WYHINWYG
What you heard at Munich is most likely what you won't hear from the same units when placed in your living room. At $15,000 USD/pair, recommend you not give up your "speakerbuilding" hobby anytime soon. WHG
What you heard at Munich is most likely what you won't hear from the same units when placed in your living room. At $15,000 USD/pair, recommend you not give up your "speakerbuilding" hobby anytime soon. WHG
Thanks for the friendly advice, I know what you are saying, I have no illusions 
I have been building speakers for 25 years. It started out of curiosity, then I wanted to make the greatest speaker with the most expensive drivers for cheap. Then with Linkwitz's site I realized that the room is more important than the speakers and focused on dipoles( the original Pluto was the biggest shock in my life), I even built the LXmini. Which was funny because it was a total disaster in my room but is simply breathtaking in a friend's kitchen... Honestly, I have no illusions that I can repeat what I heard at Munich in my house.
But at the same time I cannot neglect the fact that is sounded so effortless, so coherent in the midrange... I think PB once wrote that after hearing Gedlee speakers he cannot listen to classical domes anymore(apologies if I am mistaken), I feel the same way now, I had a chance to hear them in a much smaller room against a Dynaudio Confidence speaker that I love and it sure made the Dynaudio irritating.
I have great hopes for the recently advanced DSP solutions like Acourate and Audiolense, I loved Mitch Barnett's book and I bought it as a present to many friends, it is a good starting point. But I still believe we need to make the best out of the speakers and just gently support them with a correction here and there. Great hopes for the CBT as well.
I have been building speakers for 25 years. It started out of curiosity, then I wanted to make the greatest speaker with the most expensive drivers for cheap. Then with Linkwitz's site I realized that the room is more important than the speakers and focused on dipoles( the original Pluto was the biggest shock in my life), I even built the LXmini. Which was funny because it was a total disaster in my room but is simply breathtaking in a friend's kitchen... Honestly, I have no illusions that I can repeat what I heard at Munich in my house.But at the same time I cannot neglect the fact that is sounded so effortless, so coherent in the midrange... I think PB once wrote that after hearing Gedlee speakers he cannot listen to classical domes anymore(apologies if I am mistaken), I feel the same way now, I had a chance to hear them in a much smaller room against a Dynaudio Confidence speaker that I love and it sure made the Dynaudio irritating.
I have great hopes for the recently advanced DSP solutions like Acourate and Audiolense, I loved Mitch Barnett's book and I bought it as a present to many friends, it is a good starting point. But I still believe we need to make the best out of the speakers and just gently support them with a correction here and there. Great hopes for the CBT as well.
Last edited by a moderator:
Of course prosund speakers are of interest but this thread was about M2 for the Poors and I thought the 4367 was supposed to be derivative of it, watching this space of one of the truly interesting threads on the whole net, thanks to the enthusiasm and the smart head of PB and other, thank you guys!
I purchased the JBL 4722 as an "M2 for the poors." Still a bit expensive (and industrial looking) at about $1000 each, upgraded to 4" 2453h-SL CD (best value 4" JBL CD IMO). The woofers aren't top of the line, but are dual VC's with neo mags.
Pretty happy with the result, as one can see from these measurements. While really big dynamic sound, I sometimes wonder if the M2's, even a DIY version, would bring more resolution... Also the directivity of the 4722's are 90 x 50, so more direct sound then the M2's with a 120 x 110 pattern...
Pretty happy with the result, as one can see from these measurements. While really big dynamic sound, I sometimes wonder if the M2's, even a DIY version, would bring more resolution... Also the directivity of the 4722's are 90 x 50, so more direct sound then the M2's with a 120 x 110 pattern...
The Eminence N151M really seems to be a shameless copy of BMS. Did the patents expire or something?!
BMS 4538 - about $80
BMS 4552 - $300
Eminence N151M
BMS 4538 diaphragm
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
BMS 4552 diaphragm
Eminence N151M diaphragm
It's so close to the BMS 4538, you'd almost think the diaphragms are interchangeable. But the Eminence is neodymium while the BMS 4538 is ferrite. The BMS 4552 is neo, but it costs more than 3X as much as the Eminence.
Charles Sprinkle, the designer of the M2 waveguide is no longer at JBL. His new speaker is using an oblate spheroidal waveguide. You can give it a listen for $149:
Amazon.com: Kali Audio LP-6 6.5-inch Studio Monitor …: Musical Instruments
Amazon.com: Kali Audio LP-6 6.5-inch Studio Monitor …: Musical Instruments
When I saw that Sprinkle had left JBL, and these were his first speakers, I was a bit stumped. Because the last thing the world needs is a another Genelec-esque studio monitor that sells for $1000. It's been done to death.
The JBL LSR 4328P is an obvious example.
But it looks like Kali Audio is gunning for the low end of the market. I'm using Behringer B2030Ps at home, and they're so cheap it's hard to justify DIY'ing anything. But these Kali speakers may have some legitimate improvements.
