Official JBL Synthesis / Pro / Revel Home Theater Thread - Page 3 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 2396Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #61 of 3888 Old 07-15-2016, 08:24 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
torii's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 7,457
Mentioned: 61 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3727 Post(s)
Liked: 2124
I love all the info John provides....wish other companies stepped in and did the same...I am so happy with my French speakers but dont have a clue how they compare with the harmon group...if the jbl's/revel sound better, it would be a holy grail imo, but I am so happy w/focal...its all good.
John Schuermann likes this.

Power: Marantz sr7008, NAD C 275Bee x 2, Video: Oppo 103, Samsung 75un6300
Speakers: Focal aria 948, Focal cc900, Klipsch synergy KSF 10.5, Magnepan LRS
Subs: Rythmik FV25HP, Rythmik FV15HP
torii is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #62 of 3888 Old 07-15-2016, 08:30 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
mmiles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Delaware
Posts: 4,454
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1062 Post(s)
Liked: 550
^^^

Maybe JBL or REVEL would pay shipping both ways to double blind test them?

Mike Miles
[email protected]
mmiles is online now  
post #63 of 3888 Old 07-16-2016, 10:56 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
John Schuermann's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Colorado
Posts: 5,743
Mentioned: 94 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2008 Post(s)
Liked: 2516
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reddig View Post
Sure thing John no prob. Hey nothing wrong with that at. Everything is one giant continuation it seems so what a great revolutionary list of minds to learn from and mimic.

What's your thoughts on the current state of horns and where they are evolving to. Close to reaching points of diminishing returns I'd guess with all the man hours JBL/Harman has dedicated or is there still some scientific breakthroughs left? I often ponder that idea.
A good question. I don't think I have the expertise to specifically comment on horn technology other than to say that the D2 design utilized by the M2 and 7 series is currently state of the art. From my understanding horn drivers are extremely difficult to design, engineer and build well.

As Tim Gladwin at Harman shared with me recently:

To (your) point about resting after developing the perfect speaker, our attitude here at Harman is the exact opposite. As speakers and speaker technology has evolved and improved, it becomes much harder to make true breakthroughs. We have tools now that can measure characteristics that we could not measure, even a few years ago. In the 1970s (1980s..1990s) an improvement merely had to be plausible because there were simply no adequate measurement methods. Harman, and specifically our group, continues to invest heavily in leading edge R&D equipment to keep the facilities contemporary and relevant. From personal experience, I can attest that applying modern measurement techniques to older drivers can be a very humbling experience.

There is never any shame in finding out through new techniques that a feature into which you invested substantial effort in fact doesn’t really work as you thought. You simply take it as a lesson. However, if instead you chose to deny the new information in order to support a false reality, well that is a failure. Unfortunately there are some people who do believe that speakers were perfected years ago, and they treat the new methods with denial. They are simply wrong. I am committed to using all of the science-based methods available to improve Harman’s products, regardless of the effects such efforts may have on personal egos. My team in Northridge shares this commitment. We intend that customers will hear changes (for the better) in Harman Luxury products going forward.
Ericglo, Reddig and ValentinR like this.

John Schuermann
The Screening Room Home Theater Sales and Design
JS Music and Sound Film Scoring and Sound Design
John Schuermann is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #64 of 3888 Old 07-16-2016, 11:14 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
John Schuermann's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Colorado
Posts: 5,743
Mentioned: 94 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2008 Post(s)
Liked: 2516
Quote:
Originally Posted by mmiles View Post
^^^

Maybe JBL or REVEL would pay shipping both ways to double blind test them?
I doubt if they would - Harman just isn't structured like that. It could be that torii and I are not that far apart, though - he's in New Mexico and I'm in Colorado Springs. Would be interesting to compare the Focals with either the Revels or JBLs I have for demo.

Setting up a double blind test is another big challenge. At least equalizing speaker volume is not all that hard, plus it's possible to at least single blind the test (by blindfolding the listener or placing the speakers behind an acoustically transparent cloth). However, for a true double blind the person conducting the test AND the listener should not be aware of what is playing at any given time. It's also important to equalize room placement, as two speakers in different locations will interact with the room differently.

Ensuring an exact match in speaker location - plus blinding the test administrator - are the difficult parts. The only place in the world where I know that can be done is at the Harman labs in Northridge, California. Their speaker shuffler can move each speaker into the identical location within seconds. This is critical, as our auditory memory is extremely short. Waiting for someone to move the speaker manually - and make sure it is in the exact same location - can negatively affect the reliability of the results due to our very short auditory memory.

Anyone interested can see the Harman Speaker Shuffler in action here:


John Schuermann
The Screening Room Home Theater Sales and Design
JS Music and Sound Film Scoring and Sound Design
John Schuermann is offline  
post #65 of 3888 Old 07-16-2016, 11:15 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
John Schuermann's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Colorado
Posts: 5,743
Mentioned: 94 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2008 Post(s)
Liked: 2516
Quote:
Originally Posted by torii View Post
I love all the info John provides....wish other companies stepped in and did the same...I am so happy with my French speakers but dont have a clue how they compare with the harmon group...if the jbl's/revel sound better, it would be a holy grail imo, but I am so happy w/focal...its all good.
Thanks for your comments! Focal is no slouch in the speaker department, that's for sure, and they also have a Pro pedigree to back it up

John Schuermann
The Screening Room Home Theater Sales and Design
JS Music and Sound Film Scoring and Sound Design
John Schuermann is offline  
post #66 of 3888 Old 07-16-2016, 02:39 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Gooddoc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 8,776
Mentioned: 183 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3776 Post(s)
Liked: 3387
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Schuermann View Post
A good question. I don't think I have the expertise to specifically comment on horn technology other than to say that the D2 design utilized by the M2 and 7 series is currently state of the art. From my understanding horn drivers are extremely difficult to design, engineer and build well.

As Tim Gladwin at Harman shared with me recently:
[I]
...We have tools now that can measure characteristics that we could not measure, even a few years ago.....

...I can attest that applying modern measurement techniques to older drivers can be a very humbling experience...

...Unfortunately there are some people who do believe that speakers were perfected years ago, and they treat the new methods with denial.
There are measurements by enthusiasts on these forums that claim to show the D2 driver is inferior to the older generation drivers. JBL has been quite vocal about the fact these are superior drivers. So I'm left to wonder who is right, JBL or the enthusiasts?

Clearly, the measurements taken by the enthusiasts are decades old developments, so I wonder if it is these new characteristics they're measuring that are the disconnect?
Gooddoc is offline  
post #67 of 3888 Old 07-16-2016, 04:46 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Ericglo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Just below the US in South Florida
Posts: 12,127
Mentioned: 23 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3778 Post(s)
Liked: 2177
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Schuermann View Post
A good question. I don't think I have the expertise to specifically comment on horn technology other than to say that the D2 design utilized by the M2 and 7 series is currently state of the art. From my understanding horn drivers are extremely difficult to design, engineer and build well.

As Tim Gladwin at Harman shared with me recently:

To (your) point about resting after developing the perfect speaker, our attitude here at Harman is the exact opposite. As speakers and speaker technology has evolved and improved, it becomes much harder to make true breakthroughs. We have tools now that can measure characteristics that we could not measure, even a few years ago. In the 1970s (1980s..1990s) an improvement merely had to be plausible because there were simply no adequate measurement methods. Harman, and specifically our group, continues to invest heavily in leading edge R&D equipment to keep the facilities contemporary and relevant. From personal experience, I can attest that applying modern measurement techniques to older drivers can be a very humbling experience.

There is never any shame in finding out through new techniques that a feature into which you invested substantial effort in fact doesn’t really work as you thought. You simply take it as a lesson. However, if instead you chose to deny the new information in order to support a false reality, well that is a failure. Unfortunately there are some people who do believe that speakers were perfected years ago, and they treat the new methods with denial. They are simply wrong. I am committed to using all of the science-based methods available to improve Harman’s products, regardless of the effects such efforts may have on personal egos. My team in Northridge shares this commitment. We intend that customers will hear changes (for the better) in Harman Luxury products going forward.
I have thought this is cumulative and been building for the last decade. It looks like JBL might be running so far ahead of the competition that it could be harder to catch up.

I am glad that they are taking the stance that they have to keep pushing. With that mindset, breakthroughs will continue to happen.
Reddig likes this.

Having fun playing the new mobile game Volley Village
Ericglo is offline  
post #68 of 3888 Old 07-16-2016, 06:50 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Europe, Croatia
Posts: 1,746
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1012 Post(s)
Liked: 562
Hey guys.
A while ago during some discussion here on forum, one poster said how Revel Salon 2s aren't the right tool for the job if you intent to watch movies at reference levels, the reason being that compression in Revels tweeter kicks in in about 95 dB which basically hurts much bigger dynamic range of a typical movie. Here is a link where you can see the mentioned measurement:
http://www.soundstagenetwork.com/mea...ultima_salon2/

Now, while I do agree with that, I am also trying to undestand technical aspects and issues that arise with it. My equipment is in 4000 cu feet room, listening position is 7 feet away from fronts, AVR trim for fronts is -1 and there are also treatments in room for first reflections of fronts and center.
I don't listen at reference levels but pretty close...usually between -12 and -5, but sometimes I want to creep up a bit higher.
What I want to understand is what exactly can I expect if I decide to drive speakers to reference levels (or higher) in my conditions?
Will I just compromise sound quality because of compression?
Does going over compression threshold also mean that compressed driver is facing inevitable damage or can it still perform for a long time in such a state at a simple cost of not being able to exceed that maximum SPL?

Revel Ultima Salon 2, Revel M106, Revel C208, Yamaha P5000S, Denon X5200, Panasonic 65" VT50, Dual VBSS w Faital 18FH510
Kef LS50, Parasound New Classic, Focusrite 2i4 2nd Gen
donktard is offline  
post #69 of 3888 Old 07-16-2016, 07:20 PM
Senior Member
 
Ted C's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 338
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 155 Post(s)
Liked: 189
I think if you'll give them enough power, and they are very power hungry, you'll be fine. I've done a room of similar size with Salons and been fine. In fact is was great! They are great speakers... You'll want to put subs on them. I'm sure John will chime in too.
Ted C is offline  
post #70 of 3888 Old 07-17-2016, 01:31 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
LTD02's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 21,273
Mentioned: 886 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2997 Post(s)
Liked: 3742
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gooddoc View Post
There are measurements by enthusiasts on these forums that claim to show the D2 driver is inferior to the older generation drivers. JBL has been quite vocal about the fact these are superior drivers. So I'm left to wonder who is right, JBL or the enthusiasts?

Clearly, the measurements taken by the enthusiasts are decades old developments, so I wonder if it is these new characteristics they're measuring that are the disconnect?

measurements showed the 4" beryllium has lower distortion at the low end of the pass band. two small rings aren't going to move the air that a 4" diaphragm is going to, so that wasn't a total shocker (well, it kind of was given the jbl marketing literature). :-) but does one aspect of performance mean that the d2 is "inferior"? i don't think that was the claim from the measurements. after critical listening, it was concluded the 4" beryllium had a slight sound quality advantage, but they were VERY close, and there were other variables not completely controlled for. whether or not the difference (to the extent that there is actually any in the m2 application) can justify the 3-4x price difference was one that probably went toward affordability in this case, as the c.d. in the m2 is clearly "good enough". i'm not up to speed on the current Everest offering (if it is finished in its current design and awaiting a new version or not), but one might ask if they decided to switch from the 4" beryllium driver on that one to the 'superior' d2.

Listen. It's All Good.
LTD02 is offline  
post #71 of 3888 Old 07-17-2016, 06:53 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Gooddoc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 8,776
Mentioned: 183 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3776 Post(s)
Liked: 3387
Quote:
Originally Posted by LTD02 View Post
measurements showed the 4" beryllium has lower distortion at the low end of the pass band. two small rings aren't going to move the air that a 4" diaphragm is going to, so that wasn't a total shocker (well, it kind of was given the jbl marketing literature). :-) but does one aspect of performance mean that the d2 is "inferior"? i don't think that was the claim from the measurements. after critical listening, it was concluded the 4" beryllium had a slight sound quality advantage, but they were VERY close, and there were other variables not completely controlled for. whether or not the difference (to the extent that there is actually any in the m2 application) can justify the 3-4x price difference was one that probably went toward affordability in this case, as the c.d. in the m2 is clearly "good enough". i'm not up to speed on the current Everest offering (if it is finished in its current design and awaiting a new version or not), but one might ask if they decided to switch from the 4" beryllium driver on that one to the 'superior' d2.
What we have on the enthusiast side is more distortion, no other measurement that shows superiority, and inferior SQ. What we have on the JBL side is the claim to superiority of the D2 driver, as far as I can tell, based on "tools now that can measure characteristics that we could not measure, even a few years ago". JBL doesn't claim the D2 driver is just "good enough", but that it advances driver SOTA.

What are those tools and characteristics? My point is whether this is all JBL marketing BS or are there tools and characteristics not measurable by enthusiasts that explain the claims of "next generation" by JBL?

Is it just a great driver that mates well with the Image Control Waveguide, or truly a driver advance in its own right?

Last edited by Gooddoc; 07-17-2016 at 06:57 AM.
Gooddoc is offline  
post #72 of 3888 Old 07-17-2016, 09:17 AM
Advanced Member
 
SyntheticShrimp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 534
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 241 Post(s)
Liked: 212
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gooddoc View Post
What we have on the enthusiast side is more distortion, no other measurement that shows superiority, and inferior SQ. What we have on the JBL side is the claim to superiority of the D2 driver, as far as I can tell, based on "tools now that can measure characteristics that we could not measure, even a few years ago". JBL doesn't claim the D2 driver is just "good enough", but that it advances driver SOTA.

What are those tools and characteristics? My point is whether this is all JBL marketing BS or are there tools and characteristics not measurable by enthusiasts that explain the claims of "next generation" by JBL?

Is it just a great driver that mates well with the Image Control Waveguide, or truly a driver advance in its own right?
It'd be cool to get some Harman input on this. From what I've read in JBL's literature, UHF extension, reduced power compression, and improved time domain response are the advances the D2 offers over other CDs.

It's pretty well known that non-linear distortion at the low end is going to be higher than some of the 4" diaphram cds. But for a 2 way full spectrum monitor, I'd personally rather have some 2HD of questionable audibility in exchange for better higher end.

One of the precious metal CDs probably offers the best of all worlds. But some of them cost almost as much as the M2s sell for. Would the M2s with something the 476Be, at twice the price, really have been much better? I kind of doubt it.
SyntheticShrimp is offline  
post #73 of 3888 Old 07-17-2016, 11:25 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Gooddoc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 8,776
Mentioned: 183 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3776 Post(s)
Liked: 3387
Quote:
Originally Posted by SyntheticShrimp View Post
It'd be cool to get some Harman input on this. From what I've read in JBL's literature, UHF extension, reduced power compression, and improved time domain response are the advances the D2 offers over other CDs.

It's pretty well known that non-linear distortion at the low end is going to be higher than some of the 4" diaphram cds. But for a 2 way full spectrum monitor, I'd personally rather have some 2HD of questionable audibility in exchange for better higher end.

One of the precious metal CDs probably offers the best of all worlds. But some of them cost almost as much as the M2s sell for. Would the M2s with something the 476Be, at twice the price, really have been much better? I kind of doubt it.
Agreed. But if older generation CD's provide the best of both worlds, than they should lay off the revolutionary performance talk. If the D2 is not better in the high end, and not better in the low end, than the precious metal CD's that have been around for decades, what is so revolutionary about it? Designing a driver that's cheaper but still has great performance is only revolutionary to the profit-loss statements.

UHF performance is one area that could be a D2 advantage, but I have yet to see actual measurements to support it. And then I would have to see the evidence JBL has gathered to show that it is the UHF that contributes to why I like this speaker so much. I've always viewed the UHF claims as cool, but likely not contributory to what I hear from the M2.

None of this is to say I am not blown away by the M2. I am of the same opinion of the many pros that view the M2 as an amazing speaker, but I wonder if it is really the waveguide, crossover, and other optimizations that are the reason, not the D2 driver. The objective evidence I do have doesn't really support any revolutionary claims for the D2.
Gooddoc is offline  
post #74 of 3888 Old 07-17-2016, 11:27 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Nashville, TN.
Posts: 141
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 86 Post(s)
Liked: 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gooddoc View Post
What we have on the enthusiast side is more distortion, no other measurement that shows superiority, and inferior SQ. What we have on the JBL side is the claim to superiority of the D2 driver, as far as I can tell, based on "tools now that can measure characteristics that we could not measure, even a few years ago". JBL doesn't claim the D2 driver is just "good enough", but that it advances driver SOTA.

What are those tools and characteristics? My point is whether this is all JBL marketing BS or are there tools and characteristics not measurable by enthusiasts that explain the claims of "next generation" by JBL?

Is it just a great driver that mates well with the Image Control Waveguide, or truly a driver advance in its own right?
It was something of a shock to sit in a room full of JBL people when the whole package including the 3" drivers were introduced after sincerely feeling that the 4" diaphragm/2" throat were the ultimate expression of the driver/horn approach to reproduction.

There are more things to consider than just size though. when the last gen of 4" devices were introduced, they were coupled to flat front bi-radial horns in those applications that required more portability or lower profiles. Naturally this required higher cross over frequencies as small horns will fall apart much faster (pattern control, etc) than larger horns. Yet those same drivers were also used in the large format horns of the day where crossover frequencies could then be lowered to take advantage of the extended low frequency response/pattern control that a larger horn affords.

What am I suggesting? One can't just look at the driver or the horn alone. They have to be considered as a system. Of course, any design requires rooting in practical considerations and it really doesn't matter how much you want to charge for your product, there will come a point where cost factors will play.

Are the three inch drivers less expensive to build and does that factor? I don't know but it makes sense to think "yes." When it comes to the home, the size of a horn that would be needed to take advantage (control dispersion, distortion and provide an optimum acoustic loading to th lowest frequency) of say a 300Hz crossover is truly a detriment and practical limitation.

I have to wonder how much that plays in the home theatre. Today in live sound reinforcement, the overwhelming trend is to line arrays. Constant directivity horns (though we know JBL now has such a package that is claimed not to require e.q. compensation) are much less common in use in large scale PA as a result.

Compression drivers/horns are unbeatable for maximizing power/sensitivity needs and designing certain types of wide dispersion systems (for the far field) but do other things less well.

I am firmly and happily ensconced with my Salon2s, even with their tremendous thirst for clean amplification which I consider their only major trade off. Still, with "only" 500 watts per channel, I can generate steady state levels of 95dB with peaks of 110dB and over (according to my meter), at which point I start to run out of amplifier in my 3200cf room that is fairly well damped.

I prefer my direct radiators with their smooth off axis response to any horn loaded system I've heard in like conditions. Therein lies a limitation since I have not heard the M2 or Everest systems in a home environment, so take what I say as you will. But.....will a 3" driver and complimentary horn change that? I don't know but again, I have never heard a horn loaded system perform with the equanimity of the Salon2s in a small/medium room environment, including any studio I can remember. It would be
interesting to hear what the M2s could do in my room, but my (admitted) prejudices suggest I'd still prefer the Revels.

One thing I do believe is that no 4" driver/2" entry horn combination from JBL (and I'm very familiar with almost all of those those) will do for me what the Revels do in my application. The new three inch drivers/horns might....but I'd want to hear it to be sure. I do suspect that for most people, the horns will be significantly harder to integrate in the home environment regardless of size or design era.

Here's where my knowledge runs out: the 3" devices will of course be lower in mass, which allows for either higher speed or more excursion (or both, depending on design criteria). And that could be the place where the physics catches up with a 4" driver.
John Schuermann likes this.

Last edited by Lindy's lad; 07-17-2016 at 11:41 AM.
Lindy's lad is offline  
post #75 of 3888 Old 07-17-2016, 11:46 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Gooddoc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 8,776
Mentioned: 183 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3776 Post(s)
Liked: 3387
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lindy's lad View Post
What am I suggesting? One can't just look at the driver or the horn alone. They have to be considered as a system. Of course, any design requires rooting in practical considerations and it really doesn't matter how much you want to charge for your product, there will come a point where cost factors will play.

Are the three inch drivers less expensive to build and does that factor? I don't know but it makes sense to think "yes."
Agreed 100%. I have no problem with JBL taking costs into consideration. But if you design a speaker that is revolutionary, and I believe the M2 is, that doesn't mean you can call all the components revolutionary. The question is whether the D2 driver is revolutionary, or is it the overall M2 speaker?

I really despise BS marketing, regardless of whether I own the speaker.

Quote:
I am firmly and happily ensconced with my Salon2s, even with their tremendous thirst for clean amplification which I consider their only real trade off. Still, with "only" 500 watts per channel, I can generate steady state levels of 95dB with peaks of 110dB and over, at which point I start to run out of amplifier suds in my 3200cf room that is fairly well damped.

I really do prefer direct radiators with their smooth off axis response o any horn loaded system I've heard in like conditions. Will a 3" driver and complimentary horn change that? I don't know but I have never heard a horn loaded system perform with the equanimity of the Revels. It would be
interesting to hear what the M2s could do in my room, but my (admitted) prejudices suggest I'd still prefer the Revels.
I look forward to your impressions. I have yet to see measurements that show you are not experiencing power compression at those levels from the tweeters of the Salon 2. Unfortunately, dynamic compression is insidious and very difficult to identify until it is grossly apparent. It is usually only identified by it's absence, which would require an A/B against a speaker without any. The M2 would be entirely without compression at those levels, so maybe you can test it .
Quote:
One thing I do believe is that no 4" driver/2" entry horn combination from JBL (and I'm very familiar with almost all of those those) will do for me what the Revels do in my application. The new three inch drivers/horns might....but I'd want to hear it to be sure. I do suspect that for most people, the horns will be significantly harder to integrate in the home environment regardless of size or design era.

Here's where my knowledge runs out: the 3" devices will of course be lower in mass, which allows for either higher speed or more excursion (or both, depending on design criteria). And that could be the place where the physics catches up with a 4" driver.
I think you'll find the M2 waveguide unlike any other horn you've ever heard, or placed into a room. One thing I'm sure of, the horn on the M2 is a real game changing, revolutionary part of the M2.
John Schuermann likes this.
Gooddoc is offline  
post #76 of 3888 Old 07-17-2016, 11:56 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
torii's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 7,457
Mentioned: 61 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3727 Post(s)
Liked: 2124
can you run the m2's without the equalization jbl insists on? like pure direct? I would guess the eq has alot to do with the system. many people have liked the sound of their various systems for music in pure direct. is this also the case for m2 owners listening to music in 2 channel?

Power: Marantz sr7008, NAD C 275Bee x 2, Video: Oppo 103, Samsung 75un6300
Speakers: Focal aria 948, Focal cc900, Klipsch synergy KSF 10.5, Magnepan LRS
Subs: Rythmik FV25HP, Rythmik FV15HP
torii is online now  
post #77 of 3888 Old 07-17-2016, 12:02 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
John Schuermann's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Colorado
Posts: 5,743
Mentioned: 94 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2008 Post(s)
Liked: 2516
I'm trying to take a day off, but thought I'd just drop in long enough to say that the improvements that the M2 / D2 derived designs bring certainly seemed to have the hard science, objectivist crowd more than convinced at Harman. These are the engineers and scientists, not the marketing people. Not that marketing can't make something sound more important than it is, that's for sure.

Now, whether or not that has to do with the whole waveguide / driver SYSTEM vs. just the driver, that's a subject to which I can't speak authoritatively.

To the dynamic compression question, I just thought I'd just put out this definition:

Dynamic compression occurs at the point where 1 db of increased signal no longer corresponds to 1 db of increased output, roughly speaking (the 1 db figure is just arbitrary - it could be 1/2 a db, or 3 db, or whatever figure you want to use as your yardstick).
Gooddoc and Reddig like this.

John Schuermann
The Screening Room Home Theater Sales and Design
JS Music and Sound Film Scoring and Sound Design
John Schuermann is offline  
post #78 of 3888 Old 07-17-2016, 01:07 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Gooddoc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 8,776
Mentioned: 183 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3776 Post(s)
Liked: 3387
Quote:
Originally Posted by torii View Post
can you run the m2's without the equalization jbl insists on? like pure direct? I would guess the eq has alot to do with the system. many people have liked the sound of their various systems for music in pure direct. is this also the case for m2 owners listening to music in 2 channel?
Without DSP, the M2 would just be two raw drivers in a box. So...no
LTD02 and torii like this.
Gooddoc is offline  
post #79 of 3888 Old 07-17-2016, 01:16 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
NWCgrad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Frederick, MD
Posts: 3,625
Mentioned: 60 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1283 Post(s)
Liked: 1333
The D2 driver is not as good a fit with the 4722HF waveguide (JBL Pro Parts # 365359-001) as the 4" diaphragm drivers as shown by the elevated distortion at the lower frequencies. Howevery as @Lindy's lad indicated the waveguide + CD is a system. The cost of the D2 is really low compared the the 2452H-SL driver. This is pretty impressive in my view.

I would love to be able to buy the 1" exit CD used in the 708i for my diy project, but alas the Harmon version of JBL doesn't support the DIY community like in the past.

______________________________________
Home Theater:
https://www.avsforum.com/forum/15-gen...sement-ht.html
NWCgrad is offline  
post #80 of 3888 Old 07-17-2016, 01:25 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
thrang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 7,296
Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2664 Post(s)
Liked: 2165
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gooddoc View Post
Without DSP, the M2 would just be two raw drivers in a box. So...no
I think you're saying you need the active crossover found in the Dci and other Crown amps, correct, not necessarily EQ'ing which I think the earlier poster was referring to...

My understanding is is one doesn't want to use the Crown amps with DSP, there is a box Harman offers that acts as a crossover/DSP you use with existing amps...unless I have this wrong.

Finally, a question - the SCL-3/4's don't need to be bi-amped with an active crossover, correct? My intentioned was two use a 2/300 Crown Dci amp, one channel for each SCL-4, for rear channel usage...

Thanks

UPDATED 4/29/17 Thrang's Home Theater (for now...)
Sony VPL-VW5000es • Panamorph Paladin DCR • Trinnov Altitude 32/24 • Crown DCIn amplifiers • JBL M2 (LCR-LW-RW) • JBL S2S-EX subwoofers x2 • JBL SCL-4 (side/rear surrounds) • JBL SCS12 (x4) SCS8 (x2) TH/RH/TM • Lumagen Radiance Pro • Panasonic UB820 • Apple TV 4k • Synology RAID (45 TB total storage) • RTI control system
thrang is offline  
post #81 of 3888 Old 07-17-2016, 01:32 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Nashville, TN.
Posts: 141
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 86 Post(s)
Liked: 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gooddoc View Post

I look forward to your impressions. I have yet to see measurements that show you are not experiencing power compression at those levels from the tweeters of the Salon 2. Unfortunately, dynamic compression is insidious and very difficult to identify until it is grossly apparent. It is usually only identified by it's absence, which would require an A/B against a speaker without any. The M2 would be entirely without compression at those levels, so maybe you can test it .

I think you'll find the M2 waveguide unlike any other horn you've ever heard, or placed into a room. One thing I'm sure of, the horn on the M2 is a real game changing, revolutionary part of the M2.
I only considered the M2s well after I got the Salons. As a contract employee emeritus (so to speak, flattering myself) I might be able to arrange access to M2s but by far the easiest way for me to compare them here would be to buy them, and then what do I do? What if I liked them better than my Revels? Oy!

I have no doubt they are superb and would spin my head in Linda Blair fashion. I just went with my gut on the Salons and they have not disappointed. I have owned just about every JBL horn loaded pro monitor made prior to 2010 and decided to go with the Revs this round. I have a lot of respect for the engineers at Harman/Revel/JBL and tend to think they shoot straight. I know most of them, although not the guys hired since 2011.

Quick anecdote. There was a time when we were the factory reps for Genelec and JBL Pro in the northwest, both at the same time. That would not be possible today, but back then, JBL didn't really have anything to compete with Genelec. When the LSRs were introduced I actually liked them better than the smaller (1030/1031) Genelecs. In a lot of ways, they were similar but I thought the LF response sounded better (the "timbre" as it were) in both the 6328 and 6332. Anyway, the Genelec guys got a hold of a pair of LSRs and the VP of the American operation told me they were the only competitive product on the market that had the goods as Genelec viewed what good is/was. In other words, real quality that a good competitor recognized as legit. I have always trusted JBL not to lie in their marketing materials, but that doesn't mean they are bound to be forthcoming about faults that might exist even if they are aware of them. They are in the business to sell speakers, like everybody else.

Re dynamic compression and my specific speakers. I suspect right about where my amplifier starts to run out of gas (not by design... by the numbers I thought I had all I'd ever need) the Revels may be starting to exhibit some distress, but it's hard for me to say for sure what is causing what. It could be the room getting in the way, just so energized that it's getting ugly. I don't know, but steady state as it nears 97-98dB dB SPL is not nearly as nice sounding with my system as it is currently configured as it is below 95dB SPL (peaks higher). Things start to get a bit bright for my comfort. I drive with an MC452, so outright hard clipping is squelched in theory but I am plumb out of headroom at those levels with full frequency dynamic program.

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Schuermann View Post
I'm trying to take a day off, but thought I'd just drop in long enough to say that the improvements that the M2 / D2 derived designs bring certainly seemed to have the hard science, objectivist crowd more than convinced at Harman. These are the engineers and scientists, not the marketing people. Not that marketing can't make something sound more important than it is, that's for sure.

Now, whether or not that has to do with the whole waveguide / driver SYSTEM vs. just the driver, that's a subject to which I can't speak authoritatively.
I don't doubt this in the least. Nobody has more accumulated knowledge in this area than JBL. There is a precedent of the best in the business having been there. Don Keele, Bart Locanthi, John Wilson, even Cal Perkins (Perkins bin designer) and then the transition to the "modern era" of Doug Buttons, Floyd Toole, Shaun Olive, the list is long and distinguished, haven't even scratched the surface of the good guys who have contributed. They are a special group with a lot of history. I hope they keep it that way. Large corporations can be a bear sometimes.
Lindy's lad is offline  
post #82 of 3888 Old 07-17-2016, 04:01 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Gooddoc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 8,776
Mentioned: 183 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3776 Post(s)
Liked: 3387
Quote:
Originally Posted by thrang View Post
I think you're saying you need the active crossover found in the Dci and other Crown amps, correct, not necessarily EQ'ing which I think the earlier poster was referring to...

My understanding is is one doesn't want to use the Crown amps with DSP, there is a box Harman offers that acts as a crossover/DSP you use with existing amps...unless I have this wrong.

Finally, a question - the SCL-3/4's don't need to be bi-amped with an active crossover, correct? My intentioned was two use a 2/300 Crown Dci amp, one channel for each SCL-4, for rear channel usage...

Thanks
There is no recommended EQ for the M2 aside from the presets, so then I'm not sure what he was talking about.

There is nothing wrong with using Crown amps for the DSP.

The SCL's are entirely passive, you can use any amp you want.
John Schuermann, thrang and Franin like this.
Gooddoc is offline  
post #83 of 3888 Old 07-17-2016, 04:21 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
torii's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 7,457
Mentioned: 61 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3727 Post(s)
Liked: 2124
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gooddoc View Post
Without DSP, the M2 would just be two raw drivers in a box. So...no
Thanks, dsp is what I was talking about...not eq from an avr. since the M2's are just as you imply speakers in a box, wish the pricepoint was lower as most of the tech is in the dsp I assume. not saying the jbl drivers dont cost a bunch to make and arent great. just thinking out loud...

Power: Marantz sr7008, NAD C 275Bee x 2, Video: Oppo 103, Samsung 75un6300
Speakers: Focal aria 948, Focal cc900, Klipsch synergy KSF 10.5, Magnepan LRS
Subs: Rythmik FV25HP, Rythmik FV15HP
torii is online now  
post #84 of 3888 Old 07-17-2016, 04:26 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Gooddoc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 8,776
Mentioned: 183 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3776 Post(s)
Liked: 3387
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lindy's lad View Post
I only considered the M2s well after I got the Salons. As a contract employee emeritus (so to speak, flattering myself) I might be able to arrange access to M2s but by far the easiest way for me to compare them here would be to buy them, and then what do I do? What if I liked them better than my Revels? Oy!

I have no doubt they are superb and would spin my head in Linda Blair fashion. I just went with my gut on the Salons and they have not disappointed. I have owned just about every JBL horn loaded pro monitor made prior to 2010 and decided to go with the Revs this round. I have a lot of respect for the engineers at Harman/Revel/JBL and tend to think they shoot straight. I know most of them, although not the guys hired since 2011.
For some reason I thought you were getting the M2's, but I reread and you said no such thing .

I am sure those Salons are a very, very nice sounding speaker and you don't have anything to regret.
John Schuermann likes this.
Gooddoc is offline  
post #85 of 3888 Old 07-17-2016, 04:46 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Gooddoc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 8,776
Mentioned: 183 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3776 Post(s)
Liked: 3387
Quote:
Originally Posted by torii View Post
Thanks, dsp is what I was talking about...not eq from an avr. since the M2's are just as you imply speakers in a box, wish the pricepoint was lower as most of the tech is in the dsp I assume. not saying the jbl drivers dont cost a bunch to make and arent great. just thinking out loud...
The DSP is simply a commodity item available to anyone.

The largest cost of the M2 is for the intellectual property, not the parts. The design of waveguide, woofer, CD, crossover, ports, etc. is what you're paying for.
John Schuermann and torii like this.
Gooddoc is offline  
post #86 of 3888 Old 07-17-2016, 05:37 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
LTD02's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 21,273
Mentioned: 886 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2997 Post(s)
Liked: 3742
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lindy's lad View Post
...
I don't doubt this in the least. Nobody has more accumulated knowledge in this area than JBL. There is a precedent of the best in the business having been there. Don Keele, Bart Locanthi, John Wilson, even Cal Perkins (Perkins bin designer) and then the transition to the "modern era" of Doug Buttons, Floyd Toole, Shaun Olive, the list is long and distinguished, haven't even scratched the surface of the good guys who have contributed. They are a special group with a lot of history.
...

this is the kind of statement that bothers some of the guys in the other thread(s). just because a speaker comes out of an excellent heritiage does not mean that it is an excellent speaker or that it isn't an excellent speaker system with some potential pitfalls. i'm not sure if that is exactly what was meant, but that is how it could be interpreted by some folks.


for example, there is more than one person scratching their heads with respect to the amplifier choice for the m2 system. the m2 is designed for a studio where having a low noise floor is critical. the amp provided is mediocre (being kind) with respect to internal noise (distortion). one guy even sent his system back for this reason.


then there is the fan noise, which has also proven bothersome/frustrating to many. just doesn't seem like the pinnacle of perfection for the application given the heritage.

@Gooddoc
not the best comparo here and you probably already have seen it, but 2430k compared with a couple of "old technology" drivers.


http://www.audioheritage.org/vbullet...l=1#post362742


the 2430k pushes out past 20khz without any significant resonances and that might be part of what makes it "super duper awesome". "new measurement technology" such as wavelet analysis or laser interferometry would make identifying such easier. ("easy reading" on wavelets for speaker design if interested: http://www.audiomatica.com/wp/wp-con...daesny2007.pdf)


at this point, my guess is the "magic" in the m2 is largely coming through three things that aren't already baked into other excellent two-ways in the same space: 1. (80% of magic) a horn that provides consistent off axis response even if not textbook "controlled directivity" (and i suspect this is what gives it the holographic imaging capability and why voecks apparently indicated that it was the first (?) c.d. horn combo that he actually ever liked), and this is more important the more reverberant the room 2. (10% of magic) the dsp that pounds the response flat (in the right way), and 3. (10% of magic) very good woofer and c.d. design, despite perhaps not being the absolute best on the planet.


isolating all the variables is probably impossible as "simple things" such as the way the pulp fiber dries on the cone could result in a more pistonic woofer and/or with different bell mode resonances that just sort of 'work' with the target crossover point. on the other hand, the wire selection/technology (it uses that nifty new wire) may have just hit the sweet spot right in between sufficient power handling to avoid thermal compression and putting too much coil in the gaps which leads to inductive breaking. who knows? g.t. just described the woofer as being subjectively "fast"--lol--a point that surely raises eyebrows from everybody given that he actually knows that is both wrong but there isn't really a better way to describe what the driver does or he would have described it in that way. :-)


as others have said, at this point, its kind of down to requiring a blinded a-b comparo where the speakers are eq'd for the same response in order to say how much, if any, the m2 blows away something like the 4722 with upgraded c.d. (even working with the constraint of something like a 12 foot listening distance in a home sized room).


peace,
jjackkrash likes this.

Listen. It's All Good.
LTD02 is offline  
post #87 of 3888 Old 07-17-2016, 06:49 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Nashville, TN.
Posts: 141
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 86 Post(s)
Liked: 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by LTD02 View Post
this is the kind of statement that bothers some of the guys in the other thread(s). just because a speaker comes out of an excellent heritiage does not mean that it is an excellent speaker or that it isn't an excellent speaker system with some potential pitfalls. i'm not sure if that is exactly what was meant, but that is how it could be interpreted by some folks.


for example, there is more than one person scratching their heads with respect to the amplifier choice for the m2 system. the m2 is designed for a studio where having a low noise floor is critical. the amp provided is mediocre (being kind) with respect to internal noise (distortion). one guy even sent his system back for this reason.


then there is the fan noise, which has also proven bothersome/frustrating to many. just doesn't seem like the pinnacle of perfection for the application given the heritage.
I have Revels not M2s. If you read my whole post you know I run an MC452 in my room, not an ITech or whatever Crown module the M2 employs. I'm not particularly taken with Class D for this application since few of its benefits accrue in a home environment and fan noise could indeed be an issue for some users. But let's also be objective about that; at 105dB in room you are not going to hear the fan and if you're not pushing the amplifier the fan may not fire up so it could be a problem in theory that doesn't apply to every application equally in practice. However, I would not get far enough to test this for myself as I would not opt for a Crown amplifier in my high end home system if given a choice. I see them as fine pro amps, good for distributed systems, big PAs and the like. If others enjoy them at home, more power to them but they're not my first pick. Now it may be they work great with the M2, I really don't know and didn't say.

As respects JBL and their knowledge of horn geometry, I will stand by my statement. I never implied that heritage has value beyond reminiscing, and I didn't even say that, but knowledge is another matter. Elsewhere in the business there are talented individuals with great skill and knowledge regarding horns and the partnering drivers, but who as a corporate entity has more knowledge than JBL on this topic?

I agree that heritage is simply prolog, it assures nothing, but knowledge is another matter. What I was trying to infer is that Harman as an entity has the ability to make as good (or great) a horn/driver package for a given application as it is likely possible to achieve at this state of the art. That may not guarantee a product you like, or even a product that anybody wants, but the resources are there to always be a contender for the....uh.....crown

Me? I reiterate that I like direct radiators for near field listening. I look forward to hearing the M2 in a suitably appropriate environment someday. Until then, the reviews I have read and people I have heard from allow me to say with equanimity that "I am confident it is a fine product." And that's it.
John Schuermann and Gooddoc like this.

Last edited by Lindy's lad; 07-17-2016 at 06:57 PM.
Lindy's lad is offline  
post #88 of 3888 Old 07-17-2016, 07:05 PM
Senior Member
 
Ted C's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 338
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 155 Post(s)
Liked: 189
I never do pay much attention to the numbers, "fanfare", etc... I let my ears do the talking. That being stated, the M2 is the first speaker out of JBL that really got my attention. Its nice, really appears someone at Harman used their "ears" in the end to do the final tune. I know the first iteration they showed to Frank Fiipetti, and he hated it. They junked it, and went back to the drawing board. The second attempt got his attention. Using your ears is really important The other is the Salon 2, different animal, but outstanding in its own right. Its so important the final touches be done with the ears. All the great room tuners use numbers to get half way there, and their ears, to the final destination...
Gooddoc likes this.
Ted C is offline  
post #89 of 3888 Old 07-17-2016, 07:05 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
thrang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 7,296
Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2664 Post(s)
Liked: 2165
Though mine aren't delivered or set up yet, the demo I heard at addino's of the M2's were the first time I head a c.d. that sounded like a soft dome tweeter.

I've not been a fan of digital amps in the past, but what I heard indicated the DCi amps were an excellent match for the M2's. But only the experience in my space will tell the true story for me.

It will be close to a month before everything is done in my theater revision, even though the gear will be here in a week or so. Waiting for new carpet and some additionally wiring.
John Schuermann and Gooddoc like this.

UPDATED 4/29/17 Thrang's Home Theater (for now...)
Sony VPL-VW5000es • Panamorph Paladin DCR • Trinnov Altitude 32/24 • Crown DCIn amplifiers • JBL M2 (LCR-LW-RW) • JBL S2S-EX subwoofers x2 • JBL SCL-4 (side/rear surrounds) • JBL SCS12 (x4) SCS8 (x2) TH/RH/TM • Lumagen Radiance Pro • Panasonic UB820 • Apple TV 4k • Synology RAID (45 TB total storage) • RTI control system

Last edited by thrang; 07-17-2016 at 07:51 PM.
thrang is offline  
post #90 of 3888 Old 07-17-2016, 07:41 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Gooddoc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 8,776
Mentioned: 183 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3776 Post(s)
Liked: 3387
Quote:
Originally Posted by LTD02 View Post
for example, there is more than one person scratching their heads with respect to the amplifier choice for the m2 system. the m2 is designed for a studio where having a low noise floor is critical. the amp provided is mediocre (being kind) with respect to internal noise (distortion). one guy even sent his system back for this reason.


then there is the fan noise, which has also proven bothersome/frustrating to many. just doesn't seem like the pinnacle of perfection for the application given the heritage.
Yes, you have to wonder about that amp choice for sure, lol. But then I turn it on to actually listen and all of the sudden I find that I'm not thinking about the amp anymore . Whatever specs may suggest regarding amp distortion it's pretty clear it's not the important spec it's made out to be. . So whatever the limitations of the amp and driver choices, it doesn't seem they are aspects contributing to audible SQ. I'm not sure who returned the M2, but it was likely due to them not optimizing the gain structure properly. Something that really shouldn't have to be done, that's for sure. But if they were hearing noise or distortion while listening to content, then maybe they had a defective speaker or amp.

It seems pretty clear the subjective listening lab at Harman has resulted in JBL paying attention to what matters audibly and contributes to preference, rather than perhaps specs that are nothing more than audiophool dogma.
John Schuermann, LTD02 and Reddig like this.
Gooddoc is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply Speakers

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off