or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Speakers › Official JTR speaker thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Official JTR speaker thread - Page 377

post #11281 of 18412
http://jtrspeakers.websitetoolbox.com/post/noesis-212ht-and-212htlp-speaker-thread-6035610
http://jtrspeakers.websitetoolbox.com/post/noesis-228ht-update-352013-6197559
http://jtrspeakers.websitetoolbox.com/post/all-new-noesis-speakers-6031289 this shows the dispersion pattern.
http://jtrspeakers.websitetoolbox.com/post/differences-between-228ht-and-212htlp-6415111


Had I taken the time to read link #4 Jeff states he does XO at 400hz.
So much for my Incorrect guesses.rolleyes.gifbiggrin.gif
Edited by countryWV - 10/11/13 at 8:50am
post #11282 of 18412
Quote:
Originally Posted by jlpowell84 View Post

Here is my raw sub response. And so it begins. Treatments, mini dsp, audyssey. Few tools to work with.

Good deal man, thats a nice looking raw response! I just got my mic and spl meter from cross spectrum and will dig into REW this weekend... looking forward to it rolleyes.gif Also, glad to see you gave those dual HP's a good home.. I'm sure they sound awseome cool.gif
post #11283 of 18412
Quote:
Originally Posted by MiniHT View Post

Good deal man, thats a nice looking raw response! I just got my mic and spl meter from cross spectrum and will dig into REW this weekend... looking forward to it rolleyes.gif Also, glad to see you gave those dual HP's a good home.. I'm sure they sound awseome cool.gif

Yes it's a good foundation. My mini dsp will be here soon too!

Hey Beast, no 40hz crossover. I'm guessing I will have a around 60 hz null anyway. But the distance isn't set right. I remembered this morning because I had it set at like 5 ft in my AVR before I moved. I didn't run Audyssey because I wanted a raw response but I should have run Audyssey then just toggled it off. I will get that this weekend. I am excited about my raw extension though because my entire room is open to the left.
post #11284 of 18412
Quote:
Originally Posted by RMK! View Post

The magic of a new component ... smile.gif

So Rob, you have owned a lot of nice equipment. Have you experienced similar? It is actual proof to me that power is not simply power. That amps can "slightly" have different sound characteristics. Now I do t believe in paying 14k for an amp. That is snake oil at that point. But like speakers, you can get better but there is the point of diminishing returns. The drums were definitively better though. As well as the male voice.
post #11285 of 18412

Thank you. I zipped an email to Jeff, too.
post #11286 of 18412
Nice! Just got confirmation my Open DRC-AN from mini dsp will be here today! That's 2 day shipping from Hong Kong!

Now I get get some shelf filters in there if needed! Plus any single frequency boost or cut!
post #11287 of 18412
Quote:
Originally Posted by jlpowell84 View Post

So Rob, you have owned a lot of nice equipment. Have you experienced similar? It is actual proof to me that power is not simply power. That amps can "slightly" have different sound characteristics. Now I do t believe in paying 14k for an amp. That is snake oil at that point. But like speakers, you can get better but there is the point of diminishing returns. The drums were definitively better though. As well as the male voice.

I have not heard a significant difference in amps/AVR's except from a pure power/SPL perspective and I think the Kansas City amp AVR comparo illustrated that point. Within their individual performance parameters they are virtually indistinguishable.

Audio memory is sketchy at best and many opinions are influenced by the enthusiasm of ownership and that isn't limited to just amps IMHO. smile.gifwink.gif
post #11288 of 18412
Cam Man,

I wrote this earlier but it didn't go through on my iPad. And sorry if you know some of this but this might be a good overview of JTR Speakers for others that are new to the thread.

JTR Speakers have their roots in the professional side, which is more focused with loud, efficient speakers; since they do need to fill a venue with sound after all. So even though some of their speakers have up to 12" woofers, these are used to have a highly efficient speaker, not a deep bass speaker. JTR makes some very good and powerful subs and Jeff has stated all of his speakers are expected to be used with a sub(s).

Noesis - Needs a crossover around 80 Hz except for the 212HT which could go down to 70 Hz. The compression driver can be rotated for vertical or horizontal (center channel) speaker alignment and has a 60 degree horizontal/40 degree vertical sound dispersion. As mentioned above, the large woofers are used to match the extreme efficiency of the compression driver and are not used to play deep midbass.

Coaxial speakers - The Straight 8, Slanted 8, Triple 8, and Triple 12s are also very efficient speakers but have a much wider dispersion of approximately 90 degrees horizontally and vertically. They are very good speakers in their own right and were the surprise hit of a speaker get together (GTG) in the past year or so. So the JTR coaxial speakers can be used as main speakers but their wide dispersion makes them a very good choice for home theater surround duty.
Edited by dgage - 10/11/13 at 10:16am
post #11289 of 18412
Quote:
Originally Posted by RMK! View Post

I have not heard a significant difference in amps/AVR's except from a pure power/SPL perspective and I think the Kansas City amp AVR comparo illustrated that point. Within their individual performance parameters they are virtually indistinguishable.

Audio memory is sketchy at best and many opinions are influenced by the enthusiasm of ownership and that isn't limited to just amps IMHO. smile.gifwink.gif

No truer words have ever been spoken! As long as you run said amplifiers within their design constraints, you aren't going to hear (or at least SHOULDN'T hear) any difference.
post #11290 of 18412
Quote:
Originally Posted by RMK! View Post

I have not heard a significant difference in amps/AVR's except from a pure power/SPL perspective and I think the Kansas City amp AVR comparo illustrated that point. Within their individual performance parameters they are virtually indistinguishable.

Audio memory is sketchy at best and many opinions are influenced by the enthusiasm of ownership and that isn't limited to just amps IMHO. smile.gifwink.gif

I totally get that and have the base of perspective. But I wasn't even looking for that. I was checking for the hum or buzz and heard it then. I wonder if I can record sound clips and compare. I only have my iPhone recorder though. I will do a blind test on my fiancée.
post #11291 of 18412
Quote:
Originally Posted by beastaudio View Post

No truer words have ever been spoken! As long as you run said amplifiers within their design constraints, you aren't going to hear (or at least SHOULDN'T hear) any difference.

I had a Denon receiver driving Polk floorstanders. I added a XPA-5 and noticed a definite difference. They became much more detailed.
post #11292 of 18412
I understand we want to avoid the snake oil mentality. But we can be arrogant to the point that every amplification power source on the planet will sound EXACTLY IDENTICAL EVERY TIME. I can tell you for 100% that there was a difference last night. The speakers sounded better with no doubt. In particular the S's from the male voice and the smaller higher frequency drums (sorry I don't know the correct terminology) were much clearer. The best way to describe it was with the Sherbourn as opposed to my 3313 you could make out the separate instruments as opposed to more blurred together. And the kicker is I wasn't even looking for that. I was checking for humm or buzz.
post #11293 of 18412
Quote:
Originally Posted by rangers View Post

I had a Denon receiver driving Polk floorstanders. I added a XPA-5 and noticed a definite difference. They became much more detailed.

The polks obviously needed a little more juice than the Denon could provide! Let's also not forget about crest factor biggrin.gif
post #11294 of 18412
Quote:
Originally Posted by jlpowell84 View Post

I understand we want to avoid the snake oil mentality. But we can be arrogant to the point that every amplification power source on the planet will sound EXACTLY IDENTICAL EVERY TIME. I can tell you for 100% that there was a difference last night. The speakers sounded better with no doubt. In particular the S's from the male voice and the smaller higher frequency drums (sorry I don't know the correct terminology) were much clearer. The best way to describe it was with the Sherbourn as opposed to my 3313 you could make out the separate instruments as opposed to more blurred together. And the kicker is I wasn't even looking for that. I was checking for humm or buzz.
Using an amp to drive 91dbs speakers will be a more noticeable difference then using the same amp to drive speakers with 101dbs sensitivity. Speakers that have 87dbs sensitivity almost have to be driven by an external amp and usually come Bi- wired.
IMO all speakers benefit from an external amp some more than others. High Quality amps SQ should always remain neutral and uncolored.
Chris
post #11295 of 18412
Quote:
Originally Posted by dgage View Post

Cam Man,

I wrote this earlier but it didn't go through on my iPad. And sorry if you know some of this but this might be a good overview of JTR Speakers for others that are new to the thread.

JTR Speakers have their roots in the professional side, which is more focused with loud, efficient speakers; since they do need to fill a venue with sound after all. So even though some of their speakers have up to 12" woofers, these are used to have a highly efficient speaker, not a deep bass speaker. JTR makes some very good and powerful subs and Jeff has stated all of his speakers are expected to be used with a sub(s).

Noesis - Needs a crossover around 80 Hz except for the 212HT which could go down to 70 Hz. The compression driver can be rotated for vertical or horizontal (center channel) speaker alignment and has a 60 degree horizontal/40 degree vertical sound dispersion. As mentioned above, the large woofers are used to match the extreme efficiency of the compression driver and are not used to play deep midbass.

Coaxial speakers - The Straight 8, Slanted 8, Triple 8, and Triple 12s are also very efficient speakers but have a much wider dispersion of approximately 90 degrees horizontally and vertically. They are very good speakers in their own right and were the surprise hit of a speaker get together (GTG) in the past year or so. So the JTR coaxial speakers can be used as main speakers but their wide dispersion makes them a very good choice for home theater surround duty.

Thank you. Very helpful. It was a good review, but the 228 and 212 are new since I last took a look at JTR. Noesis and Coaxials are different designs that are quite useful. I think the higher directivity of the 228 and 212 would be very handy in a lot of larger rooms.

As I mentinoned, my only concern is the dispersion below the crossover in the 228 when it is orientated horizontally. I've got an email into Jeff to see what I can learn about that. I wouldn't be concerned about this in the 212 since the CD/horn carry the load down to 400 Hz. A lot is going on between 400 Hz and 1 KHz in mixes (dialogue/vocals come to mind).
post #11296 of 18412
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cam Man View Post

Thank you. Very helpful. It was a good review, but the 228 and 212 are new since I last took a look at JTR. Noesis and Coaxials are different designs that are quite useful. I think the higher directivity of the 228 and 212 would be very handy in a lot of larger rooms.

As I mentinoned, my only concern is the dispersion below the crossover in the 228 when it is orientated horizontally. I've got an email into Jeff to see what I can learn about that. I wouldn't be concerned about this in the 212 since the CD/horn carry the load down to 400 Hz. A lot is going on between 400 Hz and 1 KHz in mixes (dialogue/vocals come to mind).
It looks to be that you are an individual who would benefit from the extra that the 212HT offers. Most 228 owners report that they do not think there is much difference between the two models so they are completely satisfied with what the 228 offers. There is quite a difference between the 212 & 228 but for those who do not need these advantages then it is much less important. For those who are going to use these advantages the 212 is a must. The 228 is a 2-way design while the 212 is a 3-way with the CD handling 2 different frequency ranges. 400hz to 1khz is the 212s specialty. The human voice averages between 80hz to 1.1khz so that is a very important range for dialogue.
Chris
Edited by countryWV - 10/11/13 at 11:46am
post #11297 of 18412
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cam Man View Post

Thank you. Very helpful. It was a good review, but the 228 and 212 are new since I last took a look at JTR. Noesis and Coaxials are different designs that are quite useful. I think the higher directivity of the 228 and 212 would be very handy in a lot of larger rooms.

As I mentinoned, my only concern is the dispersion below the crossover in the 228 when it is orientated horizontally. I've got an email into Jeff to see what I can learn about that. I wouldn't be concerned about this in the 212 since the CD/horn carry the load down to 400 Hz. A lot is going on between 400 Hz and 1 KHz in mixes (dialogue/vocals come to mind).

Right, there will be a wider dispersion below the CD/horn frequency range which is 400 HZ for the 212 and around 1000 Hz for the 228. Since you can turn the CD/horn, the dispersion should be the same regardless of whether the speaker is situated vertically or horizontally. Ok a little wider for a horizontal/center speaker but that's to be expected with a speaker on its long axis.

Now realize that upper frequencies are more directional than lower so as you go lower the dispersion shouldn't be as noticeable to a normal listener. But you don't necessarily seem like a normal listener.

Let me give you some advice that I was given in relation to the 212 vs 228. But first, this advice wouldn't be needed if you could listen to both. Barring that, it is very clear that if you are the type that might have some small doubt or regret, then skip the 228 and buy the 212. Otherwise you will always have that doubt in the back of your mind. Since I don't plan on buying speakers for the next 10-20 years, I decided to get the 212s.

Oh yeah, one more thing...people that bought early coaxials have been able to buy upgraded parts from Jeff to make an early Triple 8 (as an example) comparable to today's Triple 8 via speaker and/or crossover changes for a nominal fee. There haven't been any upgrades to the Noesis yet but this is something else to keep in mind for speakers that you might keep for a long time.
post #11298 of 18412
^^^Good Advice^^^
When in doubt avoid the "What ifs" and second guesses by getting the 212.
post #11299 of 18412
Quote:
Originally Posted by countryWV View Post


It looks to be that you are an individual who would benefit from the extra that the 212HT offers. Most 228 owners report that they do not think there is much difference between the two models so they are completely satisfied with what the 228 offers. There is quite a difference between the 212 & 228 but for those who do not need these advantages then it is much less important. For those who are going to use these advantages the 212 is a must. The 228 is a 2-way design while the 212 is a 3-way with the CD handling 2 different frequency ranges. 400hz to 1khz is the 212s specialty. The human voice averages between 80hz to 1.1khz so that is a very important range for dialogue.
Chris

Well, you're certainly preaching to the choir. smile.gif I am absolutely certain I would find the 212 superior, but existing niches for LCRs in my room at home are limiting factors, especially the center. I can do 228/T8 in there. I could modify the left and right compartments with a saws-all. wink.gif

I find that 3-way design of the 212 fascinating...approaching irresistable. frown.gifsmile.gif
post #11300 of 18412
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cam Man View Post

Well, you're certainly preaching to the choir. smile.gif I am absolutely certain I would find the 212 superior, but existing niches for LCRs in my room at home are limiting factors, especially the center. I can do 228/T8 in there. I could modify the left and right compartments with a saws-all. wink.gif

I find that 3-way design of the 212 fascinating...approaching irresistable. frown.gifsmile.gif
What speakers will these be replacing? Or what speakers do you currently have?
post #11301 of 18412
Quote:
Originally Posted by countryWV View Post


Using an amp to drive 91dbs speakers will be a more noticeable difference then using the same amp to drive speakers with 101dbs sensitivity. Speakers that have 87dbs sensitivity almost have to be driven by an external amp and usually come Bi- wired.
IMO all speakers benefit from an external amp some more than others. High Quality amps SQ should always remain neutral and uncolored.
Chris

Perhaps it's just allowing the speaker to open up more? I was at -17 on both the Denon 3313 and the Sherbourn PA 7350 test that I did after I noticed the 7350 sounded better. Maybe the 5 1/2 mid wanted a little more to open up. I could see that making the difference smile.gif
post #11302 of 18412
Quote:
Originally Posted by jlpowell84 View Post

Perhaps it's just allowing the speaker to open up more? I was at -17 on both the Denon 3313 and the Sherbourn PA 7350 test that I did after I noticed the 7350 sounded better. Maybe the 5 1/2 mid wanted a little more to open up. I could see that making the difference smile.gif
You will definitely notice a difference with the speakers that are driven by the PA 7350 vs AVR. I think what is being said is if you replace that amp with say the Sunfire 400/800 it would sound exactly the same as the PA 7350. Quality amps pretty much all sound the same. An amp should accept a signal, amplify that signal, then send it out amplified but NO change to the sound quality or sonic signature. What you are experiencing is that the PA7350 can drive your speakers to the fullest while the AVR does not. A speaker being driven to its full capability should sound better then the same speaker that has half the juice required.
post #11303 of 18412
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cam Man View Post

Well, you're certainly preaching to the choir. smile.gif I am absolutely certain I would find the 212 superior, but existing niches for LCRs in my room at home are limiting factors, especially the center. I can do 228/T8 in there. I could modify the left and right compartments with a saws-all. wink.gif

I find that 3-way design of the 212 fascinating...approaching irresistable. frown.gifsmile.gif

I hate to squash your excitement but the 212 is a 2-way design with the Cd/horn and woofers. The CD/horn is so efficient that it takes two large woofers to get near the efficiency of the CD/horn. Remember that adding a second speaker will give you an additional 6db (assumes double power) so that is how Jeff can use regular speakers to be as efficient as the CDs/horn. The difference is the CD/horn goes so much lower in frequency that a larger woofer can handle the lower midrange and upper midbass.
post #11304 of 18412
Quote:
Originally Posted by jlpowell84 View Post

I totally get that and have the base of perspective. But I wasn't even looking for that. I was checking for the hum or buzz and heard it then. I wonder if I can record sound clips and compare. I only have my iPhone recorder though. I will do a blind test on my fiancée.

If you're trying to compare if the 2 sounds coming from 2 different speakers are indeed different.. why not just use your mic and REW? If it's a hum/ground loop then it'll show up as a 60hz peak on the graph. If the other speakers "buzz" is different than the "hum", it will show up different on the graph, no? I would think a different sound would also mean a different frequency. Sorry if this was not what you were looking solve..
post #11305 of 18412
Quote:
Originally Posted by dgage View Post

I hate to squash your excitement but the 212 is a 2-way design with the Cd/horn and woofers. The CD/horn is so efficient that it takes two large woofers to get near the efficiency of the CD/horn. Remember that adding a second speaker will give you an additional 6db (assumes double power) so that is how Jeff can use regular speakers to be as efficient as the CDs/horn. The difference is the CD/horn goes so much lower in frequency that a larger woofer can handle the lower midrange and upper midbass.

Maybe I should have put 3-way in quotation marks. I don't think I understand the "dual" roll the CD plays with mids and highs ( if dual is the proper term). redface.gif
post #11306 of 18412
Quote:
Originally Posted by dgage View Post

I hate to squash your excitement but the 212 is a 2-way design with the Cd/horn and woofers. The CD/horn is so efficient that it takes two large woofers to get near the efficiency of the CD/horn. Remember that adding a second speaker will give you an additional 6db (assumes double power) so that is how Jeff can use regular speakers to be as efficient as the CDs/horn. The difference is the CD/horn goes so much lower in frequency that a larger woofer can handle the lower midrange and upper midbass.

Nope, incorrect. The CD in the 212 is a two-way compression driver. It has its own crossover point between the two parts of the CD and the "third" part is the two 12's. This is very much a Three-way design
post #11307 of 18412
Quote:
Originally Posted by dgage View Post

I hate to squash your excitement but the 212 is a 2-way design with the Cd/horn and woofers. The CD/horn is so efficient that it takes two large woofers to get near the efficiency of the CD/horn. Remember that adding a second speaker will give you an additional 6db (assumes double power) so that is how Jeff can use regular speakers to be as efficient as the CDs/horn. The difference is the CD/horn goes so much lower in frequency that a larger woofer can handle the lower midrange and upper midbass.
Read this it will explain. http://bmsspeakers.com/index.php?id=bms_4593nd
post #11308 of 18412
post #11309 of 18412
Quote:
Originally Posted by countryWV View Post


Read this it will explain. http://bmsspeakers.com/index.php?id=bms_4593nd

Yes, I checked that out earlier today while reading up. If you open the data page on the CD it shows the two curves. http://bmsspeakers.com/fileadmin/bms-data/product_data_2012/bms_4593nd_t_data_2012-02.pdf
Although the mid/high splice is kind of wanky-looking. With good EQ like XT32 and a good sub, I'm sure these are amazing.
post #11310 of 18412
Quote:
Originally Posted by countryWV View Post


3-way is correct. The 228 is a 2-way design.

Is the Tripple 8 a 3-way design with its coaxial mid woofer/CD? It appears that those would be friendly to horizontal orientation for this reason. And the more open dispersion characteristics of the coaxial design would have to be appropriate for your room (verses higher directivity).
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Speakers
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Speakers › Official JTR speaker thread