Price should have nothing to do with it. As borne out by the measurements, the LSR708is are just about dead accurate. What you hear is what is in the recording.
All of this:
I thought I would jump in here. I had a chance to demo the JBL 708p in my room....blah blah blah....
Is classic "Circle of Confusion" BS. Problems with the above referenced post:
I have had experiences with almost every speaker but have been using ATCs for the last 2.5 years.
So, the poster quoted mixes on the ATCs, which means he is going to mix to their relative strengths and weaknesses. If the ATCs lack in highs, his mixes will sound shrill or sibilant on an accurate monitor. Without any accompanying measurements, we have no idea how the ATCs actually perform. How can the poster tell what problems are in the mix and what problems are coming from the speakers?
I wanted to extensively test this on VO recordings I have done for TV. All different VOs. Ones that I've listened to on many different systems. And the JBLs are not accurate in this frequency area.
Yes they are - in fact, they are particularly accurate in this frequency area:
Question: how did the poster come to the conclusion that the speakers are not accurate in this area? How does he / she know the issues are not in the recording?
The LSR708o measurements prove that the speakers are accurate in the vocal range. Without any measurements on the ATCs we have no idea if they are accurate or not.
I actually called JBL to see if the tweeter would soften over time. Nope.
How would you ever know when the speaker is actually giving you accurate sound if it changed over time...?
But to me, the biggest giveaway:
A/Bing them to the ATCs it was apparent that ATC rules the mid range.
So, we have a speaker we know is accurate - the LSR708i - and a speaker that the poster is claiming has a richer midrange. The answer could be
right there - from what he / she is reporting
, the ATC has a warmer midrange and a rolled off treble. No surprise that someone mixing on ATCs would produce recordings with a pronounced top end, that would sound shrill and sibilant on a neutral monitor. Of course, part of this is conjecture, as we have no measurements of the ATC to look at...
This is a perfect example of the Circle of Confusion:
And it goes back to what I was saying the other day - it's amazing how many mixers will use different monitors for different types or styles of music. When mixing, you want a monitor that reveals what's actually in the recording - nothing less, and nothing more. That should be the only criteria for picking a mixing monitor - how neutral it is. Otherwise the monitor is acting like a permanent EQ in the mix chain, always adding its own character to whatever you are mixing.
Broken record time, but it's like a video mastering engineer picking a video monitor that over-emphasizes green to do color timing on a movie scene that takes place in a rain forest. The result would be UNDER saturated green on a neutral monitor. Why is it just about everyone can understand this concept when it comes to video, but when it comes to audio all of it goes out the window?