How is the 4367? [Archive] - Lansing Heritage Forums

DerekTheGreat

09-15-2023, 03:39 AM

Hey Martin,

I can't tell you about those drivers or speakers, but I can tell you there is no correlation between price and listening enjoyment. My experience was with vintage Marantz gear of the blue face era. I bought a 510M power amp and ran it with a 3600 preamp. Damn pretty stuff it was, but that stuff was no match for the "scab" budget Adcom gear I ran while that stuff was being serviced. Years later, I still have the Adcom gear whereas the Marantz stuff is long gone.

Looking at the 4367, I can see I recognize it. Looking at the specs, I see that I most likely wouldn't be satisfied with them; 6ohm system sporting 94 dB sensitivity. While 94dB is a pretty decent number for sensitivity, I don't think I'd be 100% satisfied with it, as I'd need more amplifier than I could afford or my electrical system could provide. Not sure my Crown SR-II or PS-400's would enjoy seeing a 3ohm load while bridged. Furthermore, they appear to be down 6dB at 30hz. So I'd most likely need to find some subwoofers to compliment the system as well as more amplification. Perhaps the 4367 is superb on it's own, but it's running it's bass driver all the way up to 700hz and I haven't met a system yet which didn't benefit from subwoofers...

Robh3606

09-15-2023, 08:29 AM

toddalin

09-15-2023, 06:19 PM

Stereophile was impressed with their "jump factor" but really not much else, and certainly not their soundstage. And while they improved after 3 weeks, he never notes what aspects "great" refers too.

Listening
My first three weeks of listening to the JBLs were pretty miserable. They sounded rhythmically disjointed, grayish, soft, bass shy, and so incapable of creating a soundstage that I at first thought I had connected them out of phase. This confused me, because the Harman rep had informed me that these were demo units, presumably with many hours of use. Yet, after about 200 hours of play, the 4367s had improved dramatically, and after 300 they began to sound great. I later learned that the pair I received had only a few hours on them. Mystery solved.

As expected, the big JBLs proved remarkable in their ability to play (very) loudly. Almost every speaker and amplifier combination reaches a point where you know to back off the volume control: The music begins to sound disorganized and strident, or it starts to compress, with the quiet parts getting louder but the loud parts remaining the same. Driven by a sufficiently powerful amplifier, the 4367s reached that point at appreciably higher volumes than any speaker I've heard in my home. I took advantage of this dynamic headroom to enjoy music that sounds best loud. Played at a plate-rattling volume I hadn't attempted before, the opening percussion on "Five Man Army" from Massive Attack's Blue Lines (16/44.1 rip from Virgin TOCP-53870), a record that has lost none of its rousing, innovative charge, sounded intensely satisfying and yet completely composed.

https://www.stereophile.com/content/jbl-4367-studio-monitor-loudspeaker

https://www.stereophile.com/content/jbl-4367-studio-monitor-loudspeaker-page-2

Ian Mackenzie

09-15-2023, 11:07 PM

martin2395

09-17-2023, 12:26 PM

Hello Find a pair and have a listen. You have to decide for yourself. As far as 30Hz I use 2216nd and you just add a little EQ and you are fine. I have a pair of 4344's that were bested by my 1400 Arrays so yeah those big blues are great speakers but in this day and age I would look at more modern gear. Depends again on what you are looking for. Rob :) That's the main problem, I'd have to buy blind - no chance for a demo, let alone at my own place. I suspect the 223x driver will reach lower but at the cost of lower SPL due to limited X-max. The 4367 seems to have a still suspension too. My heart says buy old TAD but my brain says forget it - no parts and extremely expensive. :D

Ian Mackenzie

09-17-2023, 06:52 PM

It is awkward.

My closing thoughts:

Read as many reviews as you can from actual owners.

As l mentioned the final result can be room dependant.

These loudspeakers need a reasonable sized room to give their best.

If you have access to a HT processor with Dirac that may help moderate some of the irregularities in the bass. Try different enclosure and listening positions until you artist an acceptable result.

sebackman

09-18-2023, 02:14 AM

I agree with Ian above.

I think you need to start by figuring out if you prefer the vintage sound in the older designs or the somewhat "in-your-face" of a transparent modern monitors. The 4367 and other newer constructions will sound wonderful on new material but will reveal the "flaws" in older material. Hence, many are arguing that vintage is better for older recordings but I think its just that newer designs are so superior on new well recorded music that when playing older music it sounds "worse" in comparison. In real life they are more faithful but you do get to hear the limitations of 40 year old recording technology, which you may or may not do in older designs.

Also agree with Robh3606, with some basic EQ with maybe +6db @35-40Hz the 2216 will take you as low as any 2235 and/or 2245 in a good cabinet.

Not all individuals like the analytical sound of a modern "monitor" and some even prefer brands that sport a "signature sound", ie alters the input. Only your ears can decide what is best for you and your room. I have respect for that as enjoying music in your own setting is the goal.

From an objective side the 4367/M2 (and alike) are miles more "correct" than any of the older designs. 2216 is hands down a better unit than 2235 in all aspects. Albeit 2235 is still a very good VLF unit below 350Hz. I would also like to add to member toddalins good experience above that getting the wave guide into "ear level" makes a significant difference and may warrant a stand of sorts. As toddalin points out units may eed break in but maybe more pronounced is our human function of "hearing memory". If we have heard a type of sound we get used to it and regardless if it is distorted from the input we will prefer that to a new sound until the point where we get used to the new sound and then we will prefer that and wonder how it was possible to settle for the distorted sound for so many years. "The circle of confusion" as Dr Toole calls it.

Hence I like the older 4-way designs better that often priced 4333/L300/4430 due to the difficulty to marry a 2235 to a driver in a decent size horn (XO >800Hz). Many try to solve that by using 2360 and other gigantic horns and lower the XO, but that creates other and IMHO worse compromises.

Regarding subs it is your preferences that matters. 2 x 15" with a good power amp is plenty in a normal room. If want to run HT with explosions and stuff you may need them, but for music I would start with just the 15"s. If you do decide on subs (get 4 or at least 2 of them if so) it opens many alternative ways as no normal individual at home needs a 15" "midrange"..... Then you can look at the 4349 with 4pcs 12" subs, one on the middle of each wall. Many (up to 4) is better than bigger.
https://www.harman.com/documents/multsubs_0.pdf

On a budget we get used Array 4892, swap in new VTX waveguides, new SL diaphragms and add subs. With a good DSP curve you get into M2 territory for $2-3000 and some work. And that is a fully active DSP system.

Unless your ears favor the vintage sound I would certainly not hesitate on a pair of 4367 or similar modern designs.
https://www.erinsaudiocorner.com/loudspeakers/jbl_4367/

As for the TAD route, I would argue that the 4367 waveguides (and other new wave guides) are so superior to the older horn designs so even a modest driver would surpass even the TAD BE's in an older 2" horn. I have 476Be's and albeit being a small improvement compared to non Be there are other things affecting the sound in an other order of magnitudes as the room, placement, getting you drivers properly setup and so on.

Having had many 1", 1,5" and 2" drivers over they years I would not get stuck on the on-line worship of the older TAD solutions. They are no doubt very good but you can "get there" and further with other more cost efficient solutions.

If you are inclined you can build your own M2 or 4367 and there is a lot of data here on LHF to do so. Many of us has.

-And whatever route you go, do get a god size solid state amp to drive those big 15"s, they do need lot's of current to come alive. But when they do :-) .

My 25 cents
//Rob

Robh3606

09-18-2023, 05:46 AM

That's the main problem, I'd have to buy blind - no chance for a demo, let alone at my own place. I suspect the 223x driver will reach lower but at the cost of lower SPL due to limited X-max. The 4367 seems to have a still suspension too. My heart says buy old TAD but my brain says forget it - no parts and extremely expensive. :D

I have for the most part have always built blind. When you DIY that's what you do.

So what resources do you have to build??? You have a measurement system and crossover simulation software??? You can for go the software if you go DSP but a measurement system is needed.

All of these older drivers be it JBL or TAD are rapidly ending their service lives as far as access to fresh re-cones. Buying used you can't be sure you are even getting original cones. Too spend a fortune on drivers where re-cones or diaphragm's are no longer available is fine if you are willing to take the risks involved.

I agree with Rob and would look at a modern system. You can get drivers and waveguides use DSP and get yourself up and running to see if you at least like the option.

Having built both and compared them, they are inherently different but are both a worthy build.

Rob :)

Robh3606

09-18-2023, 06:43 AM

It’s highly subjective.

The more important thing is to choose a loudspeaker that will work in your room without being unduly compromised.

Attached are some frequency response curve of the 4344 and the 4367.

It’s a bit hard to make a definitive comparison but if you look at the bass response the 4344 holds up more level than the 4367 at 40 hertz. That 40 hertz thump could be an important cue for listeners of traditional JBL legacy systems.

Hello Ian

Yes but that doesn't address the biggest difference being the modern systems are CD designs that are easier to integrate into the room and have a much more predictable in room response compared the non CD heritage designs.

The overall in-room response is much more uniform on the CD systems. The difference is clearly audible off axis which is why the older systems are harder to get right. You also have a larger listening window and are not slaved to the 2405/077 very narrow vertical directivity.

I realize this is also preference but there are advantages built into the newer systems.

Rob :)

martin2395

09-18-2023, 01:45 PM

Just a sidenote - no DIY, have no skill / place / materials for that. We're talking only factory built stuff :D I've had the 4343 for years so I'm quite used to the old vintage sound and I sold them just because I finally went the DIY route on the xovers and was getting tired of continuous tweaking. I agree TAD parts are insanely expensive and rare, I don't even know if the TD4001 diaphragms are still even being made? I mean, it's robust but all it takes is an angry amp or a rogue tube...do TAD's actually suffer from the diaphragm suspension cracking from their age? The JBL 435Be is also a pretty vintage unit already. It's a shame that JBL doesn't have anything between the 4367 and the K2 - going from the 4367 each subsequent model is double the price, with the DD67000's approaching 100 grand in Europe. p.s Sorry for the chunk of text, I can't seem to be able to add any spacing...weird.

1audiohack

09-18-2023, 06:00 PM

Hi Martin;

Try this:

Go to settings, top right of the maroon page by your profile and the log out button, then to general setting in the drop down tree on the left, then almost to the bottom of the page there are three text editor setting, the bottom most basic is it.

Barry.

Ian Mackenzie

09-18-2023, 10:04 PM

Hello Ian

Yes but that doesn't address the biggest difference being the modern systems are CD designs that are easier to integrate into the room and have a much more predictable in room response compared the non CD heritage designs.

The overall in-room response is much more uniform on the CD systems. The difference is clearly audible off axis which is why the older systems are harder to get right. You also have a larger listening window and are not slaved to the 2405/077 very narrow vertical directivity.

I realize this is also preference but there are advantages built into the newer systems.

Rob :)

Hi Rob,

Yes l was only thinking about the bass when posted.

I think any room is the final arbiter in how any loudspeaker will or won’t perform.
Why l don’t agree with you in principle it needs to be pointed out that the best hifi loudspeakers are direct radiator designs that are NOT 100 x 100 cd in terms of dispersion across the freq ranges

No body told the consumer was the wrong approach and consumers buy them.

My view is that controlled directivity 90 x 60 (DD67000 ect) is more suitable for home listening that 140 x 100 dispersion. That is why JBL used them and they deliberately don’t offer those horns as spares. They are proprietary to the current consumer products.

Those 140x 100 M2 wave guided are meant for acoustic treated studios.

There are many points of view and l respect that.

In diy do as you wish but no one is holding your hand saying how it will turn out.

Ian Mackenzie

09-18-2023, 10:08 PM

These Robert S post :

These are my thoughts only and if any one had or has a different point of view l respect that,

Referring the above post l believe that there are too many variables and inconsistencies in recording technology and techniques over the decades to make a generalisation about recording quality.

Some of the 60’s-70’s RCA vinyl label recordings are reported by purists as the best ever produced of classical and other genres.

The technology, the process flow and techniques used to bring artists work to a listener are many and varied. It has also changed significantly over the 60’s to current day.

For example in the 60’s -70’s in a period when Elvis Presley made his mark an artist could only enter the recording industry through a studio and a label that thought they were a commercially viable artist to market.

These studios had medium to large recording studios with known acoustics and control rooms that met recording standards. They used SOA mixing chassis consoles that were custom configured. Dean Jenson introduced discrete class A opamps in the 1970’s which raised the sound quality Bar for the motion picture and the recording industry following the transition from valve based mixers to solid state mixing consoles.

Rupert Neve’s classic class A consoles complete with custom wound interstate transformers are state of art technology today and cost more than a house to buy.

The narrative is that in the above era the faculties and equipment were generally consistent.

Ian Mackenzie

09-18-2023, 10:09 PM

The exceptions were rock and other genres where live music was recorded by engineers using varying skill sets and techniques and equipment that wasn’t up to that of the major studios.

It’s also important to appreciate that most consumers only listened with consumer HiFi equipment they often tonally modified the sound and much less accuracy that the studio monitors used at the time. This equipment has significantly less dynamic range that a JBL based system.

Technologies arrived in the 1980’s and Denon, Sony and Fairlight started to introduce VCA controlled mixing consoles and digital recording machines. The started a change in the recording workflows where a group of artists could send their individual recordings to a central producer and engineer. No longer were artists required to all assemble at a recording labels major studio. This meant that in some cases some recordings were less well recorded and produced than others because the source recordings were not under sole control of a label.

Ian Mackenzie

09-18-2023, 10:09 PM

Back then on my diy 4343 system some recordings were chalk and cheese. The jazz genres were generally of higher production standards than pop or rock genres. The exceptions were groups signed to major labels like Pink Floyd, the Eagles and Fleetwood Mack who had the funds to employ highly capable engineers and producers and top studio facilities.

The Blue Note label, Chesky, A&M and others were generally of superior vinyl and CD playback. This particularly applied to imported pressing. Billy Joel albums and Neil Diamond were excellent recordings as a rule while Deep Purple live recordings sounded compressed.

There are a number of narratives here. A key one is that the 4343 could readily discern the quality of a recording. It was designed for mastering.

Ian Mackenzie

09-18-2023, 10:10 PM

Enter the 1990’s and the use of the portable recording solution lead to more inconsistencies in recordings that opened up. Digital recordings were being mastered for both vinyl and CD. The source recordings were in many cases being farmed out to individual artists if they were unable to attend an event.

At this stage DA consumer playback was in its adolescence and consumers had mixed feelings over vinyl and cd recordings. Audiophile purists preferred hi end moving coil cartridges to a CD play back and the Linn Sondek LP12 became a benchmark.

I can personally attest that a Sheffield Lab Direct Disc vinyl recording has significantly greater dynamic headroom than its CD version. This is a Fact.

Ian Mackenzie

09-18-2023, 10:11 PM

What l found in the early 2000’s was that my diy 4345 system used with Pass Labs hi end amps made much of my vinyl collection as a so so hifi experience. I attribute this to improved drivers, crossovers and much superior amplifiers that l built using Pass Labs Aleph designs. These were high power SE mostfet amplifiers up to 140 watts. The lack of class AB crossover distortion was very noticeable on the 2307 horn and 2405 slot radiator with charge coupled crossovers.

The narrative here transparency of your electronics and passive crossovers cannot be underestimated in terms of revealing a good or a less than enjoyable recording. This is a Fact.

Ian Mackenzie

09-18-2023, 10:14 PM

JBL applied aquaplas coatings to their consumer statement systems from the 1990’s up till today to tone back the live analytical qualities of their titanium and BE diaphragms.

The new M2 based drivers offer a new approach. But some hifi retailers won’t stock the M2 because it’s too analytical and their customers are put off by it.

That’s a Fact.

The narrative here is it depends on the Bar you set yourself. Better as in analytical isn’t necessarily going to bring a more enjoyable listening experience. Dynamic range, low distortion and micro dynamic resolving power does improve the listening experience.

Ian Mackenzie

09-18-2023, 10:15 PM

Mixing and matching play equipment is as much an art as it is a science.

I Intend to favour strong low end linearity, tonal accuracy, micro dynamics (piston range limited drivers) tonal purity (low distortion) and dynamic range over outright analytical accuracy and imaging for home listening.

Listening to mistakes and imperfections in a recording not in my opinion what the hobby is about. It’s about enjoying emotional connection with your favourite tunes.

This is why l like using a Rega Planar 3 Turntable with a moving magnetic cartridge for playback of my popular vinyl music collection and my VPI Prime Turntable and Kesiki Purple Heart cartridge for my most revered vinyl albums.

I do enjoy streaming from my JBL Synthesis processor when time permits.

My front 7.1.6 system are M2 clones and l regularly swap out for other JBL systems.

Cheers

Ian

martin2395

09-19-2023, 03:31 AM

sebackman

09-19-2023, 06:24 AM

Ian, I agree with you that the goal is to enjoy music and every pair of ears are different. Rooms are different. Preferences are different. I certainly don't hink there is any final recipe that will suit all. That is the beauty of our hobby.

The newer designs are objectively better (as in more faithful to the original signal) in transforming electrical signals to acoustic signals in pretty much all aspects. I think we all agree on that.

When it comes to applying new technology in the recording industry I could not agree with you more. The fast development in the recording technology and exponential increase of competition (everyone can record now), not least from the portability of recording capabilities, has generated some really lousy recordings and songs (even if the last is subjective).

So, from a listening perspective you may well be right in all your comments, even if the objective technology has improved.

And no doubt very pronounced analytical capabilities of a system/speaker would certainly not appeal to everyone. That is the basis for the most of the HiFi industry.

The fact that the tools has improved does not mean that the outcome does. Not seldom do we see the opposite. I don't think many of us listen for faults and the reference of "flaws" was just that in many systems artifacts are not as audible as with a "very analytic setup". They are there, they have always been there but we have just have not heard them the same way before.

My point was not that age of a recording precludes the music or a specific recording from being more enjoyable than newer versions of the same. A well made vintage recording is almost always "better" (more enjoyable) than a mediocre contemporary ditto.

But a well made new recording will bring a new dimension when played on a modern and analytic/transparent system, which to a large extent is due to technology (limited by room). Of course given that the level of craftmanship behind the knobs are similar.

That is just me using too many words to say "martin2395 I recommend buying a modern system, given a choice".

If budget and space permits, buy a vintage system in addition. And a keg of beer.

Martin2395, I would not worry too much about the driver technology. All equipment is made to a price point for marketing. JBL decided that they cannot create enough margin at the given price point with a 4" driver in the 4367, or even M2, so they developed a new unit that meets their needs. Technology moves forward. This is based upon their experience but also where the perceived market is for each application (and the 4" is old technology going EOL). K2 are statement speakers and price is not as sensitive for some buyers, I guess.

4367 and M2 would not get the amount of positive reviews if they were not genuinely spectacular speakers for what they are intended for. I agree with Ian that 4367 may be easier to use in residential room compared to M2 which is aimed for the controlled environment in a studio. There is nothing precluding additional DSP to be added to a pair of passive 4367 to go after the last few millimeters that the DSP in the M2 strive to do. Or use Dirac.

I find 4367 in their original form hard to beat. At prices I have seen on the secondary market lately there are really very few competitors. 2216Nd is a great woofer in the correct box with a well designed filter. However, I would argue that the wave guide is the icing on the cake. -And at that price point the 2430K drivers are very capable, even compared to the BE's. I have both (not TAD).

I need to add, given what I have written in other threads, I personally prefer the 4" drivers but JBL never made that combination. -Except för the 4365, the K2's and some PA boxes (probably missed some). That is why I'm stuck in the DIY swamp, with all that comes with it.

Many of my friends has the opposite view and most I know used D2 (2430K) drivers in their builds even if they had the 4" (K2) as an option.

If you need to play that loud some of the JBL alternatives to 4367 is to go M2, vintage 4-way monitors (can also be an excellent choice), bring the big check book and go K2 or go the DIY route as some of us.

There are of course many other very good JBL factory speakers like S4700, 4365, 4349, Array 1400 and more. Some of them can be found in the used market at real appealing prices. Large boxes are out of fashion. And they do not have Bluetooth built in....

Kind regards
/Rob

Robh3606

09-19-2023, 03:30 PM

Hi Rob,

Yes l was only thinking about the bass when posted.

I think any room is the final arbiter in how any loudspeaker will or won’t perform.
Why l don’t agree with you in principle it needs to be pointed out that the best hifi loudspeakers are direct radiator designs that are NOT 100 x 100 cd in terms of dispersion across the freq ranges

No body told the consumer was the wrong approach and consumers buy them.

My view is that controlled directivity 90 x 60 (DD67000 ect) is more suitable for home listening that 140 x 100 dispersion. That is why JBL used them and they deliberately don’t offer those horns as spares. They are proprietary to the current consumer products.

Those 140x 100 M2 wave guided are meant for acoustic treated studios.

There are many points of view and l respect that.

In diy do as you wish but no one is holding your hand saying how it will turn out.

Hello Ian

Oh OK so you believe the room is dominate and that directivity is secondary. I can understand that however using DIRAC or any other EQ system will be more beneficial using CD speakers.

As I see it any CD system independent of dispersion pattern will be more room friendly. As far as 140 X 100 vs say 90 X 60 I don't see an issue with either. They can both work well.

As far as cone and domes their directivty can be excellent like Revels or down right awful where where it's not considered as an important aspect.

I like a stable image and soundstage and tonality that doesn't change if you move 3 ft. Hence my DIY preference for 100 x100 starting with 2344, 2342, PTH1010 and M2.

Back to the Revels for a minute. This is right from Erin's Corners review of Performa 226Be

"Dispersion and Off-Axis Response:

Horizontal dispersion is approximately ±65° out to 10kHz and about ±50° out to 20kHz.

Vertical dispersion is approximately ±80° out to 10kHz and about ±60 out to 20kHz°. This is the widest vertical dispersion I have measured to date.

The wide horizontal and vertical dispersion help give this speaker a wider sweet spot, a larger soundstage and a more balanced tonality as there is no large shift in directivity through the crossover region thanks to

the relatively steep crossover slopes implemented between drive units. "

I don't understand why you say this "the best hifi loudspeakers are direct radiator designs that are NOT 100 x 100 cd in terms of dispersion across the freq ranges" and why 140 X 100 is limited to treated control rooms.

Clearly this is not always the case. Take a look at the attached non normalized plots for the M2 vs the Revel.

From my own experience my Performa F206's sound more like my passive M2 than my Array 1400's which are 90 X 60 WRT soundstage and imaging.

It's really a mixed bag there are no hard rules.

Rob :)

Ian Mackenzie

09-19-2023, 06:14 PM

Hi Rob,

Sorry my bad typo on the beach should read “while l agree with you in principle”

There are always exceptions to the rule. I accept that.

My point was more around Controlled Directivity over a specific angle and range of frequencies.

Edit
l personally used the 2245/2122 with the 2344/2425 for a year or so in a typical living space with windows and flat wall surfaces. It certainly worked well enough but l subjectively found the 100 x100 pattern of the 2344 washed out or overly diffused compared to the 2407/2307 with a 2425 driver+2405. The later to me was subjectively more precise. I found favour with the 2344/2425 on certain genres like classical but less so on rock and popular genres.

At John Nebel’s elaborate JBL basement we compared his 4343 with the 4435 side by side. The 4343 were subjectively better on Jazz than the 4435. The 4435 scored better on classic music.

I look forward to auditioning the 2344/2425 again in my new media room with full acoustic treatments.

Beyond that l think it comes down to personal preferences and what works in a particular room.

I think the DD67000 is more like 100 x 60 because for cosmetic reasons and because first reflections off walls, the ceiling and a floor are destructive in a SOA home listening room.

A constant 60 vertical angle is better than 80 narrowing down to 40 at high frequencies. However, l will surprise many of you when l publish my 2407/2307 polar response curves.

The M2 and it’s nearfield cousins are designed for acoustically treated control rooms and home studios where the absorption and diffraction is uniform over all six surfaces. If you look carefully at Tool’s work he refers to rooms with uniform acoustic absorption particularly at first reflection points which otherwise bounce straight to the listener. At higher frequencies the sound reflected off all surfaces is like rays of light that then cloud the direct ray to the listening position. The RTA delay or reverberation time of these scattered rays kills the accuracy of the direct sound to the listener with blurring. Moving closer to a nearfield listener position helps.

In a correctly treated room is where a wide pattern 140 x 100 CD wave guide shines. This is well recognised is control room acoustics so the artist and the mix engineer hear virtually the same thing. This is not the case with the 43xx systems.

The vast majority of home living listening spaces have minimal effective acoustic treatments at the first reflection points.

People interpret this as an Imbalances in upper midrange and high frequencies intensity. To temper this people EQ the wave guide at high frequencies. It’s a band aid on the real role of acoustic treatments. Greg Timbers suggested to me that 1 - 2 db per octave attenuation 1.5 khertz may be beneficial when using the M2 wave guide at home.

So controlled directivity has benefits for diy use at home.

Overall we are all talking the same thing just from different user perspectives.

Hi Rob,

Yes l was only thinking about the bass when posted.

I think any room is the final arbiter in how any loudspeaker will or won’t perform.
While l agree with you in principle it needs to be pointed out that the best hifi loudspeakers are direct radiator designs that are NOT 100 x 100 cd in terms of dispersion across the freq ranges

No body told the consumer was the wrong approach and consumers buy them.

My view is that controlled directivity 90 x 60 (DD67000 ect) is more suitable for home listening that 140 x 100 dispersion. That is why JBL used them and they deliberately don’t offer those horns as spares. They are proprietary to the current consumer products.

Those 140x 100 M2 wave guided are meant for acoustic treated studios.

There are many points of view and l respect that.

In diy do as you wish but no one is holding your hand saying how it will turn out.

Ian Mackenzie

09-19-2023, 06:26 PM

See, that what bugs me the most....the 4367/M2 driver feels like a cheapo compared to Be drivers, hence I have trouble believing the 4367/M2 have a more detailed presentation (which I prefer) than let's say a TAD 4000 series.

I agree it seems odd. You have to find an owner and try and audition.

The point made earlier about longevity and the high prices is a real consideration.

Btw other manufacturers like BMS, 18Sound and Radian made drivers that have similar performance but not exotic prices.

While the JBL Be diaphragm is the one to have it’s the only one that reaches up to 20,000 hertz with really needing a super tweeter. Greg Timbers has commented that he could tell if the 045be was on or off in the SD67000. (Details of the crossover are important to understand when interpreting this comment).

Whereas other Be diaphragms with the Mylar surround seem to stop being effective much above 10,000 hertz according to reports by users.

This is where the M2 driver and the older acquplas coated titanium diaphragms win.

A Be diaphragm may sound like it has a bit more clarity but if it fails to offer high freq brilliance is it worth the money shelling out on a matching super tweeter?

I would argue that as a diy pursuit no. This is because the 2450 series jbl drivers are much less costly and it’s a much simpler implementation for diy

martin2395

09-20-2023, 05:22 AM

I know the 2450, in fact I had them in my 4343's with 3155 crossovers and with Radian 1245-16 but would really prefer to stay well clear of any DIY. I want something that 'just works' ;)

sebackman

09-20-2023, 08:12 AM

Hi Martin,

Where in Europe are you?

With that kind of monetary investment it may prove a good idea to find the nearest dealer that can demo both 4367 and the K2's, so you can make a call for your selves.

If it is just a one day travel, which will reach most of Europe, it should not be very costly. There are many cheap ways to travel nowadays.

I have a spare pair of hot-rodded Array 4892 with PRO1400 woofers and 2450SL's on a modern VTX waveguide + needed BSS DSP (and tailored dsp curve). Together with some good subs it would take you very close to the exotics you are mentioning at a fraction of the cost. And they are ready to run. And in Europe. :-) . Pm if of interest.

Here are some used alternatives
https://www.hifishark.com/search?q=jbl+4367
https://www.hifishark.com/search?q=jbl+k2

Kind regards
//Rob

martin2395

09-20-2023, 01:03 PM

Hi Rob, I'm in the Netherlands. We have JBL / Revel shop here in the city but the DD67000 is a special order only, even for a demo. Same goes for the K2's. Not sure who imports the Studio Monitor line but I think it's a different dealership, would have to ask.

Ian Mackenzie

09-20-2023, 02:52 PM

Hi Martin,

I respect you now want thing that just works.

In Canada Joseph Crowe had been developing hifi loudspeakers using an improved version of the Tad bi radial horn. Joseph designs the passive crossover for his clients and the horn to match the drivers.

If you want a nice looking wood horn look no further at a fraction of the cost.

https://josephcrowe.com/collections/600hz-horns

Ian Mackenzie

09-20-2023, 07:09 PM

Buying sight unseen

This may seem common sense but unfortunately people do buy without enough auditioning and without dealer support.

A case study

A few years ago l visited some of Greg Timbers own clients who were interested in evaluating a prototype tri amp active crossover for use with the Jbl DD67000.

The owner of one system heard it in a NY dealer show room and ordered the system from an unknown seller in the USA.

He was using a Passlabs XVR1 analogue active crossover sold to him by Greg. The guy had been tweaking the DD67000 which he upgraded from a DD66000 and at the time l met him he had removed the 045 uhf driver and had it mounted atop the system.

His sentiment was that he was not entirely happy with the loudspeakers since owning them for several years.

A friend bought it sight unseen on the basis of the other users decision.

I spent several days listen and checking everything before starting the evaluation of the prototype active crossover.

The room was rectangular about 20 x 30 feet
There wasn’t a lot of furniture in the room. An office swivel chair was used for listening.

I don’t remember all the changes l made but l ended up with the main woofers set as the inner woofers in a tri amp configuration with a cascaded 700 hertz 4th order + 290 hertz 2nd order filter on the outer woofers and a 4th order 700 hertz filter on the inner main woofers .

It’s sounded more coherent and balanced than it did originally. But l personally found the office chair about 8 inches too high to obtain the best blend of the woofer and the horn at about 3 metres.

Ironically the owner had found the woofer and horn crossover unhappy and he was at this stage trying different diy settings on the Pass XVR1. Unfortunately the output levels of the XVR1 change when you change the filter slopes from 6,12,18 or 24 db.

The user liked the changes by questioned the need for a specific listening height.

The overall experience since the purchase made the user sceptical of the loudspeaker.

After l left he changed it back to how he had.

There are several take aways here

Not having local dealers support to set up the system can leave you in the dark. Hearing it in a show room is no real indication of what it will be like at home. Going off the reservation and making changes can be a time consuming journey. Any loudspeaker is going to need some setting up adjustments before obtaining the best results. A dealer should be able to help you with that.

The DD67000 is very large system requiring a room at least 1 1/2 metres wider than both loudspeakers with a 1 1/2 metre space between them. It’s a very good loudspeaker but users would be encouraged to assess their listening room before the purchase and consider adding the latest DEQX active crossover with advanced dsp room correction.
Room treatments should be arranged by an expert in the field of hifi room acoustics.

When l got back we talking about it. The consensus was that unfortunately if users don’t seek advice or don’t follow advice there’s not much that can be done and it’s best to leave them too it. Nelson Pass’s input was that dependent on the region language can influence the sensitivity and threshold of the human ear to certain sounds. Th I s apparently starts with an infant learning the language from the mother.

So there are a multitude of reasons why one person’s listening experience will be different from another’s. Coming here with questions can help weigh up with a consensus of common sense what to do next. But the decision should not be rushed. Once you buy it you own it with all the idiosyncrasies.

Closely following a know JBL design is a sure fire way of getting a good result. Spinning your own design isn’t necessary a simple and straightforward process. This applies to dsp crossover networks where there is a limited knowledge of the drivers/horn and woofers and a very limited understanding of dsp crossovers. I have seen people spend a large sum on JBL S98000 components only to see it all on the market 12 months later out of sheer frustration. It takes real skill and experience with designing a loudspeaker from scratch and even then sometimes it just doesn’t come together.

Ian Mackenzie

09-20-2023, 07:10 PM

Closely following a know JBL design is a sure fire way of getting a good result. Spinning your own design isn’t necessary a simple and straightforward process. This applies to dsp crossover networks where there is a limited knowledge of the drivers/horn and woofers and a very limited understanding of dsp crossovers. I have seen people spend a large sum on JBL S98000 components only to see it all on the market 12 months later out of sheer frustration. It takes real skill and experience with designing a loudspeaker from scratch and even then sometimes it just doesn’t come together.

In an interview Greg Timbers offered some very good practical advice.

Put together a rough out of your loudspeaker enclosure. Using a passive crossover test board with some switchable text book crossover options simply try the horn/driver and listen to it before considering any measurements. This might include a simple passive CD EQ compensation.

If you can’t get a promising result at that point it might not get much better!!

So try a different woofer, driver or horn.

(This assumes your drivers are in good working order)

If anyone is interested l will post a schematic of a switchable passive crossover.

Robh3606

09-21-2023, 06:58 AM

Buying sight unseen

Closely following a know JBL design is a sure fire way of getting a good result. Spinning your own design isn’t necessary a simple and straightforward process. This applies to dsp crossover networks where there is a limited knowledge of the drivers/horn and woofers and a very limited understanding of dsp crossovers. I have seen people spend a large sum on JBL S98000 components only to see it all on the market 12 months later out of sheer frustration. It takes real skill and experience with designing a loudspeaker from scratch and even then sometimes it just doesn’t come together.

Hello Ian

I have had several good builds cloning JBL systems with the information available on this sight. That's a shame about the 9800 component's and surprising the schematic is widely available.

I don't get the tweakers frankly. If you are constantly changing things how can you not get lost?? Seems like an inevitable consequence.

Also another good idea is to have a reference system for comparison. Makes differences and changes easier to hear if you have a know system for comparison. I have always compared DIY to a reference system.

If DIY is off it's rather obvious just have to figure out why which can be difficult at times.

How are the Joseph Crowe horns and systems?? Never heard a pair.

Rob :)

hjames

09-21-2023, 07:13 AM

Ian Mackenzie

09-21-2023, 11:23 AM

Hello Ian

I have had several good builds cloning JBL systems with the information available on this sight. That's a shame about the 9800 component's and surprising the schematic is widely available.

I don't get the tweakers frankly. If you are constantly changing things how can you not get lost?? Seems like an inevitable consequence.

Also another good idea is to have a reference system for comparison. Makes differences and changes easier to hear if you have a know system for comparison. I have always compared DIY to a reference system.

If DIY is off it's rather obvious just have to figure out why which can be difficult at times.

How are the Joseph Crowe horns and systems?? Never heard a pair.

Rob :)

Hi Rob,

You raise some very helpful points.

I personally haven’t tried the Joseph Crowe horns yet.

The reports are promising. The point there is that Joseph closes the loop by making sure the client gets the results out of his investment.

The particular person l was referring to was using an early DEQX active crossover that promised good results. It was not a passive system.

With something like those drivers and the horn it should your forever system.
I think the X factor is what people say or think they are doing is NOT actually the correct way (per the original design). I heard it and it was not running like it should.

Over on Diyaudio l have seen countless people plug and play with expensive drivers and horn shaking their heads. Not everyone thinks logically like an engineer or has problem solving skills.

About 35 years ago l didn’t have an inkling of how to measure a loudspeaker with Might Mike or how to use TL parameters. If your not familiar with this sort of thing and the technical theory you are very much in the DARK. In the early 1990’s l attended a loudspeaker building course at a Technical College run by an engineer who worked at the broadcasting commission. I was like WTF. The learning curve was mind boggling. The understanding of how different cone profiles and suspensions work is very insightful. It wasn’t till l started to build multi way loudspeakers that l started to gradually understand what it was about. If you have the opportunity to talk or collaborate with people like Greg Timbers and Nelson Pass it solidifies your understanding on unknown aspects of the topic.

In some of the contemporary JBL systems they pretty much shoe horn the drivers to get them to do what they want. The S9800 with the 0435be and 4700 and the 4367 with the 2216nd and the 2216nd-1 are examples of that approach. What Greg did with his tri amp version of the DD66000 was so radical that it is not something anyone would figure out. It’s very clever but complicated to explain and you go dooo. That loudspeaker was meant to be tri amped but Greg had to build a passive system for Harman.

Apparently the new range of DEQX is much better according to Greg. But like US$5000+ it’s a lot to put into a diy project and your on your own.

Reading the Loudspeaker Cookbook is insightful but is not a guarantee of success. You have to work at it in a systematic or logical approach. It might take several hands on attempts before you get the results your looking for. That’s the fun part in this hobby and it’s where you learn what makes your project tick.

A huge misnomer in diy that making or forcing a loudspeaker measure flat is NOT a guarantee it will sound good. An analogy is buying a car. Both cars do 0-60 in 6 seconds. But which one will you prefer to drive. You can’t tell by looking at the specs or looking at it. A loudspeaker driver is much the same. It has a motor, suspension and moving parts. How all the parts function together is what you hear.

rusty jefferson

09-21-2023, 08:02 PM

...Apparently the new range of DEQX is much better according to Greg. But like US$5000+ it’s a lot to put into a diy project and your on your own....
My understanding from a friend who has been in contact with them recently (he was supposed to be a beta tester) is the 4 way may cost close to $10k. They haven't made or sold any products for a couple years now and some are beginning to wonder....

This discussion does seem to come up pretty frequently and I always think about the thread Ken Pachkowsky started back in 2010 about using a professional to setup your active crossover even if you think you can do it.
https://www.audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?29281-Some-thoughts-on-Deqx-and-their-products&highlight=DEQX+Westlake

I found that thread in 2014 and reached out to Ken just a few weeks before the accident and obtained the contact information for the person he's referring to in that thread who can Zoom in and adjust the DEQX far better than you can from the comfort of his office. I gave my friend his contact info and was there when he tuned my friend's system. I should say my friend is a highly qualified engineer who regularly writes technical articles for Audioxpress magazine. He had fiddled with his system and took measurements for months thinking he was making progress. He got to the point that it sounded good but never great. The fellow who Zoomed in had it sounding great in a few hours, pretty much as Ken described in that thread. It was an eye opener.

Not to derail this discussion, but if anyone would like that fellows contact info I'd be happy to pass it on to them but don't want to post it publicly. BTW, there is a newcomer into the digital crossover market. My friend gave up on DEQX and is an early adopter of this product and is working with the company on some minor bugs but he says it sounds much better than his older DEQX and is in that $5k price range for a 4 way.
https://danvillesignal.com/dspnexus-dsp-audio-processor

Ian Mackenzie

09-21-2023, 10:26 PM

That’s interesting.

Please see this link

https://www.deqx.com/products/

https://www.deqx.com/news/

Up until recently there was a world wide shortage of electronic parts. This effected a number of industries include automotive.

They appear to be in the production stage.

https://m.facebook.com/photo.php/?photo_id=742661311200565&set=a.485664770233555

I have no affiliation with DEQX.

It ultimately comes down to having some very specific skills and a big swag of experience if you want to get it right in a short space of time. I know the Widget and others spent a long time tweaking their systems. That can be fun but unless you adopt a systematic approach to solving one issue at a time it can be excruciatingly frustrating. Think long rabbit hole.

rusty jefferson

09-22-2023, 06:52 AM

Understood, but their website has looked like that for more than a year now and still no release date or pricing information yet. Hope it comes together for them soon. My friend is turning 80 this year and when they missed the January '23 release date announced this time last year he moved to the Danville unit. He's seeing a light in the tunnel and didn't want to wait to see what it is. :-)

.... I know the Widget and others spent a long time tweaking their systems. That can be fun but unless you adopt a systematic approach to solving one issue at a time it can be excruciatingly frustrating. Think long rabbit hole.
I think that was Ken's point in that thread. Even if you're extremely experienced and understand the technology, hire a professional and you're going to be happier with the results. It's only a few hundred dollars.

dn92

09-22-2023, 11:49 AM

I did not have the chance to listen to 4367, but I listened several times some M2. It shares the same 1.5 inch compression driver with 4367. For the medium treble part of the signal, it doesn’t reach the performance of a TAD TD-4001. Many M2 clones builders also prefer old JBL 4 inches diaphragm compression drivers, which makes sense to me.I also listen JBL S4700 during last year’s Paris Audio Video Show, using same 15 inches woofer as the M2, and it is not at the level of as TAD Pioneer eXclusive 2402 or 2404. I’m an every day user of a pair of 2402, with active crossover (analog with specific crossover) and TN-3 EQ filtre after having used the original TN-2 passive crossover.If you can listen Pioneer eXclusive 2402 or 2404 and compare to 4367 it would be interesting to have your feedback.

dn92

09-22-2023, 12:02 PM

I know the 2450, in fact I had them in my 4343's with 3155 crossovers and with Radian 1245-16 but would really prefer to stay well clear of any DIY. I want something that 'just works' ;)In France there is a Pioneer eXclusive 2402 like enclosure manufacturer that can ship to The Nederlands.The crossover schematic can be found on Internet. TAD TL-1601a/b and TD-4001 can be bought in Germany. Even if you install the components by yourself it is not really DIY.

Ian Mackenzie

09-22-2023, 01:00 PM

Robh3606

09-22-2023, 07:32 PM

Hi Rusty

I agree for new to crossover/ room correction users hiring a technician is a smart move. Diy can take in a simple task but building a car or an airplane for the first time and you might get qualified advice preferably before you attempt to fly it.

Mitch Barret has been doing similar consultations with audio convolution

Somewhere on the www Mitch has a great video spelling out the myths of room acoustics and the process for how to deal with it correctly using dsp. Done wrong and you can easily mess up the whole job.

From that perspective an active crossover is one thing but then layering over that room correction it’s another Unknown Unknown. What l mean is you have to understand what it is you are dealing with before determining if you can do something about that. Sound waves inside a room behave and react differently in different frequency regions and Mitch explains this very well. My impression is that this is where diy people come up against barrier to success or meeting their expectations.

In some respects your better of leaving the DSP room correction part well alone as a diy exercise. Leave it to a specialist.

Hello Ian

Yes and getting room modes mixed in with crossover settings is just asking for trouble.

An excellent book! In case you didn't realize it is available. I have it on a tablet. Got it back in 2016! Might need updates should probably ask he is on the forum!

https://www.amazon.com/Accurate-Sound-Reproduction-Using-DSP-ebook/dp/B01FURPS40/ref=sr_1_1?crid=G4UMXHX09DB6&keywords=digital+audio+mitch+DSP+book&qid=1695436177&sprefix=digital+audio+mitch+dsp+book%2Caps%2C106&sr=8-1

Rob :)

Ian Mackenzie

09-22-2023, 09:12 PM

martin2395

09-23-2023, 01:31 AM

In France there is a Pioneer eXclusive 2402 like enclosure manufacturer that can ship to The Nederlands.The crossover schematic can be found on Internet. TAD TL-1601a/b and TD-4001 can be bought in Germany. Even if you install the components by yourself it is not really DIY. Really not wanting to go that route, I've built crossovers, did mods on the units - I'm out of that business, I have no time and space for that and it's just plain headache all the time, no more. Just want something that works out of the box, back in the day I also got rid of all the DSP I had. A pair of M.2 with crowns and just loading the presets is as much as I'm willing to do with any DSP.

Ian Mackenzie

09-23-2023, 02:39 AM

That’s understandable

Listening to your music is what it’s all about

Ian Mackenzie

09-23-2023, 04:44 AM

I am interested in the sort of tweaks you were attempting?

Not wanting to turn this thread into a speaker building thread there are a few simple things that can help you relate what you hear to what you measure.

If you have built a clone of a jbl system the hard yards have been done for you. By this a mean a panel of experienced engineers and other people have listened to the design carefully with pitch perfect ears and the system has been voiced or tweaked to what the panel accepts.

As Robert H says use a reference if you are setting up a new loudspeaker, the L pads for example.

Trust your ears. Don’t listen with your eyes open.

If something bothers you focus on that alone and try and work out what is going on. Typically you will identify issues in the bass first. This is where the emotion response from much music starts.

Walk around your room and make a mental note of the changes in the level and the character of the bass. Most of us have limited options for loudspeakers placement and listening positions. However, the 1/4 wave bass reflections from the front baffle to the front wall and back to the baffle have significant impact on the smoothness of the upper bass.

Adjustment of the enclosure forward and back in 2 inch increments will be identified as variations in the tonal balance of the upper bass. The proximity of the enclosure to any corner of a wall and floor junction will be heard as boom. This is generally a +9 db increase in the bass level with accompanying ringing. Moving the enclosure out a long way is a double edge sword on bass level and smoothness.

I will not discuss positioning for stereo imaging because most of us have to accept a compromise due to domestic constraints. The height of your horns is however important to be level with your ears.

What simple amplitude measurements don’t normally show is the time domain versus frequency. Mountain shaped peaks reaching up to above -30 db below the reference level are considered un desirable. In the attached curve a measured one 4345 in my listening room with the enclosure near the front wall and about 70 cm from the side wall.

I should point out that the measurements were taken with REW as 2.5- 2.7 metres which is my desired listening position. This was chosen empirically and married up with room modelling in REW.

Subjectively l did a test firing with one channel bi amped using a Lumin streamer. Two works described the sound. Fucking good 👍.

Now to the measurements. There are a few prominent areas l will be treating with bass traps and a band of selected absorption panels around the room, the ceiling and a heavy rug in front of the listening position. Some modest paramedics EQ will tame the bass peaks.

The divisions of 5 db. Greg Timbers recommends averaging at least 5 measurements in and at listening position and taking an average reading in REW.

In a few weeks l will re measure and tweak the bass with my Synthesis processor using Dirac.

Edit
It’s worth pointing out that the peaks in the bass can be reduced with careful use of Room Correction. However the bass peaks are a modes that resonate or ring like a bell. It’s the ringing that blurs bass notes. Only specialised bass traps can damp ringing at low frequencies in a small listening space. These modes may only congregate in the corners while at other locations there maybe a dip in the bass. So placement of the listening position may end up being a compromise of enough bass and good stereo imaging.

Cheers

Ian

Ian Mackenzie

09-23-2023, 02:03 PM

Hello Ian

Yes and getting room modes mixed in with crossover settings is just asking for trouble.

An excellent book! In case you didn't realize it is available. I have it on a tablet. Got it back in 2016! Might need updates should probably ask he is on the forum!

https://www.amazon.com/Accurate-Sound-Reproduction-Using-DSP-ebook/dp/B01FURPS40/ref=sr_1_1?crid=G4UMXHX09DB6&keywords=digital+audio+mitch+DSP+book&qid=1695436177&sprefix=digital+audio+mitch+dsp+book%2Caps%2C106&sr=8-1

Rob :)

One thing l think is useful is some sort of bass tone control much like a Blaxandell design that is progressive. Douglas Self a UK audio electronics engineer has perfected the design of a very low noise and distortion tone control. Douglas Self was the head of engineering at Soundcraft Mixing Consoles for many years. He now consults to HiFi manufacturers.

The same for a treble control. It’s a simple but intuitive control that a user can adjust to their liking without it becoming confusing like a graphic EQ. In nearly all situations a system may need more or less bass depending on the placement of the enclosures. With the treble the same applies depending on room furnishings and wall surfaces.

The modest use of both the bass and treble can approximate a room curve. But for a plug ln and make it go user the initiative approach of listening is much more straightforward.

Unfortunately pre amps rarely have tone controls.

Robh3606

09-24-2023, 01:06 AM

Hello Ian

Yeah what happened??? You used to get so much more selection back in the 80's??? I have a couple of older Technics. One is the SU-A6 which is a class A preamp.

You have sub-bass. shelving bass tone controls, stereo/mono, loudness, Ballance and MM/MC selectable loading on both 2 separate cartridge inputs. High and low filters!!

Getting long in tooth but it sure sounds great!

That was all standard how did we loose all that?? I guess the push to ultra simplicity robbed us.

Rob :)

Mr. Widget

09-24-2023, 10:01 AM

Analog or digital... that IS the question.

Complex filters get pretty messing in the analog domain and multiple analog gain stages can get noisy, yet even fairly inexpensive DSP systems are extremely powerful and potentially invisible sounding. The principle point of view over at ASR (Audio Science Review) is that all competently designed and manufactured digital audio devices should have no sound of their own and most of our opinions to the contrary are due to sighted bias.

I am tending to agree with that sentiment and to that end intend to create a simple test that I can conduct in a blind/double blind fashion to see if I or others can reliably hear the difference of an A/D to D/A with integral DSP processing vs. a reasonable facsimile of SOTA analog.

I intend to insert a digital pre/pro set to flat response and unity gain into my 100% analog Mark Levinson signal chain. It will be a little time before I conduct the experiment as I have yet to order/borrow the device. It will likely be a Lyngdorf MP40 2.1. The plan would be to route the same source through an analog input of my stripped down "ultra simplicity" (i.e. no tone controls) Mark Levinson preamp and also run the same signal through the Lyngdorf.

The Mr. Widget of a few years ago was certain that the 100% analog signal would yield superior audible performance... the Mr. Widget of 2023 is not so sure.

I will report back once the comparisons have been made.

Widget

Ian Mackenzie

09-24-2023, 11:28 AM

Edited to update and add content

Hi Rob,

That’s worthy of another thread.

Everyone is entitled to their opinions. Not to offend anyone but to the nay sayers of analog its like saying your bandwidth or understanding of the recording process is perhaps limited.

Today automated API and Neve analogue mixing consoles are still revered in top recording studios by artists and engineers alike. Mastering engineers still use Manly Pultec EQ (of anything). Some of it comes down to artistic preferences and some of it comes down to not being able to do it any other way and they mix the best recordings. The very best engineers still prefer the workflow in the automated API analogue consoles. These engineers work for artists that have sold more albums than anyone else.

Referring to this list many top engineers have a foot in both camps of analogue and digital process and mixing. Many of these processes are far more elaborate than a tone control or a set of filters. An API mixer is shown in this link

https://www.apiaudio.com/product.php?id=148&p=33

https://mixchecks.com/best-mixing-engineers/

Bob Clearmountain

Chris Lord-Alge

Manny Marroquin

Tony Maserati

Tom Lord-Alge

Phil Tan

https://www.manley.com/pro/msmp

So when a hifi buff says oh l must have a minimalist preamp and signal path aren’t they just being precious out of their own ignorance about how their favourite recording was made?

On the topic of tone controls l would suggest that the cost of manufacture and profit in the hifi industry since the hey day of mass market hifi in the 1970’s has been the marketing lever for minimalist expensive hifi equipment.

Putting it simply if the marketer tells the precious hifi market that minimalist is better they will pay anything for it.

None of this post is intended to offend. If you want to believe something that is your choice. On the floodplain of complexity we live in today quite often nothing is ever what it seems when you look right into it.

sebackman

09-25-2023, 09:54 AM

Hey Widget,

We should probably make a new thread on your DSP endeavor.

I have had the opportunity to test many DSP and nowadays they are silent if used correctly.

The problem people often encounter manifests mainly with analogue input. The ADC is the hard part to get right. DAC's are cheap now. If DSP's would be "audible" none of todays studio monitors should work or at least get unfavorable reviews. They are all digital internally.

Now the problem in doing a fait A/B testing is that the ADC do need quite high level on the input to have "enough" signal to reduce quantification noise and get a decent S/N. That will require that signal internally are monitored so no overdrive occurs. In the BSS that is never a problem as they are 41bit FP with at least +20db headroom. Anyway the next issue will be to make certain that the level out from the DSP and into the ML will give you the same speaker volume as "direct" signal (ie analogue). Even a very small level shift is detectable.

And I concur with the ASR team (been hanging there for a few years) that the new digital stuff is amazing at very competitive costs. 20 years ago the best analogue was hard to surpass. 10 years ago some digital stuff was as good as analogue. Now digital is better than most analogue. I don't like to say that but its they way it is.

Someone here once said; "You either like the M2's or you are wrong"... Today it is the same with high quality digital.

Now if you want to take your DSP unit out of the equation of sound quality, you use a BSS DSP with digital input and output cards and just add you favorite DAC. A topping D10B DAC is probably better than most High End units even if it only cost $100. Evolution.

Kind regards
//Rob

Mr. Widget

09-25-2023, 02:03 PM

We should probably make a new thread on your DSP endeavor.
Good point.
When I set this up I will create a new thread specifically for the topic.

Widget

Ian Mackenzie

09-25-2023, 07:18 PM

I have posted some insightful links to interviews with recording engineers who’s careers have spanned analogue, modern digital and Atmos.

Perhaps the most revealing aspect of these interviews is just how articulate these engineers are in describing the subtle approaches to creating what we take for granted on a recording. When you hear a comparison of these techniques you appreciate the role of the studio monitor. While most engineers use nearfield monitors today it’s an important part of JBL’s legacy. Back in the 1970’s when JBL were making inroads into the recording industry engineers were innovative in finding new approaches to bringing recordings to life with analogue effects processing using analogue mixing consoles and tape machines. Large SSL and API analogue consoles are still much of that process today. According to Mix magazine’s there is a trend for engineers to use both analogue and digital processing to obtain “that sound” for many artists, producers and record labels.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/bradmoon/2023/05/23/record-roundup-volume-20-vinyl-sales-crush-cds-counterfeit-records-mcintoshs-killer-turntable-speaker-and-more/amp/

On the consumer sound reproduction front it’s no surprise that consumers awareness of analogue sound in recordings is driving massive growth in high quality turntable sales.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=tOB5TBaUKWc&si=XeGI9q07GXt-7NU-

https://youtube.com/watch?v=lPfqh75wKx0&si=Guiau78izkq69F-R

https://youtube.com/watch?v=WYElkX6nLvs&si=2Q54KZ7y_rsbAINg

Today Bob Clearmountain is collaborating with Apogee Digital to develop plug-ins based on Bob’s ability to create incredible recordings for numerous famous artists such as David Bowie, Chic, Roxy Music, The Rolling Stones and Bruce Springsteen.

https://apogeedigital.com/

paulgyro

09-25-2023, 09:53 PM

Guys, lately I've been looking at the 4367's, they get generally very favorable reviews but I just don't feel them (judging by the looks alone and materials used) at their price. My heart rate only seems to rise from stuff like old 434x and I'd actually like a pair of TAD 2401/2402 or the TSM-1/2 but they are getting unobtainium and and AFAIK are a boat anchor (too big for a doorstop :D) if a unit goes bad. How would the 4367 stack up against those big TAD's with 4001's? Are they still much better than JBL? One would think at 3 times the used price, they'd better be.I'll share my story with the 4367 from Jul 2022."The other day I want to my local Revel dealer, US Tube Audio in Scottsdale, AZ. I was able to listen to the F208, F228Be, and the JBL 4367.I thought I'd share my impressions.F208: Sounded fine to me, good low end, midrange sounded natural, top end was nice, over all nothing special.F228Be: Sounded better to me, less low end but more defined maybe, midrange the same, top end seemed more defined to me. Most likely as a result of the Be tweeter?So, I wasn't super impressed with either, not to point where I was willing to pull out my wallet. I thought it might just be a crappy room.Next up the JBL 4367. From the moment the music started my jaw was on the floor. Everything sounded real, alive, in the room. The acoustic guitars, clarinets, vocals, you name it sounded amazing, accurate, and life like. Bass was amazing and tactile. It ran circles around the Revels while still having great tone, clarity and smoothness.Unfortunately, they were out of F328Be and Salon2 so I couldn't compare.Has anyone else experienced this? Is it the horn loaded compression driver that is crossed over at 700 Hz that gives it the life like sound? The high sensitivity? Both? I'm curious but I've got to know at this point as I've got to have speakers that do this, but I can't afford the $16k!"I was so impressed and couldn't afford the $16k I'm currently designing a 4367 inspired 2-way, horn loaded 1.4" CD crossed over at 800 Hz with a light 15" woofer in a cabinet that is about half the size of the 4367 (it's big) BUT it will have the same f3. Total cost will be about $3k. I can't wait!Paul

paulgyro

09-25-2023, 09:59 PM

Stereophile was impressed with their "jump factor" but really not much else, and certainly not their soundstage. And while they improved after 3 weeks, he never notes what aspects "great" refers too. ListeningMy first three weeks of listening to the JBLs were pretty miserable. They sounded rhythmically disjointed, grayish, soft, bass shy, and so incapable of creating a soundstage that I at first thought I had connected them out of phase. This confused me, because the Harman rep had informed me that these were demo units, presumably with many hours of use. Yet, after about 200 hours of play, the 4367s had improved dramatically, and after 300 they began to sound great. I later learned that the pair I received had only a few hours on them. Mystery solved.As expected, the big JBLs proved remarkable in their ability to play (very) loudly. Almost every speaker and amplifier combination reaches a point where you know to back off the volume control: The music begins to sound disorganized and strident, or it starts to compress, with the quiet parts getting louder but the loud parts remaining the same. Driven by a sufficiently powerful amplifier, the 4367s reached that point at appreciably higher volumes than any speaker I've heard in my home. I took advantage of this dynamic headroom to enjoy music that sounds best loud. Played at a plate-rattling volume I hadn't attempted before, the opening percussion on "Five Man Army" from Massive Attack's Blue Lines (16/44.1 rip from Virgin TOCP-53870), a record that has lost none of its rousing, innovative charge, sounded intensely satisfying and yet completely composed.https://www.stereophile.com/content/jbl-4367-studio-monitor-loudspeakerhttps://www.stereophile.com/content/jbl-4367-studio-monitor-loudspeaker-page-2From the measurements I've seen this thing doesn't compress even at 102 db. Who knows at what point it compresses but this thing has more dynamics then anything I've heard.

DerekTheGreat

09-26-2023, 04:11 AM

...So when a hifi buff says oh l must have a minimalist preamp and signal path aren’t they just being precious out of their own ignorance about how their favourite recording was made?...

This was me. Picked that up from the older folks who were kind enough to give me some pointers as I was starting out in my audio journey. 'Yeah, less is better! Everything I add to the chain just muddies the waters, I want to hear it just as it was recorded!" I wasn't paying attention to specs, never mic'd my own system to see it's true response and thus had no idea what I was doing. A good equalizer is a friend indeed.

I'll share my story with the 4367 from Jul 2022."The other day I want to my local Revel dealer, US Tube Audio in Scottsdale, AZ. I was able to listen to the F208, F228Be, and the JBL 4367. I thought I'd share my impressions:

-F208: Sounded fine to me, good low end, midrange sounded natural, top end was nice, over all nothing special.
-F228Be: Sounded better to me, less low end but more defined maybe, midrange the same, top end seemed more defined to me. Most likely as a result of the Be tweeter?
-JBL 4367. From the moment the music started my jaw was on the floor. Everything sounded real, alive, in the room. The acoustic guitars, clarinets, vocals, you name it sounded amazing, accurate, and life like. Bass was amazing and tactile...

...So, I wasn't super impressed with either [F208 / F228Be], not to point where I was willing to pull out my wallet. I thought it might just be a crappy room.
[The JBL 4367] ran circles around the Revels while still having great tone, clarity and smoothness... ...Has anyone else experienced this? Is it the horn loaded compression driver that is crossed over at 700 Hz that gives it the life like sound? The high sensitivity? Both? I'm curious but I've got to know at this point as I've got to have speakers that do this, but I can't afford the $16k!... Paul

The room is a huge player, that's for sure. So is the equipment used and the signal source. Doubt it's the "high" sensitivity of the 4367, (Seeing as I'm used to 101dB, 94 is a bit low to me, but seems high by today's standards.) but they do have a bit of an edge over the F208 (88.5dB - WOW, yuck! So bad they thought the extra '0.5' was worth including) and the F228Be (90dB - Also yuck.) After my quest to comfortably achieve SPL peaks of 125dB, which lead me to dump my XPL200's, anything under 91dB won't cut it for me outside of home theater. Even with 600 watts a side at either of those Revels and you're still only going to tickle ~118dB. We've mentioned compression, but I haven't seen a spec for the SPL capabilities/limits of those Revels or 4367's, hmmm.. At some point, I'd expect the dome systems to run out of steam before the 4367. I mean, could a 1" Be dome really be that great, much less an aluminum one when compared against a 3" compression driver? Based on my experience with my 1" compression drivers, 3" is massive, although I'm not sure if they're necessary as I haven't listened to any compression driver that was over 1". I have yet to notice any compression or subtraction to sound quality with my UREI 813C's, they sound just as great at ~85dB as they do at 120. UREI's are a great alternative to spending $16k.

Side note: I never knew the dual 8" driver + midrange & tweeter would still be a thing today. My crappy JBL E90's sport that configuration as well and were made some twenty years ago. Goes to show that with market-wanka-teering, anything old is new again when you play dress-up. "Why yes, Billy Preston, it will go around in circles, but I don't see this pig flyin' high."

Ian Mackenzie

09-26-2023, 05:12 AM

sebackman

09-27-2023, 12:07 AM

DerekTheGreat, JBL M2 is capable of about 123db with limited power compression and there is no reason to think 4367 will produce less as they use very similar setup (sans the passive filter that may affect). Here is data on driver power compression I think you were referring to.
https://www.erinsaudiocorner.com/loudspeakers/jbl_4367/

There is a huge difference between a 1" driver and a 3" or a 4" in all respects. And especially in output. But the bigger driver win hands down in almost all aspects. With the low prices on the used market there is no reason not to use them today. Pickup 2 used 1,5" (4" diaphragms) cores, get two fresh SL diaphragms and a cheap plastic wave guide (#5006815) wave guides and try them out. You will be surprised.

Very few HiFi systems (if any) are capable of clean 125db continuous output! And as that will permanently damage your hearing if listened to during long periods I suggest that may not the best yardstick. Maybe you are referring to "peak" and that is something different. as in dynamics capability.

Also worth taking into consideration is the Fletcher Munson curves which imply that the FR sensitivity of the hearing changes at different sound levels. And it certainly does at 125db.

Ian, I agree that there are very good analogue electronics and the Benchmark AHB2 is probably one of the best power amps available at any price. However, there are today digital alternatives at a lower price point that will give all those well built analogue units a real run for the money. And some of them are balanced in/out so they are built for 600 ohms.

Get one and try. I did and was pleasantly surprised. Check over at ASR forum as he regularly test them (and all sorts of audio) with the market leading and very expensive Audio Precision measuring rig.

Kind regards
//Rob

DerekTheGreat

09-27-2023, 04:19 AM

A lot of consumer HiFi electronics was bad in terms of transparency in the 70’s and 80’s as they hadn’t mastered how to make something solid state sound good. Carver was putting TL072’s in his preamps which are woeful by today’s standards. Stuff was simply done to a price. Only in the HK Citation, Mark Levinson and the likes of Threshold did you get discrete class A circuits. The difference is not subtle with a suitably matched source. With highly analytical/ transparent loudspeakers like the 4367 and the M2 drivers this makes a difference to listening fatigue...

...If you are running an analogue system try and find the Hafler 101 preamp. It was one of the best budget preamps in the heyday of hifi...

"Carver" has become a dirty word in my household. How might a Hafler 101 compare with a Crown Straight Line One? The Crown SL-One has become my favorite preamp hands down. Not that I've tried too many; Marantz 3600, Dynaco PAT-5, Adcom GFP-555 and then the Crown.

DerekTheGreat, JBL M2 is capable of about 123db with limited power compression and there is no reason to think 4367 will produce less as they use very similar setup (sans the passive filter that may affect). Here is data on driver power compression I think you were referring to.
https://www.erinsaudiocorner.com/loudspeakers/jbl_4367/

There is a huge difference between a 1" driver and a 3" or a 4" in all respects. And especially in output. But the bigger driver win hands down in almost all aspects. With the low prices on the used market there is no reason not to use them today. Pickup 2 used 1,5" (4" diaphragms) cores, get two fresh SL diaphragms and a cheap plastic wave guide (#5006815) wave guides and try them out. You will be surprised.

Very few HiFi systems (if any) are capable of clean 125db continuous output! And as that will permanently damage your hearing if listened to during long periods I suggest that may not the best yardstick. Maybe you are referring to "peak" and that is something different. as in dynamics capability...

...Also worth taking into consideration is the Fletcher Munson curves which imply that the FR sensitivity of the hearing changes at different sound levels. And it certainly does at 125db...

...Ian, I agree that there are very good analogue electronics and the Benchmark AHB2 is probably one of the best power amps available at any price. Kind regards...

//Rob

Hi Rob,

123dB continuous? That would put it over it's maximum recommended power of 300 watts RMS. Although I tend to look at maximum recommended power ratings as suggestions, I like to double them. The L150A's I had didn't really come alive until I threw 600 watts at them. Would be hard for me to try that with the 4367 as it's system impedance of 6 Ohms means none of the amplifiers I have would be comfortable driving them while bridged.

I was indeed referring to peak SPL levels. I start to see clip lights on my amplifier and so I won't run it any harder. For reasons you mentioned, I also don't listen there for longer than twenty or thirty seconds at a time, hurts the hears, feels like pressure on them. Although if I get to that point, I petty much have to shut the whole system down, as it is then not comfortable to listen at any volume. That's also what I meant by "compression." I'll admit, I do not understand the technical as well as most here, but comment anyway as I hope I'm not the only laymen who tries to play with audio.

Anyway, sometimes, those instrumental solos just call for the SPL's. For example, I cannot listen to "Shakin' Your Tree" by ZZ Top without jamming Billy's guitar interlude accompanied by Dusty's bass lines and then Frank's excellent percussion work. Need to feel that kick drum in my chest. The 813C's present all of this in a way no other system before them has been able to, not even those XPL200's, which are highly coveted/regarded in certain circles. The hype from those circles was enough to motivate me to get my own pair. Perhaps it's the magic of the 801C coaxial driver, 2245H and 2215H combo, not sure, but the low & mid-bass presentation of that system is unmatched to my ears. I never noticed or felt Dusty's bass lines in "Shakin' Your Tree" with the XPL's, for example. Plus, the cymbals/high-hat action of drum kits never sounded so life-like before. Have made me a fan of the Police just for Stewart's use of them and the kick drum. "Walking on the Moon" and "Murder By Numbers" are great to me. Tunes I knew before, but never looked at seriously. But as much as the 813A/B/C systems do get mentioned on the internet, most threads criticize them for being midrang-y and harsh. Comments like, "Those things were garbage, can't believe they were installed in so many studios, glad better things have come along." Sometimes in threads like that, you'll find people who actually worked with them chiming in about how great they actually are when set-up properly. Responses similar to, "They were the best selling monitor for a reason. If it sounded right on them, it sounded great everywhere else." It did take me awhile to get there with them. Getting back to the 4367's and to connect all of the crap I just wrote, I don't see how a two-way system could match the magic of the 813C + B460 system. Every system that has advertised frequency response near, to or below 40hz has benefited from a subwoofer in my experience. It eases the load off the full-range system and allows it to play cleaner. So it seems to me a fella wouldn't be done after $16 large, that subwoofers are a hidden expense. Maybe the 4367's don't suffer that fate, modern drivers and all. I've not been fortunate to hear modern systems, so I can't comment outside of speculation.

Another reason I drudged up the 813C's is I don't see how I could integrate a larger compression driver in them. Outside of working on cars, I'm not much of a DIY'er. Also, I've got no room for woodworking equipment, my two-car garage will always house two cars. :dont-know:

Ian Mackenzie

09-27-2023, 05:17 AM

Edited to update content

Hi Rob,

I think the argument of digital versus an analogue is not an argument at all.

It comes down to how your overall system sounds to you? No one else. If you like what you use that’s all that matters.

My earlier posts referenced the continued use of analogue electronics in the recording process. These processes including SSL, API and Neve consoles are designed implemented to a much higher specification than consumer hifi.

I then made reference to consumer mass market hifi which is what the vast majority of JBL punters use today. Only a relatively small percentage of people chase expensive hi performance amplification. If someone uses a 20 years old amp it is what it is. They are not going to change it out based on an opinion. I think the Benchmark power amp is excellent under test. It’s very quiet which is a key indicator of its transparency. But it’s price is above what most hobbyists are prepared to spend. Those who fit the more audiophile notion of a JBL user may well use higher performance equipment. That is their choice , I wouldn’t necessarily put myself in that category but l have owned and made diy builds of Pass Labs power amps which match very well with JBL horns and compression drivers. They are simply more transparent & smoother than most other solid state amplifiers. The diy jfet Aleph power amp if a favourite of mine. See my comments below on noise floor. Greg Timbers uses and recommends Quicksilver valve power amps on horn loaded compression drivers. That is a hint on how to get the best out of a horn loaded compression driver.

I haven’t done my own subjective assessment of digital power amps like Hypex who are OEM for pro self powered PA monitors. Purifi and Nad are applying innovations in digital power amplifiers and home theatre receivers for the mass market hifi. Purifi have some diy kit modules which may appeal to the technically oriented diy audio amateur or thinking cap user. Some of these products have been reviewed in the Audio Express Publication recently.

l do listen to acknowledged journalists like John Darko who is a mainstream hifi influencer operating out of Berlin. John says digital is well digital as far as power amps go. He said a Gallium Nitride Fet digital amp he audition recently sounded more like a high performance hifi analogue power amp such as Hegal. Hi performance analogue amplification is dominant in the audiophile segment.

What works for you, me or someone else really depends on a number of factors and a whole host of variables.

On listening levels l personally believe a reference level of 85 db at the listening position is adequate (if actually measured) with 20 db of headroom. Without sounding condescending this is regarded as the standard for modern near field monitoring. The ear actually compresses if exposed to long term exposure above this level and may result in permanent damage. What matters to me is getting the noise floor down in the signal path with relatively efficient active systems. Put in context that is what makes high performance high resolution amplifiers sound better.

toddalin

09-27-2023, 11:00 AM

From the measurements I've seen this thing doesn't compress even at 102 db. Who knows at what point it compresses but this thing has more dynamics then anything I've heard.

One does not need horns to attain the necessary dB and "jump factor." In fact, I believe that the proper cone driver will provide more "jump factor" because in addition to the instantaneous change in dB, it will more readily pressurize a room by virtue of moving/compressing far more air.

This is just a regular CD played on an Oppo95 through a Yamaha RX-Z9 RECEIVER in "Pure Direct" mode with no eq or room correction of any kind, electronic of physical. Speakers use 2241H 18", 2251J ~10", modified Heil AMT and my own design crossovers. Recording was done with a Nikon D750 DSLR where I sit on the couch. The soundstage and imaging on these is truely unbelievable and anyone is welcome to come by and hear for themselves.

https://youtu.be/WkgqMew8zRo

Ian Mackenzie

09-27-2023, 12:16 PM

I agree Todd. It’s about what works for you.

Ian Mackenzie

09-29-2023, 03:12 PM

The Tale of four analogue amplifiers from a Stereophile review of the JBL 4367.

Unfortunately a digital amplifier was not included in the comparison but this review illustrates just why analogue amplifiers are very much a part of hi end sound reproduction.

Note wanting to provoke a flame contest but would a digital amplifier yield these remarks from a passionate music lover?

My tip is probably not. Sting’s a bit. But l prefer not to sugar coat it when a sizeable investment in time, money and effort is involved.

Sometimes it’s takes more than a ruthlessly accurate loudspeaker to enjoy high quality musical sound reproduction.

Having personally used a variety of class AB amplifiers, digital amplification by Bel Canto and several different class A amplifiers for over two decades l can say un categorically that class A amplification wins the hearts and the minds every time.

In my own experience a digital amplifier or processing can sound sterile. This sentiment is shared in the recording industry hence the use of analogue and digital processing.

The best of the best amplifiers l have experienced were the Pass Labs diy clones of the AX Series which use a super symmetry topology cancel residual distortion components without feedback. I actually sent Mr Pass a review of my clone and he said he passed it around the factory. These amplifiers run very hot with full continuous class A bias and draw significant power from your mains outlet. The result is music with utterly life like presentation.

It’s the starting point for the most revealing listening experience without being subjected to a ruthless loudspeaker so accurate its presentation is too analytical to be enjoyed.

Btw l do use a Lumin Streamer, Audio Labs CD playback and a Prime VPI TT with a Keseiki Purple Heart cartridge and an Ortofon Black Quintet cartridge. Occasionally a friend provides 15 inch master tape copies burnt to a HD via an Oppo player. That’s as real as it gets.

The limitations are then minimised. There is only you and the music.

With the Line Magnetic LM-845IA
The Line Magnetic brought out the loveliest and most realistic timbres from the 4367s and lent them much of its pellucid transparency. But regardless of whether I used the amplifier's 4- or 8-ohm taps, the combination made bass sound slightly rubbery and slow, alerting me that 22 are simply too few watts to take control of the JBLs' woofers. Lesson learned.

With the Pass Labs INT-60
Pass Labs claims that their integrated amplifier outputs 60W into 8 ohms and doesn't leave class-A until 30W. According to the illuminated meter on the front of the amp, it remained in class-A while driving the 4367s, even during loud crescendos. With the INT-60, the JBLs became sonic microscopes, unraveling every mix, no matter how busy. On the Frank Ocean track, the hiyaa-ing martial arts students, who can sometimes sound like white noise, were rendered with rare realism and presence. Even the subtle changes in air pressure at the beginning of certain tracks became easily audible. This sci-fi level of resolution proved fascinating, but I prefer champagne to water and soon began to long for more color and emotion.

With the Mark Levinson No.5805
At the Harman store in New York City, the 4367s are hooked up to this integrated amplifier, and I could quickly hear why. The two made a synergistic sound—more full bodied if not quite as resolving as with the Pass—that was propulsive and easy to listen to. The combination drew attention to the music's rhythmic lines and offered the most satisfying bass reproduction. On "Pink Matter," Charlie Hunter's electric bass came in with whiplash-inducing force and tunefulness. The Levinson's Bluetooth input and built-in DAC made it easy to listen to movies streamed from the Roku stick in my projector, which proved to be a blast through the JBLs.

With the Ayre AX-5 Twenty
When I connected the Ayre amplifier and Frank Ocean began to sing, I might have teared up. Compared to the Pass and Levinson, the Ayre subtly shifted my attention from the sound of Ocean's voice to the meaning of his words. In the bargain, it added more saturated tone colors and more distinct instrumental textures and timbres. Like the other solid state amps I listened to, it took full advantage of the 4367s' bass-making abilities and macrodynamic talents. This was the combination I found to be the most musically enlightening and the one I ended up listening to most.

toddalin

09-30-2023, 05:43 PM

Ian, I am at a loss here...

When you say "digital amp" are you referring to an amplifier that retains a PCM signal all the way to the final stage of amplification, or are you referring to an amplifier with a Class D power supply?

Ian Mackenzie

09-30-2023, 07:14 PM

In my world any that is not analogue from the input to the output is digital. It can’t be anything else under known audio amplifier classes.

Common brands like Hypex, Purifi ect. I don’t see any confusion at all. They are all self oscillating amplifiers in some form or another.

Some amplifiers use a smps for efficiency because a linear power supply has losses in the form of heat. But the rest of it is analogue.

Incidentally l did read several “reviews” of Purifi latest offerings by Hifi online magazines such as 6Moons. My take is it’s still a work in progress. If l was ‘just’ a subjectivist audiophile running these popular wave guides and l owned a digital power amp like those mentioned above and a dsp active crossover l would be nervous or sceptical because you loose control over all the choices almost all audiophiles have.

That is the ability to select a signal path which is going to compliment your loudspeakers and your personal preferences. This has been part of selecting hifi components for the past five decades.

Loudspeaker fall into basically two categories of accuracy:

Clinical - piston range as in metal alloys, carbon fibre and ceramics
Euphoric - controlled break up such as paper, doped paper and polypropylene and miners filled polypropylene.

There is an overlap and this can be with textile / coated diaphragms or Mylar diaphragms or similar

Sometimes the paper cone woofer overlaps with the horn compression driver with is metal.

So the normal choice of analogue signal path offers the user a means of moderating the above characteristics one way or the other.

But if it’s all digital then you are going to find a greater contrast on so called good recording and bad recordings. This is because digital is a very black and white transfer function and the loudspeaker tracks this black and white perfectly. So the hifi listener is then going to be anguished over what to play next.

This is not hifi listening. . It’s surgical listening which is not the intent of fine hifi sound reproduction. That’s bad when what they really want to hear is the dynamic range, the micro dynamics, ambience and tonal shading of each recording. That is what jBL loudspeakers are renowned for.

The surgical listening is the role of the mix engineer with his very detailed near field monitors placed two or three feet away. The mastering engineer then basically ensures the recording is able to be recorded on the media (analogue or digital) and that all tracks have a consistency. Some tonal shaping is sometimes done. They listen to it on two or more pairs of loudspeakers to get an idea of how it might sound at home or in your car.

If a user is not interested in the bigger picture or they pay music to listen to loudspeakers that is their choice.

Ian Mackenzie

09-30-2023, 11:31 PM

Ian Mackenzie

10-01-2023, 03:33 AM

Looking at current consumer active loudspeaker offerings from Dynaudio and Elac there is a departure on the class of amplifiers used.

Dynaudio have had their toes in the water with a few iterations of an active consumer hifi loudspeakers. The original effort was full dsp with room correction. More recent iterations have tamed this back a notch. But still digital amplification,

https://dynaudio.com/discontinued-models/focus-

https://dynaudio.com/home-audio/focus/focus-10

Whereas Elac have taken a more conservative view.

https://www.elac.com/category/powered-speakers/

The reviews and feedback speak for the product.

Getting consumers preferences right takes a considered view of what matters to the consumers ears. If vanilla digital power amps were acceptable they would have gone the digital route. But they didn’t.

This approach resonates with my post above. Handing full control over to digital processing and amplification is not always the best avenue to success in hi fidelity sound reproduction.

‘Oh it sounds good but only on some recordings is not a consumer success story’. ‘It never was and never will be’.

toddalin

10-01-2023, 12:56 PM

Just because Class D amp involves a system similar to the way digital works, (i.e., pulse width modulation or such) it is not digital per se.

From Wiki:

Class-D amplifiers work by generating a train of rectangular pulses of fixed amplitude but varying width and separation. This modulation represents the amplitude variations of the analog audio input signal. In some implementations, the pulses are synchronized with an incoming digital audio signal removing the necessity to convert the signal to analog. The output of the modulator is then used to turn the output transistors on and off alternately. Since the transistors are either fully on or fully off, they dissipate very little power. A simple low-pass filter consisting of an inductor and a capacitor provides a path for the low frequencies of the audio signal, leaving the high-frequency pulses behind.

The structure of a class-D power stage is comparable to that of a synchronously rectified buck converter, a type of non-isolated switched-mode power supply (SMPS). Whereas buck converters usually function as voltage regulators, delivering a constant DC voltage into a variable load, and can only source current, a class-D amplifier delivers a constantly changing voltage into a fixed load. A switching amplifier may use any type of power supply (e.g., a car battery or an internal SMPS), but the defining characteristic is that the amplification process itself operates by switching.

The term "class D" is sometimes misunderstood as meaning a "full digital amplifier" (FDA). While some class-D amplifiers may indeed be controlled by digital circuits or include digital signal processing devices, the power stage deals with voltage and current as a function of non-quantized time. The smallest amount of noise, timing uncertainty, voltage ripple or any other non-ideality immediately results in an irreversible change of the output signal. The same errors in a digital system will only lead to incorrect results when they become so large that a signal representing a digit is distorted beyond recognition. Up to that point, non-idealities have no impact on the transmitted signal. Generally, digital signals are quantized in both amplitude and wavelength, while analog signals are quantized in one (e.g. PWM) or (usually) neither quantity.

Hence, my confusion.

Ian Mackenzie

10-01-2023, 02:12 PM

What l find interesting is that some of the retailers of these digital amplifiers from Purifi offer different flavours on the input board. Reading the reviews and comparisons the users and barely discern the differences from for example the Ti monolithic Opamp and the Sonic imagery discrete Opamps.

However when comparisons of the Opamps are made with a Headphone Head amp the difference are more obvious.

Putting aside the fact that in the later comparison the listening is done with headphones and not loudspeakers why s this so?

Well if we assume the loudspeaker used in the former comparison was of equivalent accuracy to the headphones this leaves the differences in the transparency of the digital power amplifier and the analogue headphone Headamp.

Chip rolling is a popular means finding the right preference for Head Fi users.

The rational conclusion here is that digital power amplification is not as transparent as a Headphone Headamp.

I am not here putting nails in the coffin for users of digital power amps. Moreover there are approaches to clear thinking which illuminate what a digital power does and doesn’t do in terms of listener subjectivity. Remembering that no two listener necessarily have alike preferences the above illustrates one size does not fit all.

I liken digital power amps modules assembled in a chassis from these vendors like buying a look alike Rolex watch from a street stall in Bali.