I guess they should be good for that price!
JTR RS1s (18” sealed subs) vs JL Audio E112s, (JBL 4367)
I got a pair of JTR RS1s (18” sealed subs) a few weeks ago to replace a pair of JL Audio E112s and I have been very impressed with the JTRs. I am using a pair of JBL 4367 speakers and a K235 active crossover from Sublime Audio with a 60hz high/low pass (24db slope). Updated pictures are in my profile.
The Sound for 2ch:
Overall, the JTRs are more detailed and textured than the JLs. They also blend better with the JBL 4367s much better than my JL E112s (also actively crossed over at 60hz). The JLs always had a bit of an over damped sound to me. That feeling of bass being from a sub and not a passive speaker, but they always sounded good regardless of this small issue. It was not until I got the JBLs with their amazing mid bass texture that I felt the JLs were lacking detail.
The JTR RS1 has a very light and nimble sound. More so than any sub I have heard. The driver even sounds/feels light when tapping on it with a light tone. When tapping on the JL driver there is a very dead low thump. I feel the 4367s outclass the JL for bass details, but I feel the JTR outclasses the 4367 for details and eclipses the JL. When actively crossed over the RS1s and JBL 4367 sound as if they are cut from the “same cloth” which is very surprising to me. To say I am impressed with their musicality would be an understatement and I never expected the end result to be so seamless.
I was not sure if I would notice the lower bass extension of the JTRs over the JLs for music but it is very noticeable and luckily adjustable on the JTRs with the Low Frequency knob on the back. There is about 8dB of adjustment between 20hz-30hz. At first the low bass sounded odd to me as I was not used to hearing it. I used the adjustment to cut the frequency. But as I adjusted, I turned it back to flat. I think this is intend for boundary reinforcement adjustments but is a very interesting tool for 2ch. After a week of tuning by ear I broke out the mic and measured the room and bass through the crossover was totally flat. Room modes of course still in tack with a peak at 90db-110db in my room but otherwise flat. I believe this 90-110db peak is caused by my low ceilings interaction with the 4367s as it was also there on my Revel 228be.
All said and done changing out good subs for better subs is not as big of a change as switching speakers but has made a bigger difference than changing electronics.
The Sound for Movies:
I am 99% music, but my room is setup as a home theater (all black, 120” screen, etc) and I bypass my home theater through my two channel system. The left and right RCA inputs in the subs can be used for both movies and music (the two channel is through balanced cables). All speakers are high-passed at 60hz and the LEF comes in at 80hz.
Anyway, I don’t have too much to say other than the power and low reach of these subs is crazy. My room is 26’X30”X8’ and I leave the back doors open to other rooms which extends the listing space to 42’. At reference volume (85dB speech, 105dB peaks) I worried about damaging the house and I am not kidding. I have no way to measure bass under 20hz with my current meters but there are scenes where I don’t “hear” the bass but it is felt and the doors flap.
Other items:
The build is very much like pro speakers with good but no thrills build. They are covered in spatter paint like a guitar amp. No issue for me in my black room but could be an issue for some.
The built in low pass crossover only goes down to 60hz so these IMO will mandate a high-pass on the mains at minimum for two channel. It does not go low enough to rolling in under a set of towers without a high-pass of some kind. You could add an external lower pass only I guess.
There is also no “phase” adjustment but there is a knob marked as “delay” in MS. I honestly don’t know how these compare as I did not need them to integrate using an active crossover.
They add no hum to my system which the JL’s did with their poor quality amps.
As a side note I am pleased with the Sublime K235 too and I will make another post about it. It is a good alternative analogue option. The K235 allows me to home theater bypass through it by using balanced for my 2ch preamp and RCA for my home theater as both inputs are active.
18 responses Add your response
Yeah I guess they are expensive but they seemed like a good buy in their market. The E112 in gloss is $2700 now and a fair enough price comparison. The trade off is the JTRs are ugly beasts lol other subs I looked at: JBL SUB18, $3800 without amps (crown amps with the needed PEQs are $$$) and total package was out of my price range Rythmik F18, $1800, probably a better buy for music, maybe not as good for movies. At the end of the day I just wanted to try the JTR. Perlisten R18 $4995, less performance but adds internal room correction I would not use as I have external solutions if needed. I did not look at them as JL will never get another penny from me (I had five failed E112 over 10 years) but the fathom F113v2 is $6000 now! That is a lot of money for an old design with questionable reliability.
|
@james633 wrote:
I’m not at all surprised by your findings re: the JL Audio vs. your recently acquired JTR subs. The 4367’s have a dynamic and tuneful bass all around, and importantly they also cover the "power region" and further up to about ~700Hz, if memory serves me correct, which is a vital area (i.e.: 100-450Hz) and having a good deal of cone area here. With this kind of 15" woofer it provides for a fuller and more natural presentation compared to smaller and lower efficiency woofer/mids (that are often low- and high-passed in this region, if it’s a 3-way or more design), and this easily exposes the chosen subs solution to augment down low if too skimpy and low efficiency a variant. I imagine a pair of JBL SUB18’s would only expand on the qualities that you have found with the JTR’s, except into the infrasonics, as this is a case of efficiency gained at the cost of extension; the SUB18’s wouldn’t impress the way the JTR’s do below 20Hz with movies, but from ~20Hz on up the SUB18’s would likely be the (even more) ideal match with the 4367’s. It’s a compromise and what to go with here. Myself I’d rather go for absolute coherency (and efficiency) and miss out on infrasonics, but when you have 25Hz flat delivered effortlessly even at bonkers SPL’s it’s quite another experience than what small cube subs do at the same frequencies. As I'm sure you know by now, the bass of the former is much more convincingly felt and perceived by comparison. Where I’ve found the 4367’s to shift character tonally is in their lowest octave around the port tune where they become warmer and less defined, and this is likely the reason for your finding the JTR’s to better them here when the 4367’s are high-passed at 60Hz. I’d argue you could wring out even more potential here with a high-pass at 80Hz or a bit higher, in addition to intricate delay settings and room correction down the line. The subs that needs finger pointing for their price isn’t as much JTR and to some degree the SUB18’s as it is the JL Audio’s and other "hifi" subs mentioned by you. Paying that much dough for the JL’s with amp failure all too frequent is simply laughable. For the same reason I would generally avoid subs with built-in plate amps and instead opt for quality outboard amps and DSP’s with more elaborate settings. This also opens the door for more all-out DIY sub options and would save you money. |
Phusis, Seem like good insight on your comments above. I also set up the subs a few different ways before settling on the K235 crossover. #1 I used my surround processor (Marantz) to crossover, time align the subs with my mains. I tried a number of higher crossover points (60-110hz etc) and still liked 60-70hz the best. The integration was good but with the processor on I felt I was missing something in sound quality. Hard to put my finger on exactly what it was. The system as a whole was just a touch less dynamic and maybe the sound stage was smaller. Could be just placebo on my part. With the processor in pure direct it does sound a bit better to me but the crossover are not active in this mode. #2. I also tried a simple highpass filters from Harrison labs. This was a 12db slope at 70hz (I had to flip the leads on my speakers) and then used the subs internal low pass. This measured very flat across the frequent range, maybe even more stable than the 24db slopes but I felt like a bit of impact as missing where the drivers over lapped. I also found the volume of the sub ultra critical with this setup. I might add room correction on the source at some point. I have not been real impressed with audyssey and almost always end up with manual adjustments. For 2ch at the moment I am not using correction and just moved everything around to where it measured/sounded the best…. Those two correlate by the way… |
On a side note I will try some higher crossover points soon. I need to order cards (only $12) for the K235 as it does not have a variable adjustment. I “knew” roughly where I wanted to start playing in my system from past experience. I sometimes feel like higher crossover points really could use super steep digital filters (48db) to keep the subs out of the low vocals. Something I have never really played with as most “highend” options are very expensive. Something cheap like the Mini DSP SHD would work (sound quality?) but really complicates my home theater with added delays due to processing and another digital to analogue conversion I really don’t want in my movies. |
Good for you using a full 2 way crossover. I would go a little higher if you can. 80 Hz would be perfect. It will lower distortion in the JBLs. Larger or multiple drivers of similar quality are always going to have less distortion because they do not have to move as far to produce the same volume. As drivers move farther the suspension becomes non linear and distortion increases. Another source of distortion is enclosure resonance and shaking. Turn the volume up and put your hand on the enclosure. Any vibration or shaking you feel is distortion. If you can feel it, it is clearly audible. This is a very difficult problem to solve and the only commercially available subs that do are the Magico Q series at ridiculous prices. I would never go larger than 18" drivers. As the cone gets larger it becomes harder to control and motion can become non pistonic, the cone starts flapping at volume. I use a total of eight 12" drivers. The main reason I use 12s is to keep the enclosure size reasonable. The enclosures are a custom balanced force design. They have a decagon cross section with 1.5" plywood walls. Plywood is stiffer than MDF, but much more expensive. There is no vibration or shaking. No enclosure resonance at all. You can see them on my system page. A photo diary of their construction will be available on Imgur. Digital crossovers are always better as long as the DACs are of good quality. The ones in the SHD are not, but the SHD Studio is the same unit without DACs. Benchmark Media Systems uses the SHD Studio with two of their own DACs with great success. I use a DEQX Pre 8. I cross at 100 Hz. A slope of 48 dB/oct keeps the subs out of the midrange. The key test is listening to the subs only with a male vocalist. If you can hear any vocal coming through the sub a higher slope is mandated. Always use the lowest slope you can get away with. |
m-db The only built in frequency adjustment on the sub is a manual low effect control adjusted by a knob. It adjust the slope from 40hz-10hz by about 8dB and has a surprising large effect on the sound. Audioholics discusses it in their review linked below (has a graph of full cut and full boost). I believe the sub they reviewed is the older driver and the current RS1 come with a new driver from the RTJ (not a typo) 18Sub which Audioholics also reviewed. when JTR talk about DSP I assume they have a non adjustable filter in the amp that forces the sub to play lower/flatter but I don’t know. They are very short on information. The measured group delay is 10ms at 20hz and only 5ms above 40hz. Where something like SVS SB16 with built in user adjustable filters has a group delay is 90ms at 20hz and about 10ms above 40hz. Some say this delay does not matter in the bass as the waves are so long but I would disagree. If you are time aligning then digitally no issue regardless but I am using simple analogue slopes.
|
@james633 -- Finding the right way to implement your subs will be a trial and error process. Your JTR subs have a DSP section built in already, and your JBL 4367’s are passively configured. Have you tried running your mains full-range and then just blend in the JTR’s via their DSP with a bit of overlap to where JBL’s start rolling off? Yes, I know you won’t take advantage of high-passing the JBL’s, but introducing a less-than-stellar DSP on top of your passive JBL’s isn’t ideal either, as you’ve found out, and so I would simply start out by leaving your mains alone and concentrate on moving those JTR’s around to where they integrate the best with the smoothest response, and top it off with delay and volume adjustments. I’d be inclined to position the JTR’s as close to the JBL’s as possible, but it mayn’t be the best way to go about it all things considered. If you want to consider high-passing the JBL’s you need a quality DSP. I use a Xilica DSP/digital crossover (now re-branded ACX, but other than that they’re the same product and built the same place) which is an excellent pro line product and fairly priced. Yes, it involves A/D to D/A conversion steps as there’s not digital input, but don’t worry about that. Trust me, it’s a great DSP and sonically transparent. The Xilica/ACX DSP’s offer a vast array of filter settings far beyond those found in most all-in-one subs, that only have the most rudimentary dittos. If you want to go a substantial step further I’d replace your 4367’s with their pro oriented siblings, the JBL M2’s in active configuration via the recommend Crown iTech amps with built-in DSP. I’m assuming the Crown DSP will be able to high-pass the M2’s, and then add a pair of JBL SUB18’s with an additional external iTech amp and be done with it. I’m not familiar with the DSP section of those Crown amps, but I take it they offer fairly elaborate settings that will eclipse those offered by the JTR DSP. With the combo of the M2’s, SUB18’s and a trio of Crown iTech’s you’d have yourself a fully active setup (i.e.: sans interfering passive crossovers) with quality outboard amps and DSP’s that would take the sound of your setup to the next level. You’d be able to juggle with crossover frequencies, delay etc. to best accommodate your needs in ways you couldn’t now, and not least looking at each speaker channel of main + sub as an integral part and not a pre-existing main speaker with passive crossovers where the sub of a different brand and driver type needs to be "latched" on with a different, built-in amp and so-so DSP. Don’t underestimate the importance of using the same amps from top to bottom - including the subs, which most never get to experience since most subs house built-in amps. Yes, the latter option will be the most expensive route, but hey, sell your existing McIntosh amp, 4367’s, K235 crossover and other gear and have it part-finance your new endeavor :) Lastly: if I'm not incorrect the DSP filter topology applied with the M2's through the iTech's is with 36dB/octave slopes, which is what I use myself in my fully active setup. Moreover, some M2 users EQ them down low to extend to close to 20Hz, but that design natively is tuned to not much lower than 35Hz and so this is asking quite a lot more of its 2216Nd woofer. By high-passing them instead at, say, 80Hz or more you're doing the exact opposite by adding substantial headroom and making for a cleaner, more effortless reproduction. Win-win. |
Phusis,
Thanks for the detailed thoughts. yes I have tried rolling in subs under my mains at 37hz with my JL but not the JTR (internally their low pass stops at 60hz) and ran it that way for a month or so. It sounded fine but lack the impact on kick drums that highpassing brings. I am very happy with the current solution. I am sure it could be better by having the same exact driver/amp but I personally have not heard a better sub system as of now. I will try some higher crossovers not that I feel I need them but a few people who I respect have recommend them. Most of the time after messing around I end up back at 60hz. Sadly crown amps are not the last word in fidelity and I think they hold the M2 back as I find them a little harsh. More or less Harman gives you a file to load into the crown amps with the needed PEQs and then you can adjust from there. The stock M2 filters are much different (much brighter) than the tuning of the 4367s. Erin’s audio corner has measurements of both if you’re interested. I would just end up filtering the M2 to match the 4367 as I like the built in “Harman curve”. The M2 replacement; the SCL-1 looks interesting. It has a passive network that can be 100% bypass to use active filters by the jumpers in the front. There is a silly deal on a pair “local” to me but I am pretty happy with the current setup.
|
I have been trying a bit higher crossover this week. I am currently using 75hz and went as high as 120hz. I think the truth this with a proper crossover you can pretty much crossover at any point and get a good blend. The 18” JTR have more detail and weighty below 80hz. 75hz is a bit smoother (due to speaker placement?) and seems not to negatively impact anything. For now I will leave it and just get accustom to the sound. With acoustic and natural recorded music the subs are stemless. With music that is mastered in a studio with a lot of bass they are far less discreet lol. I am using a 24db slope. If I had an electronic crossover with a higher slope a higher crossover might work too as long as they stay out of the vocals. I personally don’t think the 4367 need crossover higher than 60hz. Higher just becomes a game or incremental gains. |
@james633 wrote:
Having heard both the M2's and 4367's, the former actively with the Crown iTech5000 amps and the latter with a Mark Levinson integrated (can't remember which, but either the 5805 or 585.5), and in different listening spaces, my impressions didn't reflect the claimed brightness of the M2, in some ways even to the contrary compared to the 4367's. I didn't audition either of them crazy loud - say, no more than 95dB's peak, though the M2's likely a bit higher - so maybe that's part of it, but what I can say is that the M2's actively with the Crown amps was the not insignificantly preferred sonic meal to my ears. One thing that struck me was how I liked the sound of the waveguide of the M2's better than the one of the 4367's, the latter of which became a bit "too much" with extended listening and with a slightly "splashy" imprinting on violins, whereas the M2 combo came off with less to no character here, more resolved and with an even more uninhibited dynamic envelope. I like the 4367's very much, but the M2's actively is simply the more balanced and well-rounded package to my ears. The 4367's did sound warmer to me down low, but I preferred the "flatter" response of the M2's that, again, had less of a character here as well by comparison. Of course, these are just my impressions and preferences that seem not to mirror yours, but if you haven't auditioned the M2's actively with the Crown amps I can only urge you to do so. You may be surprised.
Interesting findings. It's important you go your own way in this, and yes; you can achieve a nice blend over a fairly wide frequency range when crossing over to subs. Using steeper slopes and more elaborate filter settings via quality electronic XO's/DSP could no doubt open up some further possibilities though. |
Phusis, Thanks for the impression. I have not heard the M2 just looked at the measurements (Harman’s and Kipple from Erin’s audio corner). I have heard a few crown amps which are fine. I will not argue against the advantages of active systems. It is just a lot of messing around. I saw a video (could have been print?) where Greg Timbers (co designer of these models) turned his personal Everest DD67000 into active models which was an interesting interview. I believe his goal was to time align the drivers. |
I am glad someone was able to find a well-priced, user-friendly subwoofer for the JBL 4367. That is good info. The woofers have better bass texture then my pair of 13" fathoms. The fathoms have a lot of tools to flatten room modes, though. If you have a vertical mode that can not be reduced with your crossover (by hiking it up over that frequency) an option would be to elevate the subs off the floor. Easier said than done, If I can do it, anyone can. Another experiment would be plugging the ports. I was surprised at the difference at I think ~40Hz. |
Ohlala,
I always like the sound of the JL but the JTR pretty much eclipse them. I have not owned the F13 but have done a back to back E112 vs Fathom and thought they were pretty close in sound charter, minus the built in EQ. I will give plugging the ports a shot. I am highpassed pretty far above the ports at the moment (75hz) so I might not matter much but worth a try. my room is pretty big so not too many issues with the bass that is handled by the subs. The peak from 90-110hz could use some love. I have 12 7” GIK monster traps which help a little bit and my entire ceiling is turned into a trap too that should reach as low as 90hz. I also have some room correction tools but have chosen not to use them at the moment. |
@james633 wrote:
Actually it’s not that much of a hassle with the M2’s + Crown iTech5000’s and the file loading of the DSP settings. Once it’s done, it’s done, and with the filter settings being preset by JBL it’s really just plug-and-play after the initially installment. You may then decide whether to tweak the settings. I’m aware though you’d be starting anew with speakers and amps and all that will require selling the stuff you currently have as well as throwing in some extra dough - that is, if you would ever get to making that decision from an informed ground of listening experience beforehand. Indeed, as an outset you may just set out to somehow get to listen to the M2’s actively with the iTech’s and see whether it appeals to you at all. I’m sure it will as the M2’s are clearly related design-wise and sonically with your 4367’s, but will the different waveguide, height of the speakers and active config. of the M2’s (in spite of different amps you may not warm to) make a worthwhile difference to you? Not trying to shove active down your throat. It’s more than that with the M2’s, but certainly a vital part nonetheless. A fairly popular and reductive assumption made about the advantage of active is simply referring to it as power efficiency and convenience (if bundled), but that’s selling active config. damn short. As you know, making an informed judgement on this matter would require of one to have the same speaker package both passively and actively for comparison, preferably the same amps too, or at least in the same overall quality ballpark, in addition of course to a high quality DSP. That being so the JBL’s make this an interessant more or less common ground to go by, and with your experience of the 4367’s would give you a solid basis for evaluation vs. their active and more pro orientered iteration. May I just make the following plead: don't let the pro-label of the M2's throw you off. Instead, go into this with an open mind (and I'm pretty sure you will).
I would have to believe there are several reasons for Greg using active config. of his Everest’s, but the important takeaway is that he does and that the sonic outcome must be something for him to strive for actively. |
? Never heard of ’force balancing’ with just the enclosure...unless you meant something else. You will need a dual opposed driver config. Examples Rythmik G22: Dual opposed 12 inch Rythmik G25HP: Dual opposed 15 inch KEF KC62: Dual opposed 6 5 KEF KC92: Dual opposed 9 inch Elac Varro DS1000bg: Dual opposed 10 inch
You could also add/cover the inner walls with some norez sheets from GR research
|