markd51
Nyuk Nyuk
After hearing this latest news, and those Speakers are now gone, I can only say one thing! LOL
Last edited:
JBL 4367 experience?
- Thread starter SaturationPt
- Start date
After hearing this latest news, and those Speakers are now gone, I can only say one thing! LOL
markd51
Nyuk Nyuk
I've been wanting to ask if you've been fortunate enough to get in some more listening sessions?
I gather you've done some sampling with the MC-452, but was also wondering if you've gotten in any audition time with Tubes?
I'd assume with a change to different speakers, and trying different Amps, the speakers of course will take on the different characters-traits of those Amps.
What might also be of interest, is what possible different characteristics the Amps themselves may have now acquired?
You'd no doubt agree that if the changes are positive, that even further strengthens your personal approval for the new speaker acquisition.
I gather you've done some sampling with the MC-452, but was also wondering if you've gotten in any audition time with Tubes?
I'd assume with a change to different speakers, and trying different Amps, the speakers of course will take on the different characters-traits of those Amps.
What might also be of interest, is what possible different characteristics the Amps themselves may have now acquired?
You'd no doubt agree that if the changes are positive, that even further strengthens your personal approval for the new speaker acquisition.
It's one of those things. I researched, did some listening (not in my home), lusted after the M2s, and the 4367, didn't do anything.
Wanting to get down to one (main) system had me swapping between speakers to decide which ones to keep. In the end, none of my speakers really were "perfect" for me and my music, so back to the question whether I should open my wallet and let the Presidents squint from being in the dark so long, ...
I have listened to many speakers. The ones that typically rattle me are hard-dome tweeter makes. I also have found large woofers to sound more natural in the LF. So horns (even if metal diaphragms) have won my heart and ears with their ability to reveal dynamic presentations and finite detail at the same time. Heils do too, and some electrostats, but to date I really haven't heard anything that can blend well with the LF of a large woofer. Love large woofers' natural bass (in a large enough cabinet) but none tended to be perfectly mated to their MF/HF. It seems that most speakers have strength in one or the other, but not both. Also very low volume vs high-SPL dynamic music, some designs do one or the other well.
So the challenge was to find a 2-way that can play low SPLs with detail and without losing soundstage, but also play high SPLs without any loss in musical presentation. Then, I want something that blends so well between the HF/MF/LF that you don't lose anything at the transition frequency. Last, I want to have the system go 30Hz or below so I don't need a subwoofer for music.
Oh, and I wanted either sealed, or front port (so they're easy to place in a room), with good dispersion and good off-axis response (for multiple listeners), bi-amp capability (just in case), and I wanted them to be new.
So how are they? You might be sorry you asked already @markd51
They are large, they are heavy, and they don't look particularly sexy compared to some of the Sonus-Faber, Focal, B&W, nor even the other JBL / Synergy speakers. They look somewhat like a walnut mini-fridge or maybe even a commercial wastebasket. Sorry JBL, but sexy they're not so for the money I certainly could have gotten more bragging miles elsewhere. They are however built like the proverbial "brick ****-house" though, if there's ever someone shooting at me I'll hide behind the JBLs.
But they sound soooo good. I have been sitting with them for between 3-5 hours/day, and they have played many more hours to break-in. They have played soft, and they haves sucked 300+ watts of music peaks.
I was afraid they'd be bass-shy compared to the 2235Hs, they're not. The bass is smooth, completely realistic, and ample. Mids are neutral, voices a bit abrasive when they actually are abrasive singers, no Model Nineteen softening of the music there. Highs are sizzling and crisp, bells so sweet and even some feedback in a Michael Buble recording I've never heard before, but no shrillness. I really can find nothing wrong with these speakers other than they're not Ferrari red with eyeball tweeters on top screaming out for attention (yes, I kind of do like obnoxious speakers but not enough to buy them for their looks) saying "look at me, I cost lots of money, envy my owner". Meh, conspicuous consumption is far over-rated anyway.
The MC452 is neutral, so neutral. So are the 4367s. I am currently running with an older (C38) preamp but it is very quiet, set flat. My DSP is out of the loop, no room equalization / room correction (yet). No measurements yet either (probably this weekend).
Running the MC240, and also the Model 600 I feel that the tube amps add a bit of bass, maybe a bit of "warmth". I can hear a different sound character to the MC240 where it isn't as bright as the 452. I was running both on the 8 Ohm taps (although JBL calls these 6 Ohm Nominal there is only one excursioin below 8 Ohms in the bass region, so I'be been running them there). The Model 600 amp I ran on the 4 Ohm taps, then back to the 452 on the 4 Ohm taps for the first time, I really didn't notice a difference. However, the time between them would make it difficult to really judge whether the taps make a difference as some people claim IMO. Neither tube amp (to me) had the imaging depth of the MC452, and the center wasn't as pinpoint accurate nor as stable. Clearly (to me) the solid-state amp has the edge there.
Like most speakers, 95% plus of the time I'm listening with peaks under 30W, and most of that with peaks under 5W. The tubes are not lacking at all there (other than the perceived extra warmth, and increased & softer bass). But, I planned to keep these on the 452, and I feel that the tighter bass and overall better imaging makes that decision easy.
I also hauled out the Altec Model Nineteens again, the JBL L300As, and the ESS AMT Monitors to get a complete picture and reassure myself that this is the right direction. All of these "flat" speakers have their own characteristics in the room, and without an orchestra or vocalist in the room I just need to trust that the accuracy is there. This is the problem with such an audition: just how accurate is one's memory as to exact pitch, tonal balance, coloration, soundstage from the last live performance? It isn't. Beside that, what venue were you in when you last heard the artist? That too colors the sound. I stopped doing home A/B testing some years ago for the simple reason that I am at least smart enough to know that I DON'T know exactly which is perfectly correct, and herefore the one that sounds best in the room will win.
The 4367s win, as does the MC452. Yes I want to go back and listen to the MC1.25KWs w/ Sonus Faber Aida IIs to see if I still like that combination, ... but it's well beyond my budget anyway so it's only another reference point.
If I could have put the Model Nineteens together with the L300As to get the best of both, or even be able to swap between them easily I might never have made the change, Lord knows I can use the money elsewhere. The end result is that I am very happy wth the way these sound, and everything about them. The added warmth from the vintage tubes is quite apparent to me on these speakers, but that is what my wife desires anyway so that's good as well.
Back to shoveling the front walk.
Wanting to get down to one (main) system had me swapping between speakers to decide which ones to keep. In the end, none of my speakers really were "perfect" for me and my music, so back to the question whether I should open my wallet and let the Presidents squint from being in the dark so long, ...
I have listened to many speakers. The ones that typically rattle me are hard-dome tweeter makes. I also have found large woofers to sound more natural in the LF. So horns (even if metal diaphragms) have won my heart and ears with their ability to reveal dynamic presentations and finite detail at the same time. Heils do too, and some electrostats, but to date I really haven't heard anything that can blend well with the LF of a large woofer. Love large woofers' natural bass (in a large enough cabinet) but none tended to be perfectly mated to their MF/HF. It seems that most speakers have strength in one or the other, but not both. Also very low volume vs high-SPL dynamic music, some designs do one or the other well.
So the challenge was to find a 2-way that can play low SPLs with detail and without losing soundstage, but also play high SPLs without any loss in musical presentation. Then, I want something that blends so well between the HF/MF/LF that you don't lose anything at the transition frequency. Last, I want to have the system go 30Hz or below so I don't need a subwoofer for music.
Oh, and I wanted either sealed, or front port (so they're easy to place in a room), with good dispersion and good off-axis response (for multiple listeners), bi-amp capability (just in case), and I wanted them to be new.
So how are they? You might be sorry you asked already @markd51
They are large, they are heavy, and they don't look particularly sexy compared to some of the Sonus-Faber, Focal, B&W, nor even the other JBL / Synergy speakers. They look somewhat like a walnut mini-fridge or maybe even a commercial wastebasket. Sorry JBL, but sexy they're not so for the money I certainly could have gotten more bragging miles elsewhere. They are however built like the proverbial "brick ****-house" though, if there's ever someone shooting at me I'll hide behind the JBLs.
But they sound soooo good. I have been sitting with them for between 3-5 hours/day, and they have played many more hours to break-in. They have played soft, and they haves sucked 300+ watts of music peaks.
I was afraid they'd be bass-shy compared to the 2235Hs, they're not. The bass is smooth, completely realistic, and ample. Mids are neutral, voices a bit abrasive when they actually are abrasive singers, no Model Nineteen softening of the music there. Highs are sizzling and crisp, bells so sweet and even some feedback in a Michael Buble recording I've never heard before, but no shrillness. I really can find nothing wrong with these speakers other than they're not Ferrari red with eyeball tweeters on top screaming out for attention (yes, I kind of do like obnoxious speakers but not enough to buy them for their looks) saying "look at me, I cost lots of money, envy my owner". Meh, conspicuous consumption is far over-rated anyway.
The MC452 is neutral, so neutral. So are the 4367s. I am currently running with an older (C38) preamp but it is very quiet, set flat. My DSP is out of the loop, no room equalization / room correction (yet). No measurements yet either (probably this weekend).
Running the MC240, and also the Model 600 I feel that the tube amps add a bit of bass, maybe a bit of "warmth". I can hear a different sound character to the MC240 where it isn't as bright as the 452. I was running both on the 8 Ohm taps (although JBL calls these 6 Ohm Nominal there is only one excursioin below 8 Ohms in the bass region, so I'be been running them there). The Model 600 amp I ran on the 4 Ohm taps, then back to the 452 on the 4 Ohm taps for the first time, I really didn't notice a difference. However, the time between them would make it difficult to really judge whether the taps make a difference as some people claim IMO. Neither tube amp (to me) had the imaging depth of the MC452, and the center wasn't as pinpoint accurate nor as stable. Clearly (to me) the solid-state amp has the edge there.
Like most speakers, 95% plus of the time I'm listening with peaks under 30W, and most of that with peaks under 5W. The tubes are not lacking at all there (other than the perceived extra warmth, and increased & softer bass). But, I planned to keep these on the 452, and I feel that the tighter bass and overall better imaging makes that decision easy.
I also hauled out the Altec Model Nineteens again, the JBL L300As, and the ESS AMT Monitors to get a complete picture and reassure myself that this is the right direction. All of these "flat" speakers have their own characteristics in the room, and without an orchestra or vocalist in the room I just need to trust that the accuracy is there. This is the problem with such an audition: just how accurate is one's memory as to exact pitch, tonal balance, coloration, soundstage from the last live performance? It isn't. Beside that, what venue were you in when you last heard the artist? That too colors the sound. I stopped doing home A/B testing some years ago for the simple reason that I am at least smart enough to know that I DON'T know exactly which is perfectly correct, and herefore the one that sounds best in the room will win.
The 4367s win, as does the MC452. Yes I want to go back and listen to the MC1.25KWs w/ Sonus Faber Aida IIs to see if I still like that combination, ... but it's well beyond my budget anyway so it's only another reference point.
If I could have put the Model Nineteens together with the L300As to get the best of both, or even be able to swap between them easily I might never have made the change, Lord knows I can use the money elsewhere. The end result is that I am very happy wth the way these sound, and everything about them. The added warmth from the vintage tubes is quite apparent to me on these speakers, but that is what my wife desires anyway so that's good as well.
Back to shoveling the front walk.
markd51
Nyuk Nyuk
There's a lot of logical sense in your plans.
Probably true for many of us, and myself, that had I hung onto every last audio trinket I ever owned in my life, and other small "toys", I'd need an Armory to store it all. LOL
I think we all do such in one form or another, when something seems to be redundant, and extra weight hanging around your neck, it might be time.
Go forward, move ahead, it's not too late! LOL
Probably true for many of us, and myself, that had I hung onto every last audio trinket I ever owned in my life, and other small "toys", I'd need an Armory to store it all. LOL
I think we all do such in one form or another, when something seems to be redundant, and extra weight hanging around your neck, it might be time.
Go forward, move ahead, it's not too late! LOL
In the old days, I had the Rheem Kee Bass that he appears to play as a synthesizer in Whip It. But in fact it is a "key bass" and only plays one note at a time. I sold it to my music teacher. And yes, that is the same Rheem that made air conditioners and heaters.
markd51
Nyuk Nyuk
I'm sure all the boys and girls here know well, that as far as speakers, how far can one go, would like to go, or should go? (Where no man has gone before!)
I mean, sure, "15 frikken big ones", said in my best goodfella's tongue, but, hey, $15K, why not $25K, or $35K? LOL
Besides JBL, there's a list as long as my arm.
While I could never imagine it in my house unless I hit the lottery, sure, I'd like to be saying here, "Hey, I just caught a used mint pair of jet black Wilson Grand Slamms for $24K."
A little old lady had them in her spare bedroom, played gospel for her recitals! LOL
Oh, I forgot, I'm gonna have to rent a forklift! And get some neighbor's football kids over.
I think the 4367 will be quite tough to improve upon for what it is. If anything can be improved upon in the design, I'm sure such flaws were quite minor.
The compromises were initially known, and how best to address them.
I believe that while for a short period, one might find some discounted used examples for a period of time.
And that this particular speaker will perhaps depreciate short term.
But it might be possible that 4-5 years down the road, this speaker will become known as one of JBL's new classics, and will be IMO a wise purchase in so many ways. Any depreciation might cease, and do a turn-around.
Besides Grand Slamms, and the rest, I think we all know, that when JBL is called to the task, they can deliver the goods! And I am aware of corporate changes tainting their legacy over the years. I'll say no more about that here.
I mean, sure, "15 frikken big ones", said in my best goodfella's tongue, but, hey, $15K, why not $25K, or $35K? LOL
Besides JBL, there's a list as long as my arm.
While I could never imagine it in my house unless I hit the lottery, sure, I'd like to be saying here, "Hey, I just caught a used mint pair of jet black Wilson Grand Slamms for $24K."
A little old lady had them in her spare bedroom, played gospel for her recitals! LOL
Oh, I forgot, I'm gonna have to rent a forklift! And get some neighbor's football kids over.
I think the 4367 will be quite tough to improve upon for what it is. If anything can be improved upon in the design, I'm sure such flaws were quite minor.
The compromises were initially known, and how best to address them.
I believe that while for a short period, one might find some discounted used examples for a period of time.
And that this particular speaker will perhaps depreciate short term.
But it might be possible that 4-5 years down the road, this speaker will become known as one of JBL's new classics, and will be IMO a wise purchase in so many ways. Any depreciation might cease, and do a turn-around.
Besides Grand Slamms, and the rest, I think we all know, that when JBL is called to the task, they can deliver the goods! And I am aware of corporate changes tainting their legacy over the years. I'll say no more about that here.
Last edited:
4367 is a great speaker. We have a local dealer that caries JBL, Revel, Perlisten, KEF, Klipsch. He has a set of 4367's in his living room as his personal speaker and usually has a set of them in the showroom as well. 4367 is a rich sounding yet well-balanced and dynamic speaker that does most everything extremely well. Pricey and Big, but if you have room and $$$$ it should be on your short list.
BaseDeville
New Member
Do you have your raised up on stands? I have read on other sites that some 4367 owners describe the soundstage as rather low and I would like to hear your opinion.
I do not.Mine are on carpet, and I decided to tilt them back ever so slightly, I placed two of the supplied glides under the two front spikes and it is perfect for a seated (6’1”) listener approximately 10’-12’ back from the speakers. If I were to place them for my wife I would remove the glides.
Last edited:
JBL 4367 Studio Monitor loudspeaker Page 2
www.stereophile.com
Last edited:
JBL has more experience in filling living rooms, concert halls, churches, auditoriums, outdoor spaces, than any DIYer will ever hope to. The white papers and specs are available for the 4367's well designed dispersion/field, but you always need to buy a speaker that is designed to work in your space whether that is a studio monitor designed for a fairly narrow listening area to reduce second-arrival sound, a line-array designed to keep sound off of walls and ceilings, or any other configuration. If the 4367 doesn't suit your space and needs, there are plenty of other choices at that price level. For me, the 4367s have been extremely easy to work with in a lightly-damped room.
