Advice sought - Small room, loving JBL LSR305 - What's the next step up?

[Michou]

Thanks everyone for your advice. This has been very interesting. I feel I've learned quite a bit.

1. I was reading a thread here about the allegedly 'useless' nature of the Harman Preference Score. My understanding is that the preference score is a formula that takes the preferences taken from double-blind testing a wide range of listeners and applies that data to come up with a 'likability' score for a particular loudspeaker product. It is not an 'ultimate reproduction accuracy' score. It may be that I should not take the preference score so seriously. It's really more of a yardstick for narrowing down choices to a relative few.
   
   As an example, the JBL 705p (4.7) is simply murdered by the LSR 308p (5.6). Does that mean the 308p is a better speaker, and I will like it better? Or does the 308p go lower, and that generates a higher preference score?
   
   The Genelec 8030C (6.3), KEF LS50 Meta (6.0) and Revel M105 (5.9) are all well above the LSR 308p. Does that mean I should just forget JBL entirely?
   
   I think it means for an average listener, it's more likely that listener will prefer the sound from a Genelec 8030C over a JBL 705p, by a probability of 1.6 points. That looks like a rout; like a 'sure thing' on paper.
   
   Dang... So exactly how does this help me?
   
   
2. Through most of this thread, the emphasis has been on bass response. I get it. Ever since I was a teen (a long, long time ago, back in the days of Maxell cassettes and quadraphonic LPs), the emphasis has always been on bass. Tight, clean, low, loud bass. Well -- That has never been my priority. I'm a midrange clarity freak. I like all those silly audiophile tricks like 'clarity, liquidity, depth, air, soundstaging' and so on. I know there are people here at ASR who don't believe in them; believe they are artifacts of colorations, distortions, room modes, etc. OK. That's cool. I still like that stuff, and I know I'm hearing it when I hear it. That's what made my jaw drop when I heard the LSR 305p for the first time. It can do a lot of that stuff, at $300 a pair with the amplifiers included. Such a deal!
   
   
3. I believe a really good small speaker can beat a large speaker in small spaces at limited dynamic levels. Of course here I have an application where I have a small space (24' L x 12' W x 8' H with a hall and a room opening out from the sides of the main room). I have an application where I do not need high SPLs -- especially at bass frequencies. I do not want to antagonize my neighbors. Yes, that means I'm looking for a 'glorified table radio' of sorts.

Given a limited budget, in what ways can a small speaker beat a big speaker? From my experience: in midrange clarity, possibly because a smaller LF driver can be matched more easily to the HF driver, hopefully allowing for a better performing crossover at a given price point.

Another trend I've noticed is that machines made with very high headroom for their task run cooler, last longer, and perform better under a wider variety of loads. That's why I was thinking the JBL 705p might float my boat. The compression tweeter driver will be able to handle gobs higher SPLs than I will ever demand of it. I presume its 5" woofer is a little beast, made for much higher SPLs than I would ever demand of it. The LF driver is small, the HF driver is relatively large. The safe operating range of both should overlap by quite a bit (neither driver working at the outer reaches of their capabilities). Add the built in amplifiers, super-accurate (I presume) crossover, basic parametric EQ/DSP for correcting gross room modes, and I think it sounds like a compelling solution. The glaring limitations are the lack of low bass and high SPL capabilities. Fortunately, those are the two capabilities I can live without.

Can the same be said for the Genelec 8330? I think so. But perhaps not. Are its drivers as heavy-duty as the JBL's ?

And none of the above, as far as I can tell, has anything at all to do with low bass response (really, I could roll it off below 50Hz and be OK).

So my question boils down to:

What is the absolute lowest distortion/highest clarity but restricted bass/limited SPL loudspeaker for apartment dwellers?

30 years ago the accepted answer would have been "LS3/5A". Perhaps today that means LS50 Meta. Or does it?

So far, my check-it-out list is:
- Genelec 8030 or 8330
- Neumann KH 120
- JBL LSR 308P
- JBL 705P
- KEF LS50 Meta
- Revel M105
- Revel M16
- JBL Studio 530

I know I will not get to hear these side-by-side, let alone anything like a double-blind test. This may take a while.

Just FYI, the low-cost JBL Studio 530 does have a "real" compression tweeter behind its horn (waveguide?), thus no silicone grease, ferrofluid damping or thermal protection issues), and a sturdy cast-basket 5 1/4" midbass driver. It's a very dynamic and engaging sound that's also airy and delicate at the same time. I encourage you to try to listen to a pair at home and eventually return them if you're not satisfied. The only trade-off is their singular looks and their size which is a bit large for a desktop though.

 

[rongon]

JBL Studio 530

Thanks again. Maybe I should just buy them and I can return them if I hate them.
I'd be using these stand-mounted, as stereo mains in a smallish living room setup.

I have always liked 'dynamic', but when I say that, I mean the 'pop' of a bongó, or the stick striking a ride cymbal, or the way the hammer hits the strings in a piano. Some speakers generalize those midrange attacks but I like them to sing out proudly. Of course, getting that same speaker to play massed violins without sounding strident is quite a trick. I'm finding the 305Ps do a good enough job of that that I've been able to enjoy them for a good long time.

I wonder... Would I hear the Studio 530 as an improvement over the LSR 305P? I wonder...

 

[rongon]

OK, I found a pair of JBL 530 refurbs on the JBL site for $200 the pair, with free shipping. I bit. Let's see if these sound any different from the 305s...

Incidentally, the only affordable speakers I'd been able to live with long term before the LSR305s were a pair of Snell E/III and an older pair of Snell C (original). I found a Stereophile review of the Snell E/III that had a page of measurements. They don't look too bad, actually, although the horizontal dispersion plot is really vague, only going out to +/-15 degrees (?).

Snell Type E/III loudspeaker Measurements

Sidebar 3: Measurements

www.stereophile.com

FWIW, Kevin Voecks, now Revel's chief, had taken over at Snell Acoustics after its founder's death. The E/III was his refinement of the Type E that had been around for a while. I've heard the earlier E/II, which was built before Voecks joined Snell. The post-Voecks E/III is better.

Even better, that Snell E/III model was later copied (and purportedly refined) to become the Audio Note AN-E speaker, selling for scandalous amounts of money. Crazy. It was reviewed and measured by Stereophile, and if I'm not mistaken, the Audio Note version measures worse.

Audio Note AN-E Lexus Signature loudspeaker Measurements

Sidebar 3: Measurements

www.stereophile.com

 

[Speaker_tweaker]

The 530 looks good to me. It's certainly smoother and flatter than the 305.

The stereophile measurements are unreliable because they splice a nearfield bass measurement to a quasi ancheoic measurement. They also lack spacial data. The director of engineering at a prominent speaker manufacturing company told me he considers their measurements to be worthless, and I'm inclined to agree.

The detractors of the "algorithm," are ignoring the fact that we are highly unreliable at evaluating sound. We know from double blind testing that we factor what we know about a speaker (appearance, cost) heavily into our subjective evaluation of the sound. If I'm comparing a 708p to the 308p, and I know the 708p costs 7 times as much, that's going to heavily bias my judgment of the sound quality, even if im tryi g to be objective. The knowledge of the price of the speaker can't be disentangled from the judgement of the sound unless we are in a double blind environment.

So while the 708p may be a better speaker, especially at very high output levels, we can see in the measurements it would be hard to distinguish from a 308p at 86dB or even 96dB. Yes, the distortion of the 308p is a lot higher than we like to see, but that probably doesn't matter because it's below the threshold of audibility (at least according to cea 2010).

 

[posvibes]

I don't want to muddy the waters at all and make no recommendation apart from my concurrence with your liking the JBL305's which I still think are amazing, literally amazing. PEQ is a great tool to have at one's disposal and for me that was proven with the Klipsch RP600m's. I have the RP160m's and they have rightly been lambasted by many how they sound out of the box. But using a PEQ from @Maiky76 they were turned into another speaker completely, that really show what can be done with PEQ and the kindness of strangers.

Looks as if you have a great range of provided choice of directions, can't really go wrong! Enjoy.

 

[Michou]

Thanks again. Maybe I should just buy them and I can return them if I hate them.
I'd be using these stand-mounted, as stereo mains in a smallish living room setup.

I have always liked 'dynamic', but when I say that, I mean the 'pop' of a bongó, or the stick striking a ride cymbal, or the way the hammer hits the strings in a piano. Some speakers generalize those midrange attacks but I like them to sing out proudly. Of course, getting that same speaker to play massed violins without sounding strident is quite a trick. I'm finding the 305Ps do a good enough job of that that I've been able to enjoy them for a good long time.

I wonder... Would I hear the Studio 530 as an improvement over the LSR 305P? I wonder...

Make sure to give them enough power, they're at their best with a robust amplifier that's comfortable with 4 Ohms loads. And despite the horn and compression driver, to me they don't have that honkiness and piercing treble Klipsch is known for.

 

[rongon]

The 530s are due to arrive here Monday.

As noted previously, the only power amp I have available at the moment is a ca. 1995 Hafler P1000, approx 60Wpc at 4 ohms. I believe it's a good quality amplifier but I know it's not one of those arc welder-style current blasters some people recommend. It has nice finned heatsinks on each side, and is very solidly built. It's an old school class AB pro audio amp.

I also have one of those 2005-vintage Panasonic AVRs with class D amp sections that were an internet sensation back then. I use that for my TV system, driving the Snell E/III speakers. It will be interesting to see if the Studio 530s can be driven well enough by that receiver.

The reviews I've read about the Studio 530 (including Amir's) all remark about the smoothness and non-fatiguing nature of their high frequency presentation. That's the exact opposite of my experience with Klipsch speakers. Of course, the 530's sensitivity is quite low at only 86dB/2.83V/1m (mfg), which equates to 1.3W with a 6 ohm load. So they're more like 85dB/1W/1m sensitive, which is a lot less than the usual Klipsch 92dB or so (or my Snell E/III's 91dB/1W/1m). No, these JBLs are not high sensitivity 'horn speakers', not by a long shot.

I can tell you that I tried a pair of those Pioneer Andrew Jones 22-something-or-other 2-ways and I found them to be dull, hopelessly dull. Very pleasant, but dull. No dynamics, not much clarity. Just very smooth. I hope these Studio 530s aren't like that. I'll know Monday evening, I guess...

 

[Webninja]

FWIW I went from the 305 mkii to KH80s. Price to performant it is hard to improve from the 305s, but the KH80s are better all around. I added a sub later, don’t play it loud and I couldn’t be happier with my near field set up.

 

[rongon]

@Webninja - Thanks. Can you describe what you like better about the KH80 over the 305mkII? Subjective impressions are fine with me, I'm not going to demand that statements are backed up with measurements .

 

[Speaker_tweaker]

The reviews I've read about the Studio 530 (including Amir's) all remark about the smoothness and non-fatiguing nature of their high frequency presentation. That's the exact opposite of my experience with Klipsch speakers. Of course, the 530's sensitivity is quite low at only 86dB/2.83V/1m (mfg), which equates to 1.3W with a 6 ohm load. So they're more like 85dB/1W/1m sensitive, which is a lot less than the usual Klipsch 92dB or so (or my Snell E/III's 91dB/1W/1m). No, these JBLs are not high sensitivity 'horn speakers', not by a long shot.

Klipsch routinely overstates sensitivity by about 6dB, so they're really not any more efficient. Klipsch is bound by the same laws of physics as everyone else and to get +6dB efficiency they would need to raise F₃ two-fold (eg 40Hz becomes 80Hz), which is not a good tradeoff. EAC did a video about manufacturers overstating sensitivity and Klipsch was the worst offender.

In addtion to having 6dB lower than advertised sensitivity, this klipsch speaker (tested by Amir) has lots of nasty resonances and an upward spectral tilt. It's easy to see why this would fatiguing.

You're always going to have some bright recordings, so no speaker can eliminate fatigue

In

 

[rongon]

Agreed, especially regarding these little 2-way bookshelf speakers. But when I think of Klipsch speakers, I think of the big hulks like the Forte IV, La Scala, or the pair of KG4.5 I had years ago (a floorstanding 10" bass reflex 2-way 'monkey coffin'), or of course the Klipschorn (which does sound pretty good). Those big floorstanders really do have sensitivities around 92 to 94dB/1W/1m. But yes, Klipsch overstates the sensitivities on all their models and they have huge problems with crossover design. Been there, done that. I can't live with Klipsch speakers.

If I had lots of money I'd be looking at some of the bigger Revel or JBL models with sensitivities in the 91dB/1W/1m range.

With speakers, you can have
- High sensitivity
- Decent bass response
- Small size (as in smaller than a washing machine)
Pick TWO.

Come to think of it, with passive crossover design you can have
- Low insertion loss
- Good frequency response control
- Easy to drive, smooth impedance load
Pick TWO.

There are so many of those one could make up, covering all sorts of things. Sometimes it's fun dreaming those up...

 

[Michou]

@Webninja - Thanks. Can you describe what you like better about the KH80 over the 305mkII? Subjective impressions are fine with me, I'm not going to demand that statements are backed up with measurements .

I am very sensitive to the hiss I hear from lots of active speakers and that's why I prefer passive designs.

 

[rongon]

Hiss... That's a valid point. I envy your high frequency hearing. Mine has been diminishing for years now.

Does the KH80 hiss less than the 305P?

 

[raindance]

The 530s are due to arrive here Monday.

As noted previously, the only power amp I have available at the moment is a ca. 1995 Hafler P1000, approx 60Wpc at 4 ohms. I believe it's a good quality amplifier but I know it's not one of those arc welder-style current blasters some people recommend. It has nice finned heatsinks on each side, and is very solidly built. It's an old school class AB pro audio amp.

I also have one of those 2005-vintage Panasonic AVRs with class D amp sections that were an internet sensation back then. I use that for my TV system, driving the Snell E/III speakers. It will be interesting to see if the Studio 530s can be driven well enough by that receiver.

The reviews I've read about the Studio 530 (including Amir's) all remark about the smoothness and non-fatiguing nature of their high frequency presentation. That's the exact opposite of my experience with Klipsch speakers. Of course, the 530's sensitivity is quite low at only 86dB/2.83V/1m (mfg), which equates to 1.3W with a 6 ohm load. So they're more like 85dB/1W/1m sensitive, which is a lot less than the usual Klipsch 92dB or so (or my Snell E/III's 91dB/1W/1m). No, these JBLs are not high sensitivity 'horn speakers', not by a long shot.

I can tell you that I tried a pair of those Pioneer Andrew Jones 22-something-or-other 2-ways and I found them to be dull, hopelessly dull. Very pleasant, but dull. No dynamics, not much clarity. Just very smooth. I hope these Studio 530s aren't like that. I'll know Monday evening, I guess...

The Studio 530's are absolutely not dull. They sound alive.

 

[Chrispy]

I've got both the 305s and 530s but never compared them, nor have even used the 530s as mains (use them as rear surrounds) or in the same room even....some day....

 

[rongon]

The JBL 503s arrived today.

I had to hook them up to my modest Panasonic AVR and Pioneer Elite SACD player, straightaway. Gave them a listen.
They're very clear, lots of dynamics. Much better in those regards than the LSR305Ps.
Tonal balance seems well balanced. I find them a little bright, actually, but I've always favored a darker balance than most.

Initial impressions are that these give me the dynamics I was looking for from Klipsch and Tannoy speakers, but without that Klipsch honk/shriek and with better clarity and a less dark tonal balance than the Tannoys.

The imaging/localization of instruments in the stereo illusion is really good. Really, really good. There's some depth to it too. They're fun to listen to.

Talking heads on TV sound accurately portrayed, and you can hear the dynamics compression and other audio processing applied. Sibilants are well controlled (they don't sizzle and hiss). I think these might make decent recording monitors for modest listening levels.

I can't believe these cost me only $216 shipped (they're refurbs from JBL).
I'm very happy.

I'll have to live with these for a while. You know how it is... You think you're totally happy but then something bothers you after a few months. Let's see if that happens again with these.

Thanks to Amir and ASR for bringing these contemporary JBL speakers to my attention. I would never have thought they could be as good as they are. These are light years beyond the old L100 and 4311 speakers of my youth.

 

[Chrispy]

Thanks to Amir and ASR for bringing these contemporary JBL speakers to my attention. I would never have thought they could be as good as they are. These are light years beyond the old L100 and 4311 speakers of my youth.

I'd still take the speakers of my youth like the L100 or my 4311Bs over my 530s....

 

[Webninja]

@Webninja - Thanks. Can you describe what you like better about the KH80 over the 305mkII? Subjective impressions are fine with me, I'm not going to demand that statements are backed up with measurements .

For one thing the KH80s have no hiss, but I’m not sensitive to it, so I only noticed the 305s hiss if I’m closer than 12” and listening for it.

KH80s sound effortless. You keep turning them up and I give up before they do.

Without a sub, the bass is impressive for a 4”, better than the JBL 5”. With the sub and the ma1 room correction I’m not sure how I could get any better.

The KH80s, for their size on the desk and with the sub under the desk, fantastic ratio of desk/floor space to quality of sound.

 

[raindance]

The JBL 503s arrived today.

I had to hook them up to my modest Panasonic AVR and Pioneer Elite SACD player, straightaway. Gave them a listen.
They're very clear, lots of dynamics. Much better in those regards than the LSR305Ps.
Tonal balance seems well balanced. I find them a little bright, actually, but I've always favored a darker balance than most.

Initial impressions are that these give me the dynamics I was looking for from Klipsch and Tannoy speakers, but without that Klipsch honk/shriek and with better clarity and a less dark tonal balance than the Tannoys.

The imaging/localization of instruments in the stereo illusion is really good. Really, really good. There's some depth to it too. They're fun to listen to.

Talking heads on TV sound accurately portrayed, and you can hear the dynamics compression and other audio processing applied. Sibilants are well controlled (they don't sizzle and hiss). I think these might make decent recording monitors for modest listening levels.

I can't believe these cost me only $216 shipped (they're refurbs from JBL).
I'm very happy.

I'll have to live with these for a while. You know how it is... You think you're totally happy but then something bothers you after a few months. Let's see if that happens again with these.

Thanks to Amir and ASR for bringing these contemporary JBL speakers to my attention. I would never have thought they could be as good as they are. These are light years beyond the old L100 and 4311 speakers of my youth.

A little bit of a high frequency droop EQ'd in could make them suit you even better. From 6-8 feet listening distance they're not too bright. Closer up and they get brighter. They're not designed for extreme near field use, hence the suggestion about some EQ (or even just turning the treble knob down a bit). Also toeing them out a bit helps.

 

[frabor]

Maybe a bigger room. in a perfect world, the cure for small room sound is a bigger room. Me , so far, in a small room, wishing for a bigger one.