Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: JBL 4722n vs QSC 2150

This is topic JBL 4722n vs QSC 2150 in forum Film Handlers' Forum at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=011808

Posted by Steven Smith (Member # 8350) on 04-15-2015, 01:15 PM:

Hey guys, for those who've installed or heard both of these which do you prefer? Both being properly tuned to the room of course. These would be for a large HT. Smoothness, vocals, dynamics are are of high priority. I know the 4722 is well liked speaker, yet I've also read good things about the 2150 and I know how much you guys like QSC. Pros and Cons?

Thanks!

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 04-15-2015, 01:27 PM:

QSC by a long shot. The JBL is not going to come close to the dialog intelligibility you'll get out of the QSC. JBL stuff is nothing but crap today, 30 to 40 year old designs, now much of which is made in Mexico and China! I don't even bother with JBL any more.

Mark

Posted by Steven Smith (Member # 8350) on 04-15-2015, 03:08 PM:

Do you feel that strongly about the two speakers in question? I've read some really good things about the 4722 suggesting it's one of JBLs better speakers.

Posted by Marcel Birgelen (Member # 6801) on 04-15-2015, 05:38 PM:

I'm not so much in hate with the JBL like Mark and I don't think the speaker is pure junk. But if I had to choose between the JBL 4722n and QSC 2150 the choice is easy, the QSC wins hands down. Not only is it a three way system, but the high frequencies are reproduced much cleaner on the QSC, resulting in a better intelligible dialog, which in my opinion, is very important.

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 04-15-2015, 09:20 PM:

Seriously, All I install any more is QSC... for like the last 5 years. I've installed a lot of sets of the SC-2150's and they would be hard to come close to at twice the price.

BTW: How deep is the room you intend to use them in?

Mark

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 04-16-2015, 06:08 AM:

quote: Marcel Birgelen
Not only is it a three way system, but the high frequencies are reproduced much cleaner on the QSC, resulting in a better intelligible dialog, which in my opinion, is very important.

I completely agree on the dialog part. However, in general, a good 2-way beats an economy 3-way almost every time. It is much harder to get three things to match up than 2 things and the crossover points are another. In the SC-2150's case, that would at 2200Hz...right smack dab in the middle of the most sensitive part of the dialog range so you are going to have voices reproduced by both a cone and compression driver at that sensitive area. How well that is going to perform is dependent on the similarities of the two drivers and the crossover too.

The 2150 stands over 55-inches tall with the spread between the HF and LF driver larger than a 2-way like the 4722. In a home theatre, where your distance to speaker is typically going to be relatively short, this may also prove to hamper the perceived audio.

From QSC, in the home, there is a 412 and 413 (2-way and 3-way respectively). They also have new speakers for small rooms...not surprisingly 2-ways. The 1120, 1150. And their reference monitor (3-way but no midrange...two compression drivers) The 112.

But since you are going to listen to them YOU should audition what you are going to buy and not listen to any of us. I don't care what brand/model of speaker, you are going to find someone that things it is the bee's knees. Likewise, someone will have heard an awesome speaker in an unfavorable condition and think it is total crap so all you are left with is opinions. For my own home theatre, I'd used neither of the options but that is my personal opinion.

For cinemas, the JBL 4722 is an extremely cost effective speaker that gets the job done. It isn't the best thing in the world and doesn't claim to be and neither does the SC-2150...it is made to "fit" where their better stuff like the SC-423C won't but only a fool would take an SC-2150 over the SC-423C...they are both 3-ways from QSC but they are definitely not the same speaker. I also really like the SC-424...it is by far the best high-frequency system that I've worked with and an absolutely pleasure to set up and listen to. But I wouldn't use it in my home unless I had a theatre like Brad's that is effectively an actual commercial cinema in size.

Posted by Steven Smith (Member # 8350) on 04-16-2015, 06:58 AM:

Thanks for all the advice guys.

Steve I completely agree and I was hoping you would chime in as I know you like the 4722 and like Mark I know you know your stuff. How do you feel it compares directly to the 2150 besides being a 3 way but purely sound wise? Have you heard the 2150?

Mark, Thanks as well. You too Marcel!

The room is 22x16 with 10.5' ceilings. 2 rows, 16" riser, seats at 12' and 17'. Besides the front 3 I'll have rears, dual surrounds, wides, atmos. A baffle wall with 18" of space behind will be installed. 4 corner loaded hidden 18" subs. QSC 1644 to feed the front 3 (needed an amp as the atomos AVRs need an amp to run some of the channels.

BAck when I bought the 2150s (found them NIB for just $440 each) I contacted Sam Hynes from QSC (also a member here) and we discussed getting the room right and if they would work well in my room, Acoustics, aiming, baffle wall etc. The enviorment should work very well.

I know it's more speaker than I need but JBL 3677, 4722 and other pro designs have made a splash in home theater on AVS. I've owned the 3677 and loved them. My house and theater are currently being built. While testing these 2150s out I've noticed insane projection of detail. One scene from dumb and dumber they're in a hot tub and I was stunned , it sounded like I was surrounded by water and hot tub jets(this was in 2 channel testing). I hooked my Paradigms up and replayed the scene and the sound was hardly audible, they dominated the Paradigms in so many ways. It's not as much about SPL (although undistorted reference is important) but these speakers do so much else that I haven't heard elswhere, dyanamics, vocals, imaging are all top notch. This is why they've become popular on AVS. Of course over there QSC hasn't really been given a chance..It's all JBL and no one has really tried QSC.

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 04-16-2015, 10:30 AM:

quote: Steven Smith
While testing these 2150s out I've noticed insane projection of detail. One scene from dumb and dumber they're in a hot tub and I was stunned , it sounded like I was surrounded by water and hot tub jets(this was in 2 channel testing). I hooked my Paradigms up and replayed the scene and the sound was hardly audible, they dominated the Paradigms in so many ways.

It sounds to me, you've already made your choice (or you should have based on that statement).

Posted by Steven Smith (Member # 8350) on 04-16-2015, 11:57 AM:

Well I have 3 of the QSC 2150s waiting for the new room. On AVS we were having a discusion about JBL 4722. And I kinda threw a wrench commenting that QSC has kinda taken over and proven it self above JBL as far as most of the Pro installers (you guys) are concerned. That turned the topic to which is the better speaker (smoother, more dynamic, better vocals etc) , the 2150 or 4722, and how big of a difference is it? Honestly we don't have enough knowledge to do anything but speculate as lugging these huge things around the country to get together and have blind test would be an enormous pain.

We don't really have the chance to setup and use these speakers like you guys do to the point where yall basically have more knowledge on the speakers in question than all of us combined would ever have. So I figured I may as well as the Pros. So it was not only for me, but to get a feel of how they compared from those with the most experience with them.

Also if you guys felt the 4722 was a clearly better speaker than the 2150 I would definitely make the switch. Of course thankfully that doesn't seem to be the case.

Posted by Marco Giustini (Member # 4544) on 04-16-2015, 02:14 PM:

As Steve said you don't want to trust 'us' or anybody else. You have to test the speakers yourself, possibly in your room. What I like may not be what you are looking for.
Also be aware of what Steve said, again: in a small room a large speaker may be a disadvantage.

Personally, for what matters, I cannot recommend QSC.

Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 04-21-2015, 08:09 AM:

Even different models in the same series from the same manufacturer sound radically different. Brand to brand there is at least as much difference. Almost every speaker has its own personality which we call coloration. Which is best? Get one you like; everything will be filtered through it and you will like what you hear.

Posted by Robert Koch (Member # 3728) on 04-21-2015, 07:09 PM:

Steve is correct,as usual, on the 3 way vs 2 way horn systems. WE tried it years ago {Wide Range] and it was found wanting and years later with the advent of WE 594 hf and 515 lf, even with a passive crossover proved the folly of the three way.If you have transducers capable of the whole audible range, why introduce a third unit presenting additional phasing problems.