bruhl001
infinitybyond
Depends on the type of speaker but we have been in the fine tuning stage for a long time.
Dirty Weekends vs JBL Studio 590
- Thread starter cassette
- Start date
Depends on the type of speaker but we have been in the fine tuning stage for a long time.
Or... Maybe we're giving ourselves way too much credit for being that much more developed or different than chimps.
Are you holding those things up as the ultimate evolution of the loudspeaker? I'm sorry, but there are reasons horns are a minority of the speakers out there.
Yes. Physics doesn't care. The cold, hard truth is you can't ask more money for the product in the marketplace than it's virtues justify. What it actually costs to develop and build the product is irrelevant. The values are what are for sale.
fill35u
Super Member
Well, you're right that the Khorn designs have been merely fine-tuned for a very long time now.
Since "what most people own is good enough", are you saying that most people own Khorns or very similar designs?
If not, why not, since Khorns and similar are "nearly perfect"?
bruhl001
infinitybyond
Last post on an enjoyable thread....We should be happy that most speakers made by most manufacturers today can be considered/measured as being excellent and the price of this excellence is dirt cheap. We are in a golden age of audio and I celebrate anyone who has interest in this hobby and their systems.
bruhl001
infinitybyond
Couldn't resist....How the hell do you get what the 590 gives you for 1k without current speaker technology being "nearly perfected". The vehicle... a box with drivers is not perfect so no design outcome can be perfect.
jazzmans
Super Member
I'm with this guy.
and the 590s are 1k each, except only when they're on sale. obviously jbl skimped on aesthetics.
Last edited:
SterlingOne
Super Member
Yes, if the 590's had the cabinets, real wood veneers, and premium drivers found in speakers from JBL Synthesis I'd imagine they'd be about $8,000 a pair. I have a cabinet maker in my area offer to wrap the 590's in black walnut veneer for $1000 a side if I decided to get them. Instead I'm saving for a pair of 4429's.
SterlingOne
Super Member
People who like JBL like horns. L200, L300, 4429's, and 4367's.
Mister Pig
Pigamus Maximus
RGA
Super Member
I said there is no loudspeaker that is accurate - the word accurate in math means 2+2=4 if your answer ain't that, it's wrong.
I said speakers are not accurate - and then I said Harmon speakers are not accurate - where is the contradiction?
Turn your speakers around and have them face the wall - play your music - let's see how omni-directional they are - a live piano may not be uniform in all directions but it is a lot more uniform than a direct radiating loudspeaker. And smaller instruments like Violins and Oboes certainly are more uniform.
And yes there are omni-directionals - I have heard several of the top MBLs - have you? They do a remarkable job of this in fact - better than any Harmon or any direct radiating horn and better than my speakers - but then again that is ONE parameter of excellence.
Driver materials - take a 6 inch paper woofer and a 6 inch plastic woofer and a 6 inch kevlar woofer - tap them. Listen to the difference. Not in a cabinet just by themselves. Though placing all of them each time in the same cabinet would probably be more instructive.
Loudspeaker woofers and tweeters have a signature - and both drivers crossover at various points both reproducing the same "notes" and there is often discord between the two. Ie; the woofer and tweeter are reproducing the same note of a cello. So ideally you would want the woofer and tweeter to have the same sonic signature (sound the same) while doing it. It's one reason I suspect is a complaint of the "metallic aftertaste" used to describe the KEF LS-50. It looks to be a quite good on the graph but it's not quite right and I suspect it is because the two drivers signatures create that slight mismatch in signature when recreating the same notes. There is a reason people like single drivers - the sound emanates from one driver material and with no crossover - like the MBLs they have advantages and indeed One parameter of excellence - absolute cohesion.
With regards to room size - the comparison would obviously include speakers designed for the same general room size. A 2 way standmount that is sold as a front speaker would be or should be designed for a normal living room say 13 by 17 by 9. You can't compare ANY loudspeaker to ANY loudspeaker - obviously if the maker says his speaker needs to be in a 10 X 12 X 8 room and no larger then you can only compare a competing manufacturer who also designs for that room. You would phone the manufacturer ahead of time and ask if the test room is fine for their speaker. My speakers have room sizes in mind and I believe it is stated in their manuals.
The rest of the system needs to be changed because some systems work better with some amplifiers.
Let's say you were using my Audio Note E as the 2 way speaker - well it is designed for the use of low powered Single Ended Tube amplifiers not 1000 watt SS amps - the idea is to put the speaker in their best possible light and you would certainly not want to put the 8 watt 300B on a 2 way Revel.
My test idea is to test complete systems not individual components. I want to see the test that compares elite measuring systems against a Shindo/Audio Note/Cary/Western electric/Line Magnetic/Decware Horn kind of set-ups so we can see how well the elite modern measuring systems do directly against the archaic stuff.
Lastly, Subjects are trained at Harmon/National Research Council - they are taught what to listen for and how to determine if something is good or not (which is an eye roller in itself). If you tell someone that frequency response is all important and here is how to hear flat response - then you are telling someone what is good and what is bad ahead of the test. I would need to see specifically what listeners and subjects are being told to listen for - how they are "trained" but if it is anything in the ballpark of this - it is a tainted test. Musicians can easily be taught these things ahead of time as well.
Lastly cumulative scoring has statistical problems. To meet Statistical Significance to the 0.5 level would need a subject to determine that A is chosen over B 9/10 times. Otherwise the subject is deemed a failure and that he can tell he difference between A and B no better than chance.
Thus - if he can select A from b 9/10 times the subject was able to to tell A from B not by chance. If you add 10 people together who got a combined score of 50/100 and three of those people scored 9/10 then you have ignored 3 people who correctly identified A from B. Declare that the group failed because the overall number was a fail. But worse is that you might throw away the individuals who scored 6/10, 7/10, 8/10. Why do they matter?
Because a person gets 6/10 is deemed a fail because 9/10 is the significance pass to the 0.5 level. But if this listener scored 6/10 ten times with a miss for a score of 59/100 then that is the SAME level of statistical significance to the 0.5 level as a single test of 9/10. In other words this person is deemed to be able to tell the difference from A and B to the SAME significance level and NOT by chance. I have yet to see any test that tests subjects in depth. It is cheaper faster and lazier to add scores together to get results they want and to sell whatever they're making.
I said speakers are not accurate - and then I said Harmon speakers are not accurate - where is the contradiction?
Turn your speakers around and have them face the wall - play your music - let's see how omni-directional they are - a live piano may not be uniform in all directions but it is a lot more uniform than a direct radiating loudspeaker. And smaller instruments like Violins and Oboes certainly are more uniform.
And yes there are omni-directionals - I have heard several of the top MBLs - have you? They do a remarkable job of this in fact - better than any Harmon or any direct radiating horn and better than my speakers - but then again that is ONE parameter of excellence.
Driver materials - take a 6 inch paper woofer and a 6 inch plastic woofer and a 6 inch kevlar woofer - tap them. Listen to the difference. Not in a cabinet just by themselves. Though placing all of them each time in the same cabinet would probably be more instructive.
Loudspeaker woofers and tweeters have a signature - and both drivers crossover at various points both reproducing the same "notes" and there is often discord between the two. Ie; the woofer and tweeter are reproducing the same note of a cello. So ideally you would want the woofer and tweeter to have the same sonic signature (sound the same) while doing it. It's one reason I suspect is a complaint of the "metallic aftertaste" used to describe the KEF LS-50. It looks to be a quite good on the graph but it's not quite right and I suspect it is because the two drivers signatures create that slight mismatch in signature when recreating the same notes. There is a reason people like single drivers - the sound emanates from one driver material and with no crossover - like the MBLs they have advantages and indeed One parameter of excellence - absolute cohesion.
With regards to room size - the comparison would obviously include speakers designed for the same general room size. A 2 way standmount that is sold as a front speaker would be or should be designed for a normal living room say 13 by 17 by 9. You can't compare ANY loudspeaker to ANY loudspeaker - obviously if the maker says his speaker needs to be in a 10 X 12 X 8 room and no larger then you can only compare a competing manufacturer who also designs for that room. You would phone the manufacturer ahead of time and ask if the test room is fine for their speaker. My speakers have room sizes in mind and I believe it is stated in their manuals.
The rest of the system needs to be changed because some systems work better with some amplifiers.
Let's say you were using my Audio Note E as the 2 way speaker - well it is designed for the use of low powered Single Ended Tube amplifiers not 1000 watt SS amps - the idea is to put the speaker in their best possible light and you would certainly not want to put the 8 watt 300B on a 2 way Revel.
My test idea is to test complete systems not individual components. I want to see the test that compares elite measuring systems against a Shindo/Audio Note/Cary/Western electric/Line Magnetic/Decware Horn kind of set-ups so we can see how well the elite modern measuring systems do directly against the archaic stuff.
Lastly, Subjects are trained at Harmon/National Research Council - they are taught what to listen for and how to determine if something is good or not (which is an eye roller in itself). If you tell someone that frequency response is all important and here is how to hear flat response - then you are telling someone what is good and what is bad ahead of the test. I would need to see specifically what listeners and subjects are being told to listen for - how they are "trained" but if it is anything in the ballpark of this - it is a tainted test. Musicians can easily be taught these things ahead of time as well.
Lastly cumulative scoring has statistical problems. To meet Statistical Significance to the 0.5 level would need a subject to determine that A is chosen over B 9/10 times. Otherwise the subject is deemed a failure and that he can tell he difference between A and B no better than chance.
Thus - if he can select A from b 9/10 times the subject was able to to tell A from B not by chance. If you add 10 people together who got a combined score of 50/100 and three of those people scored 9/10 then you have ignored 3 people who correctly identified A from B. Declare that the group failed because the overall number was a fail. But worse is that you might throw away the individuals who scored 6/10, 7/10, 8/10. Why do they matter?
Because a person gets 6/10 is deemed a fail because 9/10 is the significance pass to the 0.5 level. But if this listener scored 6/10 ten times with a miss for a score of 59/100 then that is the SAME level of statistical significance to the 0.5 level as a single test of 9/10. In other words this person is deemed to be able to tell the difference from A and B to the SAME significance level and NOT by chance. I have yet to see any test that tests subjects in depth. It is cheaper faster and lazier to add scores together to get results they want and to sell whatever they're making.
bruhl001
infinitybyond
Alex, I'll take JBL 590's don't F with me looks for a thousand.
avguytx
Lunatic Member
Wow....a $1000 a side? For that kind of money, I could build a new pair of cabinets and cover them in walnut before I'd strip them and re-veneer. Well, maybe. I'm assuming they are vinyl veneer? Their website doesn't really say. It's too bad they don't still offer the real wood veneer finish here in the states like they did overseas. I really want a pair of these; I think I could be quite content with a pair of them from what I've read. They could potentially end up replacing the Belle clones I built....who knows.
SterlingOne
Super Member
What kind of help? There are those here who have the speaker and those that do not. Those that do not either have not heard the speaker, or they heard it and did not like it, or liked it but cannot afford it. Those that have the speaker here, from what I've read so far, seem to like it. They think it's a good value, especially when it's offered occasionally at half price. It appears the price point is achieved by using other than premium components, cabinet materials, and construction techniques, such as used in JBL Synthesis Loudspeaker designs; but, the concept does not suffer sonically from its affordable material content.
bruhl001
infinitybyond
well said
JMelton
Active Member
This is actually very helpful. I might have found this somewhere in the earlier posts but I gave up digging through them.
I’m worried only about construction techniques in the cost cutting. Still that can’t be very significant in a $2000 pair, or that’s what I’d assume. And to that price issue, how frequently do they appear at half price? I could not justify doubling my price point and I see them back up to full price on the JBL site.
Thanks for offering some good clear information Sterling.