And clean decay and group-delay and... The M2s are ported speakers and use a single driver for the whole sub-bass to mid-mids.
Perhaps it's one of the reasons why it wasn't preferred over the Ultima Salon2? [...]
Both the metrics you mentioned are really just a part of the three parameters I previously listed; that
define (high) "audio fidelity". If we wanted to start nitpicking, 'time-based errors' would be the forth and very last category to consider. I did not mention the domain of time-based errors, as they are the least audible in today's
digital world and usually not a problem.
The (audible) main differences between the (DSP-driven) '
JBL M2' and the 'Revel Ultima2 Salon2' are as follows:
(
-) narrower dispersion
(
-) lower directivity [anechoic] at HF
(
+) wider optimal listening window
(
+) lower distortion at higher max. SPL
If I recall correctly [please correct me, if I'm wrong], the listening experience you are referring to has not been conducted scientifically by any means and thus cannot be reproduced. Dr. Floyd Toole mentioned it might have been the wider dispersion of the Salon2, which ultimately got it a few more votes but again, we have no precise information about the listeners' seat arrangements, the listeners' (audio) background and the room itself; which all are very important facts to take into account for reasoning.
The 'JBL M2' is a least-compromise design and "good enough" for audio professionals who record, mix and master the music - including 'classical' genres - we, "audiophiles", love to listen to. It is a bit hard to imagine that
Dr. Sean Olive and his team did opt for this design if it was "crippled" that much; especially when taking the protocol into account they follow at HARMAN, before a (reference) loudspeaker receives its final pass-mark.
However, the most important thing is that we still enjoy the music - more than our gear!