• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

JBL 4319 Studio Monitor Review

GXAlan

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 15, 2020
Messages
3,903
Likes
6,023
I've seen too many top end Japanese audio videos on YouTube with these (and far larger) JBL Studio Monitor speakers to be convinced by the results. If I had the opportunity I'd buy these in a heartbeat.

The science is accurate *and* I enjoy these speakers.
- tweeter dials are hyper sensitive
- IMD is low of these. (Not measured but you can see the low THD).
- bass is lean

Dispersion isn’t that great which is why it scores low on preference score. However the in room measurements are better.

MusicDirect has close out pricing on these with an in-home trial option.
 

lok777

Member
Joined
Jan 10, 2020
Messages
11
Likes
1
I've seen too many top end Japanese audio videos on YouTube with these (and far larger) JBL Studio Monitor speakers to be convinced by the results. If I had the opportunity I'd buy these in a heartbeat.
I bought the 4307's (they are on sale from MD for 1200 right now) and I really like them with my SVS SB-2000.
 

GXAlan

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 15, 2020
Messages
3,903
Likes
6,023
I bought the 4307's (they are on sale from MD for 1200 right now) and I really like them with my SVS SB-2000.

You should pick up a UMIK-1 if you don't already have one and run some measurements in your room.
 

lok777

Member
Joined
Jan 10, 2020
Messages
11
Likes
1
You should pick up a UMIK-1 if you don't already have one and run some measurements in your room.
I am a bit of noob with recording gear, not sure I would trust myself to accurately measure them TBH. I was kind of surprised at the lack of reviews or information in general of this line. It would appear the L100 Classic(which was just released I believe)seems similar to the 4319, then the 4307 is the little brother of the 4319 I guess(?), kind of confusing. Have not had them long but so far I have really enjoyed them.
 
Last edited:

GXAlan

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 15, 2020
Messages
3,903
Likes
6,023
I am a bit of noob with recording gear, not sure I would trust myself to accurately measure them TBH. I was kind of surprised at the lack of reviews or information in general of this line. It would appear the L100 Classic(which was just released I believe)seems similar to the 4319, then the 4307 is the little brother of the 4319 I guess(?), kind of confusing. Have not had them long but so far I have really enjoyed them.

The UMIK-1 does make it pretty easy. When you measure at home, it helps you tweak the sound for your own room with basic EQ. From a "Review" standpoint, the homebrew measurements won't get you true anechoic bass but it's good for your own room when using REW.

The L100 is a modern global product designed to have a bit of the west coast sound with great bass and dispersion when positioned closed to the floor. It's a modern-design and the tweeter dials are apparently +/- 2dB.

The 4307 and 4319 are more vintage designs, originally intended for the Japanese market. On-average, the Japanese market favors leaner bass (compared to the Harman curve) and has less of a downward slope. This is seen in Amir's measurements (though the treble is hot in his measurements due to the idiosyncratic L-pad dials where it's even possible to turn off the tweeter completely). In my room, the 4319 measures flat which translates to sounding "thin" which is what the research suggests.

You're right that the positioning is confusing since the numbers aren't easy to follow. The 4319 definitely has flagship drivers by being designed for US manufacturing whereas the 4307 likely punches above its price point having been designed-for-manufacturing in China.

The 4307 is the spiritual successor of the 4313 with its 10"/5"/1" design. It's a 2007 design.
The 4319 is the spiritual successor of the 4312 with its 12"/5"/1" design. It's a 2010 design.

The Japanese (Google Translated) descriptions of the 4307 are
"If the previous 4312 series had an energy balance in the mid-high range, I felt that this 4307 was a model that had a strong feeling in the mid-low range. The sound of string music, which is slender and has a feeling of charisma, has changed to a thick and imposing sound"

"Tension and speedy sound across the entire area make jazz and rock sound fresh."

"The sound quality that extends well in the high range makes music play lively without selecting a genre."

There is a review here (need to translate)
https://audio.com.pl/testy/stereo/kolumny-glosnikowe/3104-jbl-4307

The 4307 has very simple first order crossovers.

The reviewer there subjectively said:
"the midrange potentiometer had to be set in a vertical position (and thus significantly "below" the zero position), and highs - to the maximum."

At the "(zero) setting of the controls, the sound is aggressive, attacks with the upper midrange, and displays the trumpets." Which is colored, but they thought pleasant for certain music like Miles Davis.

What's interesting is that while the 4319 runs a bit bright with a flat treble rather than downsloping one, the Polish reviewers measured their 4307 with a rolled off treble.
 

lok777

Member
Joined
Jan 10, 2020
Messages
11
Likes
1
The UMIK-1 does make it pretty easy. When you measure at home, it helps you tweak the sound for your own room with basic EQ. From a "Review" standpoint, the homebrew measurements won't get you true anechoic bass but it's good for your own room when using REW.

The L100 is a modern global product designed to have a bit of the west coast sound with great bass and dispersion when positioned closed to the floor. It's a modern-design and the tweeter dials are apparently +/- 2dB.

The 4307 and 4319 are more vintage designs, originally intended for the Japanese market. On-average, the Japanese market favors leaner bass (compared to the Harman curve) and has less of a downward slope. This is seen in Amir's measurements (though the treble is hot in his measurements due to the idiosyncratic L-pad dials where it's even possible to turn off the tweeter completely). In my room, the 4319 measures flat which translates to sounding "thin" which is what the research suggests.

You're right that the positioning is confusing since the numbers aren't easy to follow. The 4319 definitely has flagship drivers by being designed for US manufacturing whereas the 4307 likely punches above its price point having been designed-for-manufacturing in China.

The 4307 is the spiritual successor of the 4313 with its 10"/5"/1" design. It's a 2007 design.
The 4319 is the spiritual successor of the 4312 with its 12"/5"/1" design. It's a 2010 design.

The Japanese (Google Translated) descriptions of the 4307 are
"If the previous 4312 series had an energy balance in the mid-high range, I felt that this 4307 was a model that had a strong feeling in the mid-low range. The sound of string music, which is slender and has a feeling of charisma, has changed to a thick and imposing sound"

"Tension and speedy sound across the entire area make jazz and rock sound fresh."

"The sound quality that extends well in the high range makes music play lively without selecting a genre."

There is a review here (need to translate)
https://audio.com.pl/testy/stereo/kolumny-glosnikowe/3104-jbl-4307

The 4307 has very simple first order crossovers.

The reviewer there subjectively said:
"the midrange potentiometer had to be set in a vertical position (and thus significantly "below" the zero position), and highs - to the maximum."

At the "(zero) setting of the controls, the sound is aggressive, attacks with the upper midrange, and displays the trumpets." Which is colored, but they thought pleasant for certain music like Miles Davis.

What's interesting is that while the 4319 runs a bit bright with a flat treble rather than downsloping one, the Polish reviewers measured their 4307 with a rolled off treble.

Hey thanks for all the information, that was a bit more info than I have been able to find online for them! I knew they were originally made for the Japanese market, but I just did not want to start looking for info in Japanese :) Are they be bringing these to the general US market, or did MD just have a few pairs for whatever reason? I imagine the L100classic and the L80 or whatever the little brother is would be their target for US buyers. When I saw these for like a grand I figured it was a good deal. That makes sense these would be made in China they were about half price of the others(I do not mind the made in China moniker anymore, everything is made there). Thanks for the info-the umik is only like 60-70 bucks I may try to get one from Amazon next week when I get paid.
 

GXAlan

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 15, 2020
Messages
3,903
Likes
6,023
When I saw these for like a grand I figured it was a good deal. That makes sense these would be made in China they were about half price of the others(I do not mind the made in China moniker anymore, everything is made there). Thanks for the info-the umik is only like 60-70 bucks I may try to get one from Amazon next week when I get paid.

They're definitely a distinct sound. Many modern speakers all try to hit the "Harman target" which is best sound across the most people and music. It's proven by the marketplace and you'll see good examples in Revel, high-end KEF, and others. The new L100/L80 were designed by Chris Hagen, who developed the old L1/3/5/7 line from the 90's while adopting the philosophy of modern Revel speakers. They should sound pretty good. The 4307 and 4319 are from the Greg Timbers era, which still relied on measurements but also represented a disagreement w/the some of the preference science conducted by Dr. Toole.

The MusicDirect deal is good since you can do an in-house trial.

What music have you enjoyed on your 4307?
 

lok777

Member
Joined
Jan 10, 2020
Messages
11
Likes
1
They're definitely a distinct sound. Many modern speakers all try to hit the "Harman target" which is best sound across the most people and music. It's proven by the marketplace and you'll see good examples in Revel, high-end KEF, and others. The new L100/L80 were designed by Chris Hagen, who developed the old L1/3/5/7 line from the 90's while adopting the philosophy of modern Revel speakers. They should sound pretty good. The 4307 and 4319 are from the Greg Timbers era, which still relied on measurements but also represented a disagreement w/the some of the preference science conducted by Dr. Toole.

The MusicDirect deal is good since you can do an in-house trial.

What music have you enjoyed on your 4307?

I like all kinds of music, but I mainly listen to hip-hop rock and modern electric music. Jazz and classical music has sounded really great on them though so been listening to a bit of both of those as well. I have been able to hear the separation of instruments in jazz and classical music a bit better with these, as well as details in other songs I have saved on playlists etc. Size is a bit goofy tho, JBL was trolling calling these "Bookshelf" speakers lol. I had been looking at the L50s they looked awesome also.
 
Last edited:

CDX50

New Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2020
Messages
1
Likes
0
The 4319’s have been in my main system since early 2018 so I feel qualified to speak about them. With some experimentation and patience, these can serve most music really well and, overall, sound really good. If all I had was a set of measurements and a couple of weeks with the 4319’s (or even just a couple of months), I probably would have come to the same conclusions as the original reviewer (such conclusion being: they sound bad), unless somehow I got lucky with my initial setup (improbable—more on that later). It took me almost two years of experimentation to find out how to make these sing, but the journey was worth it because I’m satisfied and have no intention to change speakers anytime soon. So, why did it take almost two years? Because there are so many variables to play with. These are the ones I focused on: speaker position, listener position, high and mid-frequency adjustments, cabling, and room treatments. Also bear in mind that I didn’t have the “benefit” of a set of measurements and was therefore doing all my experimentation based on what my ears alone told me. Also worth mentioning is that with every system change, proper evaluation requires listening to a variety of music over a period of time.

So, let’s begin with those high and mid frequency adjustments. Yeah, the speakers sounded way too forward and aggressive with both those controls (the white marker) set to the “0 db” position. At the “0 db” position, the tweeter and midrange are simply going to pump out too much sound for a lot of folks’ listening rooms. The only scenario where I can see these speakers sounding “right” or “good” with the controls set to the “0 db” position is in a very large listening room where the speakers sit in plenty of free space away from walls. My final landing spot and where the controls currently sit today is: high-frequency adjustment – white marker slightly past the 12 o’clock position; mid-frequency adjustment – white marker slightly before the 12 o’clock position. It’s worth noting that I drive the 4319’s with an all-tube system (Audio Research tube pre-amp and Audio Research tube amp) which makes everything naturally mid-range-centric to begin with. That might explain why I am able to have the midrange adjustment slightly before the 12 o’clock position with good results.

Next, let me discuss speaker (and listener) position. I played with toe-in, height and distance from walls. Regarding toe-in, I never liked any toe-in with these, regardless of what else I did with them. The instruction manual for the speakers ratified my findings: “For best results, place the speakers 5 – 8 feet apart. If you place the speakers farther apart than this, angle them towards the listening position.” Reading between the lines, this means no toe-in is recommended unless the speakers are greater than 8 feet apart. With regard to height, I started out with those low-slung metal stands that you commonly see in photos of these and other similar JBL models (like the L100). I didn’t like them because I felt like the soundstage was too low, even despite the stands being angled back a few degrees. Perhaps the vertical dispersion of the 4319’s is not too great (can someone connect one of the measurements to this finding?). So, I had some Sound Anchors custom-built for them. I didn’t know exactly how high to go with the Sound Anchors, but I figured if I’m going to error, I should error on the low side and not have them too high. So, in went the Sound Anchors which brought the tweeters closer, but not quite to, ear-level. Raising the speakers higher made an overall subjective improvement, not necessarily because the tweeters were closer to ear level, but because the midrange and woofer were further up into the air in more free space, I feel. I wound up raising the speakers a bit further by placing some wood blocks on top of the Sound Anchors (not ideal, I know, but I believe the benefits outweigh any detriment). So, all said and done, the tops of the speakers are a shade under 41.5 inches off the floor after spikes, stands and the wood blocks on top of the stands. The speakers are decoupled from the wood blocks with the blue sorbothane pads that came with the Sound Anchors. Moving on to distance from walls and listener position: I found that the more I moved the 4319’s away from side walls (and thus closer together) the better things sounded. This reduced the contribution from reflections and gave the mid-range and bass an overall weightier feel. In the end, what I have is a classic equilateral triangle setup with these rules of thumb: (i) distance from side walls = 1.6x the distance from the wall behind the speaker; (ii) distance between the speakers = 75% to 100% of the distance from the front of the speakers to the listening position; (iii) listening position = 2/3 the length of the room, beginning from the wall behind the speakers. I had never paid much attention to these rules of thumb, but the more I adhered to them, the better the 4319’s sounded. I guess one could say this is a “near field” setup.

Lastly, moving on to the most controversial topic: cabling. I’m fortunate to have more than one type of everything. Whatever cable is not in my system is on standby in my closet. I think most would agree that such a strategy increases the chances of getting the cake iced just right. The 4319’s are no exception when it comes to speakers that can reveal different shades of color with the swapping out of one (or more than one) cable. I swapped back and forth between two sets of speaker cables. One set of speaker cable was a bi-wire, and the other set was single-wire and thus required the use of jumpers. I played with power cords and interconnects. I played with it all until I arrived at a combination that sounded best to my ears. I could go on with further observations about cabling that I perceived with these speakers, but I won’t because I don’t want to step into the cable controversy thing here.

So, after all that, the 4319’s sound really great in my room. The biggest keys to getting great sound from them is to adjust down the high and mid-frequency controls to suit your environment and keep the speakers as far away from sidewalls as possible. These may not be the best choice for a highly reflective room, or a room smaller than mine (my room is 14ft long, 12ft wide, with a tray ceiling). I have no idea how these sound with solid state amplification. The tweeter doesn’t have all the shimmer and detail of the best soft domes and electrostatics, but it accounts for itself really well. The bass is not bloated, and the midrange is realistic and tonally correct. The 4319’s represent the music really well at low to mid-levels. At high levels, they can get a bit peaky at times, depending on the source material. As far as the measurements go, they do not appear to be more idiosyncratic than other speakers I’ve owned and read about, and less in some cases. All speakers measure and behave differently, so the chances of dropping any set of speakers in your system (and room) and having them sound the way you want right off the bat are nil. What is needed to get the best from any speaker is a lot of time, patience and willingness to experiment. And thankfully, the variables to play with are almost endless, or to put it another way, plentiful enough to arrive at the results you want. It is possible that you can run across a speaker that, no matter what you do, you can’t get to sound right in your environment. In my case, the 4319’s were not one of those speakers. I hope this provides some useful perspective to this thread and these speakers.
 

anmpr1

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Oct 11, 2018
Messages
3,739
Likes
6,447
With regard to height, I started out with those low-slung metal stands that you commonly see in photos of these and other similar JBL models (like the L100). I didn’t like them because I felt like the soundstage was too low, even despite the stands being angled back a few degrees.
I don't know about the new 'classic' L100 version--I've seen them advertised with floor stands, but the 4310/11/L100 was intended as a nearfield console monitor with drivers at ear level. The boom associated with the 'Maxell' blown away thing was possible if you set them on the floor. Raised to ear level it's not an issue. Of course it's a late '60s through mid '70s design, so one has to keep it in perspective.

jbl_in_the_studio.jpg
 

GXAlan

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 15, 2020
Messages
3,903
Likes
6,023
I hope this provides some useful perspective to this thread and these speakers.

What a great 1st post. The vertical directivity is an issue that was measured and is exactly what you, I, and Amir saw. You need to have these set at the optimal height, otherwise they don't sound that great. The midrange/tweeter dials are very aggressive (off = 100% off) as opposed to a mild +/- 3 dB configuration. That does let you tune the music quite a bit.

But that's the weakness of the 4319. You need to position it well.

I have found the resolution, particularly with IMD to be exceptional. The bass is also incredibly clean. Compared to my 6 ft tall ribbons from Magnepan, the 4319 keeps up. I think the hyper-detailed treble for some speakers is actually a bit more reflective of artificial brightness whereas the 4319 remains truer to its source. It's possible that your tubes roll off the highest frequencies, and you are dialing the tweeter down a bit.

For measurement, in-room measurements are pretty easy with a UMIK-1. I highly recommend it. In my room, the flat position did give me a flat in-room response. Tuning it down can give the downward slope preferred by many.
 

LuckyLuke575

Senior Member
Forum Donor
Joined
May 19, 2019
Messages
357
Likes
315
Location
Germany
I don't know about the new 'classic' L100 version--I've seen them advertised with floor stands, but the 4310/11/L100 was intended as a nearfield console monitor with drivers at ear level. The boom associated with the 'Maxell' blown away thing was possible if you set them on the floor. Raised to ear level it's not an issue. Of course it's a late '60s through mid '70s design, so one has to keep it in perspective.

View attachment 67567
These are beautiful speakers man
 

1200FE-8

Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2021
Messages
7
Likes
1
I'm currently running the 4312SE (Made in Mexico, Jerry Moro drivers, Control monitor, L-Pads) and I know what Amir means by boxy and closed. :p
Hi to all,

I am new to the forum since today :).

I feel i need to disagree to the "boxy and closed sound".

I am running 4312SE with Sony TA-A1ES and Denon PMA-2500NE for more that 1,5 years. Cables are Jantzen solid core 1 mm and Jantzen solid core 0.5 mm both conducters soldered on a silver banana. Source is Onkyo NS-6170 with Tidal and sometimes Denon PMA 2500NE internal dac with Tidal.

At the beggining the sound was boxy and a bit closed in and i was saying to myself, okay i am a JBL fan, but why did i pay for these monitors, for such a sound? But with time the 4312SE got better and better. Now sound is relaxed when music calls for it and dynamic and hot when needed, bass quality is one of the cleanest, well paced, clean-deep i could say. I did listen to Revel Salon in Vienna and other dyi Seas speakers, and Array 1400 in Vienna as well. Also Focal with beryllium tweeter. The Revel goes lower and has beryllium, but i have to say the bass quality a very good 12 inch provides does not compare to multiple 8 inch no matter if the floorstander goes lower. Troels Gravesen said on his website none of the skinny smaller woofers can do what a good 12 inch can, i 100% agree with Mr . Troels. The midrange is nice and a bit lit from within and more relaxed than titanium Revel or polymer -glass fiber mids of Focal , and the magnesium tweeter if not the last word in resolution fits very well within system (i can listen all day). I very much enjoy the sound of these 4312SE.

The 1200FE-8 is probably the best 12 woofer on the market right now, i would assume it is better even than ATC 12 inchers or other well regarded 12 inchers. Take a look at it on Audio Heritage forum i think you'll be impressed. I for one am grateful that such a woofer can be had in a 2500$ pair of speakers. I even payed 2000$ on my pair brand new. And the midrange ohh nice, if one sees the driver out of box that is one solid driver.

I am quite suprised by the audition result of that 4319 (i have never listened to it) that woofer 2213Nd has dual voice coils and TCR wire, it is also used full range in 4312E (talkin about good drivers) compared to ones that "need" a crossover. The other woofer with TCR wire is the 2216Nd from M2. Probably the 4319 was not fully broken in?

I also think people have got used to a "polite" sound that makes pretty much everything sound good. I find the JBLs quite reveling and only bright when music is like this.

I would also like to mention some food for thought i saw written on Audio Nirvana website:

" Unfortunately, the vast majority of speakers available today are totally lacking in detail. They are 'dumbed down' to the lowest common denominator. Most speaker companies today don't seem to care if their speakers ever sound 'good.' They are more concerned that their speakers never sound 'bad.' That is, they are designed to soften even the worst sounding CD's or digital files. We refer to these modern speakers as 'dead, dull, dark, and distant sounding' (the four 'D's). People used to these speakers initially mistake 'detail' for 'brightness'. But they quickly change their mind when they listen to a good quality recording played through these speakers. Audio Nirvana DIY full range speakers are accurate and detailed, not 'bright.' "


I wish to use and say about the above copied text from Commonsense audio that i find this as true not only for it's speakers but also for other designs, if you go and listen to some live unamplified music it does not sound polished and well behaved like most speakers sound today. I find JBL and also other well made high efficiency speakers get closer and match better to this real life music.

And one more thing again well said and well observed by David Dicks:

" In most applications, only one Audio Nirvana full range speaker is used per cabinet. This gives perfect point source imaging. Commonsense tells you that when someone sings, sound doesn't come from their mouth, their chest, and their knee (like it does in so-called 'normal' speakers). In addition, there are no time alignment problems (one speaker's voice coil being farther from the listener than another), because the sound comes from a single full range speaker. You have never really experienced stereo imaging until you listen to a single, full range speaker. "

Mouth, chest, and their knee: hint : Floorstanders (depending i assume where crossover point is)

My JBLs are 3 ways but....some analogy can be made: all 3 drivers are closely spaced together, not much distance is required for the drivers to gel together, also the woofer size is closer to human chest than some skinny midrange drivers. Clever. Also the woofer dustcap is almost same size as midrange diameter, midrange diameter is also almost identical to tweeter waveguide diameter. I think it is clever design and helps drivers integrate.

One more thing i appreciate: mid to tweeter crossover is 5khz, if one looks at Fletcher Munson revised curves 5 khz is a good point to have a crossover, these curves suggest you don't want any crossover between 2 khz - 5 khz where ear is most sensitive (no matter how good drivers are)

I am not saying my comments above are "the correct stuff" some of the written above are assumptions, and i also don't wish to imply that opinions / thoughts of others are wrong.

Happy listening and stay safe.
 

TimVG

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Sep 16, 2019
Messages
1,193
Likes
2,644
I am quite suprised by the audition result of that 4319 (i have never listened to it) that woofer 2213Nd has dual voice coils and TCR wire, it is also used full range in 4312E (talkin about good drivers) compared to ones that "need" a crossover. The other woofer with TCR wire is the 2216Nd from M2. Probably the 4319 was not fully broken in?

Having measured and built a system with the 2213nd-1 (see avatar) - I have to strongly disagree. The 2213nd requires a great deal of signal shaping for it to work properly up to ~1kHz. Using this driver "full range" would sound absolutely terrible. The old 123A was a lot more forgiving in this aspect.
 

1200FE-8

Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2021
Messages
7
Likes
1
Having measured and built a system with the 2213nd-1 (see avatar) - I have to strongly disagree. The 2213nd requires a great deal of signal shaping for it to work properly up to ~1kHz. Using this driver "full range" would sound absolutely terrible. The old 123A was a lot more forgiving in this aspect.

Ok, thanks for info. It might be just as you say. The 4312E specs say it uses 2213nd-2 and 4319 uses 2213nd-1. I do not know the construction difference between these two but it must be a difference.
 

TimVG

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Sep 16, 2019
Messages
1,193
Likes
2,644
I don't suspect the difference will be very large. Although, not being familiar with the nd-2, I couldn't say with certainty.

There are some more misconceptions in your post though, many can be explained through

but i have to say the bass quality a very good 12 inch provides does not compare to multiple 8 inch no matter if the floorstander goes lower. Troels Gravesen said on his website none of the skinny smaller woofers can do what a good 12 inch can, i 100% agree with Mr . Troels.

This in my experience is only the case when they are used sufficiently high. A 12" on a wider baffle will always have better controlled directivity than an 8" on a narrower baffle. This is easily measurable. In the case of the Salon2 though, the bass drivers are used to about ~150Hz if my memory serves me right - I doubt ANY 12" will come close to 3 of those woofers.

"In most applications, only one Audio Nirvana full range speaker is used per cabinet. This gives perfect point source imaging. Commonsense tells you that when someone sings, sound doesn't come from their mouth, their chest, and their knee (like it does in so-called 'normal' speakers). In addition, there are no time alignment problems (one speaker's voice coil being farther from the listener than another), because the sound comes from a single full range speaker. You have never really experienced stereo imaging until you listen to a single, full range speaker. "

Vertical directional cues are related only to the higher treble. This is a case of sighted bias - not once in any blind test have I been able, or have known anyone to be able, to say how many drivers they just listened to. It's simply impossible. The benefits of using multiple drivers to produce the spectrum far outweigh any of the theoretical drawbacks. While our hearing is sensitive in many ways, it is at the same time quite forgiving for certain things.

One more thing i appreciate: mid to tweeter crossover is 5khz, if one looks at Fletcher Munson revised curves 5 khz is a good point to have a crossover, these curves suggest you don't want any crossover between 2 khz - 5 khz where ear is most sensitive (no matter how good drivers are)


Again it doesn't matter, as long as the phase angles overlap and the amplitude response sums correctly. It's better to look for a match in horizontal directivity - this is much more important. And remember, the higher the crossover for any two drivers, the smaller the vertical windows becomes where the drivers will sum correctly - in case of a midrange to a tweeter, it is quite important.
 

1200FE-8

Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2021
Messages
7
Likes
1
I don't suspect the difference will be very large. Although, not being familiar with the nd-2, I couldn't say with certainty.

There are some more misconceptions in your post though, many can be explained through



This in my experience is only the case when they are used sufficiently high. A 12" on a wider baffle will always have better controlled directivity than an 8" on a narrower baffle. This is easily measurable. In the case of the Salon2 though, the bass drivers are used to about ~150Hz if my memory serves me right - I doubt ANY 12" will come close to 3 of those woofers.



Vertical directional cues are related only to the higher treble. This is a case of sighted bias - not once in any blind test have I been able, or have known anyone to be able, to say how many drivers they just listened to. It's simply impossible. The benefits of using multiple drivers to produce the spectrum far outweigh any of the theoretical drawbacks. While our hearing is sensitive in many ways, it is at the same time quite forgiving for certain things.




Again it doesn't matter, as long as the phase angles overlap and the amplitude response sums correctly. It's better to look for a match in horizontal directivity - this is much more important. And remember, the higher the crossover for any two drivers, the smaller the vertical windows becomes where the drivers will sum correctly - in case of a midrange to a tweeter, it is quite important.

Hi Tim,

I disagree with some statements, but everyone is entitled to have an opinion.

Kind regards,
 

GXAlan

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 15, 2020
Messages
3,903
Likes
6,023
Just to add since this is my 4319. The L-Pads for the 4319 are not great. Even though it was just one click high, we can see in Amir's testing that it really boosted the treble. Once I had it in-room and turned the treble to flat, it was much better. The target curve is lighter than the "Harman curve" but you can certainly tune it and this was originally a Japanese market speaker.

JBL 4319 Studio Monitor Review | Page 6 | Audio Science Review (ASR) Forum

@TimVG , can you share your measurements from the 2213nd-1? For running the driver full range, I imagine that the enclosure has to be tuned carefully to allow it to run full range. The 4312E was considered a great speaker in the "4312-style" sound. The -2 has low TCR wire while the 2213nd-1 does not. Both were Jerry Moro designs and were 12" M2 woofer designs. The 4312E actually predated the M2 woofer and there is a comment that it was a "Trickle up" phenomenon instead of trickle down. Neodymium magnets got more expensive and you can get the same result with a big/heavy ferrite magnet which is why Fe is used more often now by JBL.
 

saberger0357

Active Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2018
Messages
199
Likes
189
Ok, thanks for info. It might be just as you say. The 4312E specs say it uses 2213nd-2 and 4319 uses 2213nd-1. I do not know the construction difference between these two but it must be a difference.

I just got a pair of 4312E's. The manual states it uses the -1 woofer, not the -2. So the same as the 4319.

And is it true that the woofer in the E model is intended to run full range?
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom