This is topic Using Surround Speakers at Home in forum Film-Yak 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=8;t=001056
Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 07-21-2002, 04:06 PM:
I may decide to purchase some JBL-8330's or some EV surround speakers from a cinema that I'm upgrading to 8340's.Any thoughts on whether I will run into trouble using the same model speaker in a home theatre for the main channels and also the surrounds?
In other words, are these speakers ill-suited for use as main channels? Are they unsuitable for home theatre application?
Posted by Ron Lacheur (Member # 1126) on 07-21-2002, 04:17 PM:
I was thinking the same thing...For Surround speakers they shouldn't be a problem. I believe they are 8 Ohms so there shouldn't be any compatibility issues.
Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 07-21-2002, 04:48 PM:
I know people who are using 8340s as left, center, right, left surround and right surround. It makes a perfect match between stage and surround channels for small "living room sized" home theaters. Just add sub and make sure you turn off the cinema rolloff. The systems sound pretty damn good too. I am currently using 8340s on my computer. 
Posted by Mike Schindler (Member # 1309) on 07-21-2002, 08:46 PM:
Doesn't the Widescreen Review actually recommend using identical speakers for all channels if possible?
Posted by Jason Black (Member # 684) on 07-21-2002, 10:18 PM:
Any idea on where to pick up some 8330's or 8340's at a decent price?
Posted by Ron Lacheur (Member # 1126) on 07-22-2002, 03:42 AM:
it is recommended that the LCR speakers are at least made by the same manufacturer. This is to assure that they are timbre matched. Or at least that's what all the magazines are saying 
Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 07-22-2002, 05:08 AM:
...and yet people STILL buy those crappy mini little center speakers! The most important speaker in the entire system, and it's a little piece of junk!!! What were they thinking???(and yes I know of the "magnetically shielded" argument, but if you're going to do it, you mine as well do it right and get 3 matching speakers for the screen.)
Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 07-22-2002, 08:13 AM:
Twas what I did. I bought a 6-pack of JBL Control 1s. Mag shielded and sound decent enough. There is also that JBL B460 18" sub to ensure the bottom end is fine too.Steve
------------------
"Old projectionists never die, they just changeover!"
Posted by Antonio Marcheselli (Member # 373) on 07-22-2002, 01:03 PM:
Brad,I Absolutely agree with you!!! Center channel is the MOST important, why should be the smaller one...
Bye
Antonio
Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 07-22-2002, 03:52 PM:
Oh Steve, Steve, Steve. 
Posted by Richard Fowler (Member # 893) on 07-22-2002, 04:31 PM:
Possibly the Control I has that "Altec" timber that he loves 
Richard Fowler
TVP-Theatre & Video Products Inc. www.tvpmiami.com
Posted by Darren Briggs (Member # 1071) on 07-22-2002, 05:18 PM:
I Agree with Steve,
JBL Control 1 speakers sound damn fine, we use them in the cinema bar and I bought a pair for home studio use and are great when used with a Sub.Darren
Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 07-22-2002, 05:27 PM:
Not to worry Richard...I have a pair of Altec 604s as well. I also have a pair of JBL L-250s.Steve
------------------
"Old projectionists never die, they just changeover!"
Posted by Justin McLeod (Member # 1329) on 07-22-2002, 09:28 PM:
I use 5 identical home JBL speakers with a 12 inch JBL sub at home for my system. they are all horn driven and accompanied by a single 8 inch woofer. They dont sound very good if you are using a reciever but i have never heard a reciever system i have personally liked. Go seperates based if you can for any system.
Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 07-22-2002, 10:29 PM:
I have control 1's on the home HiFI and A6's behind the screen in the screening room
best of both worlds
Posted by Mike Schindler (Member # 1309) on 07-23-2002, 01:24 AM:
I have a couple Magnavox speakers which came in a box with my first Pro-Logic receiver for my FL/FR channels, a couple of KLH speakers for my two rear channels, and a really nice Sony speaker which I got on sale for $125 at Best Buy for my center channel. I used to have an Aiwa subwoofer, but I figured the neighbors probably wouldn't appreciate that too much. I'm high-end.
Posted by Adam Fraser (Member # 1074) on 07-23-2002, 12:34 PM:
Steve,
I also had a pair of Altec 604 E's hooked to my sound set-up for a couple of years. Some of the cleanest and most complete sound that I have ever heard from a speaker. But, they went to a good home via e-bay for about $1,000/pair when I was short on cash (college is expensive). Someday I'll have another pair. ------------------
Adam Fraser
www.pinestheatre.com
Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 07-23-2002, 05:26 PM:
The 604K are also quite nice, I have the 604G. The 604K have the Mantaray horns.JBL has their LSR series of monitors...the little one is the LSR-25P that is like a high-end control 1 but bi-amped and has built in amplifiers!!!
Steve
------------------
"Old projectionists never die, they just changeover!"
Posted by Mike Olpin (Member # 1115) on 07-24-2002, 11:45 AM:
I absolutly LOVE the 8330. (wish i had a pair of my own!) Most of the theatres I went to when I was a kid had them.On a slightly related note:
A few of the theatres used a seperate JBL suround speaker with the 8330. They were really small and looked kind of funny. Mann seemed to use them in their 80's theatres. The only theatre left in my area that uses them is the Mann Hazard Center 7.
What model number are they? Do they just take care of the high end?
Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 07-24-2002, 04:48 PM:
Mike, what do you mean by "used a seperate JBL suround speaker with the 8330."?I pretty much know the JBL product line of the past and present. The 8000 series started as utility foreground music systems. The 8330 was the out-growth of the 8325. The 8325 was nearly identical to the 8330 in components but did not have a cinema EQ on it and it arranged the drivers in a vertical orientation.
A little more on the JBL lore...the "8" was the 8000 series (kinda like we have the 3000, 4000, and 5000 series stage speakers), the "3" was to signify a 3-way, which the 8325 and 8330 was. When the next speaker came out, the 8340 and 8333, they blew their naming convention since both were 2-ways but were given the higher number to signify superiority. To make matters worse, when what is now known as the 3310 came out, it was initially designated the 8310 to keep with the same series (8000) as the other surround speakers but was changed to the 3000 series (entry level cinema) instead.
Some used the 8216 as a surround speaker in smaller cinemas (2-way and quite small). Perhaps that is your funny little speaker?
Steve
------------------
"Old projectionists never die, they just changeover!"
Posted by Adam Martin (Member # 641) on 07-24-2002, 07:19 PM:
I prefer the JBL 90210.
Posted by Jason Black (Member # 684) on 07-24-2002, 07:28 PM:
I must be confusing myself with this thread. We currently use 8330's as surrounds in all houses. Or might I have my model # wrong?
Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 07-25-2002, 08:14 AM:
Hey, Steve: Is it possible that they got the initial inspiration for the first digit ("3" for screen speakers and "8" for surrounds) based on the typical quantity used in an installation?Is there a way to make sense out of the model numbers they assigned to the transducers? What's really the difference between a 2035H and a 2226H? I wanna know, dammit!
For Jason: JBL 8330's are intended as cinema surround speakers and you could indeed have them in all of your theatres. How come you were thinking that you got confused?
Posted by Jason Black (Member # 684) on 07-25-2002, 09:04 AM:
I guess I got a little conflustered when I sped-read Steve G's post.. All those numbers...
Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 07-25-2002, 12:41 PM:
I doubt 8330's have enough range to be used as front speakers in the home. And I HATE sending the low end of the front speakers to the sub. Combine that with the discrete subwoofer channel and you just have too much sub going on. Lame. Fortunately each of my speakers in my home theater speaker can shake the room, even the surrounds. They are all KLH. My surround speakers have a better dynamic range and frequency response than theater surround speakers. They are floor standing. Not those teeny tiny little things you get in "Home Theater in a Box" packages. JBL 8330's or 8340's simply cannot shake da room. I also have a subwoofer that only reproduces sound meant discretely for it.
Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 07-25-2002, 01:18 PM:
Joe be boom shake shake shakin da room.
Posted by Ian Price (Member # 14) on 07-25-2002, 01:21 PM:
I'd be proud to run either one as my main stage channels & surrounds in a home cinema or video application. I have heard 8330s used in a film screening room as main stage channels to great effect.
Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 07-25-2002, 01:41 PM:
Scott-
Word yo.If I had a smaller room the 8330's would probably be perfect. I know the 8330's sound a teeny bit better but lack the power handling capability of the 8340. But I'm sure da difference iz marginal.
Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 07-25-2002, 01:54 PM:
First, a big bulge. Now, it's a big room.What a showoff!
Posted by Justin McLeod (Member # 1329) on 07-25-2002, 02:54 PM:
Why only 100 watts for pink noise testing and 200 watts for continues programming?
Posted by Ian Price (Member # 14) on 07-25-2002, 03:32 PM:
Remember that most theatres have between 6 and 16 of these dividing the power between them. One theatre I worked at had 36 of these on the walls of one auditorium. And even if the speaker can handle 200 watts you can still hook up to a 1,000 watt amp, you just can't feed it 1,000 watts continuously.
Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 07-25-2002, 05:37 PM:
As to the naming schemes...NO the "8" and "3" have nothing to do with the typical quantity. The 8000 series predates JBL offering an Offical surround speaker. Some used their 8000 series of foreground speakers, some used utility speakers like the 4612.As to their driver convention. The 2000 series is going to be a bass driver. The 2226 is the evolution of the 2220 drivers. As in the 2226 replaced the 2225.
The 2226 is a bad-ass of a driver, it will handle 600 watts of continious pink noise. It has a rather cleaver cooling system too to minimize power compression
The 2035 is the lookalike driver to the 2226 but it only has a 3" voice coil (the 2226 has a 4"). It handles about half the power too. It was brought about to be loaded into cabinets that will have passive crossovers (first in the JBL 4670D and 4675C). Since the passive crossovers could not handle the 1200 watts the 2226 could handle, this allowed JBL to have a lower cost driver since the 2035 can adequately handle the lower powered passive systems. I don't know if it is the rooms they were in but I have had much better success with the 2226. For the most part, my systems are bi-amped.
Another difference is that the 2226 is available as a raw driver, the 2035 is not...it is only sold in finished systems.
As to the power handling...the continious pink noise is set up by the AES and is a standard in terms of the bandwith of the pink noise and the duration. Continious program is merely double that power (or 3dB more). "Peak" power is often double continious program.
So in the case of the 2226, you have 600 continious pink noise, 1200 watts of continous program and 2400 watts peak. Is that a bad-ass or what?
The JBL 2242 is even more of a humdinger...it's numbers are 800/1600/3200. However, I generally disregard the peak power and in the case of subwoofers, only look at continious pink noise.
Steve
------------------
"Old projectionists never die, they just changeover!"
Posted by Peter Dougherty (Member # 686) on 07-26-2002, 09:45 PM:
For home theatre use, I must strongly recommend a Canadian line of speakers called Paradigm. When I built my home theatre last summer I must have researched and auditioned about 30 diffrent Home Theatre setups, and after the smoke cleared, the only ones left worth buying were the Paradigms. While I can't say I compared JBL cinema surrounds in that mix (and I'd love to do so if the opportunity ever presents itself), I can say that these are the most natural sounding and clear speakers I've ever used.I went with the Monitor series--Monitor 7s for L & R, CC370 for a shielded centre (yes, the shielding is most definitely needed!), two ADP370s for surrounds (bipolar) and a PDR-10 sub. I would up using my old centre-channel speaker for the surround-back channel. Everything all said and done, I paid about $1600 Canadian. I actually drove to Canada and bought them, then got the taxes back at the border. Even with hotel bills and gas, etc, I came out MUCH further ahead than if I'd bought everything here in NYC.
Used my Gold Line RTA to try and optimize everything in my 12 x 20' room, but there are some serious accousitcal limitations to what I can do. I have a serious peak at 33, 60 and 90Hz and a huge gaping hole between 1K and 2.5K (down 30+ dB), Since I'm renting, I'll be damned if I'm going to put any money into someone else's living room!
Still, even with the accoustical problems I have, those Paradigms are simply amazing with every type of source material I can throw at it, be it CDs, ordinary TV or 6.1 DVDs. I'd love to compare this system to one made of cinema-grade JBLs or EVs, etc.
------------------
Cheers,
Peter, W2IRT
No trees were harmed in creating this message, however several thousand electrons were terribly inconvenienced.