AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Speakers › Why are JTR speakers more popular than Seaton Sound speakers?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Why are JTR speakers more popular than Seaton Sound speakers? - Page 4

post #91 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by RMK! View Post

Details can be found here:
http://www.avsforum.com/t/1446450/ne-spring-speaker-shootout-gtg-date-poll-and-discussion

Hope you can go. I would love to but it's 2000 miles and a bad week for me ...

Damn, looks like they are at max capacity frown.gif If a spot opens up, I'll jump in
post #92 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackdevil77 View Post

They are mo betta then da best EVA!!!! lol .

Well at least now you sound believable and aren't some random punk trolling the boards biggrin.gif

Thanks for your review by the way. I have never heard the Seatons but I am sure they sound fantastic and I know they have a fantastic reputation. Like many owners on this thread I own JTR, but I can appreciate great speakers regardless of brand.
post #93 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackdevil77 View Post

Damn, looks like they are at max capacity frown.gif If a spot opens up, I'll jump in

Well, if you agreed to bring your Catalysts they might make room ...
post #94 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frohlich View Post

Well at least now you sound believable and aren't some random punk trolling the boards biggrin.gif

Thanks for your review by the way. I have never heard the Seatons but I am sure they sound fantastic and I know they have a fantastic reputation. Like many owners on this thread I own JTR, but I can appreciate great speakers regardless of brand.

No problem, my pleasure, There will be more where that came from lol, I'm waiting on a pair of Sparks I ordered from Mark about 2 weeks ago that will serve surround duty
post #95 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by RMK! View Post

Well, if you agreed to bring your Catalysts they might make room ...

I thought Mark was bringing his Cats? If they weren't the so big and heavy, I would have no problem doing that. I thought lugging my mobil DJ speakers was a pain, but these things are HEAVY and to carry them without dinging them is no easy task. I dread the 2 flights of stairs I have to carry them on when my dedicated room is done.
post #96 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick Craig View Post

As a designer (and not having listed to JTR or Seaton) I would tend to favor Mark's approach. With these drivers DSP is certainly the best way to go with much greater flexibility than a passive system. Being able to tune the room with adjusting the DSP is a big plus as well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Seaton View Post

There are only 2 DSP settings which have ever shipped or reside at a customer's home. The first being the same as what fugueness has had in his speakers since the beginning, and the second being a recent addition of a subtle baffle wall compensation (at lower frequencies) for those building their Catalysts flush in a baffle wall behind a screen. I continue to experiment with options for user EQ, but such options have to allow the same capabilities of the current design, be practical to set up and use, and also be superior in some way to the many room correction systems currently available.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Fitzmaurice View Post

+1. The flattest speaker in the world isn't flat anymore when you put it in a room, and every room is different, so what's perfect in one won't be in another. Flat response was the Holy Grail of the audio Dark Ages, when we didn't have the ability to EQ. Today it's not an undesirable trait, but not a necessary one either.

There is no point arguing the potential advantage of active DSP controlled speakers. Marks last sentence and Bill Fitzmaurice's comments seem the most cogent.

I am running a 9.2 system and may go to an 11.2 at some point. To have all 9 or 11 speakers require a power source plus, running long XLR's to the pre-pro source is not a trivial process for me. I suppose a combination of active (for the LCR) and passive for the surrounds would work but that sets up and an interesting combo of DSP and EQ. I'm not saying that would not work and in fact that may be an ideal situation for some. I'm just not seeing it. I certainly lack knowledge on the subject, perhaps I also lack the vision. smile.gif
post #97 of 114
3 Noesis's plus DCX 2496 plus 3 channel amp equals 3 powered LCR's with DSP and EQ that can be tailored to any room. Don't like the quality of the DCX, there is the QSC or DBX. It does not matter if the amp and dsp is in the speaker cabinet or not.
post #98 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by MKtheater View Post

3 Noesis's plus DCX 2496 plus 3 channel amp equals 3 powered LCR's with DSP and EQ that can be tailored to any room. Don't like the quality of the DCX, there is the QSC or DBX. It does not matter if the amp and dsp is in the speaker cabinet or not.

While I agree in general with your statement, you are ignoring Marks comments (see below) as to the enhanced capability of the active crossover utilized in the Cats. I have had conversations with Jeff and he agree's this is a distinct advantage but it does come at a cost some of which I mentioned above.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Seaton View Post

Indeed, powered speakers have never been the most popular choice of enthusiasts as they are less conventional from what we are used to and regardless of the total cost being similar or not, it's easier to stomach a few smaller purchases vs. one larger expense. It was a choice I knew would limit sales, but delivered a superior product. There are aspects of the crossover alignment and integration which cannot be executed as well passively. Delays and precise, narrow EQ are simply not practical with passive crossovers. The active crossovers also make it easier to execute the very low crossover to the woofers I use in the Catalysts of <250Hz helping the in-room and off-axis response variations. The active solution is a more expensive path, just as the smooth cabinet face with large edge bevels and premium sealed woofers I employ all add to the expense. They are also key parts of what provide the resulting performance. I would never suggest that I wouldn't design and offer a passive speaker, but that's not what I wanted to found and anchor my company with.
The mention of power loss is related to the passive crossover components. Passive crossovers reduce efficiency at intended frequencies and ranges to achieve the desired response and have internal losses and non-linearities of their own. An active crossover doesn't re-direct or absorb the amplifier's power, but rather adjusts the level coming from the amplifier. As evidence by many great passive speakers, this is not a fatal flaw, but rather a compromise which can be minimized, particularly in high efficiency designs and with quality component choices. Of course and active solution eliminates the issue.
post #99 of 114
Less talk! More shoot out info! lol

Definitely curious to see how these two beast compare
post #100 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by RMK! View Post

While I agree in general with your statement, you are ignoring Marks comments (see below) as to the enhanced capability of the active crossover utilized in the Cats. I have had conversations with Jeff and he agree's this is a distinct advantage but it does come at a cost some of which I mentioned above.

You can do all that with the DCX, QSC, DBX, Ashly etc.. The better cabinet is something else and one thing that I did not mention is that Mark is doing the DSP and EQ work which I am sure would be better than doing it yourself but tweaking is fun. If I had to buy commercial it would be like this:

Powered- Catalysts

Passive- Noesis, Some line arrays, or Danley synergies.

There are 1000's of speakers out there and many that sound great, many that can play loud, but when you want loud and great the pack shrinks significantly. Now of course one must determine for themselves what is loud and great.
post #101 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by MKtheater View Post

You can do all that with the DCX, QSC, DBX, Ashly etc..

With a passive crossover sitting between the EQ and the Drivers you simply cannot "do all that". How much difference that level of control actually makes is debatable. smile.gif
post #102 of 114
Like MK said, there are lots of devices that will do the same job as the dsp software provided in the Cats. Funk Audio has a new rack amp that uses the same type of software as the Cats. There are lots of options. That being said, if I was in the market for powered speakers, the Cats would likely be it for sure.
post #103 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by RMK! View Post

With a passive crossover sitting between the EQ and the Drivers you simply cannot "do all that". How much difference that level of control actually makes is debatable. smile.gif

Im pretty sure he means the speakers with no passive xover. Just the drivers and use your own active xover. DCX etc.
post #104 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by N8DOGG View Post

Im pretty sure he means the speakers with no passive xover. Just the drivers and use your own active xover. DCX etc.

I'm sure you are correct but Marks comments were about active vs passive crossovers.
post #105 of 114
The dcx has active crossovers.
post #106 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by RMK! View Post

With a passive crossover sitting between the EQ and the Drivers you simply cannot "do all that". How much difference that level of control actually makes is debatable. smile.gif

I understand but I don't think Jeff's passive XO limits the noesis as dynamics or dynamic power are concerned, until maybe you get to the limits. Mark is right comparing apples to apples because in my limited time tweaking with JBL speakers that had both a passive network and I could bypass the network the difference was amazing! Again, apples to apples.
post #107 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by RMK! View Post

We are belaboring this point. DIY aside (I know that's hard for you wink.gif) there simply aren't many bare bones driver/enclosure speakers out there in the world.

I believe Marks comments were directed at his vs passive crossover systems like Noesis.

I understand. There are other powered speakers out there as well. I am not sure how many are refined for the home crowd though. Some higher end pro gear is very expensive and I would expect them to sound nice.
post #108 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by MKtheater View Post

I understand. There are other powered speakers out there as well. I am not sure how many are refined for the home crowd though. Some higher end pro gear is very expensive and I would expect them to sound nice.

Yes, I've heard some amazing pro systems but they are really geared for large venues so not so good for rooms like ours.
post #109 of 114
How does the price of Genelec or Procella compare to Seaton or JTR?
post #110 of 114
.
post #111 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackdevil77 View Post

Damn, looks like they are at max capacity frown.gif If a spot opens up, I'll jump in

Go ahead and post up in the thread and we'll add you to the reserve list. As history has shown, there are always a few that drop out. cool.gif
post #112 of 114
Okay awesome! Will do
post #113 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrlittlejeans View Post

How does the price of Genelec or Procella compare to Seaton or JTR?

Procella and Genelec are both *far* more expensive than Seaton / JTR.

I'd be interested to hear some opinions on the comparisons between these four though.
post #114 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by aligborat View Post

Procella and Genelec are both *far* more expensive than Seaton / JTR.

I'd be interested to hear some opinions on the comparisons between these four though.

There's a whole big comparison between Genelec and the Seaton Catalyst 12C on the seaton forums but "TheLion." Many will argue that it was an unfair fight since he bought only 1 Cat 12C and compared it to a full Genelec system. Still a good read

Here ya go:

http://www.seaton-sound-forum.com/post/Seaton-Catalyst-versus-Genelec-3way-studio-monitor-4897368?highlight=genelec
Edited by Blackdevil77 - 1/28/13 at 8:43am
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Speakers
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Speakers › Why are JTR speakers more popular than Seaton Sound speakers?