K2 9800

[frank23]

Why would the K2 9800 might have a slightly less prominent low end even though the K2 have a 15" compared to a 14" bass driver unit on the 250???

Cheers

well, I have read that flagship JBL models like the K2 were designed for the japanese market and that the japanese like a "lighter"bass. Some say this is because they have smaller rooms than americans.

The specs from the K2 9800 also show that the 9800 is specced to be at -6dB at 45Hz. That is not really low. Of course specs never tell the whole story, but I think these specs match the remarks of mr.widget who has used the 15" drivers himself.

http://www.lansingheritage.org/html/...e-speakers.htm

[yggdrasil]

I went by the local JBL dealer the other day. Norwegian price is NOK 249000 / $ 35000....

[Maron Horonzakz]

Well if the 1500al sounds too thin in the S98000 That can be corrected by substituting a better woofer. That design is not carved in stone. Try a 2235 or even a 14" 1400 with adapter reducing ring. to match size. The bass sound can be americanized for a fuller bass. Even a TAD 15" 1601. The K2 is not the holy grail your allowed to do what ever you want with it to.

[Velociraptor84]

Well you guys I can say that the K2 S9800 is my dream fantasy speakers that I always wanted but they are way toooooooo EXPENSIVE. I mean they are like buying a Benz or something. I can say though the only K2 speakers I ever heard was the K2 S3800. I went to Osaka Japan this summer and went to a huge electronic store and they had these speakers in the JBL section. I can say I was soo supprised on how clear they sounded and the highs were soo sharp too. But even those they are still toooo expensive. But I wounder is if the K2 S3800 sounded soo good I wounder how good will the K2 S9800 will sound. I will probley fall to the ground on how clear and life like they sound.

[Mr. Widget]

Well if the 1500al sounds too thin in the S98000 That can be corrected by substituting a better woofer. That design is not carved in stone.

I would have to disagree with you entirely. That woofer is remarkable. I have directly compared the 2235 (which I hold in high regard) and the 1500AL is significantly superior in every way except for low bass extension. Using a 2235 or any 15" woofer offerings from TAD or anyone else I can think of would be a step backward.

I brought this up initially since Class A mentioned the bass of his 250s were spot on... in his application, I'd suggest that he might be disappointed with the low bass. In a typical listening room where you get some degree of room gain, in rooms where many find the classic JBL sound a bit too bass heavy, you might find the K2-S9800 is perfectly balanced. In my room I felt I needed to add a sub below 50Hz.


Widget

[pangea]

I would have to disagree with you entirely. That woofer is remarkable. I have directly compared the 2235 (which I hold in high regard) and the 1500AL is significantly superior in every way except for low bass extension. Using a 2235 or any 15" woofer offerings from TAD or anyone else I can think of would be a step backward.

I brought this up initially since Class A mentioned the bass of his 250s were spot on... in his application, I'd suggest that he might be disappointed with the low bass. In a typical listening room where you get some degree of room gain, in rooms where many find the classic JBL sound a bit too bass heavy, you might find the K2-S9800 is perfectly balanced. In my room I felt I needed to add a sub below 50Hz.


Widget

I wonder why it always have to be, that speakers are either Bass heavy or bass shy?

Wouldn't it be more correct to say, that they are bass capable, or bass shy?

Being bass heavy, has such a negative ring to it IMHO. It somehow implies to me, that they might be both slow and fat at all times, regardless of the music played.
Anyone else agree?

BR
Roland

[Rolf]

I wonder why it always have to be, that speakers are either Bass heavy or bass shy?

Wouldn't it be more correct to say, that they are bass capable, or bass shy?

Being bass heavy, has such a negative ring to it IMHO. It somehow implies to me, that they might be both slow and fat at all times, regardless of the music played.
Anyone else agree?

BR
Roland

Hi. I must disagree. In respect with those who are more tecknical than me, I believe the physicks? come into this. A "bass heavy" does not mean "slow and fat". A "bass heavy" speaker can be very fast indeed. It is just a matter of how much air it can move (bass heavy). If it is a well designed woofer with a big enough magnet it will also move fast. With my (little) tekcnical know-how it must be why with JBL woofers you can hear f.ex. what kind of bass guitar is beeing used.

Those more tecknical here on the forum may explain this better. I just judge with my ears and listening experiance.

Rolf

[pangea]

Hi. I must disagree. In respect with those who are more tecknical than me, I believe the physicks? come into this. A "bass heavy" does not mean "slow and fat". A "bass heavy" speaker can be very fast indeed. It is just a matter of how much air it can move (bass heavy). If it is a well designed woofer with a big enough magnet it will also move fast. With my (little) tekcnical know-how it must be why with JBL woofers you can hear f.ex. what kind of bass guitar is beeing used.

Those more tecknical here on the forum may explain this better. I just judge with my ears and listening experiance.

Rolf

OK, slow and fat wasn't the best description, but "heavy" still implies "boomy" sounding, or overly emphasised at all times IMO, regardless the music played.

Bass capable implies, that they can perform, whenever it's needed.


BR
Roland

[jpb_dk]

Hi Guys,

I like to add some oppinions to the discussion.
Some might think i'm a fool (thanks) others might say ,....Hmmm maby.
There are a few factores that are for some reason newer mentioned in the dissucions. (wonder why)
Eithere its a matter of superp marketing or lack of knowledge. (the dominant capital that roules business/marketing/probaganda to either avoide facts or publish it.

Well the more i understand every day the more i accept NOT to understand.
So for you who only reply this posts to "wank" please dont *lol*

Well. There are several problems in designing speakers ! If you take a scientifically point of view a loudspeaker would never be able to reproduce music because of the tolerance included in the "link". Fact is, that it can reproduce music. Some better than others.

Dominant factors is to specify eithere
A, what we are measuring
B, liste to
C, or the conditons under what we are doing it
a, could be the question what is the "dut" (device under test)
b, could be the question am i listning to the speaker, or reflections in the room, standing waves (what phase), commercial digital CD's/Master tapes, or music from speakers in a theater.
c, psychoacoustic factors. Colors in the room, the boss is an idiot today, i read a silly post from jpb_dk, humidity, environmental temperature ect...

Aihh who mentioned distortion and outphased standing waves, and reflections???? Never seen it.!

In my professional life i have had the possibilities to play around with diffrent audio-equipement. Mostly the expencive.. Theshold, Krell and ML amps and two Gryphon amps. Speakers, JBL, B&W, Inifinity Beta with 2x 4x "12 (8pcs) woofers with servo, Looks and sounds outstanding. Infinitesimal 4, cheap sat/sub system,... Also with servo on the woofer. Well servo is not the only direction to heaven, but its heading the right direction. Radical control and reduction of distortion.. (a reduction from 25-40 % to only 5% is normal)
Just imagine if it was combined with outphasing standing waves it the environment where you listhen.. Well i listhen in a liveing room and can not (for the moment) force my whife to place flowers in a audiophile correct way around the living room.

Imagine a JBL woofer, that only had to do 30% of its normal job because it was told what to do ???? Servo, environmental included factors act..

Many "big and new" speakers sounds more "weak" than old ones. Simply because the controll has become better....

My humble theory is that the new woofers maby sound "thin" because they are better controlled then units based on woofer-technology from 1980. Thiel and Small did a great job in understanding whats going on in a woofer/cabinet !! But guys many things has been understood since that day.

What about a kick-ass JBLproject with servo and environmental "control"..ya ya i know reflections can not be manipulated/controlled, but standing waves and distortion can.

I love this forum for the many questions (deep or dayli) and the possibility to gather competence around the world...

What do you think guys.. ?
I think that both 250 and K2 sounds great, but diffrent.

Thanks
Jens

[Maron Horonzakz]

Widget... I agree the 1500al is a remarkable woofer but the last octive is a bummer. Its too bad a sub is needed. For the price JBL should have included one. They do in the REVEL line.

[Maron Horonzakz]

As my audioaligest stated Japanese ears are exactly the same as ours. Its all a matter of taste.

[jpb_dk]

DRG, i think at least You, I and a few others are on the same track discussing, what we are discussing and what has happend the last 20 years.

[Maron Horonzakz]

Ive been around for 71. Ive known exactly what has gone on. How many on this site own a JBL S98000.

[jpb_dk]

Maron,..

Count -1 one for me. I dont.

[Maron Horonzakz]

Count me #2. Its hard to buy one on a pension check. So whats every body els,s excuse? how doe,s Japans clout get so mutch attention? They buy the product. While I dumpster dive to find the old stuff I love. If you want power...Its done with your wallet. Then JBL will listen to your input as to what you want in a speaker to sound like.