I don't know if we are still investigating on the "bad response" of this speaker on the lows and mids, but: if it's really related to cabinet resonances, I'm really wondering about the impact of supporting the speaker by the side, and not by the bottom.JBL 4367 review by Erin
Written review https://www.erinsaudiocorner.com/loudspeakers/jbl_4367/www.audiosciencereview.com
The 4367 klippel results mirror the Harman measurements closer than the M2 results. Speculation, but this makes me suspect the M2 wasn't just a smoothing difference vs. Harman, but was more likely aggressive DSP correction to make the prettiest spin for marketing.
Also surprising that the DSP'd M2 has a rougher response than the analog 4367... Really puzzled trying to understand what happened here.
A little disappointing--and not making excuses--but the pretty Harman spin-o-Rama nonetheless demonstrates the M2 system's potential when properly calibrated in-room.
I mean, if an eigen mode induces a motion of the side pannel, it can have a greater impact on the measurements if the speaker is supported by this same pannel. Furthemore, the mass of the speaker applied on the side pannel may also have an impact on the mechanical behavior and on the frequency of this eigen mode. It could be the reason why the frequency response of the 4367 is flatter than the M2 even if they share the almost same woofer, because Erin measured the M2 laid on its side, and the 4367 standing.
What do you think?
(Sorry for my english :s)
Last edited: