JBL Conceal C83 Invisible Speaker Review

[617]

I've often come across speakers like this when I was building high-end retail stores like Chanel and Dior. Those designers didn't want to see fire strobes, let alone speakers. They were fine for background music applications.

How did you deal with fire strobes/light sensors and so on? I've mostly seen ceiling systems with slats that you can hide things in but there's something special about a flat white ceiling.

 

[simnick]

Dear god, can someone please make designer residential (and commercial) smoke/fire equipment? Totally messing up our vibe in the new house. Vents, designer option. Speakers, designer option (but maybe not a good sounding). Lights, designer option. Smoke? Good luck. And recessing them is against most fire code.

 

[SoonToBeRetired]

How did you deal with fire strobes/light sensors and so on? I've mostly seen ceiling systems with slats that you can hide things in but there's something special about a flat white ceiling.

The architects were typically against mounting fire strobes on walls which were more often than not lacquer or millwork panels. Ceiling mounted strobes were preferred, but they would have to always align with nearby lights or other equipment. Access doors for above ceiling equipment were grudgingly allowed, but they of course would have to be the taped-in GFRG variety and of course they would have to be aligned somehow--while still serving their purpose. These speakers were good in that they didn't have to align with anything. They are invisible, after all. Except, of course, if you have a lousy taper.

 

[617]

The architects were typically against mounting fire strobes on walls which were more often than not lacquer or millwork panels. Ceiling mounted strobes were preferred, but they would have to always align with nearby lights or other equipment. Access doors for above ceiling equipment were grudgingly allowed, but they of course would have to be the taped-in GFRG variety and of course they would have to be aligned somehow--while still serving their purpose. These speakers were good in that they didn't have to align with anything. They are invisible, after all. Except, of course, if you have a lousy taper.

I have a friend who does high end venetian plaster for retain spaces like this, I wonder how loud you'd need to run these to hear anything over that.

 

[GXAlan]

Lovesac StealthTech Sound Plus Charge | Home Surround Sound

Turn your home into a home theatre with StealthTech Sound Plus Charge, featuring seamlessly integrated surround sound, perfect for films, gaming, and more.

www.lovesac.com

This is an interesting alternative for the “no visible speakers” approach. Hide it all in the sofa with fabric specific tuning!

Lovesac x Harman Kardon

 

[Head_Unit]

While it probably sounds okay for the intended purpose, $1100 is ridiculously overpriced for a single speaker.

Small sales quantity. As @Matt_Holland points out there have been some of these. The oldest AFAIK is the Bertagni (because B.E.S.T. became Sound Advance got bought by Sonance). Most of the business was large panels designed to replace drop ceiling tiles, even to the extent of printing fake hole patterns. Really wide dispersion. Also usable as a screen with quite good sound. Good enough for The Three Tenors to use for PA (Placido Domingo was a B.E.S.T. investor). These were in my opinion DML drivers before NXT was a thing-totally different "cut and try" engineering approach vs. NXT's "military technology repurposed for simulation." With a big panel clamped around the edge excursion is reduced so should not crack the paint...unless you turn it up to 11!

This is like the little Bose cubes: prioritizing invisibility. And, like those cubes, when listened to standalone can sound much better than you'd expect from measurements. Definitely the big B.E.S.T panels could sound really nice; I never heard a good setup of the "Invisible" one to be judging that. As DML speakers the time response would be different from conventional speakers (though it's been a LONG time and I don't remember exactly how).

 

[pseudoid]

[This will be a bit-over-the-top post; which relates to 'concealment' and 'invisibility' of speakers. << imo: not OT.]

I recently ran across a few articles (and news stories) about some new speaker terminology: Sonify and Ac2ated.
No, this is not about the Sony's "Acoustic Surface" incorporated within some of their latest OLED panels.
One review of the CES 2024 was my first introduction to "sonification"... which, I originally greeted it with rolling-eyes.
Then, a car magazine got my eyes rolling again with an article titled

"Car Audio Speakers Embedded in the Carpet".

I was forced to look up the company on the web...

"Sonify innovates at the intersection of audio, data and emerging technologies. We design and develop audio-first products and data-driven solutions. "

Yet, I was still skeptical at the claims. Next article from FinancialTimes was

"Sonification: turning the yield curve into music": meh

Then, I had to look up Arkamys claim that

"80 Million vehicles carry their passengers in the Arkamys sound dimension"

[Note to self: Buy some Visine]

"Sonification research is intrinsically interdisciplinary. Consequently, a proper documentation of and interdisciplinary discourse about a sonification is often hindered by terminology discrepancies between involved disciplines, i.e., the lack of a common sound terminology in sonification research."

This above quote is from a free AES paper (by Tim Zimmer) on the topic of "Sound Terminology in Sonification", with many references for further reading about interdisciplinary Sonification.

[Color me a skeptic, in the interim!]