• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

JBL 280CSA In-Ceiling Speaker Review

Rate this speaker:

  • 1. Poor (headless panther)

    Votes: 57 66.3%
  • 2. Not terrible (postman panther)

    Votes: 29 33.7%
  • 3. Fine (happy panther)

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 4. Great (golfing panther)

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    86

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
44,368
Likes
234,384
Location
Seattle Area
This is a review and detailed measurements of the JBL Stager 280CSA in-ceiling speaker for use in surround and Dolby Atmos height applications. It was kindly drop shipped to me by a member and costs US $225.
JBL Stage 280CA Speaker In-ceiling two-way Dolby Atmos Height review.jpg

Sorry for low fidelity picture. It is from my mobile phone with the speaker mounted in test baffle. While build quality is good including a nice magnetic grill, the speaker felt fair light. Here is the backside showing the crossover and such:
JBL Stage 280CA Speaker In-ceiling two-way crossover teardown review.jpg

As we would expect at these price points, there is nothing fancy going on here. OK, they could have used a first order electronic crossover but they went to second order.

Measurements were performed using special mode of Klippel Near-field scanner which eliminates back radiation and that of the room. So it is equivalent to "2 Pi" anechoic measurement. The tweeter is angled which creates a problem for measurements as the design of Klippel here calls for 0 degree (going into the driver). I am able to however show the offset angle measurement as you will see later.

Note: our company, Madrona Digital, caries Harman/JBL products for installation in custom designs. So feel free to read as much bias as you like in my remarks.

JBL Stage 280CSA Measurements

As usual, we start with our frequency response measurements. As noted, this is perpendicular to the surface of the speaker and NOT along the angle of the tweeter:
JBL Stage 280CA Speaker In-ceiling two-way frequency response Measurement.png

Clearly this is not a speaker you want to put above your head and expect uncolored response. We not only have ups and down response but also a series of modulations above 6 kHz. My guess is that the angled tweeter is causing reflections from the side of the speaker box which then comes back to interfere with the direct sound. The frequency determines the phase of those reflections and whether they combine, destruct or something in between. There is a nastiness around 5 kHz with a very sharp resonant peak. We can see the cause of that in near-field measurements of each driver:

JBL Stage 280CA Speaker In-ceiling two-way near field frequency response Measurement.png


That is one heck of a resonance to be even stronger than steady state response of the driver! There is some possibility this could be due to the baffle amplifying it. Still, it is a problem. We also see the ups and downs in tweeter response although the point blank measurement reduces its impact some.

To see if the response improves as we get closer to the tweeter angle and past, I selected three vertical measurements:

JBL Stage 280CA Speaker In-ceiling two-way up angle frequency response Measurement.png


It seems that the 40 degree alignment is the best. You still need significant EQ to get a flat response but you are in better shape.

I plotted the early window reflections even though they would not apply to a speaker mounted above:

JBL Stage 280CA Speaker In-ceiling two-way early window frequency response Measurement.png


The reflections are out of phase with each other, producing a smoother treble response. I don't want to post the predicted in-room response as it really doesn't apply here.

Power handling is good as far as distortion is concerned (and me listening to sweeps in real time):

JBL Stage 280CA Speaker In-ceiling two-way THD Distortion Measurement.png

JBL Stage 280CA Speaker In-ceiling two-way relative THD Distortion Measurement.png


As noted, if you want low distortion, you should cross this over at higher frequencies than typical 80 Hz.

Minimum impedance in lower frequencies is a fair high (and hence good) of 7+ ohm:
JBL Stage 280CA Speaker In-ceiling two-way  Phase and Impedance Measurement.png


There is a very low point though around 10 kHz but signal content should be quite low there as to not upset the amplifier.

Horizontal coverage is not great:
JBL Stage 280CA Speaker In-ceiling two-way Horizontal Beamwidth Measurement.png

JBL Stage 280CA Speaker In-ceiling two-way Horizontal Directivity Measurement.png


Vertical response requires interpretation as it is at 0 degrees and not 40 degrees:
JBL Stage 280CA Speaker In-ceiling two-way Vertical Directivity Measurement.png


It seems you better not go past 40 degrees or things get much worse.

Here is the waterfall:
JBL Stage 280CA Speaker In-ceiling two-way CSD Waterfall Measurement.png


That near 5 kHz resonance is quite strong, seemingly going forever.

It doesn't make sense to listen to the speaker in an open baffle so I did not do that.

Conclusions
These angled tweeter designs are messy both to measure and interpret the results. They make intuitive sense to point the tweeter at the listener since the speaker itself can't be angled. But in doing so one buys fair bit of grief in other artifacts such as comb filtering. Simple crossover design doesn't get rid of a very pronounced resonance. Lack of baffle compensation causes other oddities in frequency response. Overall this makes for a mess tonality wise some of which can be forgiven by the rather low cost of the speaker.

Overall, this is not a speaker I would want in my home theater. So the search continues for a better design (I have a couple more to review).

-----------
As always, questions, comments, recommendations, etc. are welcome.

Any donations are much appreciated using: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/how-to-support-audio-science-review.8150/
 

Talisman

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 27, 2022
Messages
897
Likes
2,546
Location
Milano Italy
Sometimes I think it would be enough to take two elac dbr62 for the same amount and attach them to two wall mounts pointing downwards.
Atmos speakers almost never have the quality commensurate with their cost.
Thanks for the review
 
Last edited:

DanielT

Major Contributor
Joined
Oct 10, 2020
Messages
4,750
Likes
4,633
Location
Sweden - Слава Україні
Thanks for the measurement Amir. Of all the tests on various HiFi stuff, tests of speakers are and remain the most interesting to read, I think.:)

Anyway.Among the worst to have is a round tweeter mounted without a baffle. Talk about baffle edge reflections when all the sound waves hit the round edges at the same time. Equally and at the same time on all edges due to the round shape. It amplifies the sound in the worst possible way (if not controlled).
We see the result in your measurement, I think I should add. It could also be as you say: "My guess is that the angled tweeter is causing reflections from the side of the speaker box which then comes back to interfere with the direct sound."

Could also be a combination of what I mentioned and what you say.
 
Last edited:
OP
amirm

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
44,368
Likes
234,384
Location
Seattle Area
Anyway.Among the worst to have is a round tweeter mounted without a baffle. Talk about baffle edge reflections when all the sound waves hit the round edges at the same time. We see the result in your measurement, I think I should add.
If you mean the edges of the baffle I built, Klippel NFS eliminates that effect. If you mean that of the speaker itself, yes, that would be there.
 

DanielT

Major Contributor
Joined
Oct 10, 2020
Messages
4,750
Likes
4,633
Location
Sweden - Слава Україні
If you mean the edges of the baffle I built, Klippel NFS eliminates that effect. If you mean that of the speaker itself, yes, that would be there.
I mean the speaker itself.:)

Edit:
A simple test for any DIYer to do. Measure a tweeter not mounted VS mounted on a baffle.
The most classic mounting for measurements is probably the IEC Baffle, which is the mounting that many data sheets on tweeters are based on:
iec_baffle (1).png

 
Last edited:

rvsixer

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Apr 6, 2018
Messages
605
Likes
409
Location
Somewhere at the base of the Rockies....
Sometimes I think it would be enough to take sue elac dbr62 for the same amount and attach them to two wall mounts pointing downwards.
Absolutely, couldn't agree more (well maybe with caveat that top locations are defined by decoder specific angular references to the MLP(+required seat coverage)....so might properly wind up on wall or ceiling).

And spending just a little more, you can get smaller bookshelf's that actually meet reference Atmos etc. output specs, with distortion/compression in check at those output levels as well (bass managed of course). My top contender to date is in this link:
 

Everett T

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Aug 2, 2020
Messages
648
Likes
486
This is a review and detailed measurements of the JBL Stager 280CSA in-ceiling speaker for use in surround and Dolby Atmos height applications. It was kindly drop shipped to me by a member and costs US $225.
View attachment 272001
Sorry for low fidelity picture. It is from my mobile phone with the speaker mounted in test baffle. While build quality is good including a nice magnetic grill, the speaker felt fair light. Here is the backside showing the crossover and such:
View attachment 272002
As we would expect at these price points, there is nothing fancy going on here. OK, they could have used a first order electronic crossover but they went to second order.

Measurements were performed using special mode of Klippel Near-field scanner which eliminates back radiation and that of the room. So it is equivalent to "2 Pi" anechoic measurement. The tweeter is angled which creates a problem for measurements as the design of Klippel here calls for 0 degree (going into the driver). I am able to however show the offset angle measurement as you will see later.

Note: our company, Madrona Digital, caries Harman/JBL products for installation in custom designs. So feel free to read as much bias as you like in my remarks.

JBL Stage 280CSA Measurements

As usual, we start with our frequency response measurements. As noted, this is perpendicular to the surface of the speaker and NOT along the angle of the tweeter:
View attachment 272009
Clearly this is not a speaker you want to put above your head and expect uncolored response. We not only have ups and down response but also a series of modulations above 6 kHz. My guess is that the angled tweeter is causing reflections from the side of the speaker box which then comes back to interfere with the direct sound. The frequency determines the phase of those reflections and whether they combine, destruct or something in between. There is a nastiness around 5 kHz with a very sharp resonant peak. We can see the cause of that in near-field measurements of each driver:

View attachment 272013

That is one heck of a resonance to be even stronger than steady state response of the driver! There is some possibility this could be due to the baffle amplifying it. Still, it is a problem. We also see the ups and downs in tweeter response although the point blank measurement reduces its impact some.

To see if the response improves as we get closer to the tweeter angle and past, I selected three vertical measurements:

View attachment 272015

It seems that the 40 degree alignment is the best. You still need significant EQ to get a flat response but you are in better shape.

I plotted the early window reflections even though they would not apply to a speaker mounted above:

View attachment 272016

The reflections are out of phase with each other, producing a smoother treble response. I don't want to post the predicted in-room response as it really doesn't apply here.

Power handling is good as far as distortion is concerned (and me listening to sweeps in real time):

View attachment 272017
View attachment 272018

As noted, if you want low distortion, you should cross this over at higher frequencies than typical 80 Hz.

Minimum impedance in lower frequencies is a fair high (and hence good) of 7+ ohm:
View attachment 272019

There is a very low point though around 10 kHz but signal content should be quite low there as to not upset the amplifier.

Horizontal coverage is not great:
View attachment 272021
View attachment 272022

Vertical response requires interpretation as it is at 0 degrees and not 40 degrees:
View attachment 272023

It seems you better not go past 40 degrees or things get much worse.

Here is the waterfall:
View attachment 272024

That near 5 kHz resonance is quite strong, seemingly going forever.

It doesn't make sense to listen to the speaker in an open baffle so I did not do that.

Conclusions
These angled tweeter designs are messy both to measure and interpret the results. They make intuitive sense to point the tweeter at the listener since the speaker itself can't be angled. But in doing so one buys fair bit of grief in other artifacts such as comb filtering. Simple crossover design doesn't get rid of a very pronounced resonance. Lack of baffle compensation causes other oddities in frequency response. Overall this makes for a mess tonality wise some of which can be forgiven by the rather low cost of the speaker.

Overall, this is not a speaker I would want in my home theater. So the search continues for a better design (I have a couple more to review).

-----------
As always, questions, comments, recommendations, etc. are welcome.

Any donations are much appreciated using: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/how-to-support-audio-science-review.8150/
Backround music only...
 

tifune

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 18, 2020
Messages
1,085
Likes
767
Conclusions
These angled tweeter designs are messy both to measure and interpret the results. They make intuitive sense to point the tweeter at the listener since the speaker itself can't be angled.

Today, Denon released firmware update that plays Auro3D out of top speakers. So, now I'm interested in trying out ceiling speakers. But I'm confused on this point - all ceiling speaker instructions I've ever seen show speaker firing straight down.

I agree, though, it makes sense to aim at the listener. For example, for a single row of seating what's the point of top front if you don't aim at the listeners? Aesthetics aside, wouldn't a decent bookshelf be a better option? Not talking about front/rear height here, but top (ceiling) speakers.

So, are manufacturers going out of spec to draw buyers? Or it doesn't matter that much? Or maybe a little angle is in the spec somewhere? Revels can tilt tweeter, too, so I guess it's not uncommon.
 
OP
amirm

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
44,368
Likes
234,384
Location
Seattle Area
Today, Denon released firmware update that plays Auro3D out of top speakers. So, now I'm interested in trying out ceiling speakers. But I'm confused on this point - all ceiling speaker instructions I've ever seen show speaker firing straight down.
Indeed. I think a lot of these in-ceiling speakers are designed for rear 5.1 setup when ceiling mounted. There, I guess angling the tweeter makes sense. For height speakers, I think "shower" design may be better with non-angled drivers. I should say there is a non-angled version of this speaker as well.
 

Steve Dallas

Major Contributor
Joined
May 28, 2020
Messages
1,201
Likes
2,784
Location
A Whole Other Country
I may be on my own island here, but I do not expect much from my surrounds and heights beyond being convincing noise makers. I do expect the front three to be high fidelity.

If helicopter blades sound like helicopter blades, fireworks sound like fireworks, and raindrops sound like raindrops, I do not expect any more than that. That said, I rarely listen to multichannel music.
 

rvsixer

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Apr 6, 2018
Messages
605
Likes
409
Location
Somewhere at the base of the Rockies....
So, are manufacturers going out of spec to draw buyers? Or it doesn't matter that much? Or maybe a little angle is in the spec somewhere? Revels can tilt tweeter, too, so I guess it's not uncommon.
1) Absolutely. One can see many instances of where they state to place speakers, that don't match decoder specs (i.e. Atmos, Auro, etc.)
2) Yes (ever read a post that says tops/wides etc. don't add much I am going back to stereo or 5.1?)
3) Yes each decoder specs list the required speaker output, dispersion, angling, locations, and limits etc. And none of them iirc have top front/rear speakers facing straight down, etc.
 

Dj7675

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 12, 2019
Messages
2,116
Likes
2,781
Appreciate very much taking the time to measure these type of ceiling speakers. If you want to do an Atmos theater properly, you need speakers above you. If you have room limitations and you can't put a good bookshelf speaker on the ceiling you are stuck with attempting to find the best in ceiling option you can. It is very challenging to make a flush mount ceiling speaker that also "aims" the sound at the listeners, which are typically around 45 degrees off axis with 4 ceiling speakers.
If a person can put bookshelf speakers on the ceiling, that is bar far the best option IMO. If I had a 9 foot ceiling I would do that (either the Revel M55xc or M80XC are my two favorites). I currently use the JBL SCL-8 which meet my needs.. flush mount, 45 degree baffle. Amir reviewed the SCL-5 and it isn't without issues but actually sounds good and the averaged response is pretty good at my listening position. Anyway appreciate the testing and trying to find some good enough performers in this tough category.
 

tifune

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 18, 2020
Messages
1,085
Likes
767
3) Yes each decoder specs list the required speaker output, dispersion, angling, locations, and limits etc. And none of them iirc have top front/rear speakers facing straight down, etc.

Here's an example, Denon manuals show similar:


The angles of the speaker location relative to the listener are shown, yes, but the other picture shows the speakers point straight down. Are there other diagrams you can recommend that show the ceiling speakers actually angled at listeners?
 

Sancus

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Nov 30, 2018
Messages
2,923
Likes
7,616
Location
Canada
Sometimes I think it would be enough to take sue elac dbr62 for the same amount and attach them to two wall mounts pointing downwards.
Atmos speakers almost never have the quality commensurate with their cost.
Thanks for the review
Yes, it is always better to use a regular speaker. Ceiling speakers are compromised designs so they can fit in your ceiling. There are probably some decent compromises out there, but I doubt any of them are cheap.

If you look at spatial audio music demo setups or studios they're pretty much always using real speakers on ceiling mounts.

Indeed. I think a lot of these in-ceiling speakers are designed for rear 5.1 setup when ceiling mounted. There, I guess angling the tweeter makes sense. For height speakers, I think "shower" design may be better with non-angled drivers. I should say there is a non-angled version of this speaker as well.

I think the Kef in-ceiling non-angled coaxial designs have the best chance of approaching a normal speaker for that use case.
 

rvsixer

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Apr 6, 2018
Messages
605
Likes
409
Location
Somewhere at the base of the Rockies....
Here's an example, Denon manuals show similar:


The angles of the speaker location relative to the listener are shown, yes, but the other picture shows the speakers point straight down. Are there other diagrams you can recommend that show the ceiling speakers actually angled at listeners?
From what I have seen, Dolby caters to all sides (and rightly so, we ASR type readers might be in the 5% of those actually caring about playback quality):

1) Consumer level - where they whittle things down to the LCD for base users (i.e. almost anything goes including upward firing Atmos speakers, speakers aimed no where near the listening axes, sound bars, people who just want some effect out of surrounds instead of the high-output high-fidelity that is actually available to tops/surrounds to the mixing studio, etc.). The consumer level setup guides, as you have linked, are geared to this market; IMO to make it easy for end users to just get some semblance of a halfway decent sounding setup and be totally happy with what they purchased.

2) Pro level - where actual specs define mixing/screening rooms, what it takes to make full use of the decoder, etc. These guides are where enthusiasts should go to to ensure playback is as close to the mix as possible. Here's what I use for Atmos setup, including how to select/setup speakers and locations (I like to keep the tops at the spec limits closest to cieling centerlines/MLP, plenty of backup on that lookup Grimani, Home Theater Guru, etc.):
Note in many instances the pro guides differ from the consumer guides in where things should go.

Anyways all imho and straying off speaker test a bit (but related i.e. dispersion, tweeter angling etc. so hope it can stay here if not mods delete please). Also covered ad nauseam elsewhere. Good luck.
 

sarumbear

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Aug 15, 2020
Messages
7,604
Likes
7,313
Location
UK
So the search continues for a better design (I have a couple more to review).
Maybe someone can send you the KEF Uni-Q based ceiling speakers like this one? Much more expensive but it has the same concentric speaker technology that KEF use on loved models.
 
OP
amirm

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
44,368
Likes
234,384
Location
Seattle Area
I think the Kef in-ceiling non-angled coaxial designs have the best chance of approaching a normal speaker for that use case.
There is a KEF here waiting to be tested. :)
 

lewdish

Active Member
Joined
May 29, 2021
Messages
247
Likes
178
I straight up hate the sound of all the in ceiling speakers none I've heard sound great, but if those KEF THX Ultra 2 certified Ceiling speakers are measured by THX under the same target as KEF's in wall THX line then I'd imaging the response from them should be pretty decent. Klipsch also has a THX Ultra 2 certified ceiling speakers id be interested in knowing about. Ive also always wondered but is there any reason why you couldnt just put a good measuring in-wall on the ceiling? There seems to be a much wider selection of in-walls than ceiling speakers, aside from the fact that you can't angle them.
 

sarumbear

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Aug 15, 2020
Messages
7,604
Likes
7,313
Location
UK
I straight up hate the sound of all the in ceiling speakers none I've heard sound great, but if those KEF THX Ultra 2 certified Ceiling speakers are measured by THX under the same target as KEF's in wall THX line then I'd imaging the response from them should be pretty decent.
They sound pretty decent to my ears. Looking forward to see the tests.

Ive also always wondered but is there any reason why you couldnt just put a good measuring in-wall on the ceiling? There seems to be a much wider selection of in-walls than ceiling speakers, aside from the fact that you can't angle them.
That’s what I used on my system. At 45 degrees they behave excellent and even at 60 degrees they are perfectly useable. I tilted them about 10 degrees using a custom frame, which helped even more.

Here is the SPINORAMA of their top of the range model that I use for LCR. I use this model on the ceiling.
 
Top Bottom