Project Array 1400 Audition

[Dave_72]

My bet is on the 1400s. It's not even close. Yeah, they are that good. Goofy good. It's hard to explain. They float vocals in the room like nobody's business. Creepy good.

Ok, you are entitled to your opinion. Even if I disagree with it.

However, have you heard the S4700s? I have heard both the 1400s and the S4700s, and the S4700s are more dynamic and transparent than the 1400s. I didn't like them a lot when I first got 'em, but after 2 months of break in, they're starting to gel.

Also, have you done a shoot out between the 1400s and the S4700s?

In addition, why would JBL put out a speaker that didn't perform better than the previous models?

It doesn't make sense from a design and business standpoint. I'm not saying it can't happen though.

Or are you just saying the S4700 is a dud.

I look forward to your response.

[Dave_72]

Some people like the looks of the 1400 Array and some people prefer the looks of the S4700.

I personally could live with either, although I would probably just take them both apart and put the 1400 Array horn over the 2216Nd.

Oh wait... wouldn't that be kind of like putting a SAM1HF over a low frequency transducer of choice? Where have I heard that before?

Yes, I know I said I could never go back to a three-inch voice coil no matter how many of them JBL stuffed into a single driver, but the 2216Nd is a cutting edge transducer, arguably and understandably too clean for some old school JBL lovers.

Right, I hear ya. But, I just wanted to know how he formed his opinion.

If he's never heard the S4700, then it's all a wild guess on his part.

I just don't want people to be misleaded. As can happen on other forums.

Anyway, a shoot out is definitely in order, and I hope it happens somewhere out there, and sooner than later.

[Mr. Widget]

Right, I hear ya. But, I just wanted to know how he formed his opinion.

If he's never heard the S4700, then it's all a wild guess on his part.

I just don't want people to be misleaded. As can happen on other forums.

Anyway, a shoot out is definitely in order, and I hope it happens somewhere out there, and sooner than later.

Hmmm... Hearing is believing, but if I compare two speakers and another person compares two speakers it is quite possible to come to two very different conclusions. That doesn't even begin to take into account hearing them with different electronics and in different rooms....



Widget

[Dave_72]

Hmmm... Hearing is believing, but if I compare two speakers and another person compares two speakers it is quite possible to come to two very different conclusions. That doesn't even begin to take into account hearing them with different electronics and in different rooms....



Widget

True...good points.

[Titanium Dome]

I have to admit, my early (1960s) choices were largely governed by looks, meaning not only the speaker's appearance but did it have impressive looking drivers I could show off, too?

It was fortunate in a way that I took this approach, because the JBL L100 Century pair I bought in 1970 took me to the other side. Not only was the appearance a show stopper, but the drivers were significantly better than what I was used to, and that started me on a more balanced looks plus performance quest. Now I'm sort of at a point where performance is the key component, but performance being equal and price being close, then I would choose the better appearing speaker. That's personal taste, eh?

Of course in a dedicated HT, speakers should be heard and not seen, so the SAM1/SAM2 combo is fine, regardless of appearance. Recently I got some additional vertical horn-based loudspeakers, and there's no question the performance is there, no question at all. I'm hoping to pit them against the K2s this weekend. The problem will come if I try to move the K2s out (maybe sell them) because Huikyong loves the K2s, especially the way they look. She does not like the look of Array-styled horns in any configuration.

If the 1400 Array and the S4700 were anywhere close to being equally satisfying, I'd be making the smart buy to get the S4700 which has that K2-esque appeal. I could get a pair in the house. The 1400 Array is not likely to get in unless it's all the way down to the lower level.

I know there's a tendency here to believe that an A-B comparison would solve a lot of issues, but frankly it creates more problems than it solves. (I'm ignoring the whole A/B/X thing, so please let's not bring that into it as well.) At least in my case, every time I compare two good JBL speakers, I tend to like both for different reasons. Anyone who's been to my house knows what that means; I end up keeping both. As Widget points out, speakers will have different strengths. Extension on a stock loudspeaker, especially at the bottom end, is easy to fix. Imaging, if it can be improved on a stock loudspeaker, can't be fixed without quite a bit of effort and modification.

Inevitably, one of us will get a 1400 Array and S4700 in the same place, listen to them in as accurate a way as anyone can in a sighted comparison, and report back on his or her findings. I will read that with interest, but also with a spoonful of skepticism, because it wasn't done in my listening environment, with my equipment, with my music, with my ears, and with my preferences/prejudices.

I really do believe it's better to "love the one you're with," but I keep bringing in these fascinating alternatives that easily convince me they're the one.

[Dave_72]

I have to admit, my early (1960s) choices were largely governed by looks, meaning not only the speaker's appearance but did it have impressive looking drivers I could show off, too?

It was fortunate in a way that I took this approach, because the JBL L100 Century pair I bought in 1970 took me to the other side. Not only was the appearance a show stopper, but the drivers were significantly better than what I was used to, and that started me on a more balanced looks plus performance quest. Now I'm sort of at a point where performance is the key component, but performance being equal and price being close, then I would choose the better appearing speaker. That's personal taste, eh?

Of course in a dedicated HT, speakers should be heard and not seen, so the SAM1/SAM2 combo is fine, regardless of appearance. Recently I got some additional vertical horn-based loudspeakers, and there's no question the performance is there, no question at all. I'm hoping to pit them against the K2s this weekend. The problem will come if I try to move the K2s out (maybe sell them) because Huikyong loves the K2s, especially the way they look. She does not like the look of Array-styled horns in any configuration.

If the 1400 Array and the S4700 were anywhere close to being equally satisfying, I'd be making the smart buy to get the S4700 which has that K2-esque appeal. I could get a pair in the house. The 1400 Array is not likely to get in unless it's all the way down to the lower floor.

I know there's a tendency here to believe that an A-B comparison would solve a lot of issues, but frankly it creates more than it solves. (I'm ignoring the whole A/B/X thing, so please let's not bring that into it as well.) At least in my case, every time I compare two good JBL speakers, I tend to like both for different reasons. Anyone who's been to my house knows what that means; I end up keeping both. As Widget points out, speakers will have different strengths. Extension on a stock loudspeaker, especially at the bottom end, is easy to fix. Imaging, if it can be improved on a stock loudspeaker, can't be fixed without quite a bit of effort and modification.

Inevitably, one of us will get a 1400 Array and S4700 in the same place, listen to them in as accurate a way as anyone can in a sighted comparison, and report back on his or her findings. I will read that with interest, but also with a spoonful of skepticism, because it wasn't done in my listening environment, with my equipment, with my music, with my ears, and with my preferences/prejudices.

I really do believe it's better to "love the one you're with," but I keep bringing in these fascinating alternatives that easily convince me they're the one.

I see. Good points there as well. I didn't go for the Arrays mainly because of the assembly required. I'm a klutz for the most part, and I'd probably wreck the cabinet. And/or the horn.

[JuniorJBL]

but I keep bringing in these fascinating alternatives that easily convince me they're the one.

Hummmm........................What did Dome drag home this time?

[Mr. Widget]

As much as sonics are subjective, beauty truly is in the eye if the beholder. I do prefer the aesthetics of the Everest II to all other JBLs, hell... most all other speakers. I readily admit this is a biasing factor. Luckily they sound pretty damned good too!


Widget

[Dave_72]

As much as sonics are subjective, beauty truly is in the eye if the beholder. I do prefer the aesthetics of the Everest II to all other JBLs, hell... most all other speakers. I readily admit this is a biasing factor. Luckily they sound pretty damned good too!


Widget

There you go. Sounds good.

[sweet212]

I've got to but in here. The 1400's are the most un JBL like sound I have heard. Neutral and mellow mid and top end with an almost overwhelming bass output.... IMO.
Audiomagnate is right when he says "they can float a voice into the room".
Of all the JBL's I 've owned and I've owned many - these are my favorite.

[Dave_72]

I've got to but in here. The 1400's are the most un JBL like sound I have heard. Neutral and mellow mid and top end with an almost overwhelming bass output.... IMO.
Audiomagnate is right when he says "they can float a voice into the room".
Of all the JBL's I 've owned and I've owned many - these are my favorite.

That's cool, but that doesn't mean they're better than the S4700s or even the K2 9900s.

[doodle6]

I've got to but in here. The 1400's are the most un JBL like sound I have heard. Neutral and mellow mid and top end with an almost overwhelming bass output.... IMO.
Audiomagnate is right when he says "they can float a voice into the room".
Of all the JBL's I 've owned and I've owned many - these are my favorite.

Initial impressions of the 1400s are very good. I haven't had the opportunity yet to play them with a high powered amp, but with a smaller McIntosh, the MA6100, I have to say that I am very pleasantly impressed. The most prominent feature of all is their ability to create a very open and accessible sound stage, with instruments and voices perceived in a spatially coherent way. This is a perception that's pretty unique from JBLs, at least from my experience with them, which dates back over thirty five years to my first purchase of L-150s in 1976 or so. I've been up and down the ranks from L-26s and L-65s up to 4345s and 4350s, and including two way, three way, and four way offerings and these really are different in that regard. Where what I'm used to has been accuracy and a lack of coloration, and an ability to handle any dynamics presented (most amazingly with the 4350s) I am finding an additional quality of immediacy and immersion in the auditory experience. Only one other speaker has made this impression on me and that, surprisingly, was the Altec Valencia. Unfortunately, in my experience, the Valencias don't have anywhere near the ability of JBLs to handle dynamics. They tend to begin breaking down and getting muddy and incoherent at higher volume levels, but jazz ensembles at low to moderate volumes are delightful. Anyway, the 1400s have that ability to image extremely well and to do so at any listening level, and to do it with a delicacy and clarity that's pretty amazing. I can almost feel Diana Krall peeling my grape. The only weaknesses I've detected are a noticeable boominess in the bass, perhaps an artifact of the underpowered amp that's currently driving them, and a sense that they don't have as much dynamic potential as the 4350s whose place they've taken in my living room. Again, that may just be the understandable result of powering them with a 70 wpc amp where the 4350s' bottom ends were driven with 270 wpc. But I never heard the slightest hint that the 4350s were operating above an idle, even with challenging Bach organ pieces.

One other upside is that compared to the 4350s, when one looks at my living room now, one can imagine Mitt and Ann sitting here listening rather than Jethro and Ellie Mae. Visually, they are classy.

[4313B]

a sense that they don't have as much dynamic potential as the 4350s

The 4350 bottom end was 4 ohms and 96 dB SPL 1W,1m.

I thought of using dual LE14H's for a project once but there wasn't any benefit to doing so. They would have required an 8 cubic foot box, as opposed to 10 cubic feet for the dual fifteens, and they'd still only yield 93 dB SPL 1W, 1m while costing roughly the same.

[wrager]

Hummmm........................What did Dome drag home this time?

...oh just a pair of GT's personal, custom speakers, if I'm connecting the dots correctly.

[SEAWOLF97]

...oh just a pair of GT's personal, custom speakers, if I'm connecting the dots correctly.

yes, he started a thread called "9" , crowing abt the deal , but has now disappeared.