Using two pair of L100's.

[JBLRaiser]

I'm using two pair of L100A's with a Dynaco 400 and PAS 3 in a 15x20 foot room with 16 foot ceilngs. The L100's are on JBL wooden stands, each pair side by side spaced 10 feet apart on the 15 foot wall of glass.. The room has tile floors, two walls of glass, one 15 feet wide and one 20 feet wide., one wall with fireplace and bookshelves and the other wall with a painting and ten foot opening into next room. What if any comparisons can be made to this set up and set ups using L300's, 4343's, etc. and any suggestions for improving this setup short of Bo's recommendations?

[Zilch]

You have created major phase interference issues running multiple sources playing the same program material in one listening space.

No matter where you are in the room, you are never equidistant from them.

Using two pair of anything in this manner is a bad idea.

Worse, your extraordinarily live environment is reflecting everything everywhere.

Headphones would work....

[GordonW]

Yep, stacking them (tweeter-to-tweeter) would be somewhat better as far as phasing and cancellation are concerned. But, it's still a trade-off, of output level and response contouring, vs the cancellation effects. Might be able to "warm up" the sound of the speaker a tad, to counteract the "hard" room. But, it's a total crap-shoot, until it's done and you can actually hear the results of both pairs stacked compared to just one pair...

Regards,
Gordon.

[ngccglp]

If its decibels he needs, I would suggest stacking, but disconnecting one of the speakers mid and highs. I found the L100 have adequate high freq energy but not enough bass, especially when you crank it up. This would eliminate many of the problems highlighted above, yet give you the bass output.

I had a pair of 4312Ds and was on the lookout for another pair, but unfortunately I found a pair of L222 first, so I sold the 4312Ds before I could experiment.

[JBLRaiser]

You have created major phase interference issues running multiple sources playing the same program material in one listening space.

No matter where you are in the room, you are never equidistant from them.

Using two pair of anything in this manner is a bad idea.

Worse, your extraordinarily live environment is reflecting everything everywhere.

Headphones would work....

No, you've got it ALL wrong. They sound extremely smooth AND dynamic to my ears. You and Bo should get a place together. LOL

[Zilch]

No, you've got it ALL wrong. They sound extremely smooth AND dynamic to my ears.It's axiomatic: "Know when a bad wank is at hand."

That'd be why you posted about them in the first place, of course.... :p

[JBLRaiser]

It's axiomatic: "Know when a bad wank is at hand."

That'd why you posted about them in the first place, of course.... :p

No, the point is your post was useless, unless elitist putdowns are your bag. I asked for comparison/improvement and you get cute. No help from you,as in 'zilch'.:barf:

[majick47]

My brother also tried running two pairs of JBL (4311b and L19) placed in numerous locations and none of the setups sounded satisfactory to me. I also tried runnung two pairs of L200b side by side in a large room and the results were dissapointing.

[Don C]

Some people do like the sound of multiple drivers interfering with each other. That's why the Bose 901 was so popular.

[edgewound]

I'm using two pair of L100A's with a Dynaco 400 and PAS 3 in a 15x20 foot room with 16 foot ceilngs. The L100's are on JBL wooden stands, each pair side by side spaced 10 feet apart on the 15 foot wall of glass.. The room has tile floors, two walls of glass, one 15 feet wide and one 20 feet wide., one wall with fireplace and bookshelves and the other wall with a painting and ten foot opening into next room. What if any comparisons can be made to this set up and set ups using L300's, 4343's, etc. and any suggestions for improving this setup short of Bo's recommendations?

I'd say the easy solution is to do what you want with them til you're satisfied with the results. Two pairs of the same speakers in the same room is not a crime. Maybe split the two pairs so the left and right speakers are at the front and back of the room at their respective sides.

The other models you mention are so different...so much bigger in output and dynamics that you really can't compare the two. Some woud love them in comparison....some would not...might be too much.

[Mr. Widget]

No, the point is your post was useless...Having spent a few years here I have discovered that there are many ideas of what good sound is... I have heard L100s in a large live room and I couldn't turn them off quickly enough. I did discover that in a small moderately live room in a mid field situation I quite liked them.

Since you are happy with the sound you currently have what are you trying to "improve"?


Widget

[Zilch]

Two pairs of the same speakers in the same room is not a crime.No, but it's likely worse than two pair of different speakers.

[HEY -- I'm just trying to be helpful here.... :p ]


I asked for comparison/improvement and you get cute.Let me put it this way, then:

For improvement, disconnect one pair of L100's.

If you've "Just gotta" run both pairs, stack them tweeter to tweeter, as Gordon suggests.

For comparision, single pairs of L300 or 4343 would be better, yes, but you'd still have to address the high reflectivity of the room you describe.


No, the point is your post was useless.... No help from you,as in 'zilch'.:barf:I apologize for taking your inquiry seriously. The actual intent is now clear.... :coolness:

[JBLRaiser]

I'm using two pair of L100A's with a Dynaco 400 and PAS 3 in a 15x20 foot room with 16 foot ceilngs. The L100's are on JBL wooden stands, each pair side by side spaced 10 feet apart on the 15 foot wall of glass.. The room has tile floors, two walls of glass, one 15 feet wide and one 20 feet wide., one wall with fireplace and bookshelves and the other wall with a painting and ten foot opening into next room. What if any comparisons can be made to this set up and set ups using L300's, 4343's, etc. and any suggestions for improving this setup short of Bo's recommendations?

Thank you to those who were civil with their answers.

[Zilch]

"Even with all the ‘digi-wigi’ stuff, which is great, at our disposal — we still have to understand the science of sound in order to apply it. If you manage to do that, then you’ll really have something cooking. But you cannot neglect the science. You must not forget the science.”

Bob Heil

http://audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=11038

[Mr. Widget]

Hey Zilch, while that is true, there is still the issue of personal preference. In all earnestness I suggest that many people prefer the sound of Bose to an accurate stereo presentation. Among our varied membership here we have many ideas as to what the ideal sound is. Privately I have suggested that you listen to some speakers I like... it may be that after auditioning them you may conclude you prefer your home-brew speakers and Mr. Raiser may very well prefer his dual L100s to speakers with a more articulate and well defined image.

I guess I am kind of repeating myself here as this "Dual L100" thread and others have been on my mind:

http://audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=113737&postcount=42


Widget

[Zilch]

Agreed, but personal preference notwithstanding, there should be no harm in making anyone ignoring the fundamentals aware of them.

It's also apparent from reading these forums for several years that there's plenty of folks that don't know stereo presentation from a hole in the ground.

I don't consider this an elitist posture; the pursuit is largely pointless without, minimally, an appreciation of the basics of what it is and how it works....

[Steve Gonzales]

Agreed, but personal preference notwithstanding, there should be no harm in making anyone ignoring the fundamentals aware of them.

It's also apparent from reading these forums for several years that there's plenty of folks that don't know stereo presentation from a hole in the ground.

I don't consider this an elitist posture; the pursuit is largely pointless without, minimally, an appreciation of the basics of what it is and how it works.... Having spent a bit of time on this site myself, I've observed that time and time again, that, while a person might possess critical knowledge of the technical aspects in the science of sound, they sadly lack the ability to convey that knowledge with a friendly tact. The value of possessing this trait is often more valuable than the technical information itself. If you don't respect the teacher, you don't respect the message, no matter how technically valid the information is. Another point I'd like to share is that we all start somewhere. One cannot put a value on seeing and hearing for oneself. I know this to have been true in my personal journey, and it, along with some good pointers, allowed me to better understand the "why?" when confronted with a problem and how to fix it . People will do as they will. If they have "the bug", it will lead them to pursue their own "audio nirvana" until they've reached their own idea of it. There are some that have every gadget known to mankind to refine and push the absolute SOTA further. More power to them. But, this is the Lansing Heritage site, not the Million Hour R&D, Aquaplas Everything, Two Inch Thick Non -Resonant Trapazoidal Enclosure, In The Completely Dialed In, The Acoustically Perfect Room, Site. While I admire the concept and the willingness to pursue that ideal, many people don't have to achieve that, want that, need that or even have a clue of how to get there. JBL produced alot of models. The constant put-downs of so many of those models is tragic. Whatever model trips your trigger, I'm happy for you, really. If it is multiple pairs, fine, if you are happy, I'm happy for you, you love JBL's too. Sorry for being so long-winded. JBLRaiser, you are going to have to experiment for yourself. Listen for yourself. Side by side, inverted stack, one in each corner, etc., etc. I've got two pair side by side and love it personally, it's as simple as that. Does that mean that in the eyes and minds of some that I'm wrong from an absolute technical standpoint, I don't really give a flying F**K!, I like it and that's what matters. I've heard examples of the supposed SOTA systems and they didn't do a thing for me, furthermore, the people that were with me concluded the exact same thing. Different people, different tastes, same conclusion, so that tells me that all the technical know-how and $$$ in the world cannot guarantee breathtaking results either.

[JBLRaiser]

Having spent a bit of time on this site myself, I've observed that time and time again, that, while a person might possess critical knowledge of the technical aspects in the science of sound, they sadly lack the ability to convey that knowledge with a friendly tact. The value of possessing this trait is often more valuable than the technical information itself. If you don't respect the teacher, you don't respect the message, no matter how technically valid the information is. Another point I'd like to share is that we all start somewhere. One cannot put a value on seeing and hearing for oneself. I know this to have been true in my personal journey, and it, along with some good pointers, allowed me to better understand the "why?" when confronted with a problem and how to fix it . People will do as they will. If they have "the bug", it will lead them to pursue their own "audio nirvana" until they've reached their own idea of it. There are some that have every gadget known to mankind to refine and push the absolute SOTA further. More power to them. But, this is the Lansing Heritage site, not the Million Hour R&D, Aquaplas Everything, Two Inch Thick Non -Resonant Tapazoidal Enclosure, In The Completely Dialed In, The Acoustically Perfect Room, Site. While I admire the concept and the willingness to pursue that ideal, many people don't have to achieve that, want that, need that or even have a clue of how to get there. JBL produced alot of models. The constant put-downs of so many of those models is tragic. Whatever model trips your trigger, I'm happy for you, really. If it is multiple pairs, fine, if you are happy, I'm happy for you, you love JBL's too. Sorry for being so long-winded. JBLRaiser, you are going to have to experiment for yourself. Listen for yourself. Side by side, inverted stack, one in each corner, etc., etc. I've got two pair side by side and love it personally, it's as simple as that. Does that mean that in the eyes and minds of some that I'm wrong from an absolute technical standpoint, I don't really give a flying F**K!, I like it and that's what matters. I've heard examples of the supposed SOTA systems and they didn't do a thing for me, furthermore, the people that were with me concluded the exact same thing. Different people, different tastes, same conclusion, so that tells me that all the technical know-how and $$$ in the world cannot guarantee breathtaking results either. Thanks Steve, Well put.
Maybe I'll try two pair of L300's side by side or 4343's or whatever will loosen my shingles when I'm playing Petty ,Van Halen or Jimi!!! jblraiser

[Steve Gonzales]

Thanks JBLRaiser,

I want to clarify my long-winded point. Using two pair is not recommended here. There are some valid issues to consider. I do it because it works for me and the ill effects don't outweigh the good in my case. You will find that the major players here on this site have sound technical advice that is not to be taken lightly. Unfortunately, alot of it is lost because of the way it is delivered, and in all fairness, I have found that communication via typed word is a very poor way of getting to know someone as a person. Good luck with the quad L100 deal, Steve G.

[JBLRaiser]

Thanks JBLRaiser,

I want to clarify my long-winded point. Using two pair is not recommended here. There are some valid issues to consider. I do it because it works for me and the ill effects don't outweigh the good in my case. You will find that the major players here on this site have sound technical advice that is not to be taken lightly. Unfortunately, alot of it is lost because of the way it is delivered, and in all fairness, I have found that communication via typed word is a very poor way of getting to know someone as a person. Good luck with the quad L100 deal, Steve G.
Same here, the 'ill' effects don't outway the benefits in my case.

P.S. The suggestion to do the dual L100's came from a technician who repaired JBL's for ten years before opening his own shop 30 years ago and troubleshoots and repairs any all vintage equipment ever made. I have never seen him stumped. His philosophy is much like yours, if it sounds good to you, what good does anyone else do to make jest of it. "Happy Hearing", JBLRaiser

[Robh3606]

Damn I am sorry I missed this one. I used to have a Dynaco ST400 and L100 set-up. Had a great time with it. Every once in a while I would run the L100'S with a pair of L25 Prima's. It was great fun. Give it a whirl just watch the L100's in parallel, the impedance get's low, close to 4 ohm, in spots so if you have the optional fan installed run it.

Rob:)

[Zilch]

Same here, the 'ill' effects don't outway the benefits in my case.And those "benefits" would be??? :dont-know

"Jest?" Where?

[Steve Gonzales]

Zilch, when are you going to learn the most basic concept in life?. Not everyone needs what you insist is perfect ideal. They don't need to know how you feel about it either, at least to the point that you've got to drive it home with a constant "you're an idiot and I'm not". BFD Bud. The science will either convince someone on it's own merit or it will not. The real tragedy here is that the smartass comments overshadow the science. Think about it. I've noticed that over time that as your technical understanding has grown, your ability to be humble has decreased. Get those two going in the same positive direction and you'll really have something IMO. Good luck with that.

[Zilch]

Thank you, Steve.

I won't be the first to give it up here, of course.

Let Raiser answer the question, and we MIGHT have a rational (and, perhaps, illuminating) discussion of substance.

He now acknowledges there are "ills" associated with his setup. Let's find out what the perceived benefits are.

Who knows? Raiser's guru technician's theories might alter my own perspectives and preferences.... ;)

[garyl]

Back in the mid 70s Quad was the way to go and I had more cash then knowledge.
I bought two pairs of Altec 19s for my large basement play room.

Very bad idea. I then tried two pairs of large Advents and again Bad Idea.

Later I tried two pairs of Yamaha NS 1000Ms and still could not find the right sound. Quad went out the door but all the speakers remained.
My system has always sounded best with one good set of speakers hooked up per room.
I never knew the technical reason why but I have always known 4 of any speaker is two too many.
I have messed around with stacking the Advents and with surprisingly good results but these are the only ones I was happy with.

In your room I would be quite happy with a pair of L 300s and a wife who could drape the glass and soften up all the harshness surrounding and destroying your tunes.

Gary

[JBLRaiser]

Damn I am sorry I missed this one. I used to have a Dynaco ST400 and L100 set-up. Had a great time with it. Every once in a while I would run the L100'S with a pair of L25 Prima's. It was great fun. Give it a whirl just watch the L100's in parallel, the impedance get's low, close to 4 ohm, in spots so if you have the optional fan installed run it.

Rob:)
Hi Rob,
Thanks for your comments. Yes, the optioal fan is installed.

[BassHog]

I've never tried running two pairs of speakers at the same time, but I have read a few accounts from people that extolled the benefits of doing so. Apparently this was really popular back in the 70's. Here is a review that I read for the L100 at audioreview.com that mentions it. The reviewers name is dave. It's the last review on the page.

http://www.audioreview.com/cat/speakers/floorstanding-speakers/jbl/PRD_119733_1594crx.aspx#review0

[Mr. Widget]

Running dual "Large Advents" was quite the rage for a brief time back then too. I suppose if you like the '70s sound it might appeal to you. If you like a more contemporary sound where the ideal is an attempt at a point source or line source with a more neutral tonal character you may not.

As always you really have to listen to these things with your own gear in your room to decide what is best for you.


Widget

[garyl]

I think doubeling up on pairs of identicle speakers was a direct result of Quad systems that never really made it but lots of us gave it our best shot. Many of those quad systems had four Lg. Advents, 4- KLHs or four L 100s and when quad died the speakers lived on and ended up in stereo systems.

I guess after all my experimentations with all the different pairs I came to one conclusion I was tring to bring to this thread.
2 pairs of L 100s does not equal 1 pair of L 200s or L 300s.
If your room has the size and you need more SPL then buy a bigger pair of speakers and be happy.

Gary

[Zilch]

Apparently this was really popular back in the 70's. Here is a review that I read for the L100 at audioreview.com that mentions it. The reviewers name is dave. It's the last review on the page.

http://www.audioreview.com/cat/speakers/floorstanding-speakers/jbl/PRD_119733_1594crx.aspx#review0 80% of the "reviewers" on that site gave L100 an overall rating of 5 out of 5; several purporting to be "audiophiles."

I assume you are quoting and citing "dale," not "dave," at reviews #21 and 27, who further states that "Stacked in parallel, their independence drops to 4ohms," and that the "base gets tighter."

I know, I'm a BAD person.... :p

[garyl]

Wonder what those 80 % would rate a real speaker at?

No offense to L 100s as they are a nice bookshelf but 5 of 5 I DON'T THINK SO!

Gary

[BassHog]

80% of the "reviewers" on that site gave L100 an overall rating of 5 out of 5.

I assume you are quoting and citing "dale," not "dave," at reviews #21 and 27, who further states that "Stacked in parallel, their independence drops to 4ohms," and that the "base gets tighter."

I know, I'm a BAD person.... :p

No, actually it was review #20 and his name is dave. I thought the link would go to that page, but it starts at the beginning.

[Zilch]

No, actually it was review #20 and his name is dave. I thought the link would go to that page, but it starts at the beginning.Well, dale and dave seem to have the same difficulties.

Compare #20 and #21.

#27 is dale. That's why he's more credible.

['Course dave has also used 4312's, whereas dale forgets he used 4412's.... :p ]

[BassHog]

Well, dale and dave seem to have the same difficulties.

Compare #20 and #21.

#27 is dale. That's why he's more credible.

['Course dave has also used 4312's, whereas dale forgets he used 4412's.... :p ]

Huh! Good spelling = good hearing? I think dave and dale are the same person. Look, I could care less whether anyone stacks their speakers. You asked what would be the benefits of using two pair of speakers and I referenced someone who liked the results of stacking his speakers. He's not the only one. So your response is to disparage him and apparently anyone else who likes L100's. How dare they like something that you don't!

[Zilch]

So your response is to disparage him and apparently anyone else who likes L100's. How dare they like something that you don't!Oh, HELL no. I own L100's myself, as do many other forum members.

All I'm saying is, if we're citing evidence of the benefits of the subject approach to using multiple pairs of them, which is NOT stacked, by the way, the source should be somewhat more credible than such internet pap.

Thus far, we have dave/dale, noted expert on "independence," attesting that they're a match for L300's, when stacked.

Let's see something authoritative and worthy of consideration, here, PLEASE.

[I find his assertion that "Now you can imagine full size performers" (as opposed to miniature ones, presumably,) a notable, if not compelling, benefit.... :thmbsup:]

[Ian Mackenzie]

I would try stacking them vertically and horizontally and check out which way you prefer or even try one flipped up side down.

Stacking will raise sensitivity about 3 db due to mutal coupling and you will get about 6db more headroom with the lower impediance.

I stacked my two L100's for temporary centres the other night for my home theatre..it worked pretty good.

The technical merit behind all this seldom if ever translates directly to listening pleasure and don't be conned in to spending buckets ón bullshit leads and other mystic mods. Simple practical execution can pay dividends so just persist until you like what you here...

Never let anyone tell you what you should and should not like when it comes to personal audio.

Screw them and if they persist tell them to serious fuck off.

[Don C]

Never let anyone tell you what you should and should not like when it comes to personal audio.

Screw them and if they persist tell them to serious fuck off.
OK, but this doesn't apply if you have asked people for their comments.

[Zilch]

Never let anyone tell you what you should and should not like when it comes to personal audio.So, Ian, now having experience with stacked L100's, how about addressing the original question with respect to those and side-by-side configuration?

How DO they "stack up" to 434x, as Raiser specifically inquired at #1?


What if any comparisons can be made to this set up and set ups using L300's, 4343's, etc. and any suggestions for improving this setup short of Bo's recommendations?

[Zilch]

OK, but this doesn't apply if you have asked people for their comments.Thank you, Don, for reinforcing that point. In retrospect, however, it turns out there was no actual inquiry here, as Mr. Widget observed at #11.

Rather, Raiser is merely seeking affirmation of the equality (if not superiority) of his setup in comparison to the more expensive monitor systems, as is repeatedly posited on the audioreview.com website linked by BassHog. I apologized (at #12) for having had the temerity to respond to what was, in actuality, a rhetorical question.

Then, aboard came the "Trust your ears; ignore the science and its rude and tactless proponents; personal preference RULEZ" school of system configuration contingent, always welcome to the discussion, of course.... :p

So, now we have real benefit #1: They'll play louder than a single pair, and/or enjoy the advantage of more headroom, amplification being equal. I'll add that mutual coupling will also differentially boost the bass, thereby enhancing the "West Coast" coloration.

Are there more benefits?

Anyone?

I think we're getting to it now; there's merit to this analysis, after all.... :thmbsup:

[Robh3606]

How DO they "stack up" to 434x, as Raiser specifically inquired at #1?

They don't. Not even in the same ballpark. Stack ten of them if you want it doesn't matter. There is no way to get arround the basic issues such as the the LF tuning and the bass hump at 40-60Hz. The next would be runing the 12" in the L100 from 300Hz-1200 where the 2121/2122 runs. The 12 simply can't compete and when driven hard you can hear it in the lower midrange. Then up top you have no real response above 15K and a colapsing and beaming high end. The LE5-2 and Le-25 simply can't match the dynamics and clarity of the 2420/2405 combo. On the low end they can't get near the 2235 below 40Hz and on top off all that they don't image worth a damn in comparison. I ended up modifying mine so there were mirror imaged like the 4312/4412. That helped quite a bit. You also have very shallow slopes on the midrange and tweeter and that limits the usefulness of the level controls. The rising response in the Le-5-2 runs right into the tweeter range and makes tring to level out the presensce peak difficult. Remember the L100/4311 is a Control Room Monitor and the 434x is a Studio Monitor. Jbl doesn't characterize the 4310/4311 as Studio Monitors in the traditional sense. Their response is tailored.

Sounds like I hate them??? Well you would be wrong. I have had a pair forever and still do. They are a blast to listen too. Just have to compare apples to apples.

Rob:)

[4313B]

How DO they "stack up" to 434x, as Raiser specifically inquired at #1?They are physically taller when stacked on end but that's about it.

I really can't believe you guys talk about these inane subjects.

Oh who am I kidding, of course I can believe it... you're all a bunch of nut jobs...

It can be "fun" to run two pairs of the same loudspeakers. Just do it and move on.

BTW - Years ago Griffith Park Observatory ran a whole gaggle of 4311's in surround. They were nowhere near as impressive as the four 2231/2390/2440/2405 systems Gates Planetarium ran for the same LaserRock shows. It wasn't even a remotely close contest.

[4313B]

The next would be runing the 12" in the L100 from 300Hz-1200 where the 2121/2122 runs. The 12 simply can't compete and when driven hard you can hear it in the lower midrange.You're right - same basic motor topology with a ton less moving mass and a nice linear compliance in the 2121/2122. The dynamic range of the ten is heads and tales above that pancake twelve. It doesn't mean the pancake twelve is junk, it works just fine in the 4311 or L100. The 2121 and 2122 were designed specifically for those then TOTL Studio Monsters.
Then up top you have no real response above 15K and a colapsing and beaming high end. The LE5-2 and Le-25 simply can't match the dynamics and clarity of the 2420/2405 combo. On the low end they can't get near the 2235 below 40Hz and on top off all that they don't image worth a damn in comparison.Good points.
I ended up modifying mine so there were mirror imaged like the 4312/4412. That helped quite a bit.Yep, that's the first thing you do with any stock JBL system that isn't mirror imaged.
Sounds like I hate them??? Well you would be wrong. I have had a pair forever and still do. They are a blast to listen too. Just have to compare apples to apples.It's nice that you can appreciate these systems for what they are, warts and all. They are fun. I personally wouldn't want to have to live with alot of them anymore but I never pass up an opportunity to hear yet another pair in yet another environment with yet another selection of tunes.

[Ian Mackenzie]

So, Ian, now having experience with stacked L100's, how about addressing the original question with respect to those and side-by-side configuration?

How DO they "stack up" to 434x, as Raiser specifically inquired at #1?


Did IQ's drop suddenly on the West Coast!!

Obviously he would have to do direct comparisons in his own room. There is no other way of working this out. Every room is totally different and we all have our own opinions on what is better or correct..that is why there so so many choices on the market. We have discussed this over and over and over in numerous threads. This is why some prefer 4430 in some rooms and others 4333. I have no doubt the L100 sounds better in some locations than the larger systems and visa versa.

If I flipped a coin I would say the L100 would fair better in his room.

A picture of his room might prove useful but the above still applies.

[Zilch]

:rotfl:

[boputnam]

I'm confused.


Unfortunately, alot of it is lost because of the way it is delivered...You made this point twice, in two nearly successive posts.

The point that needs be made is, much of the "sound technical advice" is not taken - and is argued against. That makes it frustrating is all. As you yourself noted, many just go their own way "because it sounds good".


The real tragedy here is that the smartass comments overshadow the science. This seems at odds with:


...in the eyes and minds of some ... I'm wrong from an absolute technical standpoint, I don't really give a flying F**K!, I like it and that's what matters. OK. That is what makes it frustrating to keep offering real knowledge and measurements that obviate personal opinions/impressions. It's the "going it my way" posts that moot and outnumber the useful ones here.


There are some that have every gadget known to mankind to refine and push the absolute SOTA further. More power to them. But, this is the Lansing Heritage site, not the Million Hour R&D, Aquaplas Everything, Two Inch Thick Non -Resonant Trapazoidal Enclosure, In The Completely Dialed In, The Acoustically Perfect Room, Site. While I admire the concept and the willingness to pursue that ideal, many people don't have to achieve that, want that, need that or even have a clue of how to get there. JBL produced alot of models. The constant put-downs of so many of those models is tragic. And damned good thing they do. The ability to measure what is really happening, to assist our ears in interpreting the results is a phonmenal advancement from the past. The things you post here are all ad hoc improvements that are available to mitigate undesired physical and electrical performance / behavior in an attempt to achieve linear response. This has been shared in hopes we can all learn better to collect real data and understand what we are used to listening to, versus what was originally recorded. These are pursuits shared by your loftily held JBL. In that, we are no different here.

If you are accustomed to a non-linear and "phase challenged sound", it takes un-training the ears and learning to be able to appreciate the difference. It is like any growing. You have to be able to look back to understand how far you have come.

-----------------------------

An OT example: We last weekend played a pretty good club. During load-in the Juke was blasting with a terribly wrong EQ - but the house was used to it. SmaartLIVE showed a broad hump from 30Hz to 160Hz. Brutal, but the afternoon crowd loved it. I got my system up and unplugged the Juke, and my system sounded really awful, even tho SmaartLIVE showed a good curve. Mind-you, we have played this room before, so I double-checked all my saved parametric settings and delays and mains EQ. All fine, but still an awful sound. Thin. Seemed to have no bottom, at all. Well, I let it run softly while we ran the wedges and cabled the snake stage box. Ten to 15 minutes later, after the quiet background interlude, I ran the mains to about 45dB. It was perfect. SmartLIVE still showed a really nice FFT - no change. So, what had changed?

What had changed was our hearing. Our hearing had adjusted to the boom-box Juke, even tho it was awful. It took a few minutes to "de-tune" from that and get to being able to hear normally. The Juke was a tiring, unmusical EQ, but we got used to it.

Through the night, as the show went on, we had the best comments ever from the patrons and owner of the club. The mix was good, the EQ not tiring. Everything was appropriately represented and honest.

I used to EQ the room by ear only, but the room acoustics are there to tease me - too often the results were uneven. With measuring tools I am constantly surprised at the strength of some room resonances - even -18dB Hi-Q filters are sometimes not enough to tame the response. The power of measurement software is that it does not rationalize - it is harsh fact. It is my job to seek a linear response so that everyone has a good show - not just those that are accustomed to a "boom box bass" or a "bass-less horn honker". Linear is least tiring to the audience and most supportive of the musicians who pay a great deal of money and spend time to get the best intruments and tone they can.

[Mr. Widget]

I'm confused.Apparently so. The premise for this thread was for any possible improvements to the system except for any you might make.:applaud:


...and any suggestions for improving this setup short of Bo's recommendations?
On a serious note, I can't imagine any system sounding right to my ear in the room as Mr. Raiser described it... it sounds like it has the acoustics of an airline terminal. That said, in later posts Mr. Raiser says:

They sound extremely smooth AND dynamic to my ears.From that quote I decided that I obviously have no idea what is going on here and decided it best not to speculate.


Widget

[4313B]

OK. That is what makes it frustrating to keep offering real knowledge and measurements that obviate personal opinions/impressions. It's the "going it my way" posts that moot and outnumber the useful ones here.There's a cure for that.

From that quote I decided that I obviously have no idea what is going on here and decided it best not to speculate.Confused? What about me? I don't even read through these things anymore. Who has that kind of time to waste. I wouldn't even know about this thread if someone else hadn't pointed it out to me. Since you pointed out his first post I did read it and I think you're right, it sounds like it has the acoustics of an airline terminal and I decided it best not to speculate.

[garyl]

Very well said Bo and all very valid points for sure.
I think one thing that gets missed alot here is that we all don't hear the same and we all can't afford the very best there is. Actually, many of us would not appreciate the very best there is in sound reproduction.
Very possibly your test equipment would consider my own system as a good deal less then perfect. For me, it is the best I have ever had and can afford. This does not make me a bad person or any less of an audio enthusiast then any other member here.
Many come seeking advice from very knowledgable members nothing says the advice will be heeded. Frustrating to some, unaffordable to others or just plain more info then can be digested by those not technical enough to understand.
The part of this thread that is a bit over the top is when a knowledgable member attempts to shove siad knowledge down another members throat and refuses to lighten up even when this is pointed out.
There is no need for over heated keyboards here.

I enjoy reading it all but I am much happier when the mood is friendly.

Gary

[4313B]

The part of this thread that is a bit over the top is when a knowledgable member attempts to shove siad knowledge down another members throat and refuses to lighten up even when this is pointed out.There are a few hats to wear here. This is DIY and anything goes. The technical crap is next door. This particular thread was done with post number three and post number two could have been deleted.

[boputnam]

Apparently so. The premise for this thread was for any possible improvements to the system except for any you might make.:applaud:Yea, I saw that - I've been bummed out for weeks about it. But I'm on the mend!! :p

[Zilch]

The part of this thread that is a bit over the top is when a knowledgable member attempts to shove siad knowledge down another members throat and refuses to lighten up even when this is pointed out.
There is no need for over heated keyboards here.Being the perpetrator of said transgression, allow me to say that I didn't, and still don't, consider anything I posted "unfriendly." I apologized for giving the wrong answer, as well.

It'd be good if folks just stated the desired answer up front; that would save a lot of effort and insult. :p

*****


From that quote I decided that I obviously have no idea what is going on here and decided it best not to speculate.

It was subsequently clarified here:


Maybe I'll try two pair of L300's side by side or 4343's or whatever will loosen my shingles when I'm playing Petty ,Van Halen or Jimi!!! jblraiser

[4313B]

Being the perpetrator of said transgression, allow me to say that I didn't, and still don't, consider anything I posted "unfriendly." I apologized for giving the wrong answer, as well.

It'd be good if folks just stated the desired answer up front; that would save a lot of effort and insult. :p

*****



It was subsequently clarified here:I can't fucking believe how condescending I have become.
What a fucked up piece of shit I guess I turned out to be. :barf:
Oh well, I had to go to hell at some point I guess.

[Steve Gonzales]

Confused?. No Doubt. There is a huge difference in sharing what I've done and promoting it as what to do. I believe if you really took the time to actually read all my posts and put them in proper context, you would not remain confused. Instead, it's the same ol' song and dance for the LHF clique, defend at all cost, IMO. If you were to take into consideration that I clearly stated that using two pair is not recommended here and that I said that there are valid issues to consider and that there is sound advice here, regardless of how it is delivered. My point in stressing that point is because I believe alot of the technical brains around here sound so full of themselves and act high and mighty because of it. Just like technical advice is disregarded here, so is the just as important human to human advice, no matter how many times it comes to these kinds of tangental cluster fucks. Take the snootyness out of the first few posts and insert clear, friendly science and we would not have this conversation, would we?. There is a huge difference between saying, I do this, I like it and don't give a flying F**K what anyone thinks and promoting something as completely scientifically correct, make no mistake. I am human , I like to be respected and I don't think it's a far stretch of the imagination to believe others would appreciate it here either, no matter what their level of technical understanding is. You can dissect my statements any way you want, but if you miss that central point, you will remain confused.

[4313B]

4,626 members now and these are the kinds of threads we are ending up with. I sincerely hope the ubiquitous lack of talent here isn't a microcosmic view of the world as a whole. :rotfl: I suspect it is though.

I say we take off and nuke the entire site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.

[Robh3606]

Geez

Let's not turn this thread into a slugfest.

Rob:)

[Steve Gonzales]

I think you are the biggest offender of them all. I don't care what happens to me. Unlike you Giskard, I'll probably be banned for stating the truth. I think on some level everyone knows that you can get away with much, much worse and never suffer any real consequences. You've raised your "kids" to act just like you and it shows. I don't think half of you offenders would be so bold in person, there might be some real consequences for being your smug selves. But as it stands, you can blot out yourself out of pictures and be a big badass weasel behind the keyboard. I call it the "Giskard of Oz" syndrome. No matter what becomes of my ability to post here, I'm left with the satisfaction of knowing that you know, that I know your game. Make no mistake, I am not condeming the whole body of the membership, just the high and mighty snobs ( you know who you are). How many times have you been banned? Who are you, Giskard, Lancer, Techbot, DRG? The only one that is worth a damn is Techbot because he never opens his mouth. There, Knuckle Head, I said it. Aquaplas THAT!.

[rgrjit8]

Well Jeeze guys!

I guess I'll have to place myself in the ranks of the tone deaf because I LOVED the sound of two pairs of XPL 200s stacked tweeter to tweeter. The sound seemed richer and fuller to me with no greatly apparent degradation of imaging (though I concede that there was some).

Could this merely have been a function of having a second set of woofers going like a sub, giving the impression of a fuller sound?
- I don't think so, because I distinctly recall liking the sound of them stacked rather than side by side where coupling may have been in effect.

Accurate? -Probably not.
Enjoyable? -Definitely.

[Mr. Widget]

You guys are taking this waaaaay too seriously.




Widget

[Zilch]

Could this merely have been a function of having a second set of woofers going like a sub, giving the impression of a fuller sound?
- I don't think so, because I distinctly recall liking the sound of them stacked rather than side by side where coupling may have been in effect.Reread Gordon's post #3. Inverted stacking's a half-assed implementation of D'Appolito's MTM alignment, a special case, whereas side-by-side merely messes up most of the effort the system designer originally dedicated to creating a coherent source.

There are few principles of sound reproduction more fundamental than this one: Two or more sources playing the same program interfriggin'FERE with each other.

[In a complex manner, depending upon frequency, phase, delay, separation, and a buncha other stuff.... :p ]

[4313B]

I think you are the biggest offender of them all.I probably am. Here's the short story - I think guys like you have wrecked this forum, I'm pretty pissed about it, and I often post from that perspective. I've gotten worse as the years have gone by.
I think on some level everyone knows that you can get away with much, much worse and never suffer any real consequences.I personally think that the consequences I suffer are much worse. I have to watch this forum turn into something that I never envisioned. Unlike Don, I've not been able to "go with the flow". Don has bent over backwards to accommodate alot of ideas but I have to come to terms with the fact that what this has become is simply the nature of the beast. I think it's a brutal shame but there is obviously nothing I can do about it.

As for the rest of your post - it's "typical" of your style. My biggest problem with you is that you are way too intense and always post from a very personal perspective. That has been a problem right from the very start of your membership. That's just you and obviously you aren't going to change. Some people respond positively to that. I do not.

There, Knuckle Head, I said it. Aquaplas THAT!.There is a fundamental difference between you and I. I'm already at point B while you will never get there. While I often stoop to your level you will never rise to mine. It's a fact you will never escape regardless of what you think or what you post in rebuttal. This has been pointed out to me by several other forum members since you started, during the times when I've gotten down in the mud and wrestled with you. I do find you to be a pretty offensive person online, I have from the first month you joined, and I responded accordingly. Most simply ignore you. My mistake was in not following that example, and that mistake has had very real, very negative consequences that are bigger than just you or me.

On a real personal note - I find your veiled statements with respect to Mr. Widget inane at best. I can't stress that enough - inane at best. Your remarks prove beyond doubt that you will never really "get it". Yes, they are your opinions and that's real neato and all, but sometimes certain opinions are simply worthless. I think you and a few others would fit in quite well and have substantial success on another forum.

[Steve Gonzales]

I personally think that the consequences I suffer are much worse.

As for the rest of your post - it's "typical" of your style. My biggest problem with you is that you are WAY too intense and always post from a very personal perspective. That has been a problem right from the very start of your membership. That's just you and obviously you aren't going to change. Some people respond positively to that. I do not.

Dood, you start off by stating tripe from a completely personal perspective, WTF?. I've watched your "tantrums" time and time again and I'm too intense?. Remember the "Conjugate is wrong meltdown" and countless others?. I do not, nor will I ever get people like you. You bully people and say whatever offensive crap you want, whenever you want, to whomever you want, without serious consequence. I've had countless PM's about Giskard, the grade A-1 Asshole. As for my style, well, I react. I've never set out to belittle or take a cheap shot at someone. That is your style. I'm just tired of your shit. You may hold yourself in high regard, but I guarantee you that you have alienated more good people here than I ever have, if ever, and they don't think much of you. You remind me of that obnoxious, cruel little shitass guard that everyone hated in the movie The Green Mile, you know the one. The lack of being able to moderate your posts and the precedence you set with your over the top bullshit has changed the LHF, not my willingness to stick up for myself and confront you or anyone like you. Anyone that has stood up to you finds out that you get away with just about anything, multiple times and they either like it or leave it. Your "style" has changed the tone of this site and it's more than just me that sees it. I understand why you don't like me and that is cool with me. I'm not going to smack up to you, ever. Call me what you please. Whatever that might be, I believe it is alot better than being you or a wannabe clone of you. I'll be banned or one of your minions will attempt to chastise me for what I'm doing now. You've got nothing to point out about me that you haven't outdone by a factor of ten. Enough of you, I've got to get to work.

[4313B]

I've got to get to work.You probably should have done that BEFORE you posted. As it is you've simply reinforced the fact that you are incapable of understanding much of anything here.

I do not, nor will I ever get people like you.We know. We understand that to be one of your problems. And it's ok. We all have our shortcomings.

Call me what you please.Aggravating. But I also empathize with your position.

[boputnam]

Steve - you are correct. I guess I don't understand really any of your posts. I have tried, but they wander OT and end-up bashing. You are relentless in your quest to try and modify people's behaviors and engage in mud-slinging and name calling. Shame. That will not achieve your goal.

As has been advised here before, members distinguish themselves by the content and style of their posts. It all shows through.

-------

I had a thought last night: The difference in you and me is the difference between precision and accuracy. You strive for precision sound; I strive for a precise and accurate sound. You are happy with high quality drivers doing a great job but with your configurations producing a non-linear, "colored" EQ. The Steve Gonzales EQ. That's cool. But, I don't like anyone's personal EQ. I prefer a linear EQ - a precise accurate frequency response so that my systems (be it live or in the home) add the least coloration possible. It's hard to achieve that and this forum has bunches of tips on how to approach this idea. It's that simple. No harm, no foul.

Whatever ideas, suggestions or experiences I have offered here were merely to share the knowledge I have gained on how to achieve that, and not "settle" for mere precision - but to get the most out of those great JBL drivers and control their performance so as to achieve accuracy near as feasible.

[4313B]

You are relentless in your quest to try and modify people's behaviorsYou nailed it.

As has been advised here before, members distinguish themselves by the content and style of their posts. It all shows through.Which is why I should never have started posting in the first place due to a lack of patience for the medium coupled with the frustration of trying to get a point across. I simply lack the requisite language skills to post clear and concise paragraphs that can't be misconstrued. So much for A's in Grammar & Composition, Fiction & Non-fiction, and Technical Writing.

[whizzer]

...a lack of patience for the medium coupled with the frustration of trying to get a point across.
It's not your fault. Here's a recipe: add some ego, perhaps unwarranted, to a secret need for a personal preference to be validated by those one may secretly consider as "higher" authorities, and what you've got there is explosiveness and imperviousness to reason. Of course, there are any number of non-linear systems that will and do sound "good" to someone, but "good" is a relative term with no intrinsic meaning of its own. All the preference for such systems in the world won't make them linear. Apples are apples, turkeys are turkeys; this whole argument revolves around confusing the one for the other. You can't get a point across, because you're not speaking the same language; facts are not the same as opinions or preferences. You might as well be talking to a wall; if you were, at least you'd get some quality reflection time out of it.

[boputnam]

You might as well be talking to a wall; if you were, at least you'd get some quality reflection time out of it.That's there is BOSE talk, Mr!! :rotfl:

(sorry, couldn't resist!)

[whizzer]

That's there is BOSE talk, Mr!! :rotfl:

(sorry, couldn't resist!)

Well, at least it's direct.

[Steve Gonzales]

Steve - you are correct. I guess I don't understand really any of your posts. I have tried, but they wander OT and end-up bashing. You are relentless in your quest to try and modify people's behaviors and engage in mud-slinging and name calling. Shame. That will not achieve your goal.

As has been advised here before, members distinguish themselves by the content and style of their posts. It all shows through.

-------

I had a thought last night: The difference in you and me is the difference between precision and accuracy. You strive for precision sound; I strive for a precise and accurate sound. You are happy with high quality drivers doing a great job but with your configurations producing a non-linear, "colored" EQ. The Steve Gonzales EQ. That's cool. But, I don't like anyone's personal EQ. I prefer a linear EQ - a precise accurate frequency response so that my systems (be it live or in the home) add the least coloration possible. It's hard to achieve that and this forum has bunches of tips on how to approach this idea. It's that simple. No harm, no foul.

Whatever ideas, suggestions or experiences I have offered here were merely to share the knowledge I have gained on how to achieve that, and not "settle" for mere precision - but to get the most out of those great JBL drivers and control their performance so as to achieve accuracy near as feasible. Where in the world have I ever posted about E.Q.? The Steve Gonzales E.Q.?. I thought as a Minion, you would at least try to post something that had a basis in fact. So now you've heard my system? You can speculate all you want. You don't have a leg to stand on Knuckle Head Jr. You took the time to dissect my earlier post and I responded. Pure and Simple. You get that mixed up so often Bo, there is a difference between instigation and response. And how come when Giskard has a meltdown, your "wisdom" is always absent?. Afraid he'll turn that septic tank on you?. The Master and his Dog?. Same ol' song and dance. The Pathetic Duo. You assume alot, but that is what you do so well, why stop now?. I am secure in the knowledge that nothing I would ever say in a response to you clowns would ever come close to the shit Giskard has spewed in offence. He will FOREVER hold that distinction and birds of a feather, flock together. Now there's a feather in your cap, Bo.

[Mr. Widget]

Steve, I believe you have a point, but you ruin your argument by resorting to name calling. While "Master and his dog", and "Pathetic Duo" may feel good to say, you are actually crossing the line here.


Widget

[4313B]

Steve, I believe you have a point, but you ruin your argument by resorting to name calling. While "Master and his dog", and "Pathetic Duo" may feel good to say, you are actually crossing the line here.Just ignore him as per Don. You can't win Mr. Widget. He has Evereadies in that mouth of his.

[Steve Gonzales]

[quote=Giskard]Just ignore him as per Don.:rotfl: :rotfl: . If you only had a clue as to the number of times people have been told to do this very thing concerning you!. You ARE THE KING!.

[Mr. Widget]

I think we are done here. I hope Mr. Raiser was able to get something of value from this thread... but we seem to be on to a new series of topics. I am going to close this thread.

If you guys want to start a new thread discussing the effectiveness of ignoring each other go right ahead.


Widget