JTR RS1s (18” sealed subs) vs JL Audio E112s, (JBL 4367)

@james633 wrote:

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.

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. 

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. 

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:

I will not argue against the advantages of active systems. It is just a lot of messing around.

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 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 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.