AVS Forum banner

4781 - 4800 of 5525 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,499 Posts
for music getting bass same as with subs is proud moment...but then the imaging and soundstage gets analyzed more...and then the awesome speakers suddenly get questioned on the sound of a triangle or imaging of a piano players fingers on the keys.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Scotth3886

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,226 Posts
So I was playing around with the M2s tonight since I have only had them for a couple of weeks. Just for fun I turned off both of my subs and ran them full range (well, with the 27hz filter in the tunning files). I was shocked at how much bass they were producing. Way more than my old JBL 4722 which have dual 15 inch drivers (but aren't designed to run full range..they drop off a ton below 40HZ). It literally sounded and felt like my subs were on but I checked the cone movement on both subs and neither was moving so it was just the M2s running.
AVSers in general wildly overstate how much bass capability is needed or even noticeable. I'm not surprised by your observations. An M2 owner should be able to EQ for room modes and have outstanding bass at one listening position. IMO the only reason for subs with such a loudspeaker is to reduce spatial variance. Or to do wiz-bang-BOOM! crap on movies.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,619 Posts
. Or to do wiz-bang-BOOM! crap on movies.
I am all about that wiz-bang BOOM! :p But I do agree with Frolich, the 4722's shocked me at their lack of bass. To look at those monsters one would think they would bring down the house. They were probably the most anemic tower speaker that I ever owned from a bass standpoint. The M2 surpasses my old beasts at every level (to my ears at least). My dad came over the other day and I played one of his favorite Joe South CDs. He looked at me and said, "I cant hear the new speakers, I only hear the one behind the screen." I had him walk up to the screen and place his ear next to the fabric. The look on his face was priceless when he realized there was nothing playing back there.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,043 Posts
I am all about that wiz-bang BOOM! :p But I do agree with Frolich, the 4722's shocked me at their lack of bass. To look at those monsters one would think they would bring down the house. They were probably the most anemic tower speaker that I ever owned from a bass standpoint. The M2 surpasses my old beasts at every level (to my ears at least). My dad came over the other day and I played one of his favorite Joe South CDs. He looked at me and said, "I cant hear the new speakers, I only hear the one behind the screen." I had him walk up to the screen and place his ear next to the fabric. The look on his face was priceless when he realized there was nothing playing back there.
That's the way all of this is supposed to work provide that the 'screen is not only room width, but wraps 180 degree around you and is about 100' deep 'on the right material'
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,619 Posts
That's the way all of this is supposed to work provide that the 'screen is not only room width, but wraps 180 degree around you and is about 100' deep 'on the right material'
Agreed, but the M2 has imaged better than anything that I have had in my room. My dad has listened to my previous setups. My L/R is outside the screen, not behind it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,043 Posts
Agreed, but the M2 has imaged better than anything that I have had in my room. My dad has listened to my previous setups. My L/R is outside the screen, not behind it.
Right. Understood, but on well recorded classical, organ, even big band to some extent, the illusion should be pretty real that the stage can be 100 and some odd feet deep and envelopes you in the front half of the room from floor to ceiling and side wall to side wall with the occasional illusion that the soundstage extends beyond those side walls. With lights off in a totally dark room it should sound as if there's no relationship to the physical location of speakers. The speakers could be potted plants for all that matters. That's my goal and standard since 1947 and I'll do whatever it takes to get with my now limited budget.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,580 Posts
I am all about that wiz-bang BOOM! :p But I do agree with Frolich, the 4722's shocked me at their lack of bass. To look at those monsters one would think they would bring down the house. They were probably the most anemic tower speaker that I ever owned from a bass standpoint. The M2 surpasses my old beasts at every level (to my ears at least). My dad came over the other day and I played one of his favorite Joe South CDs. He looked at me and said, "I cant hear the new speakers, I only hear the one behind the screen." I had him walk up to the screen and place his ear next to the fabric. The look on his face was priceless when he realized there was nothing playing back there.
Have you considered that perhaps it was your amplification/processing and not the speaker? The M2 and the 4722 will roll off around the same point, though a bit steeper on the 4722 for sure. The M2 boosts a bit below tune, but also adds a limiter for safety. Still, the 4722 will produce prodigious amounts of bass above 40hz. If you think the 4722 is anemic in that department, you were doing something wrong.

4722


M2
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,941 Posts
Have you considered that perhaps it was your amplification/processing and not the speaker? The M2 and the 4722 will roll off around the same point, though a bit steeper on the 4722 for sure. The M2 boosts a bit below tune, but also adds a limiter for safety. Still, the 4722 will produce prodigious amounts of bass above 40hz. If you think the 4722 is anemic in that department, you were doing something wrong.

4722


M2
Aren't you comparing in-room measurements to anechoic measurements? I know my M2's do not roll off at 40 Hz in-room. More like 20.

Edit: Reviewing measurements it's actually 25 Hz in-room
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,580 Posts
Aren't you comparing in-room measurements to anechoic measurements? I know my M2's do not roll off at 40 Hz in-room. More like 20.
Anechoic chambers still have LF gain. There's likely less LF gain in my room than in the chamber the M2 was measured in. The room/position the 4722 was measured in is actually down at 20hz.

The point was to show the knees of the speakers. Calling the 4722 anemic in the bass department is absurd. The M2 rolls off a couple hz lower, and more gradually due to the tuning. Not arguing that bit, just the rest of it. The M2 tunings have almost a 5db boost at 21hz, but I wouldn't expect that to exactly play loud or sound good as it's below the tune of the enclosure. At lower levels it may be acceptable.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,619 Posts
Have you considered that perhaps it was your amplification/processing and not the speaker? The M2 and the 4722 will roll off around the same point, though a bit steeper on the 4722 for sure. The M2 boosts a bit below tune, but also adds a limiter for safety. Still, the 4722 will produce prodigious amounts of bass above 40hz. If you think the 4722 is anemic in that department, you were doing something wrong.
Two users who have had both the 4722 and the M2 say the same thing about the bass and you come at me that it was my setup? With a passive crossover, what could I possibly hook up wrong? The 4722s during their residency at my house were paired with Arcam, Marantz, NAD, Onkyo, and Denon receivers with four different room corrections, which all yielded the same overall results. The 4722 in direct mode fed to both an Outlaw and Emotiva amp didn't impress me in the bass deparment The M2 has much better low end in the same direct mode. I know you aren't a big M2 fan but I have had both in my room and much prefer the M2. If the M2 was over-hyped, I would be the first to say so. I have openly dogged out products I have owned. I have never been a "its the greatest because I own it" guy.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,580 Posts
Two users who have had both the 4722 and the M2 say the same thing about the bass and you come at me that it was my setup? With a passive crossover, what could I possibly hook up wrong? The 4722s during their residency at my house were paired with Arcam, Marantz, NAD, Onkyo, and Denon receivers with four different room corrections, which all yielded the same overall results. The 4722 in direct mode fed to both an Outlaw and Emotiva amp didn't impress me in the bass deparment The M2 has much better low end in the same direct mode. I know you aren't a big M2 fan but I have had both in my room and much prefer the M2. If the M2 was over-hyped, I would be the first to say so. I have openly dogged out products I have owned. I have never been a "its the greatest because I own it" guy.
*shrug* can't comment on what you did or how you configured things. Measurements may shed light on it if you have any. The M2 will extend a bit lower, not arguing that point, but they have a similar knee. The M2s are boosted below the tune of the enclosure to not fall off as fast, though. I have the 4722 LF sections hooked up to NC400s without boosting below tune and they will play loud enough bass to affect your vision. That's hardly anemic. It's not like I have some special speakers or don't know what bass sounds like :/
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,619 Posts
*shrug* can't comment on what you did or how you configured things. Measurements may shed light on it if you have any. The M2 will extend a bit lower, not arguing that point, but they have a similar knee. The M2s are boosted below the tune of the enclosure to not fall off as fast, though. I have the 4722 LF sections hooked up to NC400s without boosting below tune and they will play loud enough bass to affect your vision. That's hardly anemic. It's not like I have some special speakers or don't know what bass sounds like :/
I never said they wouldn't play loud. Those things could cause ringing for days. They roll off very fast and there roll-off point misses a lot of lower end content in music. Frolic said the same thing, so I guess I have to *shrug* too. I am still a huge fan of the 4722 but I still found them lacking in direct mode with no subs with music. I don't have any graphs from my old setup anymore, but the M2 is in pretty much the same spot that the 4722 was so any room null should have the same effect on one as it does the other.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,580 Posts
I never said they wouldn't play loud. Those things could cause ringing for days. They roll off very fast and there roll-off point misses a lot of lower end content in music. Frolic said the same thing, so I guess I have to *shrug* too. I am still a huge fan of the 4722 but I still found them lacking in direct mode with no subs with music. I don't have any graphs from my old setup anymore, but the M2 is in pretty much the same spot that the 4722 was so any room null should have the same effect on one as it does the other.
You keep trying to compare these in direct mode, but you're ignoring the fact that there's still a huge boost to the M2 LF in the processing that doesn't go away when you turn on direct mode in your avr/pre. Target something similar with the 4722 and you won't be calling them anemic.

This is the shaping applied to the M2. Just a wee bit of boost there.

 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,619 Posts
You keep trying to compare these in direct mode, but you're ignoring the fact that there's still a huge boost to the M2 LF in the processing that doesn't go away when you turn on direct mode in your avr/pre. Target something similar with the 4722 and you won't be calling them anemic.

This is the shaping applied to the M2. Just a wee bit of boost there.

I see what your talking about now. That makes sense.
 

·
Member
Joined
·
844 Posts
Anechoic chambers still have LF gain. There's likely less LF gain in my room than in the chamber the M2 was measured in. The room/position the 4722 was measured in is actually down at 20hz.

The point was to show the knees of the speakers. Calling the 4722 anemic in the bass department is absurd. The M2 rolls off a couple hz lower, and more gradually due to the tuning. Not arguing that bit, just the rest of it. The M2 tunings have almost a 5db boost at 21hz, but I wouldn't expect that to exactly play loud or sound good as it's below the tune of the enclosure. At lower levels it may be acceptable.
Whoa . . . Let's make a few things clear so that we are comparing apples with apples.

1. Anechoic chambers (all the ones I have ever used) were calibrated at low frequencies, using reference measurements on a 10 m tower or ground plane. There is no "room gain".

2. Most chambers are 4pi (total free field). The M2, being a studio monitor speaker was measured in a 4 pi calibrated chamber, as are (or should be) all studio monitor and domestic loudspeakers, as defined by ANSI/CTA 2034.

3. Cinema speakers are often mounted in screen baffle walls or against walls and JBL Pro has typically measured these in 2pi - anechoic half space, possibly on the flat roof test facility. This of course includes the boundary gain and shows a different bass response than that for the M2 which was measured in the calibrated 4 pi chamber.

3. The 4722 is a screen-channel cinema speaker. Its target performance is defined by SMPTE ST202: the X-curve. This requires a flattish steady-state room curve down to 50 Hz with rolloff below that. The LFE channel is expected to provide lower frequencies. What happens in a domestic room is, well, whatever happens.

4. The M2 was designed as a "full range" studio monitor speaker, with a wider target bandwidth and a wider dispersion - a different animal.

FYI here is the X curve. As discussed in Chapter 11 of the 3rd edition, it is not the right target.
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,580 Posts
Whoa . . . Let's make a few things clear so that we are comparing apples with apples.

1. Anechoic chambers (all the ones I have ever used) were calibrated at low frequencies, using reference measurements on a 10 m tower or ground plane. There is no "room gain".

2. Most chambers are 4pi (total free field). The M2, being a studio monitor speaker was measured in a 4 pi calibrated chamber, as are (or should be) all studio monitor and domestic loudspeakers, as defined by ANSI/CTA 2034.

3. Cinema speakers are often mounted in screen baffle walls or against walls and JBL Pro has typically measured these in 2pi - anechoic half space, possibly on the flat roof test facility. This of course includes the boundary gain and shows a different bass response than that for the M2 which was measured in the calibrated 4 pi chamber.

3. The 4722 is a screen-channel cinema speaker. Its target performance is defined by SMPTE ST202: the X-curve. This requires a flattish steady-state room curve down to 50 Hz with rolloff below that. The LFE channel is expected to provide lower frequencies. What happens in a domestic room is, well, whatever happens.

4. The M2 was designed as a "full range" studio monitor speaker, with a wider target bandwidth and a wider dispersion - a different animal.

FYI here is the X curve:
The 4722 does not target the x-curve.

Point conceded on the chamber, there's gain, but corrected via calibration. Either way, the point was just to show where the lf knee of each was.

The 2PI vs 4PI target explains why the 'flat' measurements are not the same. The knee on the 4509 cabinet is around 40hz. It's not a whole lot lower on the M2 cabinet, but there's lots of boost in the processing to extend the response. Apply similar processing to the lf sections on each speaker for a more apples to apples comparison. With appropriate processing, there's no chance the bass from the 4739 can be considered anemic.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,609 Posts
3. Cinema speakers are often mounted in screen baffle walls or against walls and JBL Pro has typically measured these in 2pi -
Speaking of cinema speakers, I am unaware of any, including subs, with appreciable power output below 20Hz, nor any measured commercial cinemas, nor dubbing stages/mixing rooms, which reproduce above [Fletcher-Munson equal loudness] threshold output below 20Hz when playing a movie at reference level. My contention is in the rare instances there's loud
 

·
Member
Joined
·
844 Posts
The 4722 does not target the x-curve.

Point conceded on the chamber, there's gain, but corrected via calibration. Either way, the point was just to show where the lf knee of each was.

The 2PI vs 4PI target explains why the 'flat' measurements are not the same. The knee on the 4509 cabinet is around 40hz. It's not a whole lot lower on the M2 cabinet, but there's lots of boost in the processing to extend the response. Apply similar processing to the lf sections on each speaker for a more apples to apples comparison. With appropriate processing, there's no chance the bass from the 4739 can be considered anemic.
I said nothing about anemia. Multiple high-power 15-inch woofers can shatter glass in small rooms, especially if equalized.

Of course the x-curve is an in-cinema measured performance, but the power and bandwidth demands of this are considered in designing cinema loudspeakers. So, in a cinema the 4722 is expected to hit the x-curve at the reference distance and play at the reference sound level. That's all. This is aided by in-situ EQ, which often ends up corrupting the inherent good sound of the loudspeakers. Chapter 11 explains the present sad situation of cinema sound.

Currently, there is a problem in many cinemas, especially those not using speakers as durable as JBLs, because of the expanded dynamic range of digital soundtracks. Drivers are being blown, and customers offended by excessive sound levels. It is a major topic in current SMPTE standards work.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,580 Posts
I said nothing about anemia. Multiple high-power 15-inch woofers can shatter glass in small rooms, especially if equalized.
That was the basis of the discussion, someone said the bass from the 4739 was anemic. I said it's likely due to processing. Silly discussion anyway, since I think everyone involved is crossing over to monster subs way above those frequencies for the most part.

Of course the x-curve is an in-cinema measured performance, but the power and bandwidth demands of this are considered in designing cinema loudspeakers. So, in a cinema the 4722 is expected to hit the x-curve at the reference distance and play at the reference sound level. That's all. This is aided by in-situ EQ, which often ends up corrupting the inherent good sound of the loudspeakers. Chapter 11 explains the present sad situation of cinema sound.
I misunderstood this since I was reading too fast (in shop working on car). I thought you meant the response targeted the X-curve, not just meant the performance criteria, since JBL targeted the X-curve natively in a lot of speakers, though the 4722 response is flat.

Currently, there is a problem in many cinemas, especially those not using speakers as durable as JBLs, because of the expanded dynamic range of digital soundtracks. Drivers are being blown, and customers offended by excessive sound levels. It is a major topic in current SMPTE standards work.
:( only getting worse lately too. So sad. Though I did just see IT chapter 2 in a Dolby cinema with some kind of mechanical transducers for the seating. I think they pulled back some of the bass from the other channels and tried to make up for it with that. Audibly there was less bass, but they were not integrated well (way too hot), but at least I wasn't hearing any blown speakers like normal. I would have liked a little more subwoofer output, and a little less transducer, but I don't think the subs they were using were adequate for the space.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,580 Posts
Speaking of cinema speakers, I am unaware of any, including subs, with appreciable power output below 20Hz, nor any measured commercial cinemas, nor dubbing stages/mixing rooms, which reproduce above [Fletcher-Munsen equal loudness] threshold output below 20Hz when playing a movie at reference level. My contention is in the rare instances there's loud
 
4781 - 4800 of 5525 Posts
Top