Everest speakers needing Sub or DSP = Poor Design

[DavidF]

I'm just happy I've finally been nominated to the esteemed echelon of Old Ratbag!

I don't think anyone was implying you're old, Dave.

[grumpy]

Lol. Touché 😄

[Mr. Widget]

I don't think anyone was implying you're old, Dave.

Widget

[ivica]

Here's what I really think about the K2 and E2:

They are $40k and $75k per pair, ultra-wide bandwidth, ultra-low distortion loudspeaker systems using the best loudspeaker components available and it would be a cold day in hell that I left the passive networks in them and didn't go fully active with DSP. Yes, the passive filters were pretty neato and all that, before the M2 came out and I had a chance to interact with it. And that is how we evolve I guess.

Hi 4313B,

I can agree with You, but I wonder why Mr.GT had not used One 1501 with much larger Vas, so lower Fs, as a hepler bass driver, deviding internal box space into larger (sat 5cft) and smaler (say about 3cft) box-parts, so lower LF section to be better reproduced. I beleve that the main construction of the 1501 drver has potential for that.
Using DSP as network controller is very practical solution, but in sach case it has to be incorporated with the preamp, in order not to lose SNR of the source. In such 4 way system attenuators has to be applied at the network outputs. Some audofils are not always aware of all such things together, so using
appropriated passive network is much confortable solution, but that require more FR linear response drivers to be used.
Not to mention that 4 stereo amps has to be applied.

regards
ivica

[4313B]

A statement loudspeaker system primarily targeted at the premier JBL Market?

I think the design goals were laid out in the Everest II white paper.

If I remember correctly, there was some concern that the original 1500AL's wouldn't cut it in a dual configuration due to the resulting low impedance as well as the fact that they kept blowing up in Studio use, hence the newer 1501AL with the 12 ohm voice coil. They run circles around all predecessors, offering a superb combination of smooth, wide band response, high power handling capacity, high sensitivity, low compression, ultra-low distortion, etc.

It was never intended that they reproduce the same over abundance of VLF like a 4435 or 4355 did. Those systems sound like **** in a smaller room, especially with associative boundary reinforcement, anyone who tells you different probably likes overblown bass. So... design a statement loudspeaker system that works well in the vast majority of cases, or design a statement loudspeaker along the lines of a 4435 or 4355 that were intended to knock the socks off of musicians that dropped by the local studio?

The short answer is - one just has to know how to apply this stuff. One might do well to always ask oneself "WTF am I doing wrong here?" Harman with their vast array of talent and resources did NOT screw this up.

[matsj]

Have someone tried them with Dsp and so on?

Mats

[4313B]

Have someone tried them with Dsp and so on?

Last I heard G.T. was using a proprietary DSP solution with his Everest II system at home and wasn't ready to share the parameters. I wasn't really interested in the results from an end user perspective since it couldn't be duplicated - the proprietary DSP solution was not available to the general public. As far as the DBX unit, he wasn't thrilled with the limited number of PEQ points. The DSP unit that was being sold with the M2 via Consumer was never considered to be an option. G.T. has had concerns with respect to DSP in the past, and rightfully so. He seems to be significantly more comfortable with the technology today.

[Bobecca]

Have someone tried them with Dsp and so on?

Mats

Everest dont need any dsp. They are fullrange loudspeakers.

They sound good already as is.

[Bobecca]

I like JBL, but I can't understand the lack of LF range in their top tier speakers like Everest ect, and needing to degrade the signal with DSP is beyond comprehension. Quality source components and amplifiers should and do deliver music as intended. There are so many loudspeakers in the range of the Everest price range that do not deliver an incomplete sound, my Magico's cost a bit more, but have full range for all types of music. Very good components like Constellation amps are vital of course, but the use of DSP for anything above basic systems is a sin. My Naim/S4700 setup in my guitar room sounds good now it's opened up, and my other JBL monitor collection works well with tubes and NO DSP! I like hearing the master tapes as they were recorded. Just a thought........

The need of sub is a preference one have to deal with depending of the room acosutics and the system one is having. Why need a sub in the first place?

I have a pair of 4312E that goes down to 25Hz in my room when measured.

This despite that in spec it says otherwise, go figure?

I also have a system with dual 18" subs powered with Crown MAi 5000 and this in a well treated room. Here I have bass power output

[AussieSteve]

G'day all, I would like to thank you for your opinions. That is all I wrote the thread for to begin with. I had no intention of "trolling" anyone, and the initial responses offended me, hence my reply. I simply expressed my opinion to get other views. On DSP, I understand it, but I am one who tries to maintain the purest signal path to maintain original recording. Obviously the sound is shaped by crossovers, however some makers minimize even that with very high quality parts. Even Kenrick Sound in Japan switch out to Janzen ect, but that's another debate about changing the original sound of the speaker. I really like Everest, however in serious comparison to other high end speakers, I feel they fall short on a few issues, bottom end being one. I use room treatment, sound absorption/diffraction ect to make my rooms as flat as possible, and whilst it's expensive I have just made some panels using Owens Corning 705 semi rigid fibreglass and it's been a hoot! When playing accurate components with flat JBL's show me a great sound true to the original recording. Their has been years of talk about West Coast sound and East Coast sound in the US, JBL owning the west with their 1970's recordings of classic rock and orchestral/ jazz recordings from NY. That is one reason I love JBL, my rock albums sound awesome through JBL and the UK manufacturers like Harbeth M40.1 monitors. JBL lovers will love Harbeth, Spendor, Rogers ect. These are replicas of classic BBC monitors that are made today with an awesome classic look! Anyway, JBL have the final say on the direction of the company, I still find it bizarre they make monitors that I have to buy from Japan, I like you cannot even purchase in our own countries regardless of cash. My Harbeth monitors come from the UK, after writing to them (they have no distributor in Aus) and anyway they were happy to sell me some and ship them out. As I had mentioned, I would love to see Mr Timbers and team buy out JBL and become a maker like so many others where the designers own the companies, their passion delivers in spades and most of the good ones have been around for decades. That combined with JBL's experience would make speakers to die for. I reckon the home audio range of JBL are designed to compete with the lower end of the market and yes, that's where the money is, but makers with less capital are making far superior speakers (and in their own state/country!) Anyway, that's my opinion - nothing more, nothing less. If anyone is offended, these are not meant to offend. Simply conversations as though we were sitting together in a pub having a beer.

[DavidF]

"...If anyone is offended, these are not meant to offend. Simply conversations as though we were sitting together in a pub having a beer."

I'm in. One can argue about all sorts of things in a pub.

[BMWCCA]

I like JBL, but I can't understand . . . needing to degrade the signal with DSP

Some Luddites probably wouldn't understand the need for any network, crossover, or filter, either.
I just consider DSP an evolution of the passive network.

And I use EQ in nearly every system in my home: Fletcher-Munson isn't an opinion, it's a fact!

[Mctwins]

Hallo!

The Everest is not a poor design, on the contrary it has good and tight bass and don't need any sub or DSP in a well controlled acoustical enviorment. I have heard Everest in various High-end shows, at least five times and also I have heard the Magico the same amount of time. The Magico, well, for that kind of money has a poor design. Weak bass, sterile hights and no musicality at all. On the Everest, tight bass, clear and natural hights. I have also heard the Magico Ultimate III at Munich High-end show, I wasen't impressed.

This is my experiance just being able to listening in hotel rooms, Give me Everest in my room and I don't need any DSP or sub. I am conviced on one aspect is that I don't whant Magico in my room, period.

[LowPhreak]

I've never been much a fan of DSP. It tends to make all recordings sound the same to my ears, like what you get from corporate FM radio. Maybe there's some new stuff happening with DSP that's better, I don't know, but I generally shy away from it.

[ivica]

I've never been much a fan of DSP. It tends to make all recordings sound the same to my ears, like what you get from corporate FM radio. Maybe there's some new stuff happening with DSP that's better, I don't know, but I generally shy away from it.

Hi,

But not to forget that all (today) CD- drives apply a kind of DSP processing ( example: oversampling, Sigma-Delta DAC...etc),
so if want to be 'out-of-DSP' then Vinyl LP, Tape Deck,..????, are the only solutions.

Regards
Ivica