|
Post by Quint on Oct 16, 2018 16:52:33 GMT -6
"Above though"? I didn't quite follow you. Directly above I said this about the 708 series : First thoughts in comparison to the LSR28P's I've been using successfully (!!!) for over a decade...
They are smaller They are lighter They are louder They have more headroom They are not as harsh when pushed REALLY loud They are not as low mid bloated They are cleaner and more hi-fi They have a MUCH HUGER sweet spot (even when I set them on top of the LSR's and they were 2 feet over my head... They sound like I already had stuff mastered They gel'd more elegantly with my sub They are super detailed without being clinical
...They are killing it for me. Switching back to the LSR's sounded like I was mixing in a box with the speakers RIGHT in my face. Ugly in comparison.
Super happy I did this. I actually got excited about a few pieces of music that almost moved me to tears.
Got it. I see what you meant now.
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Oct 16, 2018 17:18:01 GMT -6
I have a pair of JBL 4410s, which are three ways. I like them, but I've been meaning to ship the crossover cards to Jim Williams and also pick up an Adcom to have him mod as well so that I can use it in place of my current amp. I've been debating on whether or not to go this route of upgrading my JBL chain or rather leave them as is, sell my pair of Dynaudio BM5As instead, and pick up a new pair of monitors like the Dynaudio Lyd 48 or something else new like maybe these 700 series JBL. Hence the question about the three way versus two way. I like having the mid driver on the 4410s and have thought for a while now that maybe the BM5As being two way were possibly holding me back. I guess I'm just surprised to hear that some of you prefer a two way, especially when they cost $2000 a piece. I have a very close friend who works for JBL. High end system design stuff. He frequently talks to me about all kinds of tech stuff as to why their product has matured, improved and grown, but suffice it to say that this point in time, speaker technology in the last 15 years has gone through a stratospheric progression. To the point where they can make a 5" 2 way that retails for $1k and people swear there is a sub hooked up to them. I wish I could relay all the tech stuff, but JBL has gone light years even from the LSR series which are only a little over 10 years old. Definitely worth a listen before putting a lot of $$ back into a design that's ancient in comparison. Yeah, definitely worth a listen. I bought these without hearing them, and I have zero regrets.
|
|
|
Post by Quint on Oct 16, 2018 17:34:35 GMT -6
I have a pair of JBL 4410s, which are three ways. I like them, but I've been meaning to ship the crossover cards to Jim Williams and also pick up an Adcom to have him mod as well so that I can use it in place of my current amp. I've been debating on whether or not to go this route of upgrading my JBL chain or rather leave them as is, sell my pair of Dynaudio BM5As instead, and pick up a new pair of monitors like the Dynaudio Lyd 48 or something else new like maybe these 700 series JBL. Hence the question about the three way versus two way. I like having the mid driver on the 4410s and have thought for a while now that maybe the BM5As being two way were possibly holding me back. I guess I'm just surprised to hear that some of you prefer a two way, especially when they cost $2000 a piece. I have a very close friend who works for JBL. High end system design stuff. He frequently talks to me about all kinds of tech stuff as to why their product has matured, improved and grown, but suffice it to say that this point in time, speaker technology in the last 15 years has gone through a stratospheric progression. To the point where they can make a 5" 2 way that retails for $1k and people swear there is a sub hooked up to them. I wish I could relay all the tech stuff, but JBL has gone light years even from the LSR series which are only a little over 10 years old. Definitely worth a listen before putting a lot of $$ back into a design that's ancient in comparison. Yeah, definitely worth a listen. I bought these without hearing them, and I have zero regrets. I've had similar thoughts about whether or not it's worth it to put any more money into the 4410s. But if I were to go with something new instead, there's still the whole three way (Lyd 48, for example) versus two way (700 series JBL, for example) thing. I'm still surprised some of y'all would pay that much for a two way, when the prevailing wisdom (at least as far as I've been aware) has been that three ways were inherently better. Maybe things have changed on that front though? I'll admit I haven't been paying a ton of attention to new monitors for a while, but the new Lyd 48s did grab my attention. Dynaudios and JBLs have long been two of my favorite monitor makers.
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 15,012
|
Post by ericn on Oct 16, 2018 17:54:52 GMT -6
I have a very close friend who works for JBL. High end system design stuff. He frequently talks to me about all kinds of tech stuff as to why their product has matured, improved and grown, but suffice it to say that this point in time, speaker technology in the last 15 years has gone through a stratospheric progression. To the point where they can make a 5" 2 way that retails for $1k and people swear there is a sub hooked up to them. I wish I could relay all the tech stuff, but JBL has gone light years even from the LSR series which are only a little over 10 years old. Definitely worth a listen before putting a lot of $$ back into a design that's ancient in comparison. Yeah, definitely worth a listen. I bought these without hearing them, and I have zero regrets. I've had similar thoughts about whether or not it's worth it to put any more money into the 4410s. But if I were to go with something new instead, there's still the whole three way (Lyd 48, for example) versus two way (700 series JBL, for example) thing. I'm still surprised some of y'all would pay that much for a two way, when the prevailing wisdom (at least as far as I've been aware) has been that three ways were inherently better. Maybe things have changed on that front though? I'll admit I haven't been paying a ton of attention to new monitors for a while, but the new Lyd 48s did grab my attention. Three way is not inherently better all other things being equal, they will probably go deeper but nothing says they will be better. Some will argue that the crossover frequency’s will be better for voice, but that isn’t always the case. The case that the budget in 2 ways for drivers, especially in active systems will be higher per driver and possibly yield better results, but there are $35 drivers that will hold their own against $1000 drivers. A speaker system is the sum of its own parts and is best judged on what that system can do rather than in broad strokes based on type. A pair of 4410’s can be a nice system, but I will say this in the very, very brief time I got to hear the 708’s they were next to JBL’s big mega buck statement and I was disappointed that they kept switching over to the Gigantic wallet suckers! I found the 708’s much more to my liking.
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Oct 16, 2018 21:57:07 GMT -6
I have a very close friend who works for JBL. High end system design stuff. He frequently talks to me about all kinds of tech stuff as to why their product has matured, improved and grown, but suffice it to say that this point in time, speaker technology in the last 15 years has gone through a stratospheric progression. To the point where they can make a 5" 2 way that retails for $1k and people swear there is a sub hooked up to them. I wish I could relay all the tech stuff, but JBL has gone light years even from the LSR series which are only a little over 10 years old. Definitely worth a listen before putting a lot of $$ back into a design that's ancient in comparison. Yeah, definitely worth a listen. I bought these without hearing them, and I have zero regrets. I've had similar thoughts about whether or not it's worth it to put any more money into the 4410s. But if I were to go with something new instead, there's still the whole three way (Lyd 48, for example) versus two way (700 series JBL, for example) thing. I'm still surprised some of y'all would pay that much for a two way, when the prevailing wisdom (at least as far as I've been aware) has been that three ways were inherently better. Maybe things have changed on that front though? I'll admit I haven't been paying a ton of attention to new monitors for a while, but the new Lyd 48s did grab my attention. Dynaudios and JBLs have long been two of my favorite monitor makers. ?? I'll pay whatever is in my budget for whatever sounds great and helps me mix music better. Doesn't matter if it's 2 or 3 or 4 way. I've always been under the impression that the more drivers and crossovers, the more difficult the design becomes, but I'm no speaker designer. Whatever works and sounds good is good IMO. Listen - and if possible use for awhile. <thumbsup>
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 15,012
|
Post by ericn on Oct 17, 2018 7:15:32 GMT -6
I've had similar thoughts about whether or not it's worth it to put any more money into the 4410s. But if I were to go with something new instead, there's still the whole three way (Lyd 48, for example) versus two way (700 series JBL, for example) thing. I'm still surprised some of y'all would pay that much for a two way, when the prevailing wisdom (at least as far as I've been aware) has been that three ways were inherently better. Maybe things have changed on that front though? I'll admit I haven't been paying a ton of attention to new monitors for a while, but the new Lyd 48s did grab my attention. Dynaudios and JBLs have long been two of my favorite monitor makers. ?? I'll pay whatever is in my budget for whatever sounds great and helps me mix music better. Doesn't matter if it's 2 or 3 or 4 way. I've always been under the impression that the more drivers and crossovers, the more difficult the design becomes, but I'm no speaker designer. Whatever works and sounds good is good IMO. Listen - and if possible use for awhile. <thumbsup> Again it’s all trade offs and priorities, every decision has its price. Then when one adds in the designers taste in what a speaker should sound like it all gets complicated. Designers can’t. Even agree on what full range means. I’ll say it again; all speakers suck when compared to the real thing, it’s all about knowing how the speaker your using sucks that matters.
|
|
|
Post by Quint on Oct 17, 2018 7:57:26 GMT -6
I've had similar thoughts about whether or not it's worth it to put any more money into the 4410s. But if I were to go with something new instead, there's still the whole three way (Lyd 48, for example) versus two way (700 series JBL, for example) thing. I'm still surprised some of y'all would pay that much for a two way, when the prevailing wisdom (at least as far as I've been aware) has been that three ways were inherently better. Maybe things have changed on that front though? I'll admit I haven't been paying a ton of attention to new monitors for a while, but the new Lyd 48s did grab my attention. Dynaudios and JBLs have long been two of my favorite monitor makers. ?? I'll pay whatever is in my budget for whatever sounds great and helps me mix music better. Doesn't matter if it's 2 or 3 or 4 way. I've always been under the impression that the more drivers and crossovers, the more difficult the design becomes, but I'm no speaker designer. Whatever works and sounds good is good IMO. Listen - and if possible use for awhile. <thumbsup> My limited understanding of two way versus three way was that three way (or "x" way) was supposed to be "better" because you essentially didn't have to design drivers that had to accurately represent as wide a frequency range as you did with two ways, hence allowing those three drivers to more narrowly focus and not have to carry quite as big an individual load. All that being said, I realize dsp is now becoming more common and I guess other advancements have happened as well. Like I said, I haven't kept up with the latest and greatest in monitors for quite some time, so I was surprised to hear that people were shelling out that much money for two ways. I had previously only been looking at three ways like the Lyd 48, so I guess now maybe I need to consider some two ways like the JBL 700s as well.
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 15,012
|
Post by ericn on Oct 17, 2018 8:52:29 GMT -6
?? I'll pay whatever is in my budget for whatever sounds great and helps me mix music better. Doesn't matter if it's 2 or 3 or 4 way. I've always been under the impression that the more drivers and crossovers, the more difficult the design becomes, but I'm no speaker designer. Whatever works and sounds good is good IMO. Listen - and if possible use for awhile. <thumbsup> My limited understanding of two way versus three way was that three way (or "x" way) was supposed to be "better" because you essentially didn't have to design drivers that had to accurately represent as wide a frequency range as you did with two ways, hence allowing those three drivers to more narrowly focus and not have to carry quite as big an individual load. All that being said, I realize dsp is now becoming more common and I guess other advancements have happened as well. Like I said, I haven't kept up with the latest and greatest in monitors for quite some time, so I was surprised to hear that people were shelling out that much money for two ways. I had previously only been looking at three ways like the Lyd 48, so I guess now maybe I need to consider some two ways like the JBL 700s as well. Do keep in mind the Dynaudio mid is a favorite of many and Chinese Copies can be found in $20k speakers, but again don’t make judgements based on specs, you have to listen. DSP is great for adjusting freq response or some time domain issues, but can’t help with distortion and you better like that AD and DA the speaker manufacturer is using because your going to hear everything through it.
|
|
|
Post by Quint on Oct 17, 2018 9:21:25 GMT -6
My limited understanding of two way versus three way was that three way (or "x" way) was supposed to be "better" because you essentially didn't have to design drivers that had to accurately represent as wide a frequency range as you did with two ways, hence allowing those three drivers to more narrowly focus and not have to carry quite as big an individual load. All that being said, I realize dsp is now becoming more common and I guess other advancements have happened as well. Like I said, I haven't kept up with the latest and greatest in monitors for quite some time, so I was surprised to hear that people were shelling out that much money for two ways. I had previously only been looking at three ways like the Lyd 48, so I guess now maybe I need to consider some two ways like the JBL 700s as well. Do keep in mind the Dynaudio mid is a favorite of many and Chinese Copies can be found in $20k speakers, but again don’t make judgements based on specs, you have to listen. DSP is great for adjusting freq response or some time domain issues, but can’t help with distortion and you better like that AD and DA the speaker manufacturer is using because your going to hear everything through it. I'm with you on ad/da necessary for the dsp. It's what has kept me from going that route so far. But, I have begun to come around to the idea that the dsp might be worth it IF the cons of going through another round of ad/da were offset by an ability to provide a degree of flat response that was previously unachievable without dsp. I've been a fan of Dynaudio for a long time. As for listening, that goes without saying. I would think that is obvious. My comments about two way/three way were really just more of an observational thing than anything else, not necessarily a statement that three ways are always better, but rather that it seems like there has historically been a relatively high correlation between monitors which are considered to be high end in price/quality and monitors which are at least three way in design.
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Oct 17, 2018 10:07:22 GMT -6
drbill thanks for your thoughts on the 708’s been interested in these for a while - did you happen to try out the 705s too or did you go right for the 8s? I went straight to the 8's. Sorry, never heard the 5's - but I've heard amazing things about them. The tech in their LF woofer is seriously advanced speaker tech.
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Oct 17, 2018 10:14:12 GMT -6
?? I'll pay whatever is in my budget for whatever sounds great and helps me mix music better. Doesn't matter if it's 2 or 3 or 4 way. I've always been under the impression that the more drivers and crossovers, the more difficult the design becomes, but I'm no speaker designer. Whatever works and sounds good is good IMO. Listen - and if possible use for awhile. <thumbsup> My limited understanding of two way versus three way was that three way (or "x" way) was supposed to be "better" because you essentially didn't have to design drivers that had to accurately represent as wide a frequency range as you did with two ways, hence allowing those three drivers to more narrowly focus and not have to carry quite as big an individual load. All that being said, I realize dsp is now becoming more common and I guess other advancements have happened as well. Like I said, I haven't kept up with the latest and greatest in monitors for quite some time, so I was surprised to hear that people were shelling out that much money for two ways. I had previously only been looking at three ways like the Lyd 48, so I guess now maybe I need to consider some two ways like the JBL 700s as well. Shane - I've always been under the impression that it's the crossover that's the troublesome point in speaker design. But again, I'm no speaker designer, and I sure don't understand all the new-tech stuff that's breaking the old rules. Good luck on your search, and let us know where you end up.
|
|
|
Post by Quint on Oct 17, 2018 10:52:31 GMT -6
My limited understanding of two way versus three way was that three way (or "x" way) was supposed to be "better" because you essentially didn't have to design drivers that had to accurately represent as wide a frequency range as you did with two ways, hence allowing those three drivers to more narrowly focus and not have to carry quite as big an individual load. All that being said, I realize dsp is now becoming more common and I guess other advancements have happened as well. Like I said, I haven't kept up with the latest and greatest in monitors for quite some time, so I was surprised to hear that people were shelling out that much money for two ways. I had previously only been looking at three ways like the Lyd 48, so I guess now maybe I need to consider some two ways like the JBL 700s as well. Shane - I've always been under the impression that it's the crossover that's the troublesome point in speaker design. But again, I'm no speaker designer, and I sure don't understand all the new-tech stuff that's breaking the old rules. Good luck on your search, and let us know where you end up. I'm no speaker designer either. Best as I can recall, I think I remember something about the tradeoff being that more drivers meant less required of each driver but more of the crossover(s) themselves. Which, based on the little bit I've read, the dsp is supposed help fine tune those crossovers or something like that. Again I'm no speaker designer either. It does seem like there have been some pretty big advances in some of this stuff though since I last went a real hunt for a new pair of monitors. The Lyd 48s are definitely on my list, but, as I'm already a fan of JBLs as it is, the 705 will probably go on that list now too. The 708s are unfortunately more than I can swing at $4k for the pair. I'm looking at monitors which are more in the $2k to $2.5k range for a pair.
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 15,012
|
Post by ericn on Oct 18, 2018 7:14:50 GMT -6
?? I'll pay whatever is in my budget for whatever sounds great and helps me mix music better. Doesn't matter if it's 2 or 3 or 4 way. I've always been under the impression that the more drivers and crossovers, the more difficult the design becomes, but I'm no speaker designer. Whatever works and sounds good is good IMO. Listen - and if possible use for awhile. <thumbsup> My limited understanding of two way versus three way was that three way (or "x" way) was supposed to be "better" because you essentially didn't have to design drivers that had to accurately represent as wide a frequency range as you did with two ways, hence allowing those three drivers to more narrowly focus and not have to carry quite as big an individual load. All that being said, I realize dsp is now becoming more common and I guess other advancements have happened as well. Like I said, I haven't kept up with the latest and greatest in monitors for quite some time, so I was surprised to hear that people were shelling out that much money for two ways. I had previously only been looking at three ways like the Lyd 48, so I guess now maybe I need to consider some two ways like the JBL 700s as well. Your not wrong in theory, the thing is often 2 drivers just work together in a very magical way. You put a mid driver in there and the magic disappears. Also you have to keep in mind that 3wYs in most cases work best at greater distance. You also have to factor in physical size, dispersion, amplifier load, not to mention the effects of the crossover filters and complexity.
|
|
|
Post by Quint on Oct 18, 2018 15:09:09 GMT -6
My limited understanding of two way versus three way was that three way (or "x" way) was supposed to be "better" because you essentially didn't have to design drivers that had to accurately represent as wide a frequency range as you did with two ways, hence allowing those three drivers to more narrowly focus and not have to carry quite as big an individual load. All that being said, I realize dsp is now becoming more common and I guess other advancements have happened as well. Like I said, I haven't kept up with the latest and greatest in monitors for quite some time, so I was surprised to hear that people were shelling out that much money for two ways. I had previously only been looking at three ways like the Lyd 48, so I guess now maybe I need to consider some two ways like the JBL 700s as well. Your not wrong in theory, the thing is often 2 drivers just work together in a very magical way. You put a mid driver in there and the magic disappears. Also you have to keep in mind that 3wYs in most cases work best at greater distance. You also have to factor in physical size, dispersion, amplifier load, not to mention the effects of the crossover filters and complexity. Can't a guy just be surprised?
|
|