JBL studio 4410, speaker resolution

[dcolak]

Hey guys, I just bought JBL studio 4410 speakers. What is going on here?

I have never ever heard speakers with so much resolution, so strong stereo image.

JBL Array 1400, Wharfedale Elysian 4, JBL DD65000, Revel Salon 2, ATC... none of them comes close to what these old 4410 speakers can do, resolution and stereo image wise.

They all measure the same, flat... so what measurement is missing, that could tell us "hey, this speaker can give you full transparency into the signal?"

What in the world is going on here? One of the visiting guests told me "this is how it sounds when I use my earphones."

We were hearing the chair of a singer creak while she was recording the song!

Camila Moreno - Disfruto

I thought my JBL Array 1400's were holographic, but this...

There is not even a wave guide being involved! My mind is blown!

 

[MarkS]

What is going on here?

Only way to find out is to measure them.

 

[dcolak]

Only way to find out is to measure them.

Measure what? They measure flat, like so many other speakers I have or heard.

How do you measure transparency and stereo image? This things image even if you throw them into a most unsymmetrical space.

 

[MarkS]

You need to measure frequency response in your room to get a first idea of what they're doing. These are old speakers (I presume), and who knows how they measure now: you could have failed capacitors in the crossover, leaking surrounds, dried out ferrofluid in the tweeter, etc etc. And frequency response anomalies can produce all sorts of weird subjective effects.

 

[Juhazi]

https://jblpro.com/km/site_elements/4410-information

Nothing special in measurements. A good wide baffle 3-way with low smooth horizontal DI. Most likely low distortion too.

 

[Ageve]

These are old speakers (I presume), and who knows how they measure now: you could have failed capacitors in the crossover, leaking surrounds, dried out ferrofluid in the tweeter, etc etc. And frequency response anomalies can produce all sorts of weird subjective effects.

I don't think ferrofluid was used in the 035Ti tweeter, but there's foam behind the diaphragm.

The foam deteriorates with age & turns into a crumbly mess / eventually pulling away from the dome ( & no longer fulfilling its original design function ).
- The foam "crumble" can also get into the voice-coil gap, causing ugly distortion type problems .

https://www.audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?37005-035Ti-Tweeter-Repair&p=376274&viewfull=1#post376274

 

[dcolak]

You need to measure frequency response in your room to get a first idea of what they're doing. These are old speakers (I presume), and who knows how they measure now: you could have failed capacitors in the crossover, leaking surrounds, dried out ferrofluid in the tweeter, etc etc. And frequency response anomalies can produce all sorts of weird subjective effects.

They were reconed, crossovers renewed, these are as good as new.

 

[dcolak]

You need to measure frequency response in your room to get a first idea of what they're doing. These are old speakers (I presume), and who knows how they measure now: you could have failed capacitors in the crossover, leaking surrounds, dried out ferrofluid in the tweeter, etc etc. And frequency response anomalies can produce all sorts of weird subjective effects.

Hahah, right, they sound transparent and distortion free because they are broken. Come on people, you can do better.

I have 10x more expensive speakers, none are so transparent, holographic and distortion free.

These measure flat, most of my speakers measure flat. Two speakers measure the same +/- dB flat, but they don't sound the same at all.

My question stands, how do we measure speaker transparency?

How can these speakers without any wave guide image so well?

 

[staticV3]

they were reconed, crossovers renewed, these are as good as new.

You're curious why they sound like they sound, but seem to be strictly against measuring your room response to find out why they do.

Instead, you seem to be dead set in your belief that these measure ruler flat (despite the speaker's age and comprehensive rebuilds where all sorts of things could've happened), and hence that audio science has failed and there's an unmeasurable, magic resolution attribute.

Come on @dcolak, you can do better.

 

[Mart68]

I don't know the answers to your questions but I've always thought JBL got it right decades ago at least with some of their models.

Proper JBL are rare here in the UK as the press disparaged them heavily for decades. Always fun to be there when people get their first listen to them and realise they've been told lies for years.

 

[JayGilb]

Maybe you’re paying more attention because you’re looking for differences ?

Speaker size compared to your older models is aligning better to your listening position and you’re hearing more details ?

Whatever the reason, glad you’re enjoying your new speakers.

 

[dcolak]

I also purchased a pair of Greg Timber's JBL S412P. They also measure flat, but image nowhere near close or have transparency of the 4410.

So, what measurement gives us the transparency and imaging?

 

[dcolak]

You're curious why they sound like they sound, but seem to be strictly against measuring your room response to find out why they do.

Instead, you seem to be dead set in your belief that these measure ruler flat (despite the speaker's age and comprehensive rebuilds where all sorts of things could've happened), and hence that audio science has failed and there's an unmeasurable, magic resolution attribute.

Come on @dcolak, you can do better.

Why would they not measure flat? The same room, same position, different speakers I get 30% of transparency.

So, what measurement measures transparency? I am not talking about boosting highs or doing EQ. I could try eq-ing for forever and I would never get the transparency and resolution of the 4410's.

If it was only about FR we could eq them all so that they all sound the same, which absolutelly does not work.

So, which measurement is for transparency?

 

[DSJR]

I just downloaded a JBL pro into brochure on these and the response plots are how I imagined them to be, based on related models they made in the late 80s to early 90s. there's a slight midrange lift, which may be adjusted out with control set to -3 as in the pics above. The tweeter or at least relatives of it, was used in many 80s models and performed well in these designs I recall, although reviews suggested it could 'rasp' a little in smaller models.

Got to say I've been tempted for many years now to see what these models could do, the 'exuberance' in JBLs better designs being quite addictive. All but ignored in the UK, the only worry I have is foam rot on the bass drivers, no skill to repair myself and a bit of distrust of 'repairers' here after one repairer fitted the wrong foam surrounds to the Elac drivers in my IMF Compact mk1's (less than ten years and the foam has failed again - may be cheaper to see if a 6" driver can be obtained with similar sensitivity or greater to just plop in instead as the speakers aren't worth much)

 

[Tassin]

What about sharing your measurements?

 

[Mart68]

Why would they not measure flat? The same room, same position, different speakers I get 30% of transparency.

So, what measurement measures transparency? I am not talking about boosting highs or doing EQ. I could try eq-ing for forever and I would never get the transparency and resolution of the 4410's.

So, which measurement is for transparency?

What's your definition of 'transparency'?

You can't measure something that has no objective definition.

Problem here is there's a dozen variables, including you.

I'd suggest multiple different factors that can be measured combine to give an effect/perception you're calling transparency.

 

[Beave]

You keep saying "they measure flat," in describing multiple speakers. That claim is clearly puffery, as no speaker measures perfectly flat.

We'd need detailed measurements, preferably from the Klippel NFS, to see on axis and off axis responses, distortion, etc. The JBL-provided measurements linked above are a start but aren't nearly as high resolution as what the Klippel NFS can provide.

 

[DSJR]

I don't know the answers to your questions but I've always thought JBL got it right decades ago at least with some of their models.

Proper JBL are rare here in the UK as the press disparaged them heavily for decades. Always fun to be there when people get their first listen to them and realise they've been told lies for years.

Martin Colloms (!!!) was a bit snooty about the 4311mk2 in HFN I remember*, but said they came to life properly when used with a Krell KSA300i I think it was (I'd probably use a Quad 606 family amp as they're powerful, load tolerant, cheap and easy to service)... My dealer pal sold a handful of pairs (can't remember what amps he had with them) and loved 'em for their exuberant sonics. the 12" bass drivers as in the L100mk2 would be too much, but the 10" version? (Yes, a wishful *subjective* feeling, but I believe that Greg Timbers did try very hard to tame these designs and did very well at it without spoiling their strengths!

*HiFi News don't have back issues readily available to read - I think they're behind a paywall - and that's a shame as before the subjectivist puff that forever changed this mag from the late 70s to early 80s, they used to be a good UK-based source of proper reviews along with Hi Fi Sound, which merged and then disappeared by the late 70s. The 4310 was severely coloured I remember (first hand), but the L65 Jubal wasn't so much if lifted off the floor a bit (again first hand).

Sure, it'd be great if the OP can get a Umik 1 or similar, REW software and had some fun with measuring the speakers in room as carefully as possible. It might just be that the off-axis performance of these speakers suits their room perfectly while the other speakers don't. Only guessing, however...

 

[Ageve]

They were reconed, crossovers renewed, these are as good as new.

How do you know that? Do you have any measurements to back it up?

Measuring is absolutely essential after rebuilding the crossovers.

What do you mean by "they all measure the same"? Anechoic on-axis? Listening window? Sound power? In-room? THD? Multitone distortion? Impulse response? Group delay?

I haven't seen two speakers from different manufacturers that measure identical.

 

[dcolak]

Martin Colloms (!!!) was a bit snooty about the 4311mk2 in HFN I remember*, but said they came to life properly when used with a Krell KSA300i I think it was (I'd probably use a Quad 606 family amp as they're powerful, load tolerant, cheap and easy to service)... My dealer pal sold a handful of pairs (can't remember what amps he had with them) and loved 'em for their exuberant sonics. the 12" bass drivers as in the L100mk2 would be too much, but the 10" version? (Yes, a wishful *subjective* feeling, but I believe that Greg Timbers did try very hard to tame these designs and did very well at it without spoiling their strengths!

*HiFi News don't have back issues readily available to read - I think they're behind a paywall - and that's a shame as before the subjectivist puff that forever changed this mag from the late 70s to early 80s, they used to be a good UK-based source of proper reviews along with Hi Fi Sound, which merged and then disappeared by the late 70s. The 4310 was severely coloured I remember (first hand), but the L65 Jubal wasn't so much if lifted off the floor a bit (again first hand).

Sure, it'd be great if the OP can get a Umik 1 or similar, REW software and had some fun with measuring the speakers in room as carefully as possible. It might just be that the off-axis performance of these speakers suits their room perfectly while the other speakers don't. Only guessing, however...

The moment I heard them in seller's crowded room a singer popped up dead center and kept floating between and above the speakers

They were not even centered, absolutelly stunning.

Colored sound? Compared to JBL Array 1400, Elysian 4, many studio monitors I have... nothing colored about these.

You could also use the two pots to modify the mids and highs but... why bother. And that 10 incher... where does all that bass come from? I am most impressed.