JBL 4349 Review (Studio Monitor Speaker)

[amirm]

Can someone with more computer savvy than me, almost everyone. Do a comparison post showing the measured results between the JBL 4329 and KH310 results posted by Amir.
Either measurements matter or they don’t, which is it?

I can do that later. For now kh310 got a higher award from me but in near field listening.

 

[dfuller]

The measurements matter. But one must be careful with interpretation. Again, if the spinorama would show the main axis as what is currently being shown as -10°v, we'd have a different picture.

The KH310 is a nearfield monitor and a very good example of one. This is clearly a loudspeaker to be enjoyed at greater distances, but not at 1 meter, not even at 2 unless you want to listen with your head in a (vertical) vice.

So what you're saying is this is more comparable to something like an ATC SCM50 or Neumann KH420 in terms of use case. Midfield, maybe soffited. If that's the use case, give me KH420s or SCM50ASLs any day.

 

[wwenze]

So how loud it goes mattered here, enough for subjective listening to be favorable.

But at $7500 a pair...

Can we get 10x $750 speakers for an extra 10dB?

 

[Frank Dernie]

Can we get 10x $750 speakers for an extra 10dB?

Hard to position so they don't interfere with each other hideously.

 

[levimax]

So how loud it goes mattered here, enough for subjective listening to be favorable.

But at $7500 a pair...

Can we get 10x $750 speakers for an extra 10dB?

I have never thought about it like this before but +10dB means the energy output of the speaker is 10X higher so 10X the price? Not as crazy as it sounds at first.

 

[Kachda]

This is an absolutely wild thing to say.

When we speak of those things, we're talking about an objectively and repeatably measured property of the speakers. It's the literal opposite of audiophool talk.

I had to edit this post for civility several times before hitting "Post reply" because wow, that's just an unbelievable statement.

Oh come on...say what you really mean .

How do you measure 'dynamics' ?

 

[PuX]

View attachment 125315

is that a Primare amp on the top shelf? it hasn't been tested yet, has it?

 

[MZKM]

That's probably correct but you have to take into account the listening distance. If you are on the acoustical axis but at 3-4m you'll only be a couple of degrees off the horn center as well. I wonder what would happen if you ask the NFS to compute the soundfield to 4 or 5 meter instead of 2m as shown here.

10° at 4m, we can use SOHCAHTOA

tan(10°) = O/4
O = 4•tan(10°) ≈0.7m

≈28in.

This speaker is 29” tall, so you’d have to elevate the speaker up high. You could also tilt it back a good deal, but then you could run into phase issues as the drivers are no longer on the same vertical plane.

At 2m then that is ≈0.35m, which is ~14”, so around woofer axis.

Unless my math is wrong (I’m doing this quickly on my phone).

 

[Rick Sykora]

The measurements matter. But one must be careful with interpretation. Again, if the spinorama would show the main axis as what is currently being shown as -10°v, we'd have a different picture.

The KH310 is a nearfield monitor and a very good example of one. The 4349 is clearly a loudspeaker to be enjoyed at greater distances, but not at 1 meter, not even at 2 unless you want to listen with your head in a (vertical) vice.


Here is the 4349 on its best measuring axis (-10v) against the Neumann (green)

View attachment 125432

Very well put, but consistent use of the measurements is key too...

If the Klippel results are almost the same, then unless other condition(s) change, a result cannot be good for one speaker and bad for another. Without some more context, I can see why there is confusion over some of Amir’s reviews. As you point out in this case, the FR difference could be as simple as listening distance vs measurement distance.

Personally, have little problem with subjective opinion. However, if someone is going to claim the measurements support their opinion, consistent application of the data is critical to objective credibility.

 

[m8o]

I'm more interested in the compression driver coupling to the horn than anything after reading this on JBL's website: "This monitor loudspeaker features a 2-way design with patented High-Definition Imaging (HDI™) horn technology, the patented D2415K dual 1.5-inch (38mm) compression driver, and a ..."

Right away I thought of the old legacy dual Y horn throat that could be used in sound reinforcement. Didn't know jbl (and maybe others) are doing it this way now.

 

[TimVG]

10° at 4m, we can use SOHCAHTOA

tan(10°) = O/4
O = 4•tan(10°) ≈0.7m

≈28in.

This speaker is 29” tall, so you’d have to elevate the speaker up high.

At 2m then that is ≈0.35m, which is ~14”, so around woofer axis.

Unless my math is wrong (I’m doing this quickly on my phone).

It's also not just the physical distance but also the aim of the 'beam' if we want to make it even more complicated. Passive speakers where there is a discrepancy between physical driver distances in terms of depth rarely have have a completely forward (0°) beam projection

Compare that to a more 'time aligned' monitor such as the genelec 8050B

 

[JohnBooty]

Oh come on...say what you really mean .
How do you measure 'dynamics' ?

Assuming we're not listening to sine sweeps or pink noise all day, we know the SPL level of our music varies, yes? In other words, it has dynamic range.

If we are listening to our music at a relatively safe & sane level of perhaps an average of 70-80dB, then (depending on listening material) obviously there will be peaks perhaps 10-20dB higher than this average. Perhaps even more for some classical music that is recorded with an extreme dynamic range.

So, one characteristic of a "good" speaker (along with others such as even dispersion and good FR) is that it should be able to reproduce these dynamic peaks without distortion, yes?

The 96dB distortion numbers seem to be a fairly good indicator of how well a speaker can handle those aforementioned dynamic peaks.

(Among other shortcomings, the current test suite doesn't test how well a speaker can play 96dB @ 1M on a continuous basis, but that's also probably not a realistic requirement for a speaker unless we're talking about something providing sound for large, open spaces. So, for an "average" sized residential situation, I suspect these 96dB distortion measurements are actually a very strong indicator of real world performance...)

It's very surprising to me that this is being debated. There's no audiophool magic being discussed here. We're talking about fundamental and measurable properties. I can only ascribe this pushback to folks treating the "Harmon preference score" as some sort of absolute gospel, which it is not and was never intended to be. The Harman stuff isn't a law; it's merely a useful (if we understand its limitations) statistical model.

 

[hardisj]

you got me curious about how the Klipsch horn-loaded legacy line measures

I tested the Heresy IV back in November. You can find the results here. And below is my CTA-2034. I have since re-measured with my NFS but the results are close enough to the same. I'll provide those updated results soon, though. Here is a sneak peak. The NFS is in black. The teal is my original measurement.

 

[Kachda]

Assuming we're not listening to sine sweeps or pink noise all day, the absolute basics of audio theory tell us that the SPL level of our music varies, yes? In other words, it has dynamic range.

If we are listening to our music at a relatively sane level of perhaps an average of 70-80dB, then (depending on listening material) obviously there will be peaks perhaps 10-20dB higher than this average. Perhaps even more for some classical music that is recorded with an extreme dynamic range.

So, one characteristic of a "good" speaker (along with others such as even dispersion and good FR) is that it should be able to reproduce these dynamic peaks without distortion, yes?

The 96dB distortion numbers seem to be a fairly good indicator of how well a speaker can do this.

It's bizarre to me that this is even a matter of discussion honestly. There's no audiophool magic here. We're talking about extremely basic and objective measurable properties.

Yes, a speaker should have low distortion. But the #1 important factor is Frequency Response, which is not good here. And the reason for low distortion seems to be that the speaker cannot produce low bass in spite of its large woofer (which probably also contritbutes to its high efficiency). Spending $7500 on something which has such an anomalous response and then having to supplant it with subs does not seem like a good return to me. Cheaper Klipsch horn speakers should be able to have similar dynamics due to its high efficiency.

 

[hardisj]

The good engineers must have transferred to Revel.

Or to Kali Audio.

However in reality dynamic range is an obvious limitation of the 3 Series monitors relative to big boys like these 4349s.

If you have the 305p MKII, I know exactly why. There is significant compression (limiting?) in the 305 at high volumes (somewhere between 96-102dB @ 1m). I'll have data on this soon.

 

[TimVG]

Very well put, but consistent use of the measurements is key too...

If the Klippel results are almost the same, then unless other condition(s) change, a result cannot be good for one speaker and bad for another. Without some more context, I can see why there is confusion over some of Amir’s reviews. As you point out in this case, the FR difference could be as simple as listening distance vs measurement distance.

Personally, have little problem with subjective opinion. However, if someone is going to claim the measurements support their opinion, consistent application of the data is critical to objective credibility.

The problem is that different speakers have different applications, and a universal approach may not be entirely possible. I believe Amir has excellent listening skills and when the measurements don't entirely add up it doesn't hurt to look further. In this case I believe this particular speaker is somewhat better than represented in the measurements in this particular form.

 

[More Dynamics Please]

Really appreciating the acknowledgement of speaker dynamics and efficiency in this thread. But the price is a killer and greatly limits the market. If we acknowledge the importance of dynamics and efficiency in our listening experience then it would be nice to see more speakers like this reviewed here but at a more affordable price point, say <$1,000 per speaker.

 

[daftcombo]

What are the measurements to speaker dynamics?

 

[hardisj]

Added it to the review:

@amirm, quick question for you.
Are your "hand drawn" lines intended to be a trendline or are they intended to relay a slope from bass to highs? When you first started reviewing I thought the purpose was to draw a -1dB/octave slope from LF to HF and I hadn't paid much attention to it deviating from that until I saw the above graphic. I assume from this graphic, that you're drawing a trendline instead of what I thought originally. The reason I ask, though, is because up until now it seemed your trend lines started with the bass and trended down to the HF. Meaning, in this case of this speaker, I'd have expected your line to start ~ 90dB @ 100Hz rather than 86dB. But that may just be because the other ones I'm referencing below have had less of a bass bump and a more linear trend from LF to HF. Again, I'm just asking to make sure I understand this is the intent. Not starting or picking fights.

 

[Andrej]

I have seen several posts claiming that the frequency response is the most significant component of measured performance evaluation. I disagree. A few dBs deviation from "perfection" is very hard to detect in double blind listening, unless it is caused by a pronounced resonance. Distortion is much more significant (to me). I also do not care much about the directivity, as I listen alone in a room lined with 5+" of rock wool, so very few reflections. Not a typical scenario! Most rooms can easily create +/-10dB swings in the frequency response, making a narrow band 3 dB dip perceptually inconsequential. To me.