I measured it at my listening location in my home. It was unusually flat 40Hz to 20KHz.
-RNM
Not crazy.
One that is comfortable at 95-100 mph for 75 minutes heading to the hospital at 3 am, priceless.
Jn
Hi Richard, these may interest you to measure how hard your JBL's can go (bragging rights too lol).
January 21, 2019 - Meyer Sound Introduces M-Noise Test Signal
M-Noise - Theory 9Min
M-Noise - Practical 14Min
7:19 -
4:55 - "If you can't hear this difference you need a different career" LOL.
Dan.
Such a(n active) transformation of space acoustics, I would like to experiense
Joshua Bell on Constellation | Meyer Sound
George
Joshua Bell on Constellation | Meyer Sound
George
I occasionally buy them to rip if I can't find lossless versions online, but I've gotten in the habit of throwing the CD away once I rip it and verify the checksum.
It explains why memory allocation might be a problem when using it with longer high sampling-rates files.
And eats headroom that may lead to clipping and thus to more distortion over the whole frequency band.
32-bit process limit on 64-bit Windows is 4 GB. It's still 2 GB on 32-bit Windows. If the executable is 64-bit itself then the sky is the limit.
It is more about the HF level delivered by the source; a NOS device will most likely often present mirror images that are only attenuated by the zero-order hold amplitude weighing. Additionally, it surely will produce in-band IMDs (if high-level frequencies were present in the upper audio-band region).
Looking at the graphs, DSD-noise above 20 kHz reaches surprising levels too.
@ Chris719,
given the age of diffmaker, I´m sure that it was a 32-bit executable.
Last edited:
Me too, except I keep them for posterity. But then the Boss will tell you I never throw anything away.......
I never actually play a CD, just rip it and add to the streamer server. When the last CD player died it wasn't replaced.
Ok, no actual measurements to share then. Shame, would have been interesting to compare.
What Were Once Vices Are Now Habits © Doobie Brothers
I have finished to read the thread about JBL M2 VS Revell listening comparisons and the thread "Preference for Direct Radiators".
Trying to figure out what was behind the comments of those blind tests participants, I noticed that:
- Most of the participants seems to prefer a more large "sound stage". That I translate like more room reflections. (The mono seance is reveling). They dislike the M2 with mono sources because it was "mono" (no enlargement)
- 3 members on the 16 recognize systematically and prefer the M2, while the others seems to change their preferences according to the piece of music played.
I concluded that all the participant do not look at the same things. The majority is looking for a more agreeable reproduction (we can think to them as "consumers"). While the 3 with 100% accuracy) are looking to an more ... accurate one, even if it reveal defects on the sources with a sharper experience . I think of them as "professionals".
My poor English do not help to explain what i want to say in an easy way. If, between two records, a speaker will sound a lot different, while an other will present more agreeable reproduction of the bad source and a better one of the good source, I will chose the one that is less "indulgent" and underline more the differences, despite one of the two sources is less agreeable to listen too. An other guy will change its preference between the two.
This comment seems to confirm my hypothesis:
Obviously, all of this is subjective, but to me the Vandersteens sound more "euphonic" when listened to at a distance. There's additional ambiance that seems to be generated by the much wider directivity.
I noticed too that no participant was never complaining about any "horn sound" about the JBL.
To give a car comparison, a pilot driver will chose the sport car, less comfortable but that allows-him to feel all the defects of the road, while the average driver the Rolls Royce, more silent, comfortable, that erase the defects of the roads.
I'm on the way to order a pair of KEF LS50 to can listen some records that I like music, while my system underscores the mixing errors too sharply.
I will use-it to listen to TV because, with my big system, there is, among other things, an inconsistency between the size of the screen and that of the sound stage.
I have finished to read the thread about JBL M2 VS Revell listening comparisons and the thread "Preference for Direct Radiators".
Trying to figure out what was behind the comments of those blind tests participants, I noticed that:
- Most of the participants seems to prefer a more large "sound stage". That I translate like more room reflections. (The mono seance is reveling). They dislike the M2 with mono sources because it was "mono" (no enlargement)
- 3 members on the 16 recognize systematically and prefer the M2, while the others seems to change their preferences according to the piece of music played.
I concluded that all the participant do not look at the same things. The majority is looking for a more agreeable reproduction (we can think to them as "consumers"). While the 3 with 100% accuracy) are looking to an more ... accurate one, even if it reveal defects on the sources with a sharper experience . I think of them as "professionals".
My poor English do not help to explain what i want to say in an easy way. If, between two records, a speaker will sound a lot different, while an other will present more agreeable reproduction of the bad source and a better one of the good source, I will chose the one that is less "indulgent" and underline more the differences, despite one of the two sources is less agreeable to listen too. An other guy will change its preference between the two.
This comment seems to confirm my hypothesis:
Obviously, all of this is subjective, but to me the Vandersteens sound more "euphonic" when listened to at a distance. There's additional ambiance that seems to be generated by the much wider directivity.
I noticed too that no participant was never complaining about any "horn sound" about the JBL.
To give a car comparison, a pilot driver will chose the sport car, less comfortable but that allows-him to feel all the defects of the road, while the average driver the Rolls Royce, more silent, comfortable, that erase the defects of the roads.
I'm on the way to order a pair of KEF LS50 to can listen some records that I like music, while my system underscores the mixing errors too sharply.
I will use-it to listen to TV because, with my big system, there is, among other things, an inconsistency between the size of the screen and that of the sound stage.
Last edited:
But what if you where playing music and the headroom was already limited? Is it so difficult to understand simple concepts?
- Status
- Not open for further replies.