An audiophile dilemma


A friend of mine just bought the JBL PRX635 stage speakers and they sound just great!
These are not the typical high end speakers that are in demand among audiophiles and they cost far less than their high end siblings.
Sometimes I wonder if all the money is well spent, because for far less $$ someone can become an owner of a pair of these JBL's and be happy for the rest of his life.
Are those high end (and very expensive) speakers really better than the JBL's?

Chris
dazzdax
Rok2id, everyone makes assumptions, as you have. I will point out two things to put your awe, good or bad, into perspective:

1. It seems you had an "aquisition problem" which you needed to quit, as you say, "I was out of control." You are to be commended for reining in the impulsivity, which would not be easy. This would make perfect sense why you now own a modest rig and do not seek to hear every new/hot item. When one has to practice a forced contentment to combat impulses then an aggressive stance against the demon of desire is good!

But, did your acquisition fever switch to media? How big is your media collection? I find it interesting how some audiophiles have a "media bias," in that they think they are a bit better than gearheads. My media collection is quite small. I have very defined taste/criteria for my listening, as well as for its performance, so I have not spent tens of thousands on media (If the numbers are crunched it is scary how much can be spent in a lifetime on media!). The media I have is dearly loved and used; I don't have hundreds of pieces of media sitting around unused. But the media I play is exquisitely performed, just the way I like.

I'm actually quite pleased by this now that I can get the world online. I feel vindicated that I didn't spend tens of thousands on media but put the money on systems to play it back. I think that was a wise move long term. And look what I have to show for it - a nice audio system with variety to it rather than stacks and stacks of discs collecting dust and only one form of expression of the music. Some people justify spending $20-25 for an album which will sit along with dozens of others. All those $20-25 decisions I chose to put toward systems. I use all the stuff I buy, gear and media, so that could be a difference between us, perhaps.

Yes, I LOVE the equipment, which is why I focus on it rather than stacks of discs. Some people take pictures to proudly show off their media collection, but no one says, "How shallow! What a waste! Look at all the unnecessary money they spent..." Pursuit of variety in systems is every bit as legitimate a hobby in audiophilia as collecting media and having a more modest system. It may be that you have spent as much as I have when media and system is combined.

2. You misconstrue my agenda; I could have one fantastic speaker system, but have learned about myself that is not what brings me more satisfaction. I am trying to broaden the understanding in the community that a variety of technology at whatever level and price point is as compelling - I assert even more compelling - as having "the One," the supposed perfect speaker. A guy with a variety of three good $1K speakers may have far more fun and enjoyment than having one $5K speaker. This is not to be taken as endorsement of poorer quality, but of variety being a compelling element to enjoyment. Even though I point that out generally in my comments on the system, you seemed to have simply looked at the pics and drawn a hasty conclusion.

3. Lastly, I have spent 20 plus years of consistent annual budgeting and controlled spending on audio to attain a very high level. If you want to call that getting even for something, feel free. I call that sensible, successful and blessed long term planning and execution.

I am done with our discussion. Blessings to you. :)

BTW, you have excellent taste in affordable audio racks. :)
Not sure how this got missed in this discussion, but a major factor in the preference for this speaker over that one goes back to the fact that people differ considerably as to how they prioritize the many sonic variables involved.

On a very simple level, the designer has to juggle dozens upon dozens of variables, making choices along the way. Inevitably some things get sacrificed for others. The cone material and voice coil configuration that handles extreme volume peaks well may not be the perfect choice for another sonic consideration. Super-expensive parts may help to some degree, but alone will never solve all the problems.

Hence, one very expensive "great" speaker rarely sounds like another very expensive "great" speaker.

A good example for me are the Wilson speakers. They are highly regarded, but the times I've heard them they've never impressed me as having a natural sound. I call it the "Kodachrome" effect -- in my book, the designer just couldn't resist the temptation to juice things up a bit compared to live acoustic music.

That said, I recognise that Wilson has a serious following who think they are the penultimate in speaker design. Lots of people think Wilson came up with the perfect balance in speaker design an lots of others don't.

There will never be a universal consensus as to what the perfect speaker should do. There are just too many variables in play and too many differing opinions about priorities.
Mlsstl, I agree. I tried to touch on the point when I compared the $10,000 Quads to $100,000 behemoths. There are some things the Quads can do that a big pair of Wilsons can't, and vice-versa. I don't think anything will beat the Quads for acoustical music at moderate levels, and that makes them great speakers -- but not for people who want to rock out. And if you do need high SPL's, do you go with the more colored sound of a Wilson (you aren't alone in your observation) or the accuracy of a Magico? Or do you sacrifice a bit of that level and go for the even better accuracy and imaging of a huge electrostatic like the Sound Labs?

At every level, the speaker to get is the one that best fits our needs, and these may occupy very different price points, because some attributes that some people need -- loud deep accurate bass, say -- are costlier to provide than others.
From my limited experience with pro-monitors, they put you inside the recording studio not in row C or H. That means they collapse the soundstage and don't float images in a 3D holographic way as most audiophile speakers do. Maybe mid-field monitors like the JBL-LSR6332 do a better job of creating a 3D soundstage illusion? When I demoed the ATC-SCM 11 soundstaging was their major weakness even though they excelled in many other ways.
Douglas_schroeder,
I could not agree more with your comments about investing in "the hobby".