Xtreme 4

The Extreme 4 is the clear winner.

I remember researching speakers last year and returning a few to Best Buy. The JBL was the clear choice for me. I'd even go as far to say the lower tier JBL holds it's own against the higher tier competition.

I have two charge 5’s usually use them in stereo. But I now want two Extreme 4’s.

Xtreme 4 because it has a swappable battery and you can run it on AC

Even if they are, the main drivers are stacked on one another vertically. The tweeters are probably separated horizontally, but they only cover a fraction of the audible spectrum. The boombox 3 plays 200hz and up truly in stereo with decent separation. That's very similar to vinyl records, which are also down mixed to mono around that same crossover point. The boombox is big, and the mids/tweeters are half a meter apart. It does stereo better than any other JBL I'm aware of, including the successor, Boombox 4.

You're gonna have to link the specific party box you're talking about. There are none that I know of that have two woofers side by side. Only stacked one on the other. You don't get passable soundstage without stereo separation. The boombox 4 has two woofers directly side by side. The 3 has the mids spaced out as far as possible. The 4 is a downgrade to me for that reason, among a couple of others. I can assure you, no partybox will have the same soundstage as a Boombox 3, unless they made one that's usable in a horizontal configuration. The BB3 is much wider in build than any partybox. I usually sit/stand <6 feet away from the boombox. It's not optimal but it definitely still has enough stereo separation. I'm an "audiophile" as my main hobby. I have been in to Hi-Fi setups and getting the correct speaker placement for years. I know what I'm looking for, and that is why I specifically sought out the Boombox 3 above all other options from JBL. https://preview.redd.it/9n5z4a588e6g1.jpeg?width=705&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=8875f6d9f43eb54807f21b76876fec8c40e0126e (Photo is not mine) That woofer only plays up to 200hz. It does not matter that the mids/highs are in "the same speaker". They are far enough apart to make a HUGE difference compared to an Xtreme or BB 4.

I have proper setups with floor-standing speakers, as well as planar magnetic headphones when I want no compromises. I still don't get where you're coming from when you say it's the "same speaker", as if it's somehow different than two bookshelf speakers placed about 50cm apart from one another. They're obviously still quite close to one another, but it's more than enough to reap much of the benefit of stereo. The midrange drivers even have their own internal enclosure. Obviously separation drops off drastically with range, but it's a HUGE upgrade over an Xtreme which is also "stereo". Even across the room, while it's closer to mono than stereo, I can still clearly make out hard pans in the mix. There's nothing accurate about this speaker, but it's a joy to listen to, and would not be even close to what it is if it was truly mono. A partybox is too cumbersome and too fragile for my specific needs. I have other options if I want the highest fidelity or deepest bass response. This is something I mainly use out on the back deck, in a prime listening position, and that stereo separation in those circumstances is something I wouldn't go without. A partybox would never emulate that.

No. I do not agree. I say there is zero difference. If I play only from the right channel, sound doesn't magically come from the whole speaker. The sound comes from the right side. The drivers being in the same unit doesn't make them less effective. They are just as isolated from one another as two separate units would be. Edit: You also seem to be describing the crossover backwards. 200hz and below is truly mono. 200hz and above is full stereo.

Wow, you've really thrown me for a loop with all your edits. I've lost track of where we stand. Seeing as you've edited and changed your entire comment, I'll engage once more. You seem to be implying that cabinet resonances ("acoustic energy") are so great, that it totally collapses any stereo "imaging" (using that term lightly, 50cm is better than nothing, great for a portable speaker, but is still poor in general). On one hand, I'm positive if I set one of my pairs of bookshelf speakers the same distance apart as the two L+R midrange drivers in this JBL, I'll get a very similar result. At the same time, you have said that "it all comes from the same speaker", and that it's no better than mono. Maybe, MAYBE I could get on board with some kind of cabinet resonance detracting very subtly from the stereo field, but you are saying that it would be much closer to mono. I can tell you that couldn't be further from the truth. Your "salt and pepper" analogy only starts making sense if we're cramming L+R channels though a single speaker driver. Obviously, that would be mono. This speaker has 5 different speaker drivers (classic 3-way setup with tweeters and mids completely isolated from one another, and a woofer in the middle). I don't think you have proved your point. You've certainly not cited more sources than I, although I'd be eager to have a look at any you may have on the topic.

I hated the sound of it and returned mine. Sounds very tame without the spatial audio on. When it's on the speaker has incredible clarity and a super wide sound stage but it's also very artifical and really not pleasing to listen to. Low end sucks too. I tested it alongside an Xtreme 4 and thought the Xtreme was far better

Xtreme 4 - I use it and love it! Also ran it by a tool I made to help with --> [informed product buying decisions](https://informed-tech-buying.theperseuslabs.com/) (No affiliate link, no paywall, no signup, just a personal side project).

Jbl is having a 20% sale. I just picked a refurbished xtreme 4 for under $200.