers, JBL's Chief Systems Engineer. He said it was the finest system he has ever heard in a home enviroment.
http://i260.photobucket.com/albums/ii4/hifiguy268/_MG_5117.jpg

So does this mean the current Project Array's will be replaced by something similar in the Picture? If yes do you know of the release date?

By the way those towers look amazing :D

So does this mean the current Project Array's will be replaced by something similar in the Picture? If yes do you know of the release date?

By the way those towers look amazing :D
No, as I said, they were the prototype for the Arrays. So the Arrays you've already seen are the finished product.
In that same room, Greg has two more stacks, one in each back corner.

those protos look indeed much more impressive !!
perhaphs putting a 1400 on the array sub. sub is heavy enough not to move i guess so it should hold
always thought the 1400 was not high enough/ should have been 140-160cm
high speakers sound great. giant towers sound amazing

For my bedroom I was thinking (2) Array 800, (1) Array 880, (2) JL Audio F113, Onkyo preamp and D-Sonic amp 7x 500W into 8 ohms, 1000W into 4 ohms.

That would be a pretty rocking bedroom set up. What do have for your main room?

I did BI-AMP my JBL PROJECT ARRAY 800,the sound is great than one pair of speaker cables and no one in Denon pre/power thread did not believe me.I think this JBL do the good job for both music and movie,also have center 880 and will buy SW. 1500 tomorrow(very heavy for one man lifting;56kg).

The web master at lansingheritage, who has listened to gear all over the world, has auditioned the Array prototypes in the home of Greg Timbers, JBL's Chief Systems Engineer. He said it was the finest system he has ever heard in a home enviroment.
http://i260.photobucket.com/albums/ii4/hifiguy268/_MG_5117.jpgMy god what is this speaker,I guess ARRAY 800 ontop of ARRAY 1500 and it was great looking in a unique way.This speaker will become 4 ways speaker,that's great.I also try BI-AMP,BIWIRE,look like BIWIRE do the best job with DENON AVP/POA-A1HD and DENON-S1 sacd player.:)

I bought JBL ARRAY 880,1000 already with biwire from POA-A1HD to ARRAY 1000.The SW.I used now is Velodyne DD12,My question Should I change SW to 1500 ARRAY or what?Thanks for advance.This speakers sound very great than expected,can't imagine how deep bass could be for 2 SW.

That speaker array in that untreated room would cause ear blistering!

That speaker array in that untreated room would cause ear blistering!
My room was calibrated already before DENON pre/power was installed and This speakers sound very nice either HT or music.Everyone visited my room always said this speakers ,he must own someday.:)

That speaker array in that untreated room would cause ear blistering!Since the ear is my expertise,what part of the ear should get a blister as you told.Is it external ear which include pinna,ear canal or middle ear which include tympanic membrane,stapes,malleus,incus,middle ear mucosa include opening at anteroinferior of Eustachain tube or inner ear whhich include cochlear,vestibule and cn8.Which part ,the blister will occur when I use this ARRAY speaker?Sometime, if you don't want to answer the question,ignore it,please.:)

Since the ear is my expertise,what part of the ear should get a blister as you told.Is it external ear which include pinna,ear canal or middle ear which include tympanic membrane,stapes,malleus,incus,middle ear mucosa include opening at anteroinferior of Eustachain tube or inner ear whhich include cochlear,vestibule and cn8.Which part ,the blister will occur when I use this ARRAY speaker?Sometime, if you don't want to answer the question,ignore it,please.:)


Just a figure of speech re: ear blistering.

My point was large, horn driven speakers in a room without acoustical tereatments will have many secoindary, tertiary reflections. This can be perceived as harshness at high levels... I love horns, use them and understand that dynamics are their strengh.That said, I also have absorption on the front wall, side walls (below the ear) and at strategic points on the ceiling... EQ helps as well.

Just a figure of speech re: ear blistering.

My point was large, horn driven speakers in a room without acoustical tereatments will have many secoindary, tertiary reflections. This can be perceived as harshness at high levels... I love horns, use them and understand that dynamics are their strengh.That said, I also have absorption on the front wall, side walls (below the ear) and at strategic points on the ceiling... EQ helps as well.If you mean as you wrote,I am sorry for what I said since this web has a dfferent kind of class and education,I don't know what truly in his mind when he post.Thank for clarification.:)

1500 ARRAY Subwoofer is great than my expected,also gave me a back pain.I enjoy it's LFE. immensely,The great SW.and Velodyne digital drive too.

Brief review of the JBL 1400 Project Array, from a pro gear mag:

http://www.nxtbook.com/nxtbooks/newbay/par_200909/index.php?startid=31

I bought JBL ARRAY 880,1000 already with biwire from POA-A1HD to ARRAY 1000.The SW.I used now is Velodyne DD12,My question Should I change SW to 1500 ARRAY or what?Thanks for advance.This speakers sound very great than expected,can't imagine how deep bass could be for 2 SW.

superb system
any photos ?

I bought JBL ARRAY 880,1000 already with biwire from POA-A1HD to ARRAY 1000.The SW.I used now is Velodyne DD12,My question Should I change SW to 1500 ARRAY or what?Thanks for advance.This speakers sound very great than expected,can't imagine how deep bass could be for 2 SW.

I wouldn't switch to the JBL sub. Even though they produce alot of kick, they don't have the articulation or control that the Velodyne has.
Getting a second DD-12 would produce a fantastic experience.

Sorry to revive such an old thread, but I recently heard the Project Array 1400s at the CES show, and I must say I was impressed to the point of being "blown away." They were the most lifelike speaker I've ever heard, and I've been chasing that "Holy Grail" for over thirty years. My first CES "best of show" was Mark Levinson's HQD (Hartley Quad Decca) system from back in the 70s. Mark demoed the system at the Palmer House IIRC in Chicago and I was completely blown away then as well, so much so that I put together my own version substituting eight modified (sand and epoxy) 8 inch Audax bextrines in huge transmission lines for the Hartleys. While the bottom of the 1400s doesn't approach that of the HQD, or even my old subwoofer, the realism of the package was astounding.

Was the photo of the prototype Arrays shown in 4DHDs post taken in Greg Timbers' listening room? The mid/high unit is severely padded down from 98 to 89dB in the 1400, so I'm interested in building something similar to what's in the photo to bring the overall efficiency closer to that of the horn section.

Sorry to revive such an old thread, but I recently heard the Project Array 1400s at the CES show, and I must say I was impressed to the point of being "blown away." They were the most lifelike speaker I've ever heard, and I've been chasing that "Holy Grail" for over thirty years. My first CES "best of show" was Mark Levinson's HQD (Hartley Quad Decca) system from back in the 70s. Mark demoed the system at the Palmer House IIRC in Chicago and I was completely blown away then as well, so much so that I put together my own version substituting eight modified (sand and epoxy) 8 inch Audax bextrines in huge transmission lines for the Hartleys. While the bottom of the 1400s doesn't approach that of the HQD, or even my old subwoofer, the realism of the package was astounding.

Was the photo of the prototype Arrays shown in 4DHDs post taken in Greg Timbers' listening room? The mid/high unit is severely padded down from 98 to 89dB in the 1400, so I'm interested in building something similar to what's in the photo to bring the overall efficiency closer to that of the horn section.

You wern't the only one impressed with these. I also heard them at CES and was blown away at how smooth and detailed they sounded. If I owned these I would still use multiple subs (4 pref).

Ivan