JBL 4329p 8”active Studio Monitor series

[Valentin R]

Active 8” Studio Monitores Series all in one
Is out

The 4305p is a very small and impressive
The 4329p has a bigger enclosure with the same HF driver in the 708

 

[AM88]

That looks like a great hifi option. If it performs like its smaller sibling and has either higher spl, lower bass extension or both then it seems to me like more hifi than most people would need.

 

[Valentin R]

28Hz -6dB anechoic seems very good
And it should give at least 6dB more output than the little 4305p based bass driver area/ sensitivity and doble the power amplification

 

[samysound]

28Hz -6dB anechoic seems very good
And it should give at least 6dB more output than the little 4305p based bass driver area/ sensitivity and doble the power amplification

Hi, where did you find the frequency response spec of 28hz -6 dB?

 

[Valentin R]

 

[samysound]

I wonder how this will measure up compared to the 708P? Any thoughts?

 

[Valentin R]

Hope seeing some measurements
I would think good ones
It’s has a bigger waveguide with a better compresión driver and a bigger enclosure and a new woofer that probably has a different objective

708 have to accomplish hi levels of sound pressure to be used in Dolby atmos at fairly long distance. Fore long work hours
The 4329p does not need that objective

It can go lower lossing some volume

708 have a 100 degree horizontal dispersion
4329 has a 90 degree horizontal dispersion

It will be interesting to comparé each other

 

[ROOSKIE]

As of right now I want this speaker.
$4500 a pair though, probably fair given what the 708p costs and this has a more expensive enclosure.
I hope it somehow has the PEQ built in like the 708p but I suspect it will not, it will have streaming powers so maybe a fair trade.

 

[mastachio]

I wonder how they sound compared to the 4309

 

[samysound]

As of right now I want this speaker.
$4500 a pair though, probably fair given what the 708p costs and this has a more expensive enclosure.
I hope it somehow has the PEQ built in like the 708p but I suspect it will not, it will have streaming powers so maybe a fair trade.

PEQ would be nice so fingers crossed.

on another note, power to the HF driver is significantly lower compared to the 708P (250watts for the 708P and 50watts for the 4329).

 

[Valentin R]

PEQ would be nice so fingers crossed.

on another note, power to the HF driver is significantly lower compared to the 708P (250watts for the 708P and 50watts for the 4329).

No user PEQ just a bass contour switch

don't think the amp is a problem with the efficiency difference between the bass driver and the compression /horn driver
the bass driver is the one gives up first especially for getting that low extension out of that small box

 

[ROOSKIE]

PEQ would be nice so fingers crossed.

on another note, power to the HF driver is significantly lower compared to the 708P (250watts for the 708P and 50watts for the 4329).

Sensitivity of the compression driver is likely near [email protected] though so in theory 50 watts should be good. I actually never understood why the 708P had 300 for the tweeter. It seems odd, but there may be a good reason for such high power available there.
Anyway, that said I do hope 250 is enough for the woofer and 50 for the tweeter as I would want them to handle the loud times.

 

[3125b]

the bass driver is the one gives up first especially for getting that low extension out of that small box

On the similar 4305P both drivers are limited quite hard, the tweeter limiting at 96dB. This has double the power for the tweeter, so 3dB more headroom (presuming it's the same tweeter).

 

[ROOSKIE]

On the similar 4305P both drivers are limited quite hard, the tweeter limiting at 96dB. This has double the power for the tweeter, so 3dB more headroom (presuming it's the same tweeter).

Something is limiting the tweeter there but I don't see why.
Typically 1/4 watt - 1/2 watt (or less) would drive that tweeter to over 96db@1m. (Depends in the waveguide )
The 4305p uses the 2410-h2 tweeter. I don't know its sensitivity but it could/should be well over 100db with 1 watt.

Possibly just a DSP choice to limit the whole system to match the limits of the 5inch driver???

Anyway I found the severe limiting JBL implimented there to be odd.

 

[Valentin R]

It’s not the same tweeter
2410H @ 4305p
2409H @ 4329p


One thought
Just think that white noise doesn’t have the same energy content as Music

Bass energy in music is way above HF

 

[RobL]

Same compression driver as my 705P’s. Excellent compression driver!
Super, super smooth, it’s the only speaker I’ve set up in my room that had such superb treble strait out of the box.

 

[DevinCortno]

Excellent specs on paper but with JBL you always have to watch for unpleasant surprises in detailed measurements... crossovers are never as clean as they should be. 4367 is a masterpiece but soooo expensive. 4349 had some unacceptable variation in FR while still being extremely expensive.

I love the style of these monitors, 8" woofer with compression driver efficiency, but don't trust JBL enough to buy without an ASR/EAC review. They know all the science but don't apply it very rigorously sometimes.

 

[ROOSKIE]

I love the style of these monitors, 8" woofer with compression driver efficiency, but don't trust JBL enough to buy without an ASR/EAC review. They know all the science but don't apply it very rigorously sometimes.

Yes, but they blind test the products.
Unless something has changed.
I be very curious what they have found that was never published. The research is aging and I can see some pretty big holes that could be filled by more study, especially regarding dispersion, higher SPL and vertical reflections. I am also not convinced by the current argument that Mono and Stereo testing results always run in parallel, especially if the speakers have very narrow or very wide dispersion. Hopefully someday someone will continue in public.

I can tell you that my 4309's sound better to me vs quite a few competitors (sighted) despite the frequency response not being as good on paper. I do use a tiny bit of correction in that midrange trouble zone. (Most of my passive speakers use some correction somewhere)
I would say I am biased but I have to admit I started out not being a strong JBL fan. They won me over, for now at least (especially with the JBL 530, L82, L52,4309). I am not a loyal for the sake of being loyal type.
I would love to have the 4349's someday, just not a good time right now. I have a couple dozen smaller speakers and have not finished testing them all. Can't currently justify something large like the 4349 set until I sell of most of this other stuff in a year or two.

It’s not the same tweeter
2410H @ 4305p
2409H @ 4329p


One thought
Just think that white noise doesn’t have the same energy content as Music

Bass energy in music is way above HF

Pink Noise is what I use for my testing along with the sweeps. I don't use white very often

Pink has equal energy in each octave and each octave contains double the frequencies as the one before it so as you go up the energy is spread out in larger range.
Sweep has equal energy in each frequency along the sweep.

 

[samysound]

As of right now I want this speaker.
$4500 a pair though, probably fair given what the 708p costs and this has a more expensive enclosure.
I hope it somehow has the PEQ built in like the 708p but I suspect it will not, it will have streaming powers so maybe a fair trade.

im guessing "street price" will be lower from a good dealer. Revel M126Be are pretty close to this price per pair as well but seems like so much less for the money (no amps, DSP, etc.)

 

[Valentin R]

Yes, but they blind test the products.
Unless something has changed.
I be very curious what they have found that was never published. The research is aging and I can see some pretty big holes that could be filled by more study, especially regarding dispersion, higher SPL and vertical reflections. I am also not convinced by the current argument that Mono and Stereo testing results always run in parallel, especially if the speakers have very narrow or very wide dispersion. Hopefully someday someone will continue in public.

I can tell you that my 4309's sound better to me vs quite a few competitors (sighted) despite the frequency response not being as good on paper. I do use a tiny bit of correction in that midrange trouble zone. (Most of my passive speakers use some correction somewhere)
I would say I am biased but I have to admit I started out not being a strong JBL fan. They won me over, for now at least (especially with the JBL 530, L82, L52,4309). I am not a loyal for the sake of being loyal type.
I would love to have the 4349's someday, just not a good time right now. I have a couple dozen smaller speakers and have not finished testing them all. Can't currently justify something large like the 4349 set until I sell of most of this other stuff in a year or two.


Pink Noise is what I use for my testing along with the sweeps. I don't use white very often

Pink has equal energy in each octave and each octave contains double the frequencies as the one before it so as you go up the energy is spread out in larger range.
Sweep has equal energy in each frequency along the sweep.

My mistake I meant pink noise