PDA

View Full Version : Everest Listening Impressions



Don McRitchie
09-15-2006, 07:18 PM
I had the most opportunity to listen to Everest in March of this year at Northridge. Since these sessions occured in JBL's listening rooms, I consider them more representative of the Everest's potential than the hotel ballrooms that formed the sole venues for my auditions in Japan. Before I get into my impressions, attached are photos from the Nortridge sessions. The first were taken upon my first listening with Steve Schell, Greg Timbers, John Eargle, Paul Bente and the delegation from Japan (Ken Yasuda of Harman Japan and Koji Onodera of Stereo Sound)

Don McRitchie
09-15-2006, 07:20 PM
The last picture was taken from the second sound room, which was the better of the two for Everest.

Don McRitchie
09-15-2006, 07:42 PM
Now to my impressions. Quite simply, Everest is a candidate for the finest loudspeaker I have ever heard. The reason that I do not come outright and state that Everest is the finest system I have ever heard is that the one or two other systems that I also consider in that regard have different strengths and weaknesses. It has been years since I have heard some of these competing systems, and since I have obviously never heard them all in the same room, it is not possible for me to make an absolute objective assessment.

Everest excels in dynamic response, bass impact, timbrel neutrality, and midrange detail. In comparison to the S9800, it has far more weight and is a more resolving system. I can't say enough about the 476Be driver. This driver is very similar to an electrostatic in its ability to be delicate and nuanced, however with all of the power and impact of a large format compression driver. The twin bass drivers make the system truly magical. The in room response is solid down into the 30's and is far more articulate than the bass that I have heard from any other system. It is impossible to make this system sound strained no matter what you throw at it.

Since there is no such thing as a perfect loudspeaker, Everest is not without its limitations. As has been much discussed, the bass response will not extend flat down to the lowest audible frequencies. However, it is much better than specs would lead you to believe due to room coupling. For 95% of music, it would not be an issue at all. However, if it were my system, I would look into EQ to provide ultimate extension. The other limitation regards imaging. It does not match the highest performing systems that I have heard in that characteristic. It is still significantly improved over the S9800 and better than any horn based system I have heard.

And there you have my impressions after around 3 hours of total listening.

Titanium Dome
09-15-2006, 08:10 PM
In any of your trips to Northridge (or anywhere else) have you had the chance to hear the direct radiator Revel Ultima Salon? If so, can you offer a comparison?

Ian Mackenzie
09-15-2006, 08:25 PM
Don,

How big is the JBL listening room?

It looks to have a high ceiling.

One gets the impression the new system commands a large room. I suppose if you can afford the Everest you can afford a large room but I am not aware too many Japanese consumers have what would be called large rooms compared to that of an American home.

But there is the irony.

Ian

mikebake
09-15-2006, 08:30 PM
The third picture of Greg looking down towards the system is a classic keeper; i.e. Lansing archive material................

scott fitlin
09-15-2006, 08:45 PM
That sounds good. Sorry about posting earlier, I didnt know, I just saw it and asked!

Sounds like a speaker to hear, and as I said in my first post, they look stunning! Thank you for posting.

Don McRitchie
09-15-2006, 08:46 PM
I have heard the Salons head to head against the S9800 in the Halcro room at the 2002 CES. The Salons imaged better and had deeper bass, but I would take the S9800's over them. The Salons have nowhere near the effortlessness and impact of the JBLs. Both were similarly timbrelly neutral, but the Salon's lack the bass articulateness of the JBLs.

To Ian, the second soundroom at JBL is similar in size to the average North American living room. It does have higher ceilings though. The large room is actually the poorer sounding of the two with significant room modes.

takenodisk
09-16-2006, 06:20 AM
Hi Don,what type of electronics were used for listening? were they all halcro? i'm curious,thanks for replying,MEvin

spkrman57
09-16-2006, 06:29 AM
Sounds like it would reproduce all natural musical instraments.

I could probably enjoy it without EQ or subs!

Thanks for sharing!

Ron

Rolf
09-16-2006, 09:06 AM
Thanks Don for your telling us your listening experience. As I have said before I will not judge them before I have heard them.

Hope I get the chance, as I do not order them without hearing them first for some days in my own home.

As for the looks, they get more and more stunning.

Rolf
09-16-2006, 09:10 AM
Sounds like it would reproduce all natural musical instraments.

I could probably enjoy it without EQ or subs!

Thanks for sharing!

Ron

If that is really so I agree. After all, how many instruments plays under 30Hz? Church organ, yes, but how many percent of the year do you listen to that? Maybe also some "ugla bubla" computer music too, but I never listen to that.

Earl K
09-16-2006, 10:34 AM
Thanks ! for posting your listening impressions ( & pics ) of the DD66000 "Everest" .

I also want to publically thank Giskard and Steve Schell for sharing their thoughts on all the ground-breaking technology inherent to these speakers .

Of course, Greg Timbers ( & team ) need to take a bow for delivering such a stunning 60th Anniversary "Statement" .

Again, Bravo !

<> Earl K

spkrman57
09-16-2006, 01:28 PM
I have found that response down to approx 45hz is not all bad. It will lack the bottom end bass, but will have dynamic impact that makes you not miss the bass on some music.

Ron





If that is really so I agree. After all, how many instruments plays under 30Hz? Church organ, yes, but how many percent of the year do you listen to that? Maybe also some "ugla bubla" computer music too, but I never listen to that.

edgewound
09-16-2006, 10:21 PM
If that is really so I agree. After all, how many instruments plays under 30Hz? Church organ, yes, but how many percent of the year do you listen to that? Maybe also some "ugla bubla" computer music too, but I never listen to that.

5 and 6 string electric bass. Low B string in concert tuning is 31Hz. Lots of acoustic & electric Jazz and Rock use the Low B bass in new music and reprise arrangements of older music.

That's why it's important to have a speaker system that is strong to below 30Hz for the US market.

Ducatista47
09-16-2006, 11:11 PM
There is the Bosendorfer Imperial. If you think the lowest notes are not supposed to be played but are there only for resonance, think again. There are pieces written for them.

I also feel that some modern instruments, think stuff like the Blue Man Group here, would suffer without low bass extension in any attempted reproduction. I have recordings utilizing African instruments that make me glad I have the 4345/2245H's capabilities.

If clear, strong bass tones are your thing, there is this: http://www.klavins-pianos.com/index_en.htm Download the sample near the bottom of the page. See the home page to view the beast. I burned it as a wav file with Nero and played it on the 4345's.

Mind you, none of this would keep me from buying a pair of Everests if I could. And despite my reputation for not caring what speakers look like, I am stunned by how bold and beautiful they look. Truly unbelievable.

Clark in Peoria

Rolf
09-17-2006, 12:32 AM
5 and 6 string electric bass. Low B string in concert tuning is 31Hz. Lots of acoustic & electric Jazz and Rock use the Low B bass in new music and reprise arrangements of older music.

That's why it's important to have a speaker system that is strong to below 30Hz for the US market.

OK, so that means that the new Everest needs a sub? Unbelievable.:(

Ducatista47
09-17-2006, 08:44 AM
OK, so that means that the new Everest needs a sub? Unbelievable.:(
It was stated earlier that the woofers have a ton of headroom and can be eq'ed to other response curves. I'm too busy drooling over the the Everests to remember where.

Clark

Hoerninger
09-17-2006, 09:06 AM
... a ton of headroom and can be eq'ed to other response
The White Paper states:
Peak-to peak linear excursion capability: 25.4 mm
It's a mass.
___________
Peter

Ducatista47
09-17-2006, 09:29 AM
It was Mr. Timbers himself. I would say no sub is needed!


In 2-channel, some EQ could be easily used as the woofers have tremendous headroom.
Clark

Shane Shuster
09-17-2006, 03:25 PM
If that is really so I agree. After all, how many instruments plays under 30Hz? Church organ, yes, but how many percent of the year do you listen to that? Maybe also some "ugla bubla" computer music too, but I never listen to that.


I see this alot on the Internet. What kind of music do you guys listen to that doesn't go below 30hz? I would say 60% of my collection does. I think the whole "most music doesn't have low bass" is a myth. Same as the "small rooms can't support low bass" misinformation.

Shane Shuster
09-17-2006, 03:36 PM
It was stated earlier that the woofers have a ton of headroom and can be eq'ed to other response curves. I'm too busy drooling over the the Everests to remember where.

Clark
Woofers don't sound good when they are flying out of the basket. Sub1500s have this problem when eq'ed or pushed hard, why would these be any different? Wouldn't the deep bass push on your upper bass woofer? Or did I miss a pic and they are in seperate enclosures?

In the pictures, what is the center speaker in the wall for? (mono?)

Zilch
09-17-2006, 03:52 PM
What Mr. Timers said.

Room rise and boundary reinforcement, 1-Pi, if desired....

Here, in a different JBL product:

Mr. Widget
09-18-2006, 12:37 AM
Woofers don't sound good when they are flying out of the basket.True... they tend to have all kinds of nonlinearities at that point and the sound quality goes to hell. As I said on the DD66000 thread, you can push the bottom end on a pair of 1500ALs and they sound very good. They also don't visibly move much until you are driving them up to brain splitting levels. As Mr. Timbers said... they have the headroom.


Widget

Shane Shuster
09-18-2006, 02:12 AM
They also don't visibly move much until you are driving them up to brain splitting levels. As Mr. Timbers said... they have the headroom.
Widget
With The Beatles or Yo Yo Ma yes, but with Rob Zombie, Bjork or The Sneaker Pimps are you sure about the brain splitting levels? They have alot of energy down low.

I don't think you should need a sub with uber speakers.
I'm not the intended market for these speakers so take that with a grain of salt.

Rolf
09-18-2006, 02:28 AM
It was stated earlier that the woofers have a ton of headroom and can be eq'ed to other response curves. I'm too busy drooling over the the Everests to remember where.

Clark

So first I need to buy a $60.000 (Probably more expensive in Norway) system and then buy a EQ to make it sound right? ... and probably a 2KW power to have enough headroom to deliver what is needed in the bass section? No ... this can't be true.

Maron Horonzakz
09-18-2006, 06:13 AM
There ia alot of supposition & conjecture going on here,,,Without even hearing the speaker.....It sounds like a lynch mob.;)

Mr. Widget
09-18-2006, 08:56 AM
There ia alot of supposition & conjecture going on here,,,Without even hearing the speaker.....It sounds like a lynch mob.;)It isn't everyday that I agree 100% with you, but you nailed it.


Widget

Titanium Dome
09-18-2006, 09:30 AM
Yeah, so a guy goes into a Rolls Royce auto retailer and wants to know about the cost of ownership: cost of insurance, cost of maintenance, cost of fuel, cost of parts, etc. He asks if it will beat a Murcielago LP640, get better mileage than a Prius, command the road better than a Hummer H2, haul more than a Ram 3500, and go off-road better than a Jeep. He wants to know the value equation.

The droll purchasing advisor gives the expected reply, "Sir, if you have to ask these questions, then first, clearly you do not understand it, and second, you cannot afford it."

The exasperated would-be customer curses him, flips him off, and proceeds to tear RR a new one any chance he gets. :shock: :spchless: :shock:


Ok, ready! :flamer:

Don McRitchie
09-18-2006, 10:45 AM
OK, so that means that the new Everest needs a sub? Unbelievable.:(

It doesn't need a sub. However, if you insist on a bandwidth that plumbs the depths of low frequency audibility, then you need to either EQ or add a sub. Just like for the 4350, L250, 4344, XPL200, K2, original Everest and every single JBL loudspeaker system ever made. In fact, the Everest is one of the few JBL systems that can do this strictly with EQ. Few, if any of the other classic JBL bass drivers or enclosure tunings have the degree of headroom as Everest.

Norm Luttbeg
09-18-2006, 12:17 PM
I suspect that these speakers can accept great wattage, but what is their efficiency? And what do they weigh?

hjames
09-18-2006, 01:15 PM
I suspect that these speakers can accept great wattage, but what is their efficiency? And what do they weigh?
Dang!
These are newly announced $65,000 speakers, just presented in Japan ...
I'm sure there will be a formal page on the official JBL website with tech specs and all of that stuff, once they are readily available.

Doesn't ANYONE use Google??

2 Minutes with JBL DD66000 for the search term and

http://www.jbl60th.jp/

a few flash pages in I hit a link for specs and saw
500 W (RMS)
96db

Of course, like folks keep saying, the only real test is to go hear a pair ...
but I do have to wonder - even if these puppies sound like the voice of god herself, how many folks here are gonna snap a pair up?:blink:

Not trying to be a snob about this - but it doesn't begin and end with the $65k speakers, you have to have amps and signal sources with comperable quality ... really, I have so many better places to put $80k ....

:applaud:

Mr. Widget
09-18-2006, 01:16 PM
Not trying to be a snob about this - but it doesn't begin and end with the $65k speakers, you have to have amps and signal sources with comperable quality ... really, I have so many better places to put $80k ....

:applaud:Well then you aren't dedicated enough. ;)


Widget

Titanium Dome
09-18-2006, 02:15 PM
Well then you aren't dedicated enough. ;)


Widget

:rotfl: The truth, like love, hurts.

Norm Luttbeg
09-18-2006, 02:18 PM
Sorry, Heather, I had spent a long time looking for JBL Everest, not DD66000. I also note that they weigh 312 pounds. This would be monumentally difficult for me to get to my second floor listening room. I like the 96db efficiency.

I also have heard that the price in Japan is $30,000, and even that is daunting.

Steve K
09-19-2006, 12:02 AM
I also have heard that the price in Japan is $30,000, and even that is daunting.

That's for 1 speaker, Norm. The price in Japan for the DD66000 is 6,000,000 for the pair (for either the rosewood or cherry finishes). The ebony and maple finishes are made-to-order and cost 400,000 yen more for the pair!

BTW, I will have an opportunity to hear a pair this Saturday. At this demo, the DD66000 will be set up with a Mac MC2K power amp, and MCD201 CD/SACD player.

Mr. Widget
09-19-2006, 12:11 AM
Good or bad please tell us all about it... for those of us here in the states we'll have to wait until January to see and hear them. :(


Widget

speakerdave
09-19-2006, 07:23 AM
. . . .BTW, I will have an opportunity to hear a pair this Saturday. At this demo, the DD66000 will be set up with a Mac MC2K power amp, and MCD201 CD/SACD player.

oooooh!

Rolf
09-19-2006, 12:30 PM
It doesn't need a sub. However, if you insist on a bandwidth that plumbs the depths of low frequency audibility, then you need to either EQ or add a sub. Just like for the 4350, L250, 4344, XPL200, K2, original Everest and every single JBL loudspeaker system ever made. In fact, the Everest is one of the few JBL systems that can do this strictly with EQ. Few, if any of the other classic JBL bass drivers or enclosure tunings have the degree of headroom as Everest.

Hi Don, and thanks for your answer. I don't really know what you mean with "plumbs the depths of low frequency", but I really don't believe that a sub or EQ in a fine loudspeaker system should be necessary. I don't feel that this is necessary in my 4343B's.

As I have said several times in different posts, I can not and will not judge the system before I have heard it. The ? I have after reading about it is the roll off frq of the woofers and the crossover at 20000 hz. I hope the rest of the response is like described.

Steve K
09-24-2006, 11:07 PM
I went to the DD66000 demo last Saturday and, for what it's worth, this is my take on the new Everest.

The demo was held on the JBL/McIntosh floor of Dynamic Audio, an audio specialty store in downtown Tokyo. The room is about 65'x45' with heavy velvet curtains covering the side walls. The DD66000s, rosewood finish, were placed about 6 feet away from the side walls and about 4 feet from the rear wall, and about 12 feet apart from each other. Instead of the announced McIntosh MCD201 CD/SACD player, the player was the Esoteric P03/D03 CD/SACD player D/A converter combination. The power amplifier was the McIntosh MC2K, two sets of the three chassis per channel monoblocks, with a combined power output of 2,000 watts! All these were controlled by a Mac C46 control amp. The speakers were connected with a single, inch thick speaker cable, wired to the pair of low terminals, which in turn were connected to the high terminals with the original bridging wires.

I wish I'd taken notes of what CDs were played but I didn't, but the selection was a variety of jazz and classical pieces, both instrumental and voiced. These recordings were of very good quality and really showed off the sonic character of the speakers. First, let me say that there was no hint of 'boxiness' of any sort. I imagine that the weight, each speaker weighing around 300lb, has a lot to do with this, but what came out was just the sound of the recorded music. The bass is plentiful, full and clear, that in an acoustic jazz combo piece, you can hear the upright bass as you would hear the musician playing right in front of you, along with every movement of both hands on the bass. The guy from Harman Japan who was there MC'ing the event said that that 1 of the two woofers handled the lows from a 100 hz down to 30Hz, while the other handled the over 100Hz to 700Hz. Unless you're setting up for a home theater with a need to reproduce all the low rumble, the booms and bangs of THX or Dolby Surround effects, there is no need for a subwoofer at all. The mids, handled by the new 476Be 4" driver and having a response range of 700Hz to 20KHz, were very clear and detailed. We heard Robert Gambarini sing Cole Porter's Easy To Love and she was right there in front, displaying her very smooth voice and articulating clearly. In another piece, showcasing the mids, was a clarinet solo that was sweet and hinted of no harshness whatsoever. My girlfriend who tagged along normally has no interest in audio (fortunately, she's understanding though) was just wowed with the Everest's sound. Back at home later that day and listening to my 4344MkIIs and 250Tis, I say that there is no contest - hands down, the DD66000 comes out on top in every respect.

On our way back to the parking lot, we stopped by at another store, and lo and behold, in the listening room in the back was a pair of DD66000 with nobody around. These were hooked up to a pair of Halcro's dm88 monoblocks and Krell pre-amp and CD/SACD player. The music that was playing was some modern jazz recording, probably late 50's to early 60's stuff. Although the performance was good, the recording was not, and the Everest revealed every flaw unmercifully. We were just puzzled why these guys would play such a bad recording on a system that could bring the best out of the best recordings made today.

I've heard the Avant Garde, the Wilson System 7, the JMLab Utopia, the Revel Salon, the B&W 800D, the German Physiks Carbon, as well as other exotically priced speakers, and they were all excellent sounding. I wouldn't say that the DD66000 is unequivocally better than those, but I can state that the DD66000 competes very well amongst such worthy competitors. I would definitely buy a pair if I could afford to, but then I would also have to be able to afford the new house in which to place them. Until such a time I'll just have to be satisfied with what I have now, which is supposed to be a pretty good system, too. But now that I've heard the new Everest....:p

Steve K from Tokyo

Rolf
09-24-2006, 11:26 PM
Very interesting report Steve. I am really looking forward to hear them when they arrive to Norway.

About the old recording you heard that didn't sound so good, this is something JBL is "famous" for. Crap in, crap out

Titanium Dome
09-25-2006, 03:39 AM
Very interesting report Steve. I am really looking forward to hear them when they arrive to Norway.

About the old recording you heard that didn't sound so good, this is something JBL is "famous" for. Crap in, crap out

Yeah, imagine that: "You are what you eat," even in recordings. :biting:

Hoerninger
09-25-2006, 04:37 PM
http://www.stereosound.co.jp/hivi/detail/feature_90.html
____________
Peter

Domino
10-05-2006, 06:21 AM
Being a proud owner of L300's and 4313B's for many years I find it disapointing and hard to believe that JBL would sell this speaker for $30,000 a pair and it is not able to reproduce the lowest octave of musical information. If it was relatively flat down to 20hz I'd stand in line for a pair in a minute. As far as I'm concerned I can see no excuse for this.

grumpy
10-05-2006, 07:29 AM
Domino,
Prepare for another disappointment... they're $30,000 each.

Earl K
10-05-2006, 08:53 AM
Now to my impressions. Quite simply, Everest is a candidate for the finest loudspeaker I have ever heard. The reason that I do not come outright and state that Everest is the finest system I have ever heard is that the one or two other systems that I also consider in that regard have different strengths and weaknesses. It has been years since I have heard some of these competing systems, and since I have obviously never heard them all in the same room, it is not possible for me to make an absolute objective assessment.

Everest excels in dynamic response, bass impact, timbrel neutrality, and midrange detail. In comparison to the S9800, it has far more weight and is a more resolving system. I can't say enough about the 476Be driver. This driver is very similar to an electrostatic in its ability to be delicate and nuanced, however with all of the power and impact of a large format compression driver.
The twin bass drivers make the system truly magical. The in room response is solid down into the 30's and is far more articulate than the bass that I have heard from any other system.
It is impossible to make this system sound strained no matter what you throw at it.

Since there is no such thing as a perfect loudspeaker, Everest is not without its limitations. As has been much discussed, the bass response will not extend flat down to the lowest audible frequencies. However, it is much better than specs would lead you to believe due to room coupling. For 95% of music, it would not be an issue at all. However, if it were my system, I would look into EQ to provide ultimate extension. The other limitation regards imaging. It does not match the highest performing systems that I have heard in that characteristic. It is still significantly improved over the S9800 and better than any horn based system I have heard.

And there you have my impressions after around 3 hours of total listening.


:) Thanks Don ! for your first hand listening impressions.
- I would truly love to audition these fine examples of JBLs' superlative engineering .
- I've highlighted the parts of your testimonial that really catch my eye.

grumpy
10-05-2006, 09:18 AM
Hi Earl. I agree completely. Thought about bringing the EQ option up, response given the
target audience, etc... I didn't really see the concern going anywhere. -grumpy

Domino
10-05-2006, 09:22 AM
Wow! $30,000 apiece. And they need and EQ. Hmmm

Mr. Widget
10-05-2006, 09:40 AM
Not everyone needs earthquake bass. I have heard quite a few great speakers that didn't produce infrasonic information... they were still great. Unlike those however these speakers are capable of amazingly deep and tactile bass... they simply need room gain or EQ.

Now that I think about it, that is probably a better design goal. If they had anechoic flat bass to 25Hz and you put them into most rooms the deep bass would be overpowering and a real bear to get rid of. With this design in an average room they will likely have plenty of deep bass and in larger rooms their owners can decide if they would like to add EQ or a sub. That is really a better way to go if the goal is to make a speaker that will work with the largest number of rooms.


Widget

Earl K
10-05-2006, 09:55 AM
Hi John, ( Johnaec)

Each of the four stacks consists of the 1500AL, the 1200FE, and prototype Array horns with 435Be and 045Be compression drivers bolted onto them (two stacks as shown in the picture and two behind me in the back corners of the living room). The center channel is the 880 Array prototype.

I believe the intent was to prove that compression drivers were viable for use in high performance loudspeaker systems designed for home high-fidelity applications. That intent has been realized in an undeniably splendid fashion.

The sonic signature of this system, with or without subs, in two channel and in surround is nothing short of stunningly spectacular. I kid you not. I'm not one for being gun shy. If the system had problems I'd say so. When I sit here now looking at the picture in the first post and try to correlate it with what I heard I'm frustrated with the picture's inadequacy.

What do you see when you look at this picture?

A nice stereo system.

Does it tell you anything?

It tells me someone has a really nice stereo system.

The sound is effortless - powerful, dynamic, smooth, detailed. No resonances. No smearing. No distortion. No pain. You see horns and know there are compression drivers bolted to them. You don't hear horns with compression drivers bolted to them. Not in any traditional sense. It's a paradox.

I very much enjoyed ( and value ) these quotes from Giskards' thread Greg Timbers & DIY . (http://audioheritage.csdco.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=9951) This implies to me, that he and I think alike, when it comes to what subwoofers should strive to achieve as "in room" sub-bass support for a very musical system.






Regarding the bass, I think it is interesting that he used the 1500AL for 80hz down only, when the only thing slightly less than remarkable that I have ever read about the 1500Al , or the K2 S9800, is the perceived lack of output in the very lowest regions. I always assumed that this was strictly due to the design goals for the K2, and that the 1500AL must be as capable as any driver ever made at low bass.

Bandwidth limiting. The 1500AL is not capable of the same type of response curve when used in the same fashion as say a 2231H or 2235H in something like a 4333B or 4430. We've been over that fact, as well as the use of bandwidth limiting several times before. When used below 60 to 100 Hz it is a capable sub. A1500AL is not a SUB1500 or W1500H. What it does have is superlative articulation and freedom from distortion. Having read different posts on this forum over the past five years I have no doubt that many of you would not find four 1500AL-based subs as inspiring as other sub solutions that have been previously mentioned. And that's fine, it's personal choice. In Greg's living room I didn't hear a ton of loading up going on. The bass was all there and it wasn't at all overpowering. The point is - in my opinion, it fit the room. The two subs in the front are out in the room while the two subs in the back are loaded into the corners. That arrangement in this room seems to be very good at killing off those pesky nodes.

Also, I can't stress enough how good the 12-inch 3-ways sounded without the subs engaged.




:)

spkrman57
10-05-2006, 09:57 AM
Your observations about Everest DD66000 is about what I expected to hear. JBL did not invest the R & D into a speaker system that would be considered average.;)

I wish I get a opportunity to see and hear a pair myself. Don't know if I could afford a trip to CES in Jan to see them, maybe pennies from heaven may flow into central Ohio and make a dream come true.:p

Interesting note to those complaining about the bottom end response, I'm sure the Everest will reproduce all the necessary music content with no problem at all. Most bottom octave material being referenced in these forums is more related to home theater related than music!:blink:

Regards, Ron :D

Rolf
10-05-2006, 02:35 PM
Not everyone needs earthquake bass.



Are you referring to the Cerwin Vega system delivered with the film "Earthquake" in the 70'th?:p



I have heard quite a few great speakers that didn't produce infrasonic information... they were still great.


Tell me ... How can a HI-FI loudspeaker system that does not deliver low notes be great?:blink:



Unlike those however these speakers are capable of amazingly deep and tactile bass... they simply need room gain or EQ.



A truly hi-fi speaker system should not need EQ!:coolness:



Now that I think about it, that is probably a better design goal. If they had anechoic flat bass to 25Hz and you put them into most rooms the deep bass would be overpowering and a real bear to get rid of. With this design in an average room they will likely have plenty of deep bass and in larger rooms their owners can decide if they would like to add EQ or a sub. That is really a better way to go if the goal is to make a speaker that will work with the largest number of rooms.

Widget

Are we not talking about a loudspeaker, the very best, under the best condition? If you want a speaker ... the "ultimate"? Don't blame the room.:bs:

mikebake
10-05-2006, 02:54 PM
If you want a speaker ... the "ultimate"? Don't blame the room.:bs:
:bs: The room is 50% of the equation involving any loudspeaker. You name the loudspeaker, and I'll show you a room that makes it sound like shit, guaranteed.

Zilch
10-05-2006, 03:21 PM
Frankly, I'd very much prefer to read more actual listening impressions here, as they occur, than speculation as to what overpriced doo-doo they might be, or further carping about Harman marketing.... ;)

Mr. Widget
10-05-2006, 05:01 PM
Frankly, I'd very much prefer to read more actual listening impressions here, as they occur, than speculation as to what overpriced doo-doo they might be, or further carping about Harman marketing.... ;)This is filler until we get that chance in January... in the meantime precious few of us will have the opportunity...


Rolf, if you really want to discuss your questions I'd be happy to answer them on a general discussion thread as they are all general issues. I really don't want to prolong this OT discussion, but Mike is absolutely correct... the room is one of the components in your system. It must be taken into consideration.


Widget

DavidF
10-06-2006, 12:33 PM
Tell me ... How can a HI-FI loudspeaker system that does not deliver low notes be great?:blink:



A truly hi-fi speaker system should not need EQ!:coolness:


How about the venerable QUAD ESL-63, or the little giant BBC LS3/5A? Each had significant compromises in total performance but each had overwhelming attributes in other areas that kept them as highly-recommended in HiFi circles.

Most speakers have some form of equalization built in to the crossover, at the least. Why would equalization to a tweeter’s roll-on be considered an acceptable HiFi design but equalization to the woofer’s bottom end be considered a deficiency?

DavidF

Rolf
10-06-2006, 06:04 PM
:bs: The room is 50% of the equation involving any loudspeaker. You name the loudspeaker, and I'll show you a room that makes it sound like shit, guaranteed.

Don't you think I know that? You obviously did not get my "under covered" meaning in the statement.:o:

Rolf
10-06-2006, 06:12 PM
How about the venerable QUAD ESL-63, or the little giant BBC LS3/5A? Each had significant compromises in total performance but each had overwhelming attributes in other areas that kept them as highly-recommended in HiFi circles.


Well, I have heard both many times, as a couple of my friends had them, before they got to their senses and bought JBL:D . I must say that none of them was to my taste.



Most speakers have some form of equalization built in to the crossover, at the least. Why would equalization to a tweeter’s roll-on be considered an acceptable HiFi design but equalization to the woofer’s bottom end be considered a deficiency?

DavidF

I know, and that is ok. If JBL had done that in the system there had been no use for an extra eq.

Maron Horonzakz
10-10-2006, 12:07 PM
In the Everest DD66000 Technical White Paper is a small line illustration of the 476 Be mid/high frequency driver (fig 6) A very small cutaway drawing showing internal workings....I need a larger more detailed drawing. Does anyone know if a LARGER illistration is available???? Maybe JBL can furnish one for our library. Can Don McRitchie inquirer???? I need to compair with drawing of driver in K2 M 95000.....

Jan Daugaard
10-10-2006, 12:20 PM
I found this drawing of the 476Be somewhere on the Internet; I don't remember the URL.

Don McRitchie
10-10-2006, 12:30 PM
It's the same basic design as the 2450 as far as the motor and phase plug goes. The major differences are that the 476Be has no throat and uses a beryllium diaphragm with an Aquaplas coating. It shares the same "Coherent Wave" phase plug. It should be noted that the 475Nd from the M9500 uses an internal magnet structure and is thus shielded while the 2450/476Be both use an external structure. The lack of a throat means that an optimized flare rate can be chosen depending on the application. The throats on all of JBL's previous large format compression drivers used the 300hz flare rate from the original W.E. design. Since there is no need for that low a cross-over frequency for this compression driver, an optimized horn can be designed for any specific use.

edgewound
10-10-2006, 12:40 PM
It's the same basic design as the 2450 as far as the motor and phase plug goes. The major differences are that the 476Be has no throat and uses a beryllium diaphragm with an Aquaplas coating. It shares the same "Coherent Wave" phase plug. .

Which would sound as if it's a 2451 with the Be/Aquaplas diaphragm.

2451 is a 2450 with no throat....both have Neo motor.

2447 is a ferrite motor with "Coherent Wave" phase plug and no throat, 1.5" exit...2446 is same with 2" throat/exit. Drop in "SL" aquaplas coated Ti diaphragm and you're getting a value in a big driver.

Think $400.00 vs $3500.00. Is the trade off worth it?

Don McRitchie
10-10-2006, 12:53 PM
Thanks. You're right in that I forgot about the 476Be being a 1.5" exit.

Don

Zilch
10-10-2006, 01:01 PM
Think $400.00 vs $3500.00. Is the trade off worth it?I recall concluding from the text description of 476Be that its design was distinguished in other ways, as well.

I can tell you that "Next Generation" 2452H-SL measures and sounds VERY different from 2450 with SL diaphragm:

http://audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=123766#post123766

edgewound
10-10-2006, 01:04 PM
I recall concluding from the text description of 475Be that its design was distinguished in other ways, as well.

I can tell you that "Next Generation" 2452H-SL measures and sounds VERY different from 2450 with SL diaphragm:

http://audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=123766#post123766

Most likely due to the "throatless" design...better HF extension, less "honkey"? Reduced HF phase cancellations without the thoat.

Hoerninger
10-10-2006, 01:39 PM
In the Everest DD66000 Technical White Paper is a small line illustration of the 476 Be mid/high frequency driver (fig 6) A very small cutaway drawing showing internal workings....I need a larger more detailed drawing. Does anyone know if a LARGER illistration is available???? Maybe JBL can furnish one for our library. Can Don McRitchie inquirer???? I need to compair with drawing of driver in K2 M 95000..... In addition to Jan's post, which shows the internal structure more clearly imho, here with english description.
____________
Peter

Mr. Widget
10-10-2006, 01:57 PM
In the Everest DD66000 Technical White Paper...Could someone post a link to the White Paper? I seem to have missed it.
Thanks,

Widget

Hoerninger
10-10-2006, 02:05 PM
White Paper:
http://audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=124667&postcount=135
____________
Peter

Robh3606
10-10-2006, 02:09 PM
I don't ever remember seeing an acoustic seal on the gap and the tuned resonance ring on other drivers. Also the machined chambers in the top plate and the under the surround. Solid copper sleve as well not plated. Don't think the standard drivers are so equiped.

Rob:)

Zilch
10-10-2006, 02:12 PM
I don't ever remember seeing an acoustic seal on the gap and the tuned resonance ring on other drivers.

Rob:)Me neither. That's one of the "distinguished in other ways" I referred to above. There's more in the text. It's not just a matter of slapping an Aquaplas'd Be diaphragm in a stock driver, I don't believe....

Don McRitchie
10-10-2006, 02:25 PM
No, it is considerably more than that. This is what I get for not looking up the white paper. I remember Greg initially describing the driver to me as based on the 2450, but this was obviously in reference to a general concept, and not the specifics of the design. Obviously Jerry Moro did considerable investigation and experimentation, particularly with the magnet circuit stability so that this represents a significant improvement on past designs. Therefore, it is definitely not fair to describe the 476Be as a beryllium diaphragmed 2450.

Don

edgewound
10-10-2006, 02:34 PM
Me neither. That's one of the "distinguished in other ways" I referred to above. There's more in the text. It's not just a matter of slapping an Aquaplas'd Be diaphragm in a stock driver, I don't believe....

I never said it was a "matter of slapping in...".

But there are some striking features that the ferrite 2447 motor shares with the 476Be: throatless 1.5" Optimized Aperature exit, Coherent Wave phase plug.

Two very desireable traits that DIYers can have for very little cost in relation to the high dollar one. Put the Aqua'd diaphagm in and the razzies are minimized...not bad for a $6000.00+ savings on pairs, eh?

Roll in a 2407 for UHF @15Khz+ and it's probably pretty usable, don'tcha think Zilch?

Zilch
10-10-2006, 03:00 PM
Roll in a 2407 for UHF @15Khz+ and it's probably pretty usable, don'tcha think Zilch?2407 on the $10 JBL horn?

You betchum! ;)

With 7 kHz crossover, this sucker is ruler flat "outta the box." Knocked me OUT first time I saw it on RTA!

I chose 2" 2450 with SL diaphragm because it's got the flattest response curve.

With 1.5", 2352 Optimized Aperture is about the only "available" JBL horn option that'll play low (800 Hz) presently.

I've never run 2447 on it. Hafta measure one with SL diaphragm to know.

2452H-SL works 2-way on that one, with simple compensation....

Maron Horonzakz
10-10-2006, 03:06 PM
Thank you....I knew I could count on you Wizz Kids to come up with the information I needed. (I mean wiz kids...Kids in relation to my age);)

edgewound
10-10-2006, 03:53 PM
2407 on the $10 JBL horn?

You betchum! ;)

With 7 kHz crossover, this sucker is ruler flat "outta the box."

I chose 2" 2450 with SL diaphragm because it's got the flattest response curve.

With 1.5", 2352 Optimized Aperture is about the only "available" JBL horn option that'll play low (800 Hz) presently.

I've never run 2447 on it. Hafta measure one with SL diaphragm.

2452H-SL works 2-way on that one, with simple compensation....

The reason I said crossed over at ~15kHz for the 2407...your 2452 curve looks impressive until that spike at about 18kHz....the 2407 would be walking in the park on that octave to about 30kHz...(quasi) DD66000 territory.

My point being that the crossover would be out of the way for high piano note fundamentals

Zilch
10-10-2006, 04:03 PM
Yup, I been thinking about rolling off that spike.

It's not that I can hear it, but that I believe what goes on up there matters.

Pushing in more power for UHF than necessary may be counterproductive. It certainly is with 2431H and 2435HPL....

merlin
10-22-2006, 01:55 PM
Hi All,

I just thought I'd share the experiences I have had as I am out in Tokyo from the UK for a few days visiting around the Audio Show.

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y225/airwise/275713054_bd573c2369.jpg

The Everest is being used both in the Harman room as seen here and also in the Accuphase setup. I had already seen a pair in the flesh in a small Dynamic Audio store in Shinjuku the day before (all stores seem to have a pair!) but my first listen was under show conditions.

First impressions are of a tremendous purity to the midrange, a bell like clarity that told me the 476be is a real honey. We listened in both rooms extensively and both me and my collegue had to agree that at the end of the day we were disappointed. At the show the Everest was utterly sublime from about 200hz upwards, but a bit of a mess, slow and bloated below. I was crestfallen to be honest. I had flown halfway around the world to be disappointed, but knowing how misleading shows can be, and convinced that Greg had overseen a lot better loudspeaker than we were hearing, we decided to go into Akaribara the following day to find a good dem room.

We were lucky. Being Sunday, we had the whole McIntosh/JBL room at Dynamic Audio to ourselves and could listen to our heart's content with our own raucous music. Finally the Everest delivered. And delivered big time. The midrange was still outrageously good, some brass and cymbal work was spooky, and now the bass was really kicking in and causing grins to appear. Any of you who think the DD66000 will be bass light should wait to hear it. Let's say it's generous.

I still thought it needed a bit more control if I was being a perfectionist, but I suspect the answer is to stick a dirty big Crown amp on the low bass 1501AL and biamp from there. But the new Everest certainly competes with products from elsewhere at the price point and to my eyes, drops them all in the design and style department. Don't expect them to sound like older JBL monitors. These are a modern low distortion tour de force. I have to consider selling the car!

Anyway, a couple of pics from the show

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y225/airwise/275713211_7cdd32a2b1.jpg


http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y225/airwise/275713080_612e1780c0.jpg

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y225/airwise/275713117_3de8c54291.jpg

Tokyo really is heaven for JBL lovers. Yesterday we managed to find, 4343, 4430, 4425, 4344, 4345, K2-5500, K2-9500, K2-9800, Everest DD66000, 4348 and 4338 all for sale and all within a square mile of each other. We finished the day in a remarkable little side street listening to a wonderful Paragon and sipping green tea. A must have is the recently published Stereo Sound 60th Anniversary Book. Well done to Don for that one - now I understand his Tokyo trip!

Earl K
10-22-2006, 02:14 PM
Merlin :)

Thanks for that ! You sure said all the right things for me .

Also, they sure are beautiful / my heart skips a beat everytime I see a new picture of these lovelys .

:bouncy:

jim campbell
10-22-2006, 06:25 PM
nice but that setup costs as much as a decent house.

Titanium Dome
10-22-2006, 06:34 PM
nice but that setup costs as much as a decent house.

Here in SoCal, you could get at least five pairs for the cost of an entry level, 800 sq. ft. house in a dumpy neighborhood. :banghead:

jim campbell
10-22-2006, 07:07 PM
i dont doubt it but i recently read that only 11% of people in your area can afford to own their own homes.nice if you are already on the scoreboard but i really dont understand how people make it.i guess that i have a hard time understanding why audio gear has such a high price tag given the accumulated body of knowlege.are the innovations of todays speakers worth the price?could vintage stuff be copied.the only drawback i can see about jbl from the 70's/80's is that they are simply not available in sufficient quantities

sfellini
10-22-2006, 07:07 PM
Here in SoCal, you could get at least five pairs for the cost of an entry level, 800 sq. ft. house in a dumpy neighborhood. :banghead:

HOUSE? Ha! In DC, you'd get TEN+ pair for a 2-bedroom condo
(but in a nice neighborhood :p).

Steve.

johnaec
01-11-2007, 07:15 PM
It's apparent that the LF works OK, but I'm just curious - since one 1501 rolls off above 150hz, won't it act as a passive radiator to the other one above that, since they're both in the same chamber? Or has JBL somehow implemented that into the design parameters?

John

4313B
01-11-2007, 07:28 PM
It's apparent that the LF works OK, but I'm just curious - since one 1501 rolls off above 150hz, won't it act as a passive radiator to the other one above that, since they're both in the same chamber?No. It isn't a passive device, it's mechanically and electrically damped, and has a resonant frequency well within it's intended operating bandwidth. Remember that a passive radiator is tuned to a certain frequency just like a port is. For all intent and purpose the 1501AL that doesn't operate above ~ 150 Hz is inert above that frequency.

There could potentially be a problem with a shared volume if the drivers varied sufficiently in their physical characteristics. Fortunately the 1501AL's, and 476Be's for that matter, exhibit excellent unit to unit consistency. :)

johnaec
01-12-2007, 06:14 AM
Thanks for the info, Giskard.

John