JBL 4343 coming soon to Mumbai

[Deleted member 15865]

and this will show up poor source material

Why Prem? That’s what I want to understand. By poor source material I imagine we don’t mean poorly composed or played music, but poorly recorded/mastered (but well-composed and well-played) music. Are we saying such material would:

a) actually sound worse on the higher resolving audio chain that it does on a less resolving one?

OR

b) give a relative feeling of sounding much worse in contrast to a well-recorded source material which the listener gets better insight into on the higher resolving chain, while that resolving ability of the chain is wasted on the poorly recorded material which doesn’t show any more detail with the increased resolution?

In other words, does a higher resolving chain reveal some more deficiencies (if so, which) in a poorly recorded material than a lower resolving chain does? Or that it only differentiates more starkly between the sound quality of a better recorded material from a poorly recorded material and therefore the latter ‘feels’ more horrible?

 

[prem]

Hi Sachin, when I say poor source material, I am referring to some of the compressed stuff that is being streamed. For me poor source material is anything that is compressed badly. Most old Hindi songs which are streamed are terribly compressed. I was talking about such stuff. This will be unlistenable as you go higher up the chain. But an original 1960s vinyl which is uncompressed but has major recording limitations will sound glorious on a good set up. As you go higher up in the audio chain, you’ll hear more of micro dynamics and subtle variations.

 

[Bloom@83]

Hi Sachin, when I say poor source material, I am referring to some of the compressed stuff that is being streamed. For me poor source material is anything that is compressed badly. Most old Hindi songs which are streamed are terribly compressed. I was talking about such stuff.

Not just vintage Bollywood, I’d say about 90% of western pop and Bollywood mainstream albums released in CD format in the nineties and next decade (barring certain editions \ labels ) were produced in the loudness war - in an effort to sound louder than competition - all of these CDs were mixed to sound loud foremost and consequently suffered from poor dynamics. These do not sound good even on mid-fi systems.

Thankfully , jazz , soul, blues , classical genre CDs managed to escape this butchering.

 

[Deleted member 15865]

Hi Sachin, when I say poor source material, I am referring to some of the compressed stuff that is being streamed. For me poor source material is anything that is compressed badly. Most old Hindi songs which are streamed are terribly compressed. I was talking about such stuff. This will be unlistenable as you go higher up the chain. But an original 1960s vinyl which is uncompressed but has major recording limitations will sound glorious on a good set up. As you go higher up in the audio chain, you’ll hear more of micro dynamics and subtle variations.

Prem, thanks. So a more resolving system can make the missing data in a compressed file more obvious whether it is frequencies cut off or loss in detail. On a less resolving system the system’s smudging might not make that obvious. And what about an uncompressed recording which was poorly recorded (like say bad stereo imaging, poor instrument-voice separation, poor mic, studio echo/recording artefacts, etc.) - will it also sound ‘particularly’ worse on a more resolving system (than on a less resolving one) for the same reason? As I can understand from your reply, it won’t.

In other words, we don’t necessarily need audiophile quality recordings to experience the prowess of a highly resolving system. Even an original 60s Bollywood recording can suffice. On the contrary, lesser resolving systems might need such audiophile recordings with whistles and bells (such as ‘Jazz at the Pawnshop’) to make them sound good.

 

[prem]

Yes Sachin, you are spot on.

 

[arj]

Not just vintage Bollywood, I’d say about 90% of western pop and Bollywood mainstream albums released in CD format in the nineties and next decade (barring certain editions \ labels ) were produced in the loudness war - in an effort to sound louder than competition - all of these CDs were mixed to sound loud foremost and consequently suffered from poor dynamics. These do not sound good even on mid-fi systems.

Thankfully , jazz , soul, blues , classical genre CDs managed to escape this butchering.

True on Jazz/Classical.

For Bollywood it is so obvious that after listening to even an average LP , listening to a CD is practically unbearable. Although in Rock/Pop the gap is narrower especially if you have a US/UK/German pressing of the CD especially the earlier presses

 

[Bloom@83]

Good source material (the best LP pressings or CD editions or - if possible - 15ips reel to reels ) will sound fantastic even on entry level setups, whereas even the highest end setup from source player to cables cannot do anything if the material is bad.

 

[arj]

True, and higher the resolution of that, the more precision needed for speaker placement !

 

[Bloom@83]

Yes , placement is crucial.

 

[prem]

The Croft continues to amaze me. It keeps opening up more and more layers. I have probably never heard an amp that is as open, dynamic and organic sounding as Croft. On certain songs I actually feel am in a studio. This is an experience I have never had at home with any of my previous systems, irrespective of their price.

 

[arj]

Amazing discovery as usual Prem !!

 

[prem]

Arj, I hope more guys get exposed to this amp. It truly is top class.

Over the years I have realised there are two kinds of amps. Amps that impress and amps that just get out of the way and add nothing. I prefer the second category. Most high end amps belong to the first category

When you go to a live concert or listen in a studio, you don’t look around to see what equipment is being used. It’s just you and the music. The equipment used just gets out of the way. And that’s exactly what I look for in home audio too.

 

[arj]

So true and its not easy to really learn/know about amps which do this so well since reviews give a sugar coating and a rose tint to every equipment ...and user reviews are very unreliable.

Hence really great to get experiences of people like you !

 

[Decadent_Spectre]

Haven't read the full thread. OP do you have a measured FR/Phase response at LP? Also how would you describe the sound subjectively, in brief please. I am only referring to the 4343 and not anything else in the chain.

Also pardon me for asking but aren't these vintage? Where did you get them?

 

[prem]

Decadent_Spectre, I have been exposed to a lot of live music since my schooling days. I have been to a lot of recordings in studios, experienced the mixing and mastering process and heard a whole lot of final masters in studios. So I completely trust my ears when setting up something. I don’t need measurements to tell me if things are wrong. The day I have to depend on measurements to tell me I am wrong, I will sell my system since I obviously have lost my listening skills

On a separate note, in the past I have had my room scientifically measured and treated, using Real Traps. I also got Rives Audio to help treat my room. But I didn’t like it. The harmonics was getting killed. I also experimented with other forms of non conventional room treatment like resonators. Franck Tchang guided me through this process. This approach was interesting but pretty expensive. Ultimately I ditched everything and preferred a non treated room. Fortunately my room is large enough to allow me optimal placement.

The JBL 4343 are studio speakers from 1976. It’s a 4 way. A lot of classic rock albums have been mastered on them. I got them from Japan. They have been completely restored to original specs in Japan.

I was going through some of your earlier threads. I realised you are into pro audio. I also saw you were selling some Danley stuff. I love their speakers. Maybe some day I will get their SH50 when I can get a separate room for my audio

 

[Hari Iyer]

I am getting similar experience with my amp and speakers like @prem

 

[Decadent_Spectre]

Maybe you misunderstood, I was only curious about measurements as a guideline. I myself am a subjectivist with some objectivity thrown in to understand the subjectivity, the objective part is not my goal at all. If you are used to studio recordings I imagine you might like a bit of HF in your sound? Is that correct? Perhaps even a little "dry"?

Untreated rooms vs treated rooms is a subjective call IMO, some prefer the livleiness of an untreated room while others will prefer the smoothness and control of a treated room I think.

When you say restored do you mean they are originals that were restored or do you mean they are copies of the originals?

I am into pro audio, that's correct. Which Danley speakers have you heard? Don't you already have a separate room for the 4343?

 

[prem]

I don’t like dry sound. Nor do I like excess HF. I always look for a balanced sound. JBL bass unlike ATC is not dry sounding. Also the 4343 I have is all Alnico.

My 4343 is in my living room. I have heard the SH 50. I almost bought it when it was introduced around 2006.

The 4343 is all original

 

[Decadent_Spectre]

I see. Flat then?

Where did you hear it? Any other speakers?

Could you point me to the people who do these restorations?

 

[prem]

I heard the Danley SH 50 in US. I bought the 4343 from Hifido Japan. You can check with them about the restorations. They will clearly tell you what changes, if any, have been done.

The 4343 is an easy speaker to drive. Pretty much flat impedance of 6 -8 ohms. It sounds pretty flat with a touch of warmth which I guess is because of the Alnico magnets.