Well stated, and point well taken, Mr. Widget..! And I really hope there are no reputable mastering rooms with Soundweb's in their signal chain...(if there are, can you state it on the recording's cover..like milk cartons with hormone warnings?)
Well stated, and point well taken, Mr. Widget..! And I really hope there are no reputable mastering rooms with Soundweb's in their signal chain...(if there are, can you state it on the recording's cover..like milk cartons with hormone warnings?)
Originally Posted by Tim Rinkerman
If you can't tell without it in writing, I don't see what your point is. If you can only tell after it's in writing, then that's a different problem.
Out.
Perhaps as a cautionary statement to prevent an unwanted purchase? Or to lower expectations?
I bought a record, as in a vinyl copy of the album of a musician I enjoy. I bought the vinyl copy to get what I had hoped to be a better sounding version. Upon listening I was rather disappointed. I read the liner notes and discovered that this 1984 recording had been recorded digitally. The vinyl sounded no better than the CD version... both victims of early digital.
Dome, I think what you are trying to say is that if signal chain is so transparent that one needs documentation to criticize it then no criticism is deserved. I would agree with you here... however we all recognize some systems/signal chains sound better than others... the result is the combined effect of every part.
Widget
We really need to see the curve in the intended backend. If it is a terrible mess then I can see cause for pause.
I suppose it is possible that this 15-inch 2-way system thoroughly sucks without the intended backend but I'm having a hard time believing that. I view it the same as Titanium Dome's HT system wherein it sounded good before it was digitally tweaked and it sounds even better now.
The 2216Nd used up to 800 Hz in both the S4700 and M2 evidently doesn't care which box it gets bolted into. I do find it interesting that it looses 2 dB of efficiency in the M2 box. A product of carefully balancing the mid-bass with the bottom end using DSP?
I just see a box containing a couple of really nice drivers without a passive network waiting for someone to voice it however they want.
And the ultra-low distortion, ultra-wide bandwidth transducers with significant dynamic range and power handling are a great choice. But it appears the backend makes it what it is, whether that is a Studio Monitor or a 2-channel stereo system in some guy's basement. There isn't some big 4345 passive network in the M2 dictating how JBL wants the system to sound.
Well, the 2216Nd is most decidely not a 150x Series transducer.
And while the D2 certainly isn't a 476, Mg or Be, it has to be a cut above the 175Nd-3 and 138Nd combo doesn't it? It is something like four times the cost.
I doubt there is much cost difference between the horn castings, the S3900 and S4700 casting might even cost more. The dispersion patterns are obviously different. 90x60 and 60x30 compared to 120x100.
I think it is unfortunate that the M2 falls between the S3900 and S4700 in price. I don't think it will end up being a big deal in the marketplace though. Consumers will never find out about it unless Pro decides to go after that segment.
Everything could be a limiting factor.
I don't get this impression at all. Most people commenting here know exactly what the M2 is intended for. That's almost never stopped folks here from trying to do different things with any JBL product. Especially right now the enthusiasm is very high, so it's great to see forum members having both simple and insane fun speculating abut the possibilities. I haven't seen this much passion in a while.
These people are accomplished professionals, no doubt about it. Whether or not they adopt this speaker has less to do with its merits than with the other realities of the music and recording biz. Who gave what to whom for what kind of endorsement and for how long, etc.
Yes, I'd like to hear them, as would everyone posting here, so who'll be the first, I wonder? As noted above, acceptance is immaterial to me, because I'd still want to hear them, and even if the big guys liked them it's possible I wouldn't, or vice-versa.
As for that last part, I think that's a keen observation. There's a lot of really good speakers, there are many great speakers, and then there are Timbers TOTL creations over the past decade. He's at the peak of his profession, with the combined strengths of years of experience, great intuition, technical prowess, professional accomplishment, and superior insight. Plus he loves music and listening to it at home, where a lot of his inspiration for the next technical leap comes from. One of the ineffable qualities of his recent work is that it has soul. If there's an area that might be missing in the M2 for me, it likely would be that soul. I'm not asserting it's missing; I'm stating that it can't be found in the measurements. It has to be heard. Or maybe to 4313B's point, the soul comes from the voice that it is given by the individual tweaker.
As a side note, there are a lot of speaker builders who put their heart and soul into their creations, and you can hear it at the audio shows where they've schlepped their stuff for others to hear. In most of those cases, it's not the soul but the technical side of things that I find lacking, and sometimes maybe I don't like the soul I hear, too.
Widget[/QUOTE]
Out.
+1
I agree with Mr. Widget in that the M2 system really is a tool as designed. The fun part is, it is open ended. However, as some at JBL have pointed out, the D2 might possibly be a bit too sterile for the typical home user. It might take some getting used to and it might take a certain backend warmth. Only time and experience will tell.
True, but I would say that the Soundwebs are far and wide better than the crap DBX is giving us (if you can even call it that!!). We are in the new norm though as far as processing and I do not think ANY studio is going to revert to analog processing. Digital is just to easy vs analog, besides this stuff will continue to get better and better.
For example:
I just removed a $2500 pre/pro from my theater and replaced it with a computer and a measly $400 audio interface and it sounds at least 75% better than the prepro that is less than 6 months old.
My software also has some great DSP functions so I do not think I will ever return to the days of old either.
As 4313b said: unless the curve in the backend is total crap and the M2's just suck, then choose a processor you like and move on.
Always fun learning more.......
Industry acceptance... insider comments from some trusted sources at Harman; these will be interesting and informative, but ultimately it is about listening. As you said, even if it takes the world by storm, it may or may not be our respective cup of tea.
As I type this I am listening to the E2s... and am grinning from ear to ear!
It would be nice if my laptop had a quieter fan. Signing Off!
Widget
I think its useful and re visit the NAMM video presentation and look at how the M2s story is sold.
Firstly the prespective on JBL monitor history and that the M2 is positioned to fill a gap between the cinema systems and the smaller 43xx studio systems and JBL sees a need to re enter the large monitor business. (In other words why are they doing this?)
Then we hear the tried and proven message that JBL has always been about the transducers and on problem solving with technical innovations.
The buzz words are then hitting all the buttons that the recording business purchasing man wants to hear.
The whole thing is it is something different in terms of how it works and gets into the detail of the benefits to the engineer. (this innovative style of marketing is very much the drive at the moment particularly at trade shows and JBL needs to have a new innovative marketing push)
The Crown DSP front end is recommended sold separately.
I guess the distinction here from the consumer K2 marketing is that its a technical sales presentation pitching to the engineer rather than a play on reproduction perfection close to a live performance for the home consumer. (recall the launch of the E2 in Japan at the hotel)
If you cast back 30 years ago to the white paper on the JBL 44XX bi radial monitors there are a lot of similarities in the approach to marketing the innovation.
I think the M2 will be a new flagship for innovation on the Pro side of JBL.
As to why Be has not been used well Mark Gander makes reference to Be but explains the innovation behind the dual annulus principle (ring radiator approach) and use of a synethetic materials. I wonder if one of the engineers stumpled on the idea by accident while he was doing a repair job on an 077 in his garage one weekend? And then the brain wave...hey boss I have an idea for that new monitor. Stranger things have happened.
It could well be that with the power handling required this approach as a better road to take. Also given a number of players in the Be driver business now there is nothing all that exclusive to having Be in a driver.
Costmetically the M2 is not beautiful and is much of a black box fill of tricks. The TOL consumer products being more costly to manufacture.
I don't agree with you here. I am using PRX600 series in my home and my twinbrother (Bobecca) uses Cinema Screen Array in one of the room, you have probably seen the pictures on my thread here.
We have great result in both our system when it comes too how it sound, and belive me, it sounds great. To me, proaudio is the way to go.
If I didn't have any system today, I would immediately bought this system with the Crown amps. A real system without a passive x-over, yummie
I am not saying that because they are pro they will suck... I am saying that since their intended application isn't in home music playback one shouldn't assume they will work ideally in that application. I have no doubt they will work well, but I am not willing to assume they will be as good as comparably priced home systems from JBL or Revel.
They may be outstanding for home stereo playback, but without an audition and more data, I wouldn't make that assumption.
Widget
Home system vs. Studio monitor Bowl 2013!!!!
Studio monitors are meant to be accurate to a fault, to make hearing frequency clashes and balances more obvious...home systems are meant to please the greatest amount of ears with the least deviation from the original format. The best you could do in either case is to loose the "sound" of the speaker altogether..leaving only what you want to hear, the way you want to hear it,with the tonal and spatial balance you feel is correct.
If you can consistently come up with the correct tonal and spatial balances to please several thousand or more people at a time, you can be considered an "engineer"...if you come up with a set of spatial and tonal balances that pleases everyone that comes into your listening room, you can be an "audiophile". 45 years of experience has proven that the 2 are not necessarily the same, nor are they mutually exclusive.
I think we're all waiting for you, Titanium Dome and Grumpy to set up another listening session in Harman's double blind room. K2, M2, 1400 Array. Maybe the S4700 too just to see how both systems handle the 2216Nd from 800 Hz on down. I have very little doubt the M2 will spank the S4700 above 800 Hz.
That would be an interesting comparison, but as different as I've heard 1/2 of those systems in different environments, I'm not sure it would result in a simple or even useful ranking. A subjective opinion of various system strengths and weaknesses as perceived by each listener, in that particular setting would be the result (which would still be interesting to many forum members). Convincing the folks at JBL that such a comparo would sell more speakers (pro or consumer) might be a trick, but TD's a pretty good magician ... Interdepartmental challenge?
Hmmm.That would be an interesting comparison, but as different as I've heard 1/2 of those systems in different environments, I'm not sure it would result in a simple or even useful ranking. A subjective opinion of various system strengths and weaknesses as perceived by each listener, in that particular setting would be the result (which would still be interesting to many forum members). Convincing the folks at JBL that such a comparo would sell more speakers (pro or consumer) might be a trick, but TD's a pretty good magician ... Interdepartmental challenge?
Out.
There are currently 3 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 3 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote