JBL HDI-3600 Speaker Review

[Theriverlethe]

I'm just describing Anthem Room Correction. You measure manually.

I must have forgotten that completely.

 

[Alice of Old Vincennes]

My only experience is Audyssey and Anthem. I never liked Audyssey. I'll try Dirac in future due to Anthem high prices.

 

[Theriverlethe]

My only experience is Audyssey and Anthem. I never liked Audyssey. I'll try Dirac in future due to Anthem high prices.

I found ARC out of the box to be much less detrimental than Audyssey. Dirac is similar.

 

[Sal1950]

Well, there is no actual "distance" setting, it's just a weird user interface choice.

I have error experience with the system but just from the hypothetical case it seems if you
have to correct the softwares determination by 7ft to get good fr, somethings in error. It should be relatively
easy for the program to get these basics right?

I found ARC out of the box to be much less detrimental than Audyssey. Dirac is similar.

I don't think you can judge any DSP on it's OTB performance from a enthusiasts point of view.
They're made for Joe Sixpack that just wants an automated click click click result he finds pleasing,
and we would hope is relatively accurate.
Then thru various channels they all offer us tools to get under the hood and do it better.

 

[Theriverlethe]

I have error experience with the system but just from the hypothetical case it seems if you
have to correct the softwares determination by 7ft to get good fr, somethings in error. It should be relatively
easy for the program to get these basics right?



I don't think you can judge any DSP on it's OTB performance from a enthusiasts point of view.
They're made for Joe Sixpack that just wants an automated click click click result he finds pleasing,
and we would hope is relatively accurate.
Then thru various channels they all offer us tools to get under the hood and do it better.

I believe the error was coming from attempting to integrate multiple generations of subwoofer with possibly different delays. It could also be a phase issue with a ported vs. sealed subwoofer. I took the PB12 out of the equation and the SB2000 is much easier to integrate. I still seem to get a "smoother" response when I set the delays manually, but I don't have to go to 16ft when the sub is only 7ft away.

I agree that auto-correct systems should give a pleasing result out of the box, but it's pretty clear that Audyssey's default target curve is counter to Harman's research and even B&K's research going all the way back to the 70's. Audyssey attempts to adapt a theater curve to a small space where it's totally inappropriate.

 

[peng]

I found ARC out of the box to be much less detrimental than Audyssey. Dirac is similar.

I found ARC Genesis very frustrating to use. The interface looks nice but is very restricted, to power users who regularly use REW to check the actual results will find that it has too many guard rails. The trouble is if you make even a slight change in deep bass, and room gain settings (just to name two examples) it affects a lot, including in the frequency point where you don't expect it to be affected.

For those who just read the manual, marketing material, and forum member talks, just run it and leave it then they could be happy as the predicted curves basically always look good. It is only when you listen, with open mind unaffected by what you have been told, and/or run REW, you wouldn't know the results, while would work to a point, could have left plenty of room to improve.

In my cases, and I could see it in those posted their REW graphs, have the same issues I have been experiencing. It typically would take me days to tweak it something almost comparable to the results I was able to get after just a few hours of tweaking, same for Dirac. To me, Audyssey and Dirac are much more effective "out of the box" and can achieve excellent results in terms of accuracy if one invests a few hours to tweak. I am okay with the final results, just that it take a lot of patience and time. Those who don't check for the actual results but just go by ears, can definitely say it is the best, there is no way I can prove anyone wrong and when you go by ears, there is no right or wrong, sound good or bad anyway as it is 100% subjective.

 

[Theriverlethe]

I found ARC Genesis very frustrating to use. The interface looks nice but is very restricted, to power users who regularly use REW to check the actual results will find that it has too many guard rails. The trouble is if you make even a slight change in deep bass, and room gain settings (just to name two examples) it affects a lot, including in the frequency point where you don't expect it to be affected.

For those who just read the manual, marketing material, and forum member talks, just run it and leave it then they could be happy as the predicted curves basically always look good. It is only when you listen, with open mind unaffected by what you have been told, and/or run REW, you wouldn't know the results, while would work to a point, could have left plenty of room to improve.

In my cases, and I could see it in those posted their REW graphs, have the same issues I have been experiencing. It typically would take me days to tweak it something almost comparable to the results I was able to get after just a few hours of tweaking, same for Dirac. To me, Audyssey and Dirac are much more effective "out of the box" and can achieve excellent results in terms of accuracy if one invests a few hours to tweak. I am okay with the final results, just that it take a lot of patience and time. Those who don't check for the actual results but just go by ears, can definitely say it is the best, there is no way I can prove anyone wrong and when you go by ears, there is no right or wrong, sound good or bad anyway as it is 100% subjective.

I’m actually using a Yamaha receiver with manual PEQ at this point. My HDI-1600’s really don’t need anything besides some minor bass tweaks, but I managed to timbre match an SVS Prime Center fairly well.

 

[peng]

I’m actually using a Yamaha receiver with manual PEQ at this point. My HDI-1600’s really don’t need anything besides some minor bass tweaks, but I managed to timbre match an SVS Prime Center fairly well.

I have never tried the latest YPAO, but with Yamaha, at least you can use PEQ, and actually to get decent result I have to use my subs PEQ to help too, it is really disappointed to find that out. Even with Audyssey, I never had to touch the PEQ settings on my subs, and I put the 2X4 HD minidsp as soon as I went from Audyssey XT to XT32 SubEQ HT.

 

[Theriverlethe]

I have never tried the latest YPAO, but with Yamaha, at least you can use PEQ, and actually to get decent result I have to use my subs PEQ to help too, it is really disappointed to find that out. Even with Audyssey, I never had to touch the PEQ settings on my subs, and I put the 2X4 HD minidsp as soon as I went from Audyssey XT to XT32 SubEQ HT.

The fact that Audyssey wants $200 per unit to manually adjust their horrible stock curve is a complete non-starter for me.

 

[peng]

The fact that Audyssey wants $200 per unit to manually adjust their horrible stock curve is a complete non-starter for me.

I used the $20 app, got great results. Others have too, but to be fair, that's with the helo of Ratbuddyssey that is a freeware.

 

[Sal1950]

The fact that Audyssey wants $200 per unit to manually adjust their horrible stock curve is a complete non-starter for me.

Editor app is only $20 and does a fine job within it's limits.
But even the $200 sounds cheap to me compared to the numbers I see for Dirac

 

[Theriverlethe]

Editor app is only $20 and does a fine job within it's limits.
But even the $200 sounds cheap to me compared to the numbers I see for Dirac

I’ve used the editor app. Even with range limiting and a custom curve, I found that Audyssey created a “dead” sound in my room. I do have thousands in acoustic treatment at this point, so maybe Audyssey over-corrected.
The few times I’ve had Dirac available, I don’t think I’ve heard it produce a bad result. But I’m also not convinced it’s doing anything careful use of PEQ with good speakers can’t accomplish. Regular Dirac still screws up subwoofer integration pretty badly.

 

[gelv]

Could someone explain how hdi 1600 is considered to measure better than this
The waterfall on 1600 looks messy at the crossover while this looks good
Same with distorsion

 

[Theriverlethe]

Could someone explain how hdi 1600 is considered to measure better than this
The waterfall on 1600 looks messy at the crossover while this looks good
Same with distorsion

1600 has less vertical directivity error around the crossover region, which could make an audible difference. I can’t comment on the waterfall plots very intelligently, but neither speaker shows distortion or compression issues that would present an audible problem.

 

[Theriverlethe]

1600 has less vertical directivity error around the crossover region, which could make an audible difference depending on listener position. I can’t comment on the waterfall plots very intelligently, but neither speaker shows distortion or compression issues that would present an audible problem.

 

[Fuzziekiwi]

I just scored a pair of these for $1K used. They image pretty darn good, and they sound very clean. I'm hearing things much clearer than I have in the past and they do not struggle to keep up with music, and separate everything very well. I now do completely understand what people are talking about cabinet resonance. These basically have none at all. The bass definition is great.

For reference, I own the original Elac Debut, Elac DBR62's, JBL LSR305 and have tried in my home the Klipsch RP600M, Polk R200, Revel Concerta2 M16, Wharfedale Diamond 11.1, KEF Q150. I wanted something with a little bit more air and presence like the JBL LSR305s, but capable of a much larger soundstage like the L100 Classic MKii.

Unfortunately, for me the tonality isn't quite there, especially with vocals, and these have quite a bit of bite a slight bit of sibilance. Using them with a subwoofer as well. They are almost too dynamic for me. I'm running them off of a Pioneer SC61. There were reviews saying that these were "easy to listen to", but I do find these to be a little bright for my taste. I was hoping these would "disappear" but unfortunately they don't really. The human voice just doesn't sound like it's in my room, but rather they are still playing through speakers. The tweeter.. well sounds like a metal tweeter.

I heard the L100 Classic MKii and L82 at the JBL Flagship store in New York, and I was very impressed upon first listen, if the grills were on, and you told me those had a metal tweeter, I would have a hard time believing so. I can't say the same with these. I'm glad I didn't get them full price. So far- I plan on selling these after a few weeks. As good as they sound, I can't quite get past the treble on these. I hope this helps anyone who is interested in buying these- those sensitive to treble should look elsewhere or audition well before buying.

Seems like I really just prefer warmer speakers with a thicker sound and those with built in treble adjustments etc, or I'm just not a real "audiophile".

 

[Sal1950]

Unfortunately, for me the tonality isn't quite there, especially with vocals, and these have quite a bit of bite a slight bit of sibilance. Using them with a subwoofer as well. They are almost too dynamic for me.

Seems like I really just prefer warmer speakers with a thicker sound and those with built in treble adjustments etc, or I'm just not a real "audiophile".

Possibly an issue with your room?
I've had mine for approx 2 years now and don't hear any of the "brightness" you've alluded to?
YMMV

 

[Fuzziekiwi]

Possibly an issue with your room?
I've had mine for approx 2 years now and don't hear any of the "brightness" you've alluded to?
YMMV

I think it's just my ears, LOL. I've tried these in multiple rooms, same thing. I have the same issue with Klipsch, KEF, less so with Polk R200 tested in multiple rooms also. I still didn't really like the tweeter in the R200 enough that I sold those too. This guy describes what I was hearing:

JBL HDI-3600 Review - Go Big « 7Review

If you want to go big with a loudspeaker - as in big sound, then JBL is your brand.This US company specialises in conspicuous power and they don’t let up.The

7review.com

The treble in these remind me more of KEFs. I should have went with my gut and just gotten the L82's or a pair of Genelecs, but I would have probably kicked myself in the foot for not trying these out for such a good price.

 

[Jim Taylor]

I think it's just my ears, LOL. I've tried these in multiple rooms, same thing. I have the same issue with Klipsch, KEF, less so with Polk R200 tested in multiple rooms also. I still didn't really like the tweeter in the R200 enough that I sold those too. This guy describes what I was hearing:

JBL HDI-3600 Review - Go Big « 7Review

If you want to go big with a loudspeaker - as in big sound, then JBL is your brand.This US company specialises in conspicuous power and they don’t let up.The

7review.com

The treble in these remind me more of KEFs. I should have went with my gut and just gotten the L82's or a pair of Genelecs, but I would have probably kicked myself in the foot for not trying these out for such a good price.

Some speakers are noticeably more directional in the treble than other speakers. This avoids a relative degree of room interaction in the treble (because there is less "room splash" to the treble) ... and this can be noticeable.
I have listened to (and admired) speakers with horn-loaded midrange and treble since the '70s, and I'm used to it. The greater directionality isolates and accentuates the frequencies produced by the horn loading. I consider that an advantage in highly reflective rooms, such as hard-surface rooms that are untreated ... but I'm also aware that some people don't like it.
I believe that Dr. Floyd Toole's research shows that the majority of people prefer room response that is less directive (more even frequency dispersion) than the response from horn-loaded speakers. I am, therefore, in the minority.

In the end, it follows the old saying ... "to each their own"

Jim

 

[Fuzziekiwi]

Some speakers are noticeably more directional in the treble than other speakers. This avoids a relative degree of room interaction in the treble (because there is less "room splash" to the treble) ... and this can be noticeable.
I have listened to (and admired) speakers with horn-loaded midrange and treble since the '70s, and I'm used to it. The greater directionality isolates and accentuates the frequencies produced by the horn loading. I consider that an advantage in highly reflective rooms, such as hard-surface rooms that are untreated ... but I'm also aware that some people don't like it.
I believe that Dr. Floyd Toole's research shows that the majority of people prefer room response that is less directive (more even frequency dispersion) than the response from horn-loaded speakers. I am, therefore, in the minority.

In the end, it follows the old saying ... "to each their own"

Jim

Yes absolutely. I agree. I have a friend that found ELACs treble on the B6.2's to be bright to them and said Klipsch RP600M are not bright at all. I'm a total opposite. And we were both listening to these speakers in the same exact room together.