• 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 Stage A130 Review (speaker)

Presently42

Active Member
Joined
Jul 30, 2019
Messages
174
Likes
238
Location
Montreal, Quebec, Canada
I have indeed tried all of the eq settings, and I seemingly prefer Maiky76's LW one - but only slightly; and only just. I'm now using a set of my own, informed by this post by member flipflop. It's terribly similar, but does not use the high-pass filter Maiky76's use. Whether or not this is wise remains to be seen. I don't listen terribly loudly, so distortion doesn't seem to be much of an issue
I'm trying currently another set of filters, this time based on Floyd Toole's research, presented in the graph in this post. It's the winner so far. I averaged the on axis and early reflections curves, and used those to create filters with only negative values between Schroeder and 5 kHz, with a -0.2 dB / oct slope; then used flat on axis for everything above. I justify this as follows:

  1. The graph indicated, that the main sonic components between Schroeder and a bit under 5 kHz are an amalgamaish of on axis and early reflections; with sound power providing marginal effects. I might play with attempting to include sound power; having done this once, and having not terribly liked the results, I have chosen now to ignore it. We'll see.
  2. Seemingly, research has shown, that a slope of -0.2 dB/oct is preferred for the listening window. Given, that the listening window is very similar to the average of the on axis and early reflections, I chose to keep this value. I cannot currently find the proof of this. Nevertheless, the results sound good. Further investigaish in to this tilt is warranted.
  3. The graph indicates, that above roughly 5 kHz, the on axis is the dominant sound field producer.
  4. Given, that research indicates a preference for flat on axis response, I've not put a tilt to this on axis curve.
Lastly, in the final eq profile, I've included a tilt, starting at 1.3 kHz (a value obtained from more than one Harman graphs. I briefly tried applying tilts starting at different values, and preferred the one starting at 1.3 kHz. However, I'm not convinced; and should like to investigate further.), of -0.6 dB/oct; figuring, that this tilt, with the tilt of -0.2 dB/oct already (somewhat) present, makes for a tilt of -0.8 - which I seem to prefer in room, and which one on-line calculator suggested; and which at least one other member agrees, is a fine amount of tilt. That being said, this tilt is room, programme and mood dependant; like salt, I add to taste.

I'll take some measurements later and see exactly what's going on. Tbh, the differences are quite subtle; and I might prefer this new one merely because it is new. Measurements and more blind testing are yet needed!
 
Last edited:

MickeyBoy

Active Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 3, 2018
Messages
114
Likes
86
This is a review and detailed measurements of the JBL Stage A130 bookshelf speaker. I purchases these online but can't find the receipt. They normally cost US $300/pair but the place I bought them from has them for $209 right now.

The A130 looks plain until you take off the grill and then looks handsome:

View attachment 98289

I like the rounded corners which are easier on the hands and reduce diffraction:

View attachment 98290

On the other hand, I did not like the binding posts that were too close to each other and to the back of the cup:
View attachment 98291

Fortunately you only deal with them once.

I did not show the grill but it has metal pins and took fair amount of energy to pull it off. So someone was thinking of longevity given that the budget did not allow magnetic mount.

Measurements that you are about to see were performed using the Klippel Near-field Scanner (NFS). This is a robotic measurement system that analyzes the speaker all around and is able (using advanced mathematics and dual scan) to subtract room reflections (so where I measure it doesn't matter). It also measures the speaker at close distance ("near-field") which sharply reduces the impact of room noise. Both of these factors enable testing in ordinary rooms yet results that can be more accurate than an anechoic chamber. In a nutshell, the measurements show the actual sound coming out of the speaker independent of the room.

I performed over 1000 measurement which resulted in error rate mostly below 1%.

Temperature was 64 degrees F. Measurement location is at sea level so you compute the pressure.

Measurements are compliant with latest speaker research into what can predict the speaker preference and is standardized in CEA/CTA-2034 ANSI specifications. Likewise listening tests are performed per research that shows mono listening is much more revealing of differences between speakers than stereo or multichannel.

The grill was off and measurements were referenced to tweeter center.

JBL Stage A130 Measurements
Acoustic measurements can be grouped in a way that can be perceptually analyzed to determine how good a speaker is and how it can be used in a room. This so called spinorama shows us just about everything we need to know about the speaker with respect to tonality and some flaws:

View attachment 98292

Ignoring the three prominent peaks, on-axis response is actually quite flat. The cause of those peaks is quite evident if we measure each radiating surface at close distance:

View attachment 98293

Starting at the right, the tweeter is clearly peaking at around 15 kHz. Coming down we see the peak around 1.3 kHz which I think is caused by the port resonance (orange). There is another peak around 870 Hz which may be from the woofer itself or combination with the port.

Early window reflections show quite a similarity (for good or bad) with the direct on-axis sound:

View attachment 98294

Putting the two together gives us a predicted response that is slightly smoothed over version of on-axis:

View attachment 98295

From experience I know that the peaking from 900 to 2 kHz can actually be pleasant and far better than dips in that area. The final resonance likely is not very audible due its very high frequency and narrowness.

Here is our impedance plot which shows the resonances as well:
View attachment 98296

The fancy trademark JBL waveguide does it job well in controlling directivity:

View attachment 98297


View attachment 98298

These are active, professional monitor class directivity and not something we often see in bargain speakers.

I was pleased that we had more wiggle room vertically, making the height of the speaker less critical:

View attachment 98299

Most impressive was the low amount of distortion:

View attachment 98300

If those resonances were not there around 1 kHz and at 15 kHz, this would look even cleaner.

View attachment 98301

We can see our 50 dB reference line is barely exceeded until we get very low in frequency. Did not expect this.

JBL A130 Listening Tests
I started to listen to the A130 as is and as I suspect, the sound was pretty pleasant. Yes, the upper mid had the accentuation that I expected. This actually makes female vocals sound more detailed and more airy. But it was a bit much so I reached in my EQ tool and knocked those two resonances down plus the one at 15 kHz:

View attachment 98302

Not only did the first two notches clean up the response but it made the sound of the speaker super clean and effortless. There was a level of fidelity that was giving me goosebumps! I can only envision the cause being reduced distortion to go alone with the better response. The third filter made a very subtle difference but was still worthwhile.

Once there, I started to crank up the volume and this little speaker can play and play loud! Despite me using a single speaker, it had no trouble playing as loud as I wanted. My speaker killer track with deep bass and zero effect on it. Bass played as if it is no big deal producing a level of fidelity that I rarely see, err hear, in speakers let alone a budget one.

Conclusions
Out of the box the JBL A130 gets a lot of things right but leaves us with basically two resonances that are issues. Fortunately the peaking there is not as bad as it seems to the eye. As it was the A130 was more than listenable. Dial in the simple EQ as I did and this speaker outperforms many speakers. It has a fluid, effort-free sound with excellent neutrality that was a joy to listen to across all kinds of music. It simply did not care what I threw at it -- it performed.

I can recommend the A130 even if you don't have an EQ. If you can apply EQ, then the JBL Stage A130 gets one of my highest recommendations. It is a great example of how we can fix one or two minor flaws in a speaker with EQ and create a hybrid solution that is nearly untouchable in its price range or even higher.

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

Had stored the last batch of Japanese shishito peppers saved up and figured I make a snack out of them:
View attachment 98303

With a touch of lemon juice, soy sauce and salt they were wonderful as always. Normally you only see them in green but I left them on the plants for too long and tehy turned red/orange and a bit sweeter. Yum!!!

Any donations are much appreciated using: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/how-to-support-audio-science-review.8150/
Think we can call me pessimistic about true acoustics for A170 but that's what i am after Amir used his wonder Klippel robot (thanks) to analyze Revel F35, what i mean is we tend to think about the positive logics as A130 must be improved as for A170 where one more cone transducer is added to relieve single cone for A130 so two must absolut be better than one, another thing that doesn't help is for A130 @ObjectAudio (thanks) report ab fabric the crossover is as simple as it get.

Try study below prints, the left column is Revel F35 where upper one is published by manufacture and lower one is Amir's analyze side by side to Amir's analyze of JBL Stage A130, my comments here is stuff gets complicated when multiple cones share same chamber but sit in different locations and distances relative to design axis and ports plus each cone have different electric dampening and passband via the dividing network. There looks be noice in DI curve (directivity index) for F35 not to speak of all the other curves in area 250-1500Hz, will guess for A170 there would also be noice and increasing DI because spacing out two cones that crossover relative high @1800Hz will normal cost some increased directivity plus also some comb filtering in highs. So summa sumarum for me is it doesn't look a walk in the park improve via add one more cone when stuff is so complicated sharing chambers and ports, but the problem is probably how to make proof because most such systems looks perform nice enough analyzed the old fashion way as we for example see in ObjectAudio's curves that there is much less noice presented than into Amir's analyze.

View attachment 108586

I would be really interested in hearing from someone who has spent time with the A130 and the A
Think we can call me pessimistic about true acoustics for A170 but that's what i am after Amir used his wonder Klippel robot (thanks) to analyze Revel F35, what i mean is we tend to think about the positive logics as A130 must be improved as for A170 where one more cone transducer is added to relieve single cone for A130 so two must absolut be better than one, another thing that doesn't help is for A130 @ObjectAudio (thanks) report ab fabric the crossover is as simple as it get.

Try study below prints, the left column is Revel F35 where upper one is published by manufacture and lower one is Amir's analyze side by side to Amir's analyze of JBL Stage A130, my comments here is stuff gets complicated when multiple cones share same chamber but sit in different locations and distances relative to design axis and ports plus each cone have different electric dampening and passband via the dividing network. There looks be noice in DI curve (directivity index) for F35 not to speak of all the other curves in area 250-1500Hz, will guess for A170 there would also be noice and increasing DI because spacing out two cones that crossover relative high @1800Hz will normal cost some increased directivity plus also some comb filtering in highs. So summa sumarum for me is it doesn't look a walk in the park improve via add one more cone when stuff is so complicated sharing chambers and ports, but the problem is probably how to make proof because most such systems looks perform nice enough analyzed the old fashion way as we for example see in ObjectAudio's curves that there is much less noice presented than into Amir's analyze.

View attachment 108586

I would love to hear from someone who has spent quality time with the A130 and A170 or A180. The tweeters, waveguides, and top woofers might be the same - or not? The crossovers for the components they have in common? JBL specs sensitivity higher by 4 dB for the A170 over the A130. Is that significant in terms of power compression? Yes, 2 or 3 woofers in a 2.5 arrangement with a common port might lead to some good and bad points. Inquiring minds would like to know. Apparently the A130 will be available again late August.
 

JeffGB

Active Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2019
Messages
229
Likes
328
I've gotten a few more weeks of listening to my pair of a130's and I still find them awesome. The bass is excellent. I was using LS50's on my desktop and they just didn't have the correct balance between lows, mids and highs. I tried equalizing the LS50's but they just sounded "boring".

As far as I have experienced, I find that slight peaks or rises in the mids can make a speaker sound "more dynamic". Certain instruments stand out and sound as though they are jumping in volume more if those rises in frequency response correspond to the frequency range of an instrument that is playing. That, of course, is expected, but if the rise in frequency response is in the right area and the right amplitude it may sound "natural" or even better than a flat frequency response that does not emphasize any frequency.

My point here is that, to me, the Kef LS50, when equalized for flat response in an anechoic environment doesn't sound great. I don't know why because the rating with equalization is very close to that of the JBL a130.

In my experience so far, the JBL a130, when equalized, still sounds dynamic, realistic, and clean, in a way the LS50 doesn't. I find the sound of the LS50's is "small". It doesn't expand above the speakers but it does a nice job horizontally. The JBL, by comparison, is much cleaner sounding after equalization. It has a more balanced bass response and seemingly less coloration on the music than the LS50. Its image is as wide and detailed as the KEF but also extends higher. This could be caused by the drivers being separated vertically in the JBL. I have no idea.

Music that in the past seemed too "thin", like older rock recordings, sound better balanced and more realistic on the JBL's. This presumably is due to the Kef LS50 having a hump and then a 5db or so drop in the bass before the rolloff frequency. Even though the LS50's should have slightly better low bass, that is overwhelmed by the flat, clean, response of the JBL down to the rolloff point.

Overall, I really can't fault the JBL's at their price or even much higher. There are many loudspeakers that cost a small fortune but will not deliver a more enjoyable musical experience. The JBL's remind me, in a way, of my Roger's LS3/5a's that I purchased in university. The balance with voices and instruments, even of difficult genres like opera, is excellent. I could quite comfortably live with the JBL a130's until I leave this planet. As always, your mileage may vary. Have a great summer!
 

BYRTT

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Nov 2, 2018
Messages
956
Likes
2,452
Location
Denmark (Jutland)
...I would love to hear from someone who has spent quality time with the A130 and A170 or A180. The tweeters, waveguides, and top woofers might be the same - or not? The crossovers for the components they have in common? JBL specs sensitivity higher by 4 dB for the A170 over the A130. Is that significant in terms of power compression? Yes, 2 or 3 woofers in a 2.5 arrangement with a common port might lead to some good and bad points. Inquiring minds would like to know. Apparently the A130 will be available again late August.
Sorry i haven't spent quality time with A130/A170/A180 but in you quoted me i try explain what we seems to learn from Amir's objective curves, that is that ported systems in general leaks complicated noisy interference so that for 2-wayers or complicated 2.5 arrangements we got to live with the interference whatever it sounds like, problem goes away for 3 or 4-wayers because the ported section of transducers here is low pass filtered relative low in frequency so that there aren't any higher frequencyes (reverse polarity delayed and coming from backside of cone) that can leak from the port itself and midrange transducers in 3 or 4-wayers are mostly loaded as a sealed arrangement.
 
Last edited:

Teeter

Active Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2020
Messages
138
Likes
60
Location
Janesville, WI
I spent 3 months with my Stage A130 and were to warm/mellow to my ears, listening to DD movies. They were okay for some music, but I am a MOVIE person. I went back to my Klipsch R-51M, with more detail and dynamics to my ears. I'll put the Stage A 130's up for sale, to get off my hand for a song and a dance price. Someone else just might enjoy.
 

MickeyBoy

Active Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 3, 2018
Messages
114
Likes
86
I spent 3 months with my Stage A130 and were to warm/mellow to my ears, listening to DD movies. They were okay for some music, but I am a MOVIE person. I went back to my Klipsch R-51M, with more detail and dynamics to my ears. I'll put the Stage A 130's up for sale, to get off my hand for a song and a dance price. Someone else just might enjoy.
I'd be interested, Teeter, particularly as ,I am younger than you (by two months.)
 

Ralferator

Active Member
Joined
Sep 2, 2020
Messages
262
Likes
152
I spent 3 months with my Stage A130 and were to warm/mellow to my ears, listening to DD movies. They were okay for some music, but I am a MOVIE person. I went back to my Klipsch R-51M, with more detail and dynamics to my ears. I'll put the Stage A 130's up for sale, to get off my hand for a song and a dance price. Someone else just might enjoy.

You could just EQ in some more high frequencies to match the elevated high frequencies of the klipsch if you like the JBLs otherwise.
 

mrpunkk

Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2021
Messages
10
Likes
4
I have some jbl es20, it would be a big change if I buy the ones at 130? in my country they are half the price of some monitor or klipsh models
 

Teeter

Active Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2020
Messages
138
Likes
60
Location
Janesville, WI
I once had the Northridge E30 and would consider the Stage A 130 a better performer. I might re-install my A 130's for a second chance.
 
Last edited:

Teeter

Active Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2020
Messages
138
Likes
60
Location
Janesville, WI
I spent 3 months with my Stage A130 and were to warm/mellow to my ears, listening to DD movies. They were okay for some music, but I am a MOVIE person. I went back to my Klipsch R-51M, with more detail and dynamics to my ears. I'll put the Stage A 130's up for sale, to get off my hand for a song and a dance price. Someone else just might enjoy.

Today, I am giving the Stage A130 another chance. I recently replaced my Denon AVR with a 2020 model vs the old Denon 2015. The AVR speaker calibration, has an improvement over the 2015 model. So, we will see, over time, if I stay with the JBL or not. Maybe the more neutral sound will be more liking to my ears, on this second go around.
 

Ralferator

Active Member
Joined
Sep 2, 2020
Messages
262
Likes
152
I have some jbl es20, it would be a big change if I buy the ones at 130? in my country they are half the price of some monitor or klipsh models

If you have the possibility to integrate EQ corrections (first page of this thread Maiky76's EQ corrections) i think the A130 are simply awesome. They sound super clear and just perfect to me. The Bass is great too and much better than you would expect for the size. I had the big JBL L90 some years ago and those little A130 sound better to me in every way, in a not too big room (if not as loud of course).

But they don't overemphasize anything. From what i read the JBL ES20 are rather bright sounding so the A130 will probably sound smoother in the high frequencies.
But they do simply sound so realistic with no annoying elements at all (with the EQ, without the EQ, like Amir said, Female voices pop out a bit and the speakers don't sound as relaxed but still pretty good). I absolutely love them.

But it all depends on preference too. What is important for you when listening to music, and is there something you don't like about the ES20?


P.S.
I just read another review of the JBL ES 20:

"the extended highs sounded very smooth,
and blended into the upper midrange nicely. The midrange had surprising
realism, with a bit of honk but overall a solid tonality"

But they also say:
"The ES20 needs good quality power to perform its best, and didn’t sound nearly as good with budget receivers or amplifiers. "
I don't have the feeling that the A130 need a especially strong amplifier to sound good.

Seems like not everybody thinks that they are bright sounding. The midrange "honk" might be the biggest problem of the speakers. So with the JBL A130 you also get a little midrange honk without EQ. With the EQ, this honk is gone and cleans up the whole sound. It simply sounds more relaxed and clear. So it all depends on if you like an extremely clean and relaxed sound and can use EQ. But i guess that in any way the A130 are better for a natural sound, but it's all a matter of taste too.
 
Last edited:

mrpunkk

Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2021
Messages
10
Likes
4
If you have the possibility to integrate EQ corrections (first page of this thread Maiky76's EQ corrections) i think the A130 are simply awesome. They sound super clear and just perfect to me. The Bass is great too and much better than you would expect for the size. I had the big JBL L90 some years ago and those little A130 sound better to me in every way, in a not too big room (if not as loud of course).

But they don't overemphasize anything. From what i read the JBL ES20 are rather bright sounding so the A130 will probably sound smoother in the high frequencies.
But they do simply sound so realistic with no annoying elements at all (with the EQ, without the EQ, like Amir said, Female voices pop out a bit and the speakers don't sound as relaxed but still pretty good). I absolutely love them.

But it all depends on preference too. What is important for you when listening to music, and is there something you don't like about the ES20?


P.S.
I just read another review of the JBL ES 20:

"the extended highs sounded very smooth,
and blended into the upper midrange nicely. The midrange had surprising
realism, with a bit of honk but overall a solid tonality"

But they also say:
"The ES20 needs good quality power to perform its best, and didn’t sound nearly as good with budget receivers or amplifiers. "
I don't have the feeling that the A130 need a especially strong amplifier to sound good.

Seems like not everybody thinks that they are bright sounding. The midrange "honk" might be the biggest problem of the speakers. So with the JBL A130 you also get a little midrange honk without EQ. With the EQ, this honk is gone and cleans up the whole sound. It simply sounds more relaxed and clear. So it all depends on if you like an extremely clean and relaxed sound and can use EQ. But i guess that in any way the A130 are better for a natural sound, but it's all a matter of taste too.
The es20 may sound a bit bright in some cases, I like how they sound with my pioneer sx780, what I want is to get the best sound from my cds, I have no choice of eq
 

Presently42

Active Member
Joined
Jul 30, 2019
Messages
174
Likes
238
Location
Montreal, Quebec, Canada
Perhaps my own eq for these speakers might be useful: it is very similar to Maiky76's and Amir's:

Code:
Filter  1: ON  PK       Fc   822.0 Hz  Gain   5.30 dB  Q  2.253
Filter  2: ON  PK       Fc   874.0 Hz  Gain  -7.70 dB  Q  2.544
Filter  3: ON  PK       Fc    1374 Hz  Gain  -3.90 dB  Q  5.000
Filter  4: ON  PK       Fc   10916 Hz  Gain  -2.00 dB  Q  2.009

Notably, this eq profile does not remove the on-axis hump at 1.8 kHz, which is not a resonance; nor does it fully remove the spike at 15 kHz, which seems to kill the highs more than remove a resonance. I can't fully explain this; but both my ears and measurements show, that there's need to diminish the hump around 10 kHz more than the spike at 15 kHz. This new research supersedes the findings of my above post - or rather, refines them.

More on the techniques I used in this post. I'd love to try these techniques on other speakers measured here, if anyone is interested.
 

Ralferator

Active Member
Joined
Sep 2, 2020
Messages
262
Likes
152
The es20 may sound a bit bright in some cases, I like how they sound with my pioneer sx780, what I want is to get the best sound from my cds, I have no choice of eq

Without EQ i still expect the JBL A130 to sound much better than the ES20. Especially if you are searching for a natural and realistic sound, where you don't listen to speakers anymore but to music. The A130 have a much more even frequency response with very low distortion. Just the female voices will stand out a little bit, but it seems like the ES20 emphasize 1-2khz quite a bit more, so the A130 should sound more natural. Also the Bass is exceptional not only for a small speaker and will reach lower and sound more precise and powerful.

Also you could still modify the crossover to make them sound even better. Take a look here:
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...s/jbl-stage-a130-review-speaker.18260/page-17

I never had better speakers and i tried a lot. I think it would be hard to find better speakers even for much more money.
 

mrpunkk

Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2021
Messages
10
Likes
4
Without EQ i still expect the JBL A130 to sound much better than the ES20. Especially if you are searching for a natural and realistic sound, where you don't listen to speakers anymore but to music. The A130 have a much more even frequency response with very low distortion. Just the female voices will stand out a little bit, but it seems like the ES20 emphasize 1-2khz quite a bit more, so the A130 should sound more natural. Also the Bass is exceptional not only for a small speaker and will reach lower and sound more precise and powerful.

Also you could still modify the crossover to make them sound even better. Take a look here:
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...s/jbl-stage-a130-review-speaker.18260/page-17

I never had better speakers and i tried a lot. I think it would be hard to find better speakers even for much more money.
Thanks for so much data, I already bought them, they arrive on Friday
 

MarkWinston

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Jul 13, 2021
Messages
736
Likes
577
Is there a way to get rid of those 2 bumps or make it better without eqing e.g plugging the port, grill on, etc?
 

abdo123

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Nov 15, 2020
Messages
7,425
Likes
7,941
Location
Brussels, Belgium
Is there a way to get rid of those 2 bumps or make it better without eqing e.g plugging the port, grill on, etc?

the resonances are cabinet resonances, not port resonances.

In future reviews you will see 'Cabinet + Port' instead of just port.

so no unfortunately you can't fix them by plugging the port.
 

MarkWinston

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Jul 13, 2021
Messages
736
Likes
577
the resonances are cabinet resonances, not port resonances.

In future reviews you will see 'Cabinet + Port' instead of just port.

so no unfortunately you can't fix them by plugging the port.
Are there other ways to reduce those resonance or counter the effect of the resonance? Would more dampening work? Would grill on take away a bit of those peaks? Or would just a simple reduction of the treble knob smooth things out a little?
 
Top Bottom