You're the other person Here who has these as LCR's and doesn't have a video of it. I actually didn't think ppl had these as LCR's lol. Watch my Triple JBL Studio 570 review and maybe it will give you the video making itch. Have recently changed the surround channels to Arena 130's and the sub to an Infinity PS28. It sound like 400% more premium now, prob will have update segment in 530 review sometime.

Sounds pretty awesome!

Wow. Can you say more about the ATCs. It's not a common speaker.

Thank you very, very much!

Would like to replace my DIY QSC 2150s front stage. I wonder if these would be a better replacement. So far I cant find anything close to replacing them.

@@bionicbob1285 These are the best speakers I've ever heard. I've heard a lot. I have not heard the Salon 2's however. I read Johns comparison between the two speakers. Where the M2 excels over the Salon 2 is dynamics. Percussion sounds insanely realistic on these things. The wider dispersion on the Salon 2's make for a larger, more enveloping sound stage, which is what drew people to them. But both are extremely accurate. With that said, I'd take a serious look at the new SCL-1's if you have the means. Looks to me like it's an improved M2. The M2 was the first with all the waveguide technology, which then trickled into other products. They've had the time now to perfect it, and then the SCL-1 gets released. I'm dying to hear those. Because of Covid, nobody has even seen these in person yet to my knowledge.

So Much Awesome. I'm astounded three of these which you have would be so nice to have now that will dream home theater for me. ✌️

@@LIMuscleBlackdevil MAKE A VIDEO about ur Triple M2's. You have permission to take footage from my Triple JBL Studio 570 review and make fun of me the whole time for being cheaper and inferior.

@@raidendigital1003 I'll never make fun of another persons home theater. Especially one with great gear. But maybe I will make a video of my home theater room. Not entirely sure of the best way to record the room.

Funny you mention the 4367. That's one I've been trying to get a hold of to test and review but haven't had any luck so far. Sometimes I wish I lived in a big city where I could find more people with these cool toys who would want to come hang out with me for a day and test some speakers. 😀

@@ErinsAudioCorner I’m in the NYC area, where are you? I would gladly loan you the 4367’s to test.. but, they’re 135 lbs..

@@pioferro Oh, I'm in north Alabama. So that ain't happening. LOL. As for the weight, the M2 weighs about 130 lbs as does the Danley I measured. So, if someone has a pair to loan, I can make it happen. :D

And also to pad the tweeter and protect against turn-on pops.

No doubt! Thanks for watching. :)

Thanks!

If you're in the states, a pair of M2's can be had with the required crown DSP amps (with factory warranty) for

Between those two, I'd personally go with the M2. I prefer the wider sound radiation pattern of the M2.

@@bartl006 Thanks bartl006. Unfortunately I'm not in the States so the prices are crazy here! I did get to spend time auditioning a 4367 last year and it was awesome. Not so awesome was the price- the rrp here was way more than the M2 although they are so similar.

@@ErinsAudioCorner Thanks a lot for your input Erin. I realize they are very different in their designs. I'll never likely get the chance of hearing both the Danley's and the M2's around the same time- so you're input and thoughts are invaluable. I know over the years of reading at avs forum, I've read sooooo many converts to the M2s, even after the Sh50s.

any other brands these would compare too? Sound signature wise? I owned Mirage M3si, Klipsch Academy & Chorus 2, B&W cdm2, & 802D as well as DIY QSC 2150, Philharmonic BMR, Fusion 12 tempest, etc etc.

@@bionicbob1285 Not really. The GedLee Abbeys I had were similar and not full range so it's hard to compare apples to apples. The M2's really are in a league of their own if you look at the total speaker design and not just the spins (e.g. SPL). All those you listed are far from a CD designed speaker. Look at the D&D 8c if you want well measuring and fit in any type of room. The M2's are big and take quite a room/system to make them work properly.

I should also mention that if you want to get a taste of what M2's sound like you can certainly buy a pair of the much less expensive LSR series. Keep in mind there is no replacement for displacement but you'll get a feel. Also, the well reviewed Kali is an option too. *Charles Sprinkle who is the designer of the Kali worked for Harman for years.

@@jasonw6993 I did listen to the HDI series and was shocked at how good they sound. Impressive soundstage for a small speaker

Well, that’s just what I heard. And the thing about this speaker is you can easily EQ it to your liking. That’s what I would do; maybe add a gentle shelf filter in the tweeter’s DSP section. Edit: and thanks for the smoke! I appreciate it!

They're designed to be as accurate as possible, that's why they remain flat rather than slope as the frequency increases. Out of the box, they're accurate. Just eq them to your liking. I'd rather have an accurate speaker I can tailor to my liking than an inaccurate speaker with it's own sound signature.

@@LIMuscleBlackdevil remember: flat anechoic is different from flat in-room, though. You can have flat on-axis anechoic but a sloped in-situ response. The rather wide and constant radiation pattern combined with the flat on-axis response make the in-situ response pretty flat as well, which is what can give the sense of “a tad bright” to some (myself included).

@@ErinsAudioCorner In mixing situations for theater, I believe the practice is to use an X-curve anyway for mid field monitors. So while that flat curve can seem bright, I think the intention was to release as accurate a speaker as possible, that can then be tailored to however the end consumer sees fit. On the Spinorama for the M2, the high frequencies actually slop upwards around 10 kHz. The listening window measures flat.

@@LIMuscleBlackdevil certainly not as flat as some other speakers Ive seen.

Wouldn't the compliment be "they just sound real!" & "believable."?

Yes, that is my understanding as well. That said, I do have friends who use these in home audio/theater settings.

I honestly can't say. I had the luxury of listening to the DD8C in stereo and I didn't have that for the M2. Output-wise, the M2 wins, hands down. Though, the DD8C is no slouch there, either and IIRC didn't have any issues reaching >100dB at 4 meters *full range*. The thing, though, is they are very different designs... I wish I had the ability to really do some listening of both in stereo at the same time.

I’ll see what I can do.

@@ErinsAudioCorner Amazing. Thanks!

M&K S150 written review here: erinsaudiocorner.com/loudspeakers/m_and_k_s150/

It’s an active speaker. I talked about the actual test SPL level in the video.

@@ErinsAudioCorner yeah but since the amplifier is interchangeable, sensitivity is relevant again.

Yep. Which is why I specifically mentioned the SPL level tested was actually about 86dB and that the Klippel script just scales it to 0.30v rather than showing the actual input voltage to the amp.

Thanks!

I’d love to get a 4367 to test as well.

The 4367 isn’t even in the same family as M2’s in many ways.

@@jasonw6993 correct, that's why I said it's the "prosumer'" version. : ) I.e., a baby M2 for the enthusiast (not high-end professional gear)

My uncle mixed one of his more recent albums on M2s and was so blown away, he got a pair of 4367s for his home. They are freaking incredible. He hasn't used very descriptive words but he says it basically sounds as he expected (and desired) after creating his album on M2s.

@@vinnytube1001 That's what a good speaker should elicit; not many subjective words. It's hard to find words to describe the sound when it sounds accurate.

okay... I'll give you my address and you can send me yours. 👍😬

@@ErinsAudioCorner wait, no!!! not like that!!

I didn't. I should have. I really wish I had another to listen in stereo.

4305P

Yea, there are DIY designs out there. In fact, I tested a DIY amp/miniDSP combo initially - which the M2 owner brought over - but purposely left that information out of my review as to not confuse people on what the review was about.

Yep. F10 is 21Hz. So once you get below about 35Hz it rolls off quickly. In most rooms, though, they should do well to upper 20’s I’d expect.

The 4367 white paper I link in my review on my site has the FR for the woofer. I’d imagine one could find the response for the waveguide but I haven’t looked.

The waveguide and driver together have a peak of several dB at around 3 kHz which requires EQ to address. The waveguide for the 4367 must have a similar issue (though I have not measured that one), because the passive crossover includes to notch filters (tuned close to each other) to flatten response.

two notch filters…

@stevenswall Yeah, for the price, I'd like to have seen the port and cabinet issues addressed. Perhaps in the future with an M3 or M2 MK-II as you suggested. These have been on the market quite a while as you know, and JBL has already produced "MK II" versions of some of their lower line "LSR" models (due to similar issues) that have been on the market for not nearly as long as the M2. Yet, these OG M2 still sound fantastic, and the effects of these measured "issues" haven't been distinctly noted as detrimentally audible in-room (AFAIK).

It's a pro studio monitor so it's designed to have a very flat and extended frequency response. Not all Harman products are tuned to the curve, especially not the pro ones.

I specify a ton of Genelec and they solve many problems for me. That I can keep the same sound between four sizes of rooms in a complex is a godsend. The M2 is in different league. They are also four time the size of a 8260.

@@dannelson6980 In a different league how? How are you measuring it? They are louder. That is the single advantage I see. Note: louder doesn't mean more dynamic unless you are pushing up against the upper limit of a speaker. The average dynamic range of most modern music doesn't exceed 10-15dB. Sure the M2 would be great if I'm listening from so far away Genelecs can't go loud enough, but after seeing this I'd likely try the Genelec 1000 series that seems just as gimped: non-coaxial, parallel cabinet walls, SPL prioritized over even response.

@@stevenswall Unfortunately getting studio monitors manufacturers to release any useful measurements and therefore modeling files is close impossible. Even Genelec seems to only have EASE and CFL files for the 4000 series loudspeakers. In Situ we use a combination of NTI, SMAART, TEF, AudioTools, Tektronix, and Fluke. There is nothing we can do about the loudspeaker, the interaction between the loudspeaker and the room what we can measure and adjust. The 1000 series has been around a long time. Pretty standard stuff, on the other hand stuff that is well understood. If you are looking at both of these fairly pricy loudspeakers, place like Cutting Edge Audio might be able to demo both for you. While the LF driver of the M2 is pretty standard, the compression driver and horn has never been seen before. It has single driver handling most of the most critical bandwidth. It has both excellent transit response and LF extension. It has the ability to move large amount of air when needed yet have this almost massless transit response. To me transit response is extremely important and rarely measured. If this channel or another with a Klippel could output a CFL of the loudspeakers they test it would fantastic. If I remember right that process is 50 to 100 hours of work. So I don't see it happening

@@dannelson6980 I'm really happy with the measurements Genelec puts out and prioritize even frequency response, bass extension, and off axis dispersion. A Genelec system of the same price as the M2 system seems far better.

@@stevenswall In the end I don't know if you are mixing or just listening. If you are happy with what you have stay with it. Especially if you are mixing trust what you know. That said if you can listen to the M2 go out of your way to do so. I used to call the B&W 801 vacation, I might call the M2 heaven. While I have complete faith in measurements, I also know we do not come close measuring everything.

Yep. I’ve got some others to get through before but they are in the queue.

If the whole world went blind today the audiophile industry would wither overnight.

Yea, very simple enclosure. This speaker was not built for flash, for sure.

yea... it'll do... I guess.

96 dB @ 5KHz is approaching pain levels.

@@abdo-dr1tu i talked about the % distortion not the SPL itself.

@@ACM1000000PT music doesn’t approach such high levels to begin with, and since the third harmonic is out of the audible spectrum it’s mostly benign second harmonic and it wouldn’t be audible at all.

I would be surprised if you really heard the influence of this distortion. Given that it is 2nd order and would be masked by the fundamental and still below about 1%.

@@ErinsAudioCorner I didn't say, clearly too much distortion, i will hear that..., i see many speaker better in that area, for example the R3 doesnt have that. You have more distortion at 5khz-10khz than the 30hz? is not the best that i ever seen Erin...

Yes, preference is based not just upon sound but aesthetics as well. This is why data is useful, though. We can determine what designs do what and help make our decisions a bit more informed rather than just "hey, this one looks cool". :)

@@ErinsAudioCornerfrankly I find the look of pro gear to be generally more elegant. I’ve dressed-down my own system to make it look more generic than it is. I get a perverse thrill out of combining the no frills vibe with high performance

I never took them down because I never posted them. I rarely ever do and I’ve discussed why I see little merit in CSD plots numerous times. 👍

@@ErinsAudioCorner I thought of those measurements as I study my system...CSD is so much more useful than a plane FR....It literally is a picture of amplitude over time...Any resonances you see in the CSD, you can hear, in respect to spl. How well a system or driver maintains a smooth/uniform decay character, is a very important aspect. Excess decay cannot easily be treated, if at all....Temporal EQ is a possible solution. Most people don't even know what that is. You must of posted them only on the forums, my mistake. I found them...I made sure to download the picture this time lol👍

@@camploismyalias the SPINORAMA shows those resonances as well. 👍

I'm watching you, watching. 😅

@@ErinsAudioCorner lol

@@chriswindham9868 kzfaq.info/get/bejne/bb-mdLx6r7m3io0.html

I think your face is too round.

It sure is

Out of curiosity, why is that? What about the results have swayed you? No wrong answer. I'm just curious.

As I said in the review, the only passive network is on the tweeter which serves to ONLY pad the sensitivity and provide protection. There is no true crossover. That’s what the amplifier/DSP provides.

​@@gregmiller3630 What you're describing is biamping (not to be confused with that pointless "biwiring" nonsense) but, that doesn't make it "active" . I suppose when I see Wikipedia sited as a reference in a professional audio book then I'll give it some credence. In the meantime, my 40+ years in the audio industry supports my contention that this is NOT an active speaker.

@Obsfucation: There's often some confusion using the term 'bi-amplification;' it can mean using two stereo amps in a vertical or horizontal config. with passive speakers (i.e.: the cross-over is seen by the amp on its output side) over two sets of terminals on each speaker, meaning one scenario is configuring the amps so that each of them covers their respective driver segment of both speakers (horizontal config.), and the other scenario is an amp for each speaker where its left and right channel are divided over the two sets of terminals feeding their respective driver segment (vertical config.). Some however also use the term bi-amplification with speakers that house no passive cross-over to imply they're driven actively, which is (really) to say the cross-over functions prior to amplification on signal level and thus requires two amps (for a 2-way speaker, at least). That is, active configuration, per definition, implies that the filtration is done prior to amplification, and on principle that's whether the DSP/electronic cross-over is placed inside the speakers or externally to them, period. I can understand why it be would maintained that an 'active speaker' is one that actually houses both the amps and DSP/electronic XO (and even DAC's) inside of it be called an active speaker, but a speaker is - per definition - configured and driven actively when it follows that (again) the filtration is done prior to amplification, be that either with the amps/DSP/DAC's placed internally or externally to the speakers. The M2's are a 3-way speaker, I must add, as their MF/HF compression driver is coaxial and thus houses two voice coils. The M2's internal and passive cross-over parts over the compression driver are for protection and lowering noise only, except I'd guess for the HF voice coil and diaphragm that must be filtered passively as there are only a total of 4 amp channels; the remaining filtration and EQ'ing is done by the the DSP unit inside the Crown amps, but it's only the JBL 2216 woofers that are seen by the Crown amp directly. Strictly speaking I gather one could call the M2 a hybrid configured speaker.