JBL 4367 review by Erin

[gnarly]

Anyway, my response to @gnarly was about his claim that JBL 4367 is too expensive and it is easy to design, build and sell the 4367 clone at much lower price. Not so!

Yes so! Hey, there is nothing very special about the 4367, and it's certainly not unique. The "white paper" for it is a marketing piece in disguise, if i ever saw one.... But i'm not here to bash the speaker....it's the lofty/pricey assessments i take issue with.

While a horn/CD over 15" reflex speaker may not be so common for small studio use, it is perhaps the most common speaker type in live and theatre sound (for smaller audiences). Certainly the most common if you also include over 12".

For less than half the price of the 4367, in the proaudio live/install world, one should expect a horn/CD over 15" will come with internal bi-amplification, DSP processing often including FIR, RMS and peak limiting to maintain clean sound at SPL, adjustable EQ's, perhaps with remote monitoring and control, and often with presets for use in various boundary conditions.

We're talking from numerous major worldwide companies with all the R&D and various forms of overhead that Harman has....
Numerous companies in competition for a much broader marketplace than a specific studio niche.

I seriously doubt the 4367 has noticeably better SQ than the better offerings in that broader market place.

I believe the 4367 is designed and priced to a very narrow market segment whose members lack broader exposure to equivalent alternatives.
It's the only way JBL can get away with such a price imho. It's also probably the only market segment that can live with the asymmetrical pattern-flip horn.

Anybody who thinks the 4367 sounds great, would benefit going to a major pro-sound convention like Infocomm or Namm (as found in the US).
There is a lot to choose from....and a lot of money to save

 

[tuga]

I always find it interesting how one person perceives sound so differently from the next. I owned the 4367s then the M2s. The 4367s always seemed a bit too sharp on the top end for my tastes. The M2s sounded smoother and the bass went deeper in my small room. The bass hit harder on the 4367s though. I hated the slight hiss the JBL SDEC processor allowed through on the M2 system. There are ways around this though for the creative.

You can have “smooth” yet exaggerated treble.
Erin’s measurements of the M2 show this.
Many people like exaggerated treble (even Olive’s research clearly points to untrained listeners preferring exaggerated top and bottom ends)

If the two speakers don’t share the same compression driver then the one you describe as overly “sharp” could be producing audible distortion.

Another possibility could be (distortion from) the amplifier used to drive the passive model.

 

[changer]

Take note that I was showing JBL 4430/4435, not JBL 2344.

My bad. 4330/35 feature acoustic lenses in front of a loading horn, which cause a huge amount of reflections through diffraction. I highly doubt they can compete with any modern waveguide at all.

Besides, small on-axis deviations with narrow Q's is seldom audible at all, while wider deviations in the directivity matters greatly.

Notches regularly indicate resonances. This is what can be seen, I am sorry I don't heave these measurements ready, with the older bi-radial butt-cheek waveguides as well. The notches themselves might not be audible, however, they indicate strong internal resonances which should not be there at all.

The directivity of the newer waveguides from JBL are simply not very good.

I cannot agree. The directivity of JBL 708 waveguide is stellar, the PT waveguides for PA use, PT-H95HF, shows an nicely controlled pattern throughout the frequency band and is rightfully a DIY champion, or note the directivity realized with HDI-1600/3800. Those are all very good devices.

This general judgement misses the point: JBL decided to make this waveguide directional from a certain frequency spectrum on, the engineers made it behave like that. Is it no good? Well, for their intended application, a HiFi slope at the listening position, it delivers.

 

[fineMen]

Notches regularly indicate resonances.

Just in case, don't say "resonance" when You mean "(reflection &) interference".

 

[jhaider]

Yes so! Hey, there is nothing very special about the 4367, and it's certainly not unique.

Take a high enough view, and the same could be said for pretty much every loudspeaker of the last 50 years, except maybe arguably Danley.

For less than half the price of the 4367, in the proaudio live/install world, one should expect a horn/CD over 15" will come with internal bi-amplification, DSP processing often including FIR, RMS and peak limiting to maintain clean sound at SPL, adjustable EQ's, perhaps with remote monitoring and control, and often with presets for use in various boundary conditions.

As well as a crudely finished cabinet, which is by far the most important aspect for home use, and greater economies of scale. Also, the driver quality here is like the flagship pro stuff - think JBL Vertec not Eon.

It’s also worth noting 4367 costs barely more than M2 in the latter’s closest equivalent comparable (raw speakers + BSS BLU-50) despite 4367’s finer finish and extra passive bits.

 

[Bjorn]

My bad. 4330/35 feature acoustic lenses in front of a loading horn, which cause a huge amount of reflections through diffraction. I highly doubt they can compete with any modern waveguide at all.



Notches regularly indicate resonances. This is what can be seen, I am sorry I don't heave these measurements ready, with the older bi-radial butt-cheek waveguides as well. The notches themselves might not be audible, however, they indicate strong internal resonances which should not be there at all.



I cannot agree. The directivity of JBL 708 waveguide is stellar, the PT waveguides for PA use, PT-H95HF, shows an nicely controlled pattern throughout the frequency band and is rightfully a DIY champion, or note the directivity realized with HDI-1600/3800. Those are all very good devices.

This general judgement misses the point: JBL decided to make this waveguide directional from a certain frequency spectrum on, the engineers made it behave like that. Is it no good? Well, for their intended application, a HiFi slope at the listening position, it delivers.

You're overlooking the driver quality and EQ when comparing the horns. A lot has happened in that apartment since the early 80s.

But I agree that the JBL 708 measures very well horizontally in the frequency band the horn operatates in. I'm not familiar with PT-H95HF but the JBL HDI-1600/3800 aren't very impressive IMO.

 

[Inner Space]

You can have “smooth” yet exaggerated treble.

Yes. I have a pair of 4367s in one of my rooms, left over after a job I did via my post production business, for which as always I had 12 samples tested and picked the closest-matching pair - which both happened to be clearly elevated above the crossover. A definite QC error. I believe there was a switch in manufacturing location at the time, which might have been responsible. I EQed them and otherwise I quite like them - an appealing blend of virtues.

 

[hvbias]

You're overlooking the driver quality and EQ when comparing the horns. A lot has happened in that apartment since the early 80s.

But I agree that the JBL 708 measures very well horizontally in the frequency band the horn operatates in. I'm not familiar with PT-H95HF but the JBL HDI-1600/3800 aren't very impressive IMO.

I'm curious what your takes are on vertical directivity of all these speakers being discussed as none of them will be as perfect as coaxials.

 

[puppet]

Can't think of another company that has freely shared their innovations/technology over the years than JBL/Harman. As other advances take over prices will come down ... and ironically, those advances will most likely be from the future efforts of JBL/Harman.

 

[fineMen]

As well as a crudely finished cabinet, which is by far the most important aspect for home use, ...

First, xxxx is not for home use. Second, the industrial design is, as with the Revels quite pretentious, but gone wrong. No elegance, missing clarity and easiness. It isn't even hefty. To much indefinite bold elements put in, as with a sausage. I like weight, edginess, the straights of the 4530, though. That was a convincing statement. I would even argue, that the xxxx tries too hard to replicate the success of the latter, but in plastic age.

the driver quality here is like the flagship pro stuff - think JBL Vertec not Eon.

But the competition is different today. Differential drive? Adire Audio XBL^2 (was gone for a while, patent issues?). Coaxial compression drivers? BMS, Germany. Ring membrane? Same. Waveguides, ok-ish with potential. Maybe the xxxx is the final 15" plus CD lense, and we see some very new stuff soon. Makes the xxxx a collectors item!

 

[Vladimir Filevski]

Yes so! Hey, there is nothing very special about the 4367, and it's certainly not unique. The "white paper" for it is a marketing piece in disguise, if i ever saw one.... But i'm not here to bash the speaker....it's the lofty/pricey assessments i take issue with.

I concur the 4367 is not very special or unique. Also, it is pricey.

But where are the competitors, with equal sound quality (measurements), equally good/acceptable looking (for home use) and with much lower price?
Well?

For less than half the price of the 4367, in the proaudio live/install world, one should expect a horn/CD over 15" will come with internal bi-amplification, DSP processing often including FIR, RMS and peak limiting to maintain clean sound at SPL, adjustable EQ's, perhaps with remote monitoring and control, and often with presets for use in various boundary conditions.
We're talking from numerous major worldwide companies with all the R&D and various forms of overhead that Harman has....
Numerous companies in competition for a much broader marketplace than a specific studio niche.

Of course there are such live/install pro loudspeakers.
But...
Have you ever seen how they look??? Would you ever, and I mean EVER, place such ugliness in your living room?
Of course, there are exceptions, like pro loudspeakers for clubs - they are sexy... but overly large and impossible to fit in a normal room.

I seriously doubt the 4367 has noticeably better SQ than the better offerings in that broader market place.

Have you ever heard how 4367 sounds? Have you seen the 4367 measurements (hint: the first post in this thread)?

I believe the 4367 is designed and priced to a very narrow market segment whose members lack broader exposure to equivalent alternatives.
It's the only way JBL can get away with such a price imho.

Are you trying to insult them??? Are they stupid and unaware of alternatives?

Anybody who thinks the 4367 sounds great, would benefit going to a major pro-sound convention like Infocomm or Namm (as found in the US).
There is a lot to choose from....and a lot of money to save

My friend who bought 4367 is working in a large company which provides audio/video solution for cinemas, concert halls, studios, and of course, private home theaters for (very) wealthy customers. He attended all possible pro-sound and high-end hi-fi conventions and fairs, where is a lot to choose from... and on the end he chose JBL 4367!
He has large, acoustically treated, dedicated listening room, with one pair of JBL 4367, four 18" subwoofers, and one pair of loudspeakers which I designed (15" woofer + 10" mid + AMT high, all pro-drivers). In his living room there is one pair of JBL HDI 3800. Office room is equipped with Genelec 8020 and JBL sub.

 

[gnarly]

Take a high enough view, and the same could be said for pretty much every loudspeaker of the last 50 years, except maybe arguably Danley.

Yep. It's amazing how long most everything has been around.
I might add Keele's CBT for home use to the Danley list, of arguably new stuff.
Most 'new stuff advances' seems to me, to have come from driver improvements due to better materials and design simulations.
And from DSP processing, including judicious use of FIR....particularly in prosound arrays.

That said, I don't think it takes much of a high view, to say that a horn/CD over a 15" or 12" reflex are common as dirt in proaudio....

As well as a crudely finished cabinet, which is by far the most important aspect for home use, and greater economies of scale. Also, the driver quality here is like the flagship pro stuff - think JBL Vertec not Eon.

Yeah, 'what price' cabinet....'what price' visual aesthetics. That's certainly each to their own.
For me, the pursuit of visual aesthetics creates such a large hit to both sound quality and the pocketbook, ...well, i can't bear it.

And can't really say the 4367 rates so high fit and finish wise....i mean it's just laminate over a rectangular MDF box....
A lot of pro boxes look just as good to me...handles and all.

Yes, the 4367 has good drivers, but i doubt they are measurably better than say in RCF's 9 series boxes....for a fraction of the price.
If i were going to clone the 4367, i'd probably upgrade the CD to a coax from BMS or B&C. Dunno much about the differential drive 15".

 

[Bjorn]

I'm curious what your takes are on vertical directivity of all these speakers being discussed as none of them will be as perfect as coaxials.

There will always be vertical lobing in a 2-way horn speaker unless it's synergy/unity horn, and which has it's own weaknesses. The question is how severe the lobing is and at what frequency.

With these JBL waveguides, which are in reality very small horns when you consider the size required for constant directivity, the lobing ends up in a sensitive area combined with comb filtering. With larger horns and with large format compression drivers that can be crossed lower, you have pushed lobing further away from the sensitive area. Often the larger horns also exhibit a much narrower vertical directivity, thus the lobing hardly shows up the listening position at all. Large constant directivity horns sound very different from smaller horns.

Coaxials have their own issues. Much higher intermodulation distortion and with most of them there's frequency unlinearity that cannot be equalized. I have yet to hear one I really like, but I'm still testing units.

 

[jhaider]

First, xxxx is not for home use.

What error led you to that conclusion?

JBL’s “white paper” clearly identifies home 2- or multi- channel use as the target market for 4367, which is sold through home hifi dealers and not PA/studio dealers.

Compare:

JBL Synthesis 4367 2-Way 15" Floorstanding Speaker

For many years, iconic JBL loudspeakers have perfected the definition of luxury audio. The 4367 is no exception. The high-performance loudspeaker was built upon the same professional-grade technology used in the acclaimed JBL Professional model M2 Master Reference Monitor, one of the most...

www.audioadvice.com

jbl 4367 | Sweetwater

View all results for jbl 4367 at Sweetwater — the world's leading music technology and instrument retailer!

www.sweetwater.com

One can not like something without making up stupid shit about it.

But the competition is different today. Differential drive? Adire Audio XBL^2 (was gone for a while, patent issues?).

Neither has gone anywhere. Creative Sound Solutions, for example, sells XBL subwoofers. XBL never had much pro presence. Off the top of my head the only PA/studio product I can think of with XBL woofer was a studio monitor called Opal.

Differential drive and XBL are basically opposite approaches to improving motor linearity over stroke. At the most superficial level, XBL is multiple gaps cut in the top plate for a single coil, and differential drive is two whole voicecoil/gap combinations in tandem.

XBL is much less expensive and much more compact, but doesn’t do anything for inductance. Indeed, early XBL subwoofers such as the Ascendant Avalanche line were terrible, because they had the very long stroke motor but no inductance mitigation. Later ones (e.g. Exodus Maelstrom-X, CSS models) fixed that and were very good.

Differential drive is more expensive and deeper, but greatly improves inductance (current flows in opposite directions in each coil) and also improves power compression because there is more coil area and more steel inside the coil.

Coaxial compression drivers? BMS, Germany.

The approach is different. D2 is more “opposed” than “coaxial.” Other people are better placed than me to analyze the pros/cons of each.

Also, the phase plug is a key element in a compression driver, because it transforms the wavefront from the CD to work on the WG.

 

[mightycicadalord]

Take a high enough view, and the same could be said for pretty much every loudspeaker of the last 50 years, except maybe arguably Danley.



As well as a crudely finished cabinet, which is by far the most important aspect for home use, and greater economies of scale. Also, the driver quality here is like the flagship pro stuff - think JBL Vertec not Eon.

It’s also worth noting 4367 costs barely more than M2 in the latter’s closest equivalent comparable (raw speakers + BSS BLU-50) despite 4367’s finer finish and extra passive bits.

There's nothing crude about the finishes on pro speakers. Ever feel the finish on a meyer cab? It's not veneer but to me it still looks damn fine.

 

[Vladimir Filevski]

Yes, the 4367 has good drivers, but i doubt they are measurably better than say in RCF's 9 series boxes....for a fraction of the price.

Oh, really? Here is the measured frequency response of RCF 945 (from their spec sheet):

Now, compare it to the measured frequency of JBL 4367:
View attachment 198133

 

[tuga]

Oh, really? Here is the measured frequency response of RCF 945 (from their spec sheet):

View attachment 198764
Now, compare it to the measured frequency of JBL 4367:
View attachment 198133

What is that plot supposed to show?

 

[abdo123]

What is that plot supposed to show?

The unapologetic V-shaped tuning?

 

[Vladimir Filevski]

What is that plot supposed to show?

Member @gnarly doubts JBL 4367 are measurably better than RCF 9 series:

Yes, the 4367 has good drivers, but i doubt they are measurably better than say in RCF's 9 series boxes....for a fraction of the price.

That plot clearly show RCF 945 (the most expensive model in 9 series) has much worse frequency response than JBL 4367 .

 

[tuga]

The unapologetic V-shaped tuning?

Member @gnarly doubts JBL 4367 are measurably better than RCF 9 series:

That plot clearly show RCF 945 (the most expensive model in 9 series) has much worse frequency response than JBL 4367 .

There's to the performance of a speaker than the just an on-axis response plot though.