JBL Everest DD67000 vs. Avantgarde Duo Mezzo

I think I’m a fan of JBL, but not sure.

I bought my first real high end audio system, B&W 800D and second hand Classe, based on the reviews on Stereophile and the other internet review sites. It seemed to me that B&W is the safest bet for the novice like me, and I actually like them.

About a year ago, I went to an audio show with my slightly more educated ears, and tried to listen to carefully each speakers at the show. The best sounding speakers to me was JBL (I think it was DD67000) and ATC. They seem to be much better sounding speaker than mine. After the show, I checked my trusted Stereophile site again, and I found there is no review for ATC and JBL high end speakers. Only mid to low end. Since then, I have been wondering why ATC and JBL are not considered to be high end...

whart, according to the spec they are 96db efficient. I would consider that "crazy efficient".

The Everest is at the very bottom of what might be considered high efficiency and at the high end of what is considered moderate efficiency.

The woofer array is 4 ohms while the rest of the speaker is 8.

An SET is inappropriate for this speaker. The woofers are in parallel and expect that the amplifier will make twice as much power into that portion of the load or barring that, half the power into the midrange and tweeter.

For a tube amp to do this it needs a lot of negative feedback, something SETs don’t have. So if you plan to use an SET, go with the AvantGarde- you will have better luck.

Due to the efficiency, you will want at least 60 watts on this speaker in most average rooms in the US (15’ x 19’ or so) if you don’t want to clip the amp.

atmasphere, I consider your reference to a quote of mine a complement of sorts. Honestly. This because I have noted how well you articulate virtually all things audio in the numerous thread in which you post. I read the other day what you had to say about balanced cables, and admittedly found it some what educational. I imagine you are an engineer associated with this company: http://www.atma-sphere.com/ In any case, I appreciate the valued input that you and certain other rather knowledgeable people impart on the forum. An often unrecognized and unappreciated thing. Thanks.

[...]
About a year ago, I went to an audio show with my slightly more educated ears, and tried to listen to carefully each speakers at the show. The best sounding speakers to me was JBL (I think it was DD67000) and ATC. They seem to be much better sounding speaker than mine. After the show, I checked my trusted Stereophile site again, and I found there is no review for ATC and JBL high end speakers. Only mid to low end. Since then, I have been wondering why ATC and JBL are not considered to be high end...

The non-pro/-studio segment of direct radiating speakers effectively seems to have been annexed as review items by Stereophile. I do remember a very favorable review of the JBL Array 1400 some years back by said magazine, something that had me very pleasantly surprised, however it expectedly turned out to be an exception to the rule, as was the case prior to the review.

Imagine if the, say, ATC SCM150 ASL Pro (or one of their "civilly dressed" active siblings, which are likely more expensive but wholly comparable sonically) were to be held up against any of the bigger models from Wilson Audio, Magico, Raidho, Vandersteen, Revel, B&W, Tidal, etc.; they (the ATC’s) are $25,000/pair fully active speakers with 15" bass drivers, and while I’m sure there are more refined and spacially expansive/exacting alternatives to be had, I gather very few of them come close to attaining the same level of overall scale, dynamics, coherency, coolness under pressure, and tonal accuracy and honesty of the ATC’s - and you only need to add a source/DAC and possibly (but not necessarily) a preamp.

The thing with the Stereophile paradigm of sound is that of favoring refinement, laid-back sweetness, lean tonality, spacial abilities/"airyness," and a sound rid of "coloration" (which comes in many forms, one might add). And then subtract fundamental pillars such as dynamics, presence, ease, low-level resolution, and not least the importance of the reproduction of the lower mids/upper bass (and how this region is usually robbed of energy and impact). To hell with the consensus of the views of the established hi-fi community (lead on by the biggest review sites/magazines) and what they consider "high end." Your ears and independent mind are the better judges of this.

EDIT: Oh, sorry - I forgot Art Dudley's enthusiastic review of Volti Audio's all-horn Vittora's not long ago. Quite a highlight. Oh well..