Originally Posted by Molon_Labe
Honestly, I dont think its animosity, but rather indifference. Posts like the one below go greatly ignored - but to each their own. Everyone discusses measurements, but when nearly identical measurements are posted, there is always another extenuating circumstance as to why spending another $20k+ is justified. When your business model is built on the accuracy of a speaker i.e recording studio, theatrical studio, etc then I can see where every ounce of accuracy is worth it's weight in gold regardless of price. With that said, more money is probably spent on the room acoustics, treatment, and design than the speakers themselves. Rarely, will these two lines cross in a home theater environment except for the very wealthy or moderately wealthy and single
I think the M2 is probably the top of the mark from a spend on a home system and those are a very, very small percentage of AVS enthusiasts. It isn't a thread issue but a target audience issue. Maybe there should be separate forums like the display forum with separate areas based on cost of product.
I am basing much of what I post upon my own conversations with JBL Pro, Synthesis and Revel engineers. A great deal of what I learned from them is: the right tool for the job. As I pointed out months back in the 708 thread, most of the Cinema models are designed for large spaces, with acoustic summing and overall accuracy being issues in smaller listening spaces. I understand that many are enjoying their 4722s and other Cinema speakers, however.
Synthesis represents adapting Pro / Cinema standards for the home, and there is a reason why actual Cinema speakers are not included in the Synthesis lineup. And there is a reason why Cinema speakers are not on the Blu-ray mastering stages, either. As I've repeated ad nauseum, over 90% of Blu-rays are mastered on a JBL Synthesis system. Speakers like the M2 and 708 are making their way into these kinds of spaces more and more, because they are designed for accuracy and near to mid field listening (just like what we do in the home).
My own home theater company has as its philosophy trying to recreate the filmmaker and sound designer's intent as closely as possible. To me, this is best accomplished by trying to replicate what was heard on the mix stage, not what was heard in the theater. Synthesis has this as its prime goal, because the filmmaker / mixer can control what goes on in the mix stage, but not what goes on once the film is dropped into the theaters.
I *kind of* agree with you about the M2s being at the top end of what many will spend, at least in regards to the typical poster here on the Forum (though there are plenty of Revel Salon2 owners, at $22K per pair). I own a set of LSR708s myself, which are very much like the M2's little brother, and about 1/3 the price. And, as mentioned, the M2 and 708 / 705 are finding their way into Synthesis systems.
As I posted at the top of this thread, "JBL Synthesis systems are designed for residential rooms—no matter how large—and are optimized for such rooms which are much smaller than the large theaters for which JBL Professional is famous." This is the actual Synthesis philosophy, not my words. And it explains why a Synthesis system is used for most Blu-ray mastering.
RE: measurements. As you can see in Harman spinorama graphs, there are many factors that can be measured that most "speaker measurement" graphs leave out, but that greatly affect sound quality (this is briefly touched on in the post you quoted). I will post a Harman Spinorama graph with a primer here momentarily, as it can really help put what matters and what doesn't into perspective.
RE: studios spending more on treatments, room design, etc. That is true to some extent, but one of the things that Harman's research has shown is that mix rooms, etc, are all over the map in terms of how flat the response is at the mix position, no matter how much effort goes into room design and treatments. Again, this is part of the Synthesis philosophy and design goal - to fix this problem, by using speakers with known high performance characteristics calibrated using ARCOS / SFM to make sure that one mix room will sound like another. This goes to Dr. Toole's famous "Audio Circle of Confusion," which I will also post about shortly.
Part of what has come out of Toole's work is that room design and treatments are only a part of the equation, and flat, even response can be achieved in even average rooms when multiple subs are used and combined with Harman's SFM technologies. Toole just wrote an article about that on Audioholics, for anyone interested:
Lastly, in regard to system cost, etc, JBL Synthesis systems start at around $18K for a 5.1 system and work there way up from there (plus calibration cost, which can vary). I would say the average Synthesis system is in the $50K to $150K range, but they can top out at half a million.
Hope this helps clarify at least my own position on these things, even if it differs from your own