JBL 4349 Review (Studio Monitor Speaker)

[ROOSKIE]

My understanding is that Earl will still build the Summa on a semi-custom basis.

According to what I have heard that is true. I don't know the guy though.

What about your designs? You have some really cool looking stuff on your site. Maybe you don't want to plug them but I do. (I have never heard any of them but man they are something to ponder, very, very cool)

 

[Duke]

What about your designs? You have some really cool looking stuff on your site. Maybe you don't want to plug them but I do. (I have never heard any of them but man they are something to ponder, very, very cool)

Thank you very much, but I do not currently have data of the scope and quality that Earl and Amir and Erin and Harman generate. I get good data down low enough to do my crossover designs, but I don't have quasi-anechoic data over the bottom few octaves. If the day comes that I have such, I may be more inclined to use my own designs as examples.

 

[DualTriode]

Speaking of the horns in this speaker and their possible dynamic range I have a pair of the D2 CD drivers that are part of the M2.

For grins here is a FR and distortion plot of the bigger brother D2 M2 CD. Typical horn stuff, not too smooth and there is the mass break stuff going on as well. Crossovers and EQ require diligence.

A truck load of dynamics is the benefit.


Thanks DT

 

[Robbo99999]

I just saw a test of a high-end audiophile speaker that in going from an average level of 70 dB (loud conversation, background music) to 90 dB (a moderate crescendo, or foreground rock listening) lost about 4 dB in output over about 3 octaves in the mid-high-frequency range. It became a different loudspeaker at different listening levels." [emphasis Duke's]

Couldn't you easily test for this phenomenon by just running frequency sweeps at a bunch of different SPL's? So you'd run a 70dB sweep, then 80dB, then 90dB, and you'd overlay the frequency responses to see if they matched. You could even increase the length of the frequency sweeps if you were concerned that the heating effect wasn't being given enough time to occur. Seems like it would be a pretty easy thing to test for?

 

[Robbo99999]

Bach BWV 565. (Better know as the Toccata and Fugue in D minor, probably the best know classical organ work ever. Even if Bach may not have actually written it.)

Ah, I quite like that, I really don't have a lot of classical music, if I was to buy a CD containing that track & similar music what would you recommend me? Perhaps there's some really good recordings, because I listened to a few on ITunes Store just now & some were clearly better recorded than others. Have you got a recommendation for a particular CD I could buy, seems like I'd enjoy listening to it, as well as a good test for a speaker system?

 

[thewas]

How does that weird shape increase directivity of woofer? Is there any study on this?

By reducing the effective surface of radiation which changes the directivity, larger drivers beam more due to the bigger path differences from different points of the radiating surface.

 

[AudioJester]

Gulp!
Just saw some prices for Aeries Cerat....

 

[Sancus]

Ah, I quite like that, I really don't have a lot of classical music, if I was to buy a CD containing that track & similar music what would you recommend me? Perhaps there's some really good recordings, because I listened to a few on ITunes Store just now & some were clearly better recorded than others. Have you got a recommendation for a particular CD I could buy, seems like I'd enjoy listening to it, as well as a good test for a speaker system?

My favourite recordings of BWV 565 are Peter Hurford @ Ratzeburg Cathedral (YouTube) (Stereo) and E. Power Biggs @ Freiburg (Multichannel).

There's nothing else I've heard that comes close to the multichannel recording because that cathedral has 4 separate organs in different areas that can all be played simultaneously from the same keyboard.

 

[Robbo99999]

My favourite recordings of BWV 565 are Peter Hurford @ Ratzeburg Cathedral (YouTube) (Stereo) and E. Power Biggs @ Freiburg (Multichannel).

There's nothing else I've heard that comes close to the multichannel recording because that cathedral has 4 separate organs in different areas that can all be played simultaneously from the same keyboard.

Listening to the Youtube version, I'd say that's a better recording than the various versions on ITunes....that CD you linked could be the one for me to get, perhaps some other recommendations will come in, but that's certainly the best one so far, thanks.
EDIT: found this exact CD on Amazon & ordered it just now.

 

[JohnBooty]

Not sure what you're in a huff about, he's right. Audiophiles get shit talked relentlessly on ASR for the same kind of thing that's happening in the OP. Their subjective experience is routinely dismissed in favor of objective measurements. This review is a rare role reversal, so I'm not surprised to see people calling it out.

I prefer ASR to AudioGon and other subjectivity paradises, but sometimes you gotta call a spade a spade.

Well, there are multiple threads in this conversation. Among others...

First there's Amir's subjective listening impression. As Amir always says, it's cleanly separated from the objective measurements so you can ignore it if you don't like it. Some people are really "in a huff" about them. And other people are really in a huff about those people being in a huff.

Second, there's a more general thread of discussion about how a particular objective measurement (distortion, particularly at higher SPLs) might correlate to listener preference.

As Geddes and others have said, ultimately all these objective measurements need to be tied back into subjective preference. Otherwise they have no meaning! Of course, when he says this, he's talking about statistically valid blind testing. I certainly don't dispute the fact that blind controlled tests are the only way to settle the matter. I wouldn't even consider that up for debate.

(Geddes also says nonlinear distortions are masked at higher SPLs, so maybe we're all barking up the wrong tree)

I think it's still okay and useful to, y'know, discuss things and share experiences/preferences. Remember, controlled blind tests tell us about the average listener... the kind of thing you would want to know if designing sound equipment designed to appeal to a broad range of people. A designer/manufacturer should probably stick to those religiously when working in those capacities.

However, as individuals listening to music I wouldn't consider it a sinful descent into subjectivism for ASR members to say they tend to like speakers that exhibit objective traits X, Y, and Z, and wonder how how various objective measurements tie into subjective experience.

 

[Frank Dernie]

Why? On what rational basis? Or is it just because you like the conclusion?

I think it well worth doing a thermal compression study.
One of the reasons I don't even look at the "score" from any of the speaker tests, but do study the individual measurements, is that every time I have checked out speakers over the last 50 years the big thing that stands out to me when making comparisons using the sort of music I enjoy, be it rock music or big orchestral pieces, has been how the speakers handle dynamics.

The first time I came across this was probably over 40 years ago when the rave reviews of the Spendor BC1 here in the UK convinced me I should buy some.
I found my local dealer and arranged a demo, they were astonishingly realistic on voice and string quartet but on the sort of music I listen to a lot they sounded much worse than the 3-way speakers I already owned.
The dealer connected a 3-way with the same size cabinet at the BC1 and it was so much better on the sort of music I listen to at home I laughed out loud.
This was a level matched but not blind test. I appreciate that level matching speakers is inherently inexact but the difference was spectacularly obvious. It was the genesis of my mistrust of magazine reviews.

I have yet to find a 2-way speaker that is any use for my type of listening, even with a sub crossed over at 80Hz. 2 subs crossed over at 220Hz may not be as hopeless but I have no experience.

 

[Frank Dernie]

This was the track:

You know it is really down to the amplifier in this case don't you
I had a bit of a set to with its designer when I disagreed with some of the things he said about the amp design ( they were used to demonstrate the horn speakers I own at a show)
I like my horns despite his amp

 

[Frank Dernie]

Bach BWV 565. (Better know as the Toccata and Fugue in D minor, probably the best know classical organ work ever. Even if Bach may not have actually written it.)
Pipe organs are probably one of the hardest things to cope with. Dynamics, deeper bass than any other source, wide timerbal palate, and can play seriously loud. Indeed something like the camarde horns many organs display can get you way louder than any other instrument. (The Grand Ophicleide horns on the Boardwalk Hall organ in Atlantic City New Jersey are 130dB SPL @ 1 metre). Reed stops can be almost comically harsh. And loud. Domestic sound systems than can do justice to a pipe organ are few and far between. Unless you have heard one in full flight in the flesh you are missing out on a fabulous experience.

So true.
I went with my wife on a concert tour (she is a musician) and at one venue near Munich (iirc) the organist asked if anybody wanted to have a look at the magnificent organ in the venue where he was rehearsing. I went along and enjoyed looking at the design and construction of it, and when he finished rehearsing he said "right lets see what this instrument can do" and did a breathtaking display of organ "lollypops" which was astonishing in its frequency range and dynamic range.
I don't think anything else comes close to being as difficult to reproduce.
Luckily for hifi manufacturers not many people listen to organ music!

 

[DSJR]

Frank, BC1's can 'do' rock, but only in a small room and with levels taken into account I just have memories of 'Halleluwah!' by Can (master tape copy) making them sound as if they were going to shake apart if the volume went too far (the 'descended/sibling' Rogers LS3/6 did melt the voice coils on this track - cough...) Oh them were the days, when big JBL's were too coloured and big IMF's were the thing...

After reading all these posts, I wonder if this summary might apply? - the best way to use these speakers mid-field is on low stands but angled back, as per the L100 Classic? That way, you get a flatter response tracking over the crossover and just maybe, better integrated mid bass? i suspect near-field might separate out the drivers a bit too much but maybe three metres away and set up as described, things may flatten out.

P.S. I did hear the 4429 three way (Primare driven) and all I really noticed was spit and 'tizzle' from the twin tweeters - a bit too 'razor sharp' for me after sweet toned domes as used in the thin-wall 8" two way (plus so called super tweeter) boxes I normally use.

 

[wgb113]

Seems even the holy Harman folks (and Amir) know it’s not all about measurements but ultimately just comes down to preference and budget.

These measure poorly for their price yet I don’t doubt that some will enjoy the heck out of them and that’s really all that matters!

 

[changer]

wbg113, I fear this is not the whole story, I think richard had a point when he wrote:

This makes sense, and it seems to be a consistent Harman strategy to differentiate JBL from Revel. JBL HDI-3800 had similar issues from not being three way that the F208 didn't show. Similar priced Revel will give you slightly higher fidelity, but less max output.

For a mastering engineer this dip is probably not up to contemporary industry standards and the speaker is rather directed towards a certain audiophile segment. Now if richard is right and the Harman Group want two distinct brands, one being Revel, the other JBL, with different formulas for their product lines, they'd get away with such easily avoidable deficiencies. They could close this crossover gap, could go active or use other drivers. They don't because their targeted market is ready for such jewels with "natural" errors like this "sad" gap.

 

[Francis Vaughan]

I went along and enjoyed looking at the design and construction of it,

Aren't they quite amazing? Hopefully you saw a proper all mechanical tracker based organ. It is astounding to think that the basic design goes back as far as the 13 or 1400's. So much so that pipe organs pre-date most orchestral instruments. But it remains the king of instruments.

Currently, creating a satisfactory rendition of pipe organ is my home audio system project. I have amassed some significant firepower to further the cause already, but there is much to come.

 

[hardisj]

Couldn't you easily test for this phenomenon by just running frequency sweeps at a bunch of different SPL's? So you'd run a 70dB sweep, then 80dB, then 90dB, and you'd overlay the frequency responses to see if they matched. You could even increase the length of the frequency sweeps if you were concerned that the heating effect wasn't being given enough time to occur. Seems like it would be a pretty easy thing to test for?

I do this using 76dB @ 1m as the reference. 86dB, 96dB and (sometimes) 102dB. You can see this in my more recent reviews:
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/kali-in-5-studio-monitor-review.22487/
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...s/focal-twin6-be-studio-monitor-review.22254/

But those are powered speakers which often have limiters built in. So, here is an example from an upcoming re-review of the Klipsch Heresy IV I tested in November last year. Sneak peak for you guys!

 

[Francis Vaughan]

Have you got a recommendation for a particular CD I could buy,

@Sancus beat me to the E. Power Biggs recommendation. He is hard to go past.

Organ music, and Baroque organ in particular, has a lot of variation from one performance to another. Every organ is different. For all useful purposes no two pipe organs are the same. The are individually commissioned and designed for the space they will be installed. So much so that separating the organ from the building isn't really possible. The acoustic space the organ plays in is a critical part of the organ's sound. Every organ built is voiced in-situ (every single pipe being adjusted for its tonal character and balance once installed in place.) No two organs have the same set of stops or voicings, and baroque music leaves a considerable amount of interpretation to the organist, with much of the ornamentation only implied. So you can and will find a quite considerable range of interpretations and sonic realisations.

 

[sarumbear]

And is 97 dB a really high efficiency? Only 6 more than 91 dB, so 1/4 power.

May I remind you how dB works? dB of sound pressure level (dB SPL) is defined as 20 log10 p1/p0. In other words 6dB means four times the sound level produced for the same electrical signal.

Also, you may want scan the sensitivity specs of the speakers that are on the market. 97dB/1w/1m is an extremely high sensitivity!