Classical Music...Do you prefer JBL's or other speakers?

[Akira]

I have never liked how any of my JBL's reproduce classical music, especially strings. However, all of my JBL' s tend to be the older studio monitor series: L100, 4315, 4411, 4430. They sound as they were designed to sound...through the studio window as opposed to concert hall in your living room.
I am a great believer that speakers designed for home acoustics sound better in the home, so perhaps JBL's designed for home use fair better in this regard. For classical stringed instruments I find speakers that disperse sound in a more omni directional field provide a fuller sound stage flattering to this type of music.
For that reason I prefer my Castle Winchester's over my JBL's for symphonic works.
They do not at all produce rock, popular music or anything with a rhythm section nearly as well as the JBL's.
But, I find the the Castle Winchester's sound good on natural acoustic instruments.
Curious if other Classical listeners feel the same way and if you prefer other designs or makes of speakers.

The Castles are basically a 2way design with a third driver pointing directly upward. Low end is derived from a variation of folded horn style tuning referred to as 'quarter plank' and fires out of a fair size mouth at the bottom rear of the speaker. This speaker has excellent 35Hz response--a bit of a waste for Classical with the exception of pipe organ.

[SEAWOLF97]

Beautiful

now that you asked..I do prefer the Walsh F's on classical and anything with acoustic guitar or piano

[hjames]

Beautiful

now that you asked..I do prefer the Walsh F's on classical and anything with acoustic guitar or piano

I'm still not sure I want a pair of nice wood-finish Daleks in my living room ...

[Akira]

Beautiful

now that you asked..I do prefer the Walsh F's on classical and anything with acoustic guitar or piano

I've always wondered what the operating principle of those speakers were.
Can you explain how they work or refer me to a link?
THX

[SEAWOLF97]

I've always wondered what the operating principle of those speakers were.
Can you explain how they work or refer me to a link?
THX

http://www.audioheritage.org/vbullet...&postcount=133

[Ducatista47]

When I listen to amplified music sources - I love Peter Green's Fleetwood Mac, Santana and Chicago Blues for instance - big JBL's are just fine. But I mostly listen to acoustic music, and a much more intimate experience is called for. Jazz combos above all, but acoustic guitar, string quartets and string orchestras, American, European, Oriental and African modern acoustic music, and much more. Then I prefer speakers that locate sound in space very precisely, and coherence is also a must for that spatial reality that is "right sizing" and convincing source location. Timbre must also be "right". The 4345's make me feel like Santana is in the room, but they will never cut it with acoustic music. Systems with multiple drivers and big enclosures trying to mimic sound fields are just not good at these program sources. At one time I thought they were fine but then I heard it done much, much better.

My two weapons of choice are the Hammer Dynamics 12" single driver augmented speakers and my Stax electrostatic headphones.

Amps matter too. There is a reason why small, high quality tube amps are legendary for their soundstages, imaging and spatial realism.

To each his own, but I like to think I outgrew big "classical" orchestras a long time ago. (I loved them when I was a kid.) For me bombastic rather than intimate, they no longer resonate with me. If I did still go for them, locating all those instruments precisely in space would be quite a challenge and my hat is off to any speaker that does that well. Those Castles look very interesting, and I wonder if big horn systems might excel at the task as well. Perhaps Tannoy Churchills might also fill the bill. Expensive stuff all. The Performance Series must have been a bargain after all.

Clark

[Titanium Dome]

Amps matter too. There is a reason why small, high quality tube amps are legendary for their soundstages, imaging and spatial realism.

What is that reason?

To each his own, but I like to think I outgrew big "classical" orchestras a long time ago. (I loved them when I was a kid.) For me bombastic rather than intimate, they no longer resonate with me.

Clark

Yes, exactly, to each his or her own, but your terminology seems either condescending or arrogant. I'm not sure which; maybe both? Probably not your intent.

[JBL 4645]

I would listen to classical music only on modified JBL control 5 and control 1 and 4645 because that is all I have LOL to listen on.

http://www.audioheritage.org/vbullet...&postcount=133

Twice the speed of sound 3,000! That’s a rather impressive Ohm speaker Tom. Don’t you use them as surrounds and the JBLTi is it 250i for the fronts?




Every time I look at those OHMS I keep thinking your doing some road surface repairs to the living room?

Come on Dome you can’t fool us we know what your listening too?

I'm still not sure I want a pair of nice wood-finish Daleks in my living room ...

[4313B]

I have never liked how any of my JBL's reproduce classical music

Yeah me neither.

[Steve0616]

Over half of my listening is classical and I still use my L100Ts which were purchased new in 1986. I updated with T3 networks a couple of years ago and like others have said, this improved clarity increased detail. But like you, I also like the "fuller sound stage" for orchestral works. For that, I still use my vinty Yamaha DSP1 to provide that ambience using L20Ts as processing speakers with an Outlaw 990 prepo and their 7 channel 200wpc amp. The key for my satisfaction with this old sound processor has always been that the volume level must never reach the point where the effects from the L20Ts transition from subtle to obvious. If I can hear them separately, the sound is totally unnatural and it defeats their purpose. For that reason, I do not care for Dolby Logic IIx music, as it does not sound natural. But I also listen and enjoy two channel, but the "full sound stage" of a large concert hall is my favorite. The listening variety helps keep my ears from getting tired with several recordings I have heard hundreds of times. No problem with strings on the L100T/3s either; violin concertos are among my very favorite.

[Titanium Dome]

The best orchestral sound I've heard is from the Performance Series, fully deployed. The clarity, richness, and fullness is wonderful.

Luckily I can compare lots of venues: LA's music center halls (Taper, Chandler, etc.), the Greek Theatre, the Ahmanson, the Long Beach Civic, the Kodak, the Nokia, Hollywood Bowl, Cerritos Center since I go to A LOT of live performances each year. The Performance Series reproduces those experiences more faithfully than anything else I've got or heard.

I heartily agree with J. Gordon Holt's 2002 statement:

I listen to very little amplified music because I prefer the sounds of acoustical instruments, and I get to hear a live orchestra once or twice a month, so I'm as picky about realism as any reviewer. Because realism is one of the Performance's strongest suits, someone who hears live music rarely probably won't share my enthusiasm about the system, but if you're interested in realistic reproduction, you'll love what these do—with size, for instance.

Size—the apparent dimension(s) of reproduced sounds—is a quality that's completely ignored in most reviews because it's relevant only to acoustical instruments and other real-life noisemakers. Every brass instrument, for example, ends in a flared bell that gives it that horn sound—variously described as an awk or an ah or an a (as in at) vowel coloration, depending on the size of the bell. The same is true of other instruments: A viola sounds bigger than a fiddle and a cello sounds bigger than a viola because, each being bigger in actuality, its wooden sound box resonates at a lower frequency. If a system makes instruments sound the wrong size, it bothers listeners who know what they should sound like. Correct size is important for home theater because so many of the sound effects used in films are intimately familiar to all of us. If a Mercedes door-slam sounds like a Renault, or a Sherman tank sounds like a bulldozer, it elicits a "Huh?" response that can undermine our involvement with the film. Not many speaker systems do size right; the JBL Performance did it much better than most.

[jblsound]

The best orchestral sound I've heard is from the Performance Series, fully deployed. The clarity, richness, and fullness is wonderful.

I've got agree with that. But it also comes down to how the system is laid out within the room.

I've auditioned systems that had the mains stuck into the corners or just too close to the side walls to develop a good soundstage. And adding absorption panels doesn't change that.

This is what Sean Olive had to say, on AVS thread, about Harman's listening rooms.

Yes, the lower half of the side walls at the front half of the room is left untreated at the first lateral reflection point (relative to listener and front speakers) to benefit spaciousness and image widening of the front stereo or mono channels. The reasons and benefits are well summarized in Floyd Toole's new book "Sound Reproduction: Loudspeakers and Rooms." These reflections will have less benefit for multichannel reproduction where the reflections in the recording from the side/rear speakers will tend to dominate any spatial effects. In the end, it comes down to a matter of taste and the particular purpose and setup.

[JBLRaiser]

classical music once. But, they just spit it out.