Monitors or Full Size Spekers

[GranteedEV]

It is highly unlikely that the JBLs will sound like Salon 2s. They have different cabinets, with completely different shapes, housing completely different drivers, using a different crossover network. What is the similarity other than they are made by the same company?

Despite those things, they are fundamentally very similar.

THe Salons might have slightly better imaging, and a probably cleaner measuring top octave. But I'm not sure that would be a major difference between 100hz to 10khz. Both are +/- 1db speakers with a similary very smooth off-axis, and very well behaved drivers/crossovers(also, LR4 slopes are used in both speakers). I can't comment on the audible differences between the Titanium tweeter and Be tweeters though. Measurably, neither appears to break up below 20khz - but I won't go down that road *shrug*. I'll say that not all Ti tweeters sound the same though.

The other possible difference i can see is that the JBL is a bit less room sensitive in the upper bass range. Tough for me to explain why. Not really worthwhile since the Salons have bass switches anyways.

Does that mean they sound identical? Maybe not. But I'd bet you'd have a tough time telling them apart in an A/B within their SPL limits. And on paper the JBLs are likely the ones with higher SPL limits, as they use a significantly more efficient woofer and midrange.

 

[Irvrobinson]

Despite those things, they are fundamentally very similar.

THe Salons might have slightly better imaging, and a probably cleaner measuring top octave. But I'm not sure that would be a major difference between 100hz to 10khz. Both are +/- 1db speakers with a similary very smooth off-axis, and very well behaved drivers/crossovers(also, LR4 slopes are used in both speakers). I can't comment on the audible differences between the Titanium tweeter and Be tweeters though. Measurably, neither appears to break up below 20khz - but I won't go down that road *shrug*. I'll say that not all Ti tweeters sound the same though.

The other possible difference i can see is that the JBL is a bit less room sensitive in the upper bass range. Tough for me to explain why. Not really worthwhile since the Salons have bass switches anyways.

Does that mean they sound identical? Maybe not. But I'd bet you'd have a tough time telling them apart in an A/B within their SPL limits. And on paper the JBLs are likely the ones with higher SPL limits, as they use a significantly more efficient woofer and midrange.

I don't know how to take you up on that bet, but I figure there's no way they would be difficult to tell apart on wide-range music and I would take the bet. Even assuming the driver and crossover differences are moot (which I doubt), the differences in the bass range alone would be a giveaway. In my listening tests I could discern differences between the Studios and the Salons, and my assumption was that the only difference between those two would be output level capabilities. Frankly, if the Studios sounded just as good I would have bought them instead. So if the Studio and the Salon can be told apart, the Salon and the JBL must be an easy choice.

 

[monkish54]

They could have put the Salon 2 in that famous listening room of theirs..

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

They could have put the Salon 2 in that famous listening room of theirs..

It would have been a lot prettier.

BTW, every time I see those acoustic panels, I think "Inception".

 

[monkish54]

It would have been a lot prettier.

BTW, every time I see those acoustic panels, I think "Inception".

That is sooo funny you say that because I do too!! xD

You have a PM, btw.

 

[GranteedEV]

Even assuming the driver and crossover differences are moot (which I doubt), the differences in the bass range alone would be a giveaway.

I believe it was originally posted that there would be subwoofers below 100hz or so.

In my listening tests I could discern differences between the Studios and the Salons, and my assumption was that the only difference between those two would be output level capabilities. Frankly, if the Studios sounded just as good I would have bought them instead.

Fair enough. But i doubt those differences are as great as your posts makes them sound. Interestingly Kevin Voecks had this to say:

Greenhill: Why would a customer purchase a Salon2 if he knows that the less-expensive Studio2 [reviewed by Kalman Rubinson in March 2008—Ed.] incorporates the same design principles?

Voecks: The Salon2 moves more air and has greater output, particularly in the bass. The Salon2's three 8" woofers have a combined area equivalent to a 14" woofer, but the heat generated is spread out among three voice-coils. This means that you won't get the heat buildup that leads to dynamic compression. (As voice-coils heat up, impedance goes up and leads to a mismatch in a speaker's filter network.) The Salon2 is more resistant to dynamic compression than the Studio2 because it has more drivers to dissipate the heat. The Salon2 also has a smaller midrange than the Studio2. This leads to a better match between tweeter and midrange drivers, helping control the Salon2's off-axis response.

Now the first point is moot with a subwoofer. The second point favors the much more efficient JBLs. The third point is the major one between the JBL/Studio vs Salon 2. It's what I alluded to WRT imaging for example.

Don't get me wrong. I'd HOPE the 4-way salon2s have something of substance to offer at 20K vs 3K JBLs. But that doesn't mean the JBLs won't have the same tonality, resolution etc etc.

So if the Studio and the Salon can be told apart, the Salon and the JBL must be an easy choice.

The JBL is extremely similar to the the Studio; much moreso than the Salon. So I don't see how that logic leads to "an easy choice". Being able to tell apart is a far cry from saying the speakers will not sound alike.

Don't confuse these JBL Professional Monitors with typical JBL consumer speakers. it's not boom n sizzle trash or pro audio gear.

 

[Irvrobinson]

They could have put the Salon 2 in that famous listening room of theirs..

They could have also put in more comfortable chairs.

I don't see Mark Levinson No53 amplifiers either. Perhaps they wanted to test in a listening room with certain cost constraints. I'm sure Revel makes Harmon some money, especially now that production has moved to Mexico, but I would guess JBL generates a lot more revenue, and is much more broadly deployed by home theater contractors.

 

[monkish54]

They could have also put in more comfortable chairs.

I don't see Mark Levinson No53 amplifiers either. Perhaps they wanted to test in a listening room with certain cost constraints. I'm sure Revel makes Harmon some money, especially now that production has moved to Mexico, but I would guess JBL generates a lot more revenue, and is much more broadly deployed by home theater contractors.

This room is closed to the public. It's at Harman's place in Northridge, CA. That's where they have the big switchy-switchy speaker thingy. They could put WHATEVER they want no matter the cost. If i'm not mistaken those continue to be in the listening room and have been for years. It doesn't prove much...but if it were THAT much worse than the Salon/Studio 2...it wouldn't be in THAT listening room. It's where they train people with the How To Listen software, if I'm not mistaken.

 

[ski2xblack]

If only they came in Oiled Oak! (Chip, as a heritage owner, should appreciate that.)

 

[Irvrobinson]

This room is closed to the public. It's at Harman's place in Northridge, CA. That's where they have the big switchy-switchy speaker thingy. They could put WHATEVER they want no matter the cost. If i'm not mistaken those continue to be in the listening room and have been for years. It doesn't prove much...but if it were THAT much worse than the Salon/Studio 2...it wouldn't be in THAT listening room. It's where they train people with the How To Listen software, if I'm not mistaken.

This is a silly discussion, and I'm sorry I got into it. I didn't say they were bad, I'm just saying that I'm not buying the notion that two very different speaker designs with different technology are going to sound so similar. Nonetheless, you guys have my curiosity piqued, so I'll look into whether or not there are some local HT dealers that have them on display.

 

[ahblaza]

That is sooo funny you say that because I do too!! xD

You have a PM, btw.

Oh no, another Borg (ADTG) who brings order to chaos from the collective colony... Loving this....

 

[GranteedEV]

This is a silly discussion, and I'm sorry I got into it. I didn't say they were bad, I'm just saying that I'm not buying the notion that two very different speaker designs with different technology are going to sound so similar. Nonetheless, you guys have my curiosity piqued, so I'll look into whether or not there are some local HT dealers that have them on display.

You will not find those speakers through an HT dealer because they are not HT speakers. They are studio monitors and sold through professional audio dealers.

But the LSR6332 is not too different technology from the Studio 2 at all. Tweeter aside, the Revel drivers are all modified JBL units in the first place.

- Both use a very pistonic 5" midrange driver (the kevlar C500G and the titanium Revel) with EXTENSIVE power handling. The JBL has an edge because it is much more efficient, of course.

The Studio 2 has slightly better off-axis performance near 2khz, as it crosses over lower and with a larger waveguide. Still the measurements show very good off axis response for the JBL out to 60 degrees and nothing objectionable and arguably not even noticible.

- both use a damped hard dome tweeter driver. Whether beryllium is audibly better than a titanium that doesn't break up until over 20khz is debatable. I won't debate it.

- both have virtually the same bass radiating area and crossover points. The dual 8s have an aesthetic value over a 12 of course. THe 12 is a doped paper, but it is crossed over so low in frequency that the material won't matter.

the biggest difference I see, is that the Studio 2 shifts from 2pi to 4pi higher up in frequency - probably around 700hz, wheras the JBL probably incorporates this transition region right into its crossover region near 300hz. Again this is stuff that's hard for me to explain succinctly, but it favors the JBL.

 

[Irvrobinson]

Don't confuse these JBL Professional Monitors with typical JBL consumer speakers. it's not boom n sizzle trash or pro audio gear.

I'm not. That was the last thing on my mind. I've been in several recording studios that use JBL near-field monitors. I have no recollection whether or not these were ever one of them. Of course, with near-field monitors you're not listening for pleasure, you're listening for mike set-up and getting the sound you want on the recording. How good the monitors are is not something you really think about.

BTW, FWIW, I use JBL Consumer speakers in my video system, and they are surprisingly good.

 

[Irvrobinson]

You will not find those speakers through an HT dealer because they are not HT speakers. They are studio monitors and sold through professional audio dealers.

Au contraire. Locally I've seen HT installations done by contractors with studio monitoring equipment, like Genelec, and the local Revel dealer (who I did not buy from) uses JBL monitors in HT installations. Remember, HT contractors like to be very cost effective on electronics and speakers, because they really want you to spend most of your budget on the custom installation features where they make the most money.

 

[GranteedEV]

Locally I've seen HT installations done by contractors with studio monitoring equipment, like Genelec,.

Genelec does not allow its studio gear to be sold by HT installers. It does have a totally different lineup for that though. Which are basically rebadged studio gear at a higher price. From what I understand, they're VERY strict about this.

and the local Revel dealer (who I did not buy from) uses JBL monitors in HT installations.

If you say so. But I still have my doubts about the Genelecs.

 

[Irvrobinson]

Genelec does not allow its studio gear to be sold by HT installers. It does have a totally different lineup for that though. Which are basically rebadged studio gear at a higher price. From what I understand, they're VERY strict about this.

You might be correct, but I'm not seeing the point. If it's just re-badged pro-monitor stuff, and it sure looks identical, it's essentially the same. One person I know used Genelec specifically because he thought it was what studios used.

Just out of curiosity, have you heard the LSR6332 for yourself?

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Oh no, another Borg (ADTG) who brings order to chaos from the collective colony... Loving this....

That is sooo funny you say that because I do too!! xD

I'm going to use my Inception skills and implant a genuine original authenic concept into everyone's mind that my TAD 2201 sounds exactly like the TAD R1.

Seriously, after listening to the TAD 2201, I can understand why Jared and GranteedEV would say the JBL 6332 could sound like the Salon2 sans the awesome Salon2 bass. These pro monitors are extremely accurate and dynamic (I'm thinking TAD 2201, KEF LS50, JBL 6332, Focal Solo6).

 

[monkish54]

I'm going to use my Inception skills and implant a genuine original authenic concept into everyone's mind that my TAD 2201 sounds exactly like the TAD R1.

PLEASE PLANT THAT IDEA IN MY HEAD! Then I can have the TAD R1 for a messily 1.9K!!

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

PLEASE PLANT THAT IDEA IN MY HEAD! Then I can have the TAD R1 for a messily 1.9K!!

It was actually $1691 delivered brand new authorized.

I'm afraid only Andrew Jones could perform such a task of TAD 2201-to-R1 Inception.

But I am 100% satisfied with the baby TAD.

 

[Audio_Karma]

What about these Evolution Acoustics MM Micro Ones...???

Evolution Acoustics MMMicroOne - Page 5