JBL 4425 vs B&W Matrix801
- Thread starter ssab
- Start date
Register to hide this ad
audiomagnate
Addicted Member
The 801 goes lower than the 4425 and is much less colored, but the JBL clobbers it in the area of dynamic compression.
dshoaf
That high voltage buzz
Have had 4425's but only heard the 801s as in-store demo. My take is much like Audiomagnate's. So, the question is, do you want a more in-your-face presentation a la 4425's or a bit more laid back presentation with the 801s. Generally, if you're looking for more bass with the 4425s, consider a set of sub woofers crossed around 80-100 hz.
A lot of other considerations also come into play:
- Size of the room
- How loud you typically play your music or HT.
- The amount of power available to drive the speakers.
Cheers,
David
A lot of other considerations also come into play:
- Size of the room
- How loud you typically play your music or HT.
- The amount of power available to drive the speakers.
Cheers,
David
ssab
Member
4.6 metr x 4.5 metr = 15x15 ft
Sometimes, in order not to loud and relaxed, sometimes loudly. I like the volume reserve. I love when the acoustics play a full 1 watt to high power without distortion.
80-100 watt amplifier transistor.
But if there is a need for power, I can buy another.
Zonker92
All shiny and chrome
I can speak only to the 4425s versus the 802 S80s, and I found that the 4425s are much more dynamic and efficient, but the 802s image better and maybe sound more neutral. And I could never get the 802s to play very loudly, even with around 300 watts per channel, as I recall.
For what it's worth, I do not agree that the 4425s are significantly colored or "in your face." They are more typical of the later generation JBLs, which are pretty linear.
For what it's worth, I do not agree that the 4425s are significantly colored or "in your face." They are more typical of the later generation JBLs, which are pretty linear.
audiomagnate
Addicted Member
A speaker can be linear and still have acoustically generated resonances and colorations. I agree the 4425's are much less colored than say an L100, but the 801s are about as neutral as it gets in that department, almost "Quad-like." I think my L300's use the same or very similar 15 as the 4425's with a similar crossover point, and you can definitely hear that big ol' paper woofer coloration on male vocals (especially if you've been living with Quads). Studios used to go to extreme lengths in a futile attempt to get 801s to play loud, like bridging the biggest amps they could purchase. Speakers with the dynamics of a big JBL and the naturalness of the 801 are extremely rare and extremely expensive. The megabuck MBL's powered with insanely high current capable amps are an example, but we 99%ers can't really have both. Pick your poison and learn to enjoy it.
Last edited:
Zonker92
All shiny and chrome
Good points. I'd just point out that the 4425 is the 12" monitor; you're thinking of the 4430 I believe, which may have more coloration in its 15" bass driver than the 4425's 12".
(The 2235H woofer of the 4430 was considered by some (including Zilch, I think), to be an upgrade over the 2231A/136A L300 woofer.)
(The 2235H woofer of the 4430 was considered by some (including Zilch, I think), to be an upgrade over the 2231A/136A L300 woofer.)
twiiii
Lunatic Member
A 4425 response falls off above 16.5 KHz rapidly, which for me is a good thing. Most of the sound at those higher frequencies are more a form of irritating noise. The below 50 HZ is the issue, Depending on room loading you might be able to squeak 35 hz out of the speaker but not likely. Give me a 4435 to make me happy. The B&W 801 Matrix is only 1 or 2 db less efficient than the JBL, but because of the horn focus the sound seems to be more in your face which it actually is not. I always found the 801 to be hard in the midrange and the bass to dry. One of these analytical speakers everyone is so fond of. Forget what the original sound was lets capture the sound of the recording studio. B&W from that period could be terribly bright, at least you can adjust the mid and tweeter on the JBL. I heard the 801's at CES Vegas, and at two particular dealers. One used Krell amps and that wasn't my cup of tea. The other used Threshold, not one of my favorites either. We had a customer that drove his with Mono Model 9 Marantz And that really me respect the speaker. But I would pass on both on a buying spree; but, would keep the JBL's if they were mine. Like I said I much preferred the 4435 with its 96 db sensitivity, greater power handling and over whelming dynamic capability. You could even drive them with a 50 watt amp and be happy 99 % of the time.
audiomagnate
Addicted Member
4 dB (91 vs 88):
http://www.bowers-wilkins.com/Downloads/Product/Archive/ENG_FT00008_Matrix-801-S2_info_sheet.pdf
http://www.jblpro.com/pub/recording/4425.pdf
It actually sounds like a lot more than 4 dB with music because of higher dynamic compression in the B&Ws which doesn't show up in a sensitivity test.
MudSlideSlim
Well-Known Member
My experience is that most B&W speakers are 1- 3 SPLs less than their specs would reveal. Do they really have a SPL of 88? I'd be more than kind saying that they are closer to 86. YMMV. If you think you have a big enough amp for these speakers, 'you've only just begun, to live' That being said with plenty watts and current these big boys can really sing and 'rock the Casaba'.
The JBL 4435 with a more honest 96 db SPL (maybe it's 95) sounds good with a whole constellation amps and not a limited amount of B&W stars which are actually very bright major planets. When you look at cost benefit the JBLs win but if you never worry about MPG or don't understand what YMMV means go with the B&Ws.
Michael
audiomagnate
Addicted Member
I agree wholeheartedly (I was just trying to be nice). 801's are notorious power sponges, and it doesn't make sense for JBL to fudge sensitivity measurements when multi-million dollar architectural proposals (binding legal documents) for commercial venues are made based on those specs. It makes total sense for B&W, mainly because their real world figures are so awful, and because the end user is almost always "just" a consumer.
Last edited:
