Jamo Concert 8 / D830 Spinorama measurements (CTA-2034)

[Ageve]

Here are some measurements of the Jamo Concert 8 bookshelf speaker.

I think the MSRP was $2.400 / pair back in 1997, but I'm not sure (~$4.696 today).

My measurements are quasi-anechoic, with port+woofer corrected for baffle edge diffraction, combined with gated 1m measurements.

Looks nice overall.

Directivity error at crossover (mostly vertical).

Near-field:

Looks good. A slight increase at ~600 Hz that can also be seen in the gated measurements (as with many other speakers). Baffle step perhaps? Overall very smooth though.

The port resonance doesn't seem to cause any problems with the frequency response (rear mounted).

Horizontal directivity:

0-90 deg for comparison with Stereophile measurements:

Vertical directivity:

Distortion:

Very low distortion.

I didn't measure at higher SPL since it's not my speaker, and I didn't want to break it.


Finally, here's the horizontal and vertical ERDI:

Overall a nice speaker even by todays standards. Build quality is excellent, it sounds good, the distortion is low and it still measures just fine after 27 years.

As you may know, Danny Richie made a crossover mod for Concert 8 based on a (most likely) broken speaker. He did a follow-up video with another sample though.

I think a better way of spending your time and money if you own this speaker, is to buy music and listen to it, perhaps with slight EQ adjustment.

 

[JSmith]

Here are some measurements of the Jamo Concert 8 bookshelf speaker.

Nice, thanks for posting.


JSmith

 

[DSJR]

Thanks for this test.

Interesting how the reflected sound played so much on my memories of this speaker's 'sonics' as I remember a warm-tinged bass when closer to the wall and a pleasant 'sparkle' up top more prominent than the original ATC 20's we had to compare them with (a good few Jamos at various prices all had a sparkle to them I remember). The 'dispersion flare' at 5kHz would certainly explain that when mid-field listening.

I reserve the right to regard that bass-mid driver as awful, as its raw response is ghastly above a few kHz and the passive crossover merely puts a sticking plaster over it - and please don't expect it to be a non-issue as all it does is put a huge demand on the crossover to try to remove it - it doesn't really, but simply makes it maybe 'good enough.'

Still, the build and finish is good and these should make for an interesting used buy if any come up.

 

[Doenerkunde]

After reading this I checked the used market for the Jamos (pretty steep prices for the Concert 8...) and learned that european electronics retailer Conrad bought in the same cabinets and sold them with simpler drivers and finish at less then half the price:


Conrad Reference 1620

I have to say that Denmark is pretty remarkable when it comes to Hifi. Such a small country and they have given the world Scan Speak, Vifa, Peerless, Audio Technology, Jamo, Dynaudio, Purifi...

 

[Ageve]

After reading this I checked the used market for the Jamos (pretty steep prices for the Concert 8...) and learned that european electronics retailer Conrad bought in the same cabinets and sold them with simpler drivers and finish at less then half the price:

View attachment 379344
Conrad Reference 1620

It sure looks almost identical.

The baffle is made of a sand-based compound, and the rest of the cabinet is MDF.

Speaking of Denmark, there's also Danesian Audio / SB Acoustics (Revel Performa3 drivers, among others).


This is my gated on-axis measurement, compared to the updated one by Danny Richie btw.

His graphs are zoomed way in, but he's using 1/3 smoothing, and he doesn't even measure the bass response below 200 Hz.

It's from this video:

 

[Ageve]

I forgot to add IMD measurements.

F208 in this thread, as a reference:

Mackie CR4 Spinorama measurement (CTA-2034)

Here are some measurements of the Mackie CR4 powered speaker. The retail price was ~120 USD / pair. It has been discontinued and replaced by CR4-X. My measurements are quasi-anechoic, with near-field port+woofer measurements, corrected for baffle edge diffraction, combined with gated outdoor...

audiosciencereview.com

I used an inexpensive SPL meter (UNI-T UT352). It 's quite accurate compared to SPL calibrated REW measurements (UMIK-2).


76 dB SPL @ 1m:

The highest distortion peak is 59 dB below the 1 kHz fundamental.

F208: 0.08%
Concert 8: 0.11%

86 dB SPL @ 1m:

The highest distortion peak (900 Hz) is 51 dB below the 1 kHz fundamental.

F208: 0.16%
Concert 8: 0.28%

 

[john11]

Thanks for this test.

Interesting how the reflected sound played so much on my memories of this speaker's 'sonics' as I remember a warm-tinged bass when closer to the wall and a pleasant 'sparkle' up top more prominent than the original ATC 20's we had to compare them with (a good few Jamos at various prices all had a sparkle to them I remember). The 'dispersion flare' at 5kHz would certainly explain that when mid-field listening.

I reserve the right to regard that bass-mid driver as awful, as its raw response is ghastly above a few kHz and the passive crossover merely puts a sticking plaster over it - and please don't expect it to be a non-issue as all it does is put a huge demand on the crossover to try to remove it - it doesn't really, but simply makes it maybe 'good enough.'

Still, the build and finish is good and these should make for an interesting used buy if any come up.

I'm using seas excel 8" the seas w22ex001 e0022, and it is very good up to about 2khz, then it all goes fuzzy

A few of these speakers on ebay right now at £500

 

[Maiky76]

Here are some measurements of the Jamo Concert 8 bookshelf speaker.

I think the MSRP was $2.400 / pair back in 1997, but I'm not sure (~$4.696 today).

View attachment 379284


My measurements are quasi-anechoic, with port+woofer corrected for baffle edge diffraction, combined with gated 1m measurements.


View attachment 379285


Looks nice overall.

Directivity error at crossover (mostly vertical).



View attachment 379286


View attachment 379287


View attachment 379288


Near-field:

Looks good. A slight increase at ~600 Hz that can also be seen in the gated measurements (as with many other speakers). Baffle step perhaps? Overall very smooth though.

The port resonance doesn't seem to cause any problems with the frequency response (rear mounted).

View attachment 379303

Horizontal directivity:

View attachment 379293

0-90 deg for comparison with Stereophile measurements:

View attachment 379294

View attachment 379295


Vertical directivity:

View attachment 379296

View attachment 379297

View attachment 379298


Distortion:

View attachment 379299

View attachment 379300

Very low distortion.

I didn't measure at higher SPL since it's not my speaker, and I didn't want to break it.


Finally, here's the horizontal and vertical ERDI:

View attachment 379301


Overall a nice speaker even by todays standards. Build quality is excellent, it sounds good, the distortion is low and it still measures just fine after 27 years.

As you may know, Danny Richie made a crossover mod for Concert 8 based on a (most likely) broken speaker. He did a follow-up video with another sample though.

I think a better way of spending your time and money if you own this speaker, is to buy music and listen to it, perhaps with slight EQ adjustment.

Better late than never?

Here is my take on the EQ.
Please report your findings, positive or negative!

For the score rational your journey starts here
Explanation for the sub score
The following EQs are “anechoic” EQs to get the speaker right before room integration.
If you able to implement these EQs you must add EQ at LF for room integration, that is usually not optional… see hints there.
The raw data with corrected ER and PIR:

Score no EQ: 5.4
With Sub: 7.6

Spinorama with no EQ:

• fairly good
• HF ragged
• Directivity could be better

EQ design:

I have generated two EQs. The APO config files are attached.

• The first one, labelled, LW is targeted at making the LW flat
• The second, labelled Score, starts with the first one and adds the score as an optimization variable.
• The EQs are designed in the context of regular stereo use i.e. domestic environment, no warranty is provided for a near field use in a studio environment although the LW might be better suited for this purpose.

Score EQ LW: 6.1
with sub: 8.3

Score EQ Score: 6.6
with sub: 8.7

Jamo Concert 8 APO EQ LW 96000Hz
January232025-155032

Preamp: -0.80 dB

Filter 1: ON HPQ Fc 40.3 Hz Gain 0.00 dB Q 1.05
Filter 2: ON PK Fc 72.1 Hz Gain -2.69 dB Q 1.82
Filter 3: ON PK Fc 1754.0 Hz Gain -1.71 dB Q 0.77
Filter 4: ON PK Fc 682.7 Hz Gain -1.70 dB Q 4.83
Filter 5: ON PK Fc 1135.8 Hz Gain -1.21 dB Q 4.91
Filter 6: ON PK Fc 4836.6 Hz Gain 1.71 dB Q 3.51
Filter 7: ON PK Fc 7144.9 Hz Gain -2.39 dB Q 1.62
Filter 8: ON PK Fc 13092.7 Hz Gain -2.33 dB Q 3.64

Jamo Concert 8 APO EQ Score 96000Hz
January232025-155032

Preamp: -0.80 dB

Filter 1: ON HPQ Fc 40.3 Hz Gain 0.00 dB Q 1.05
Filter 2: ON PK Fc 71.3 Hz Gain -2.71 dB Q 1.82
Filter 3: ON PK Fc 1660.0 Hz Gain -1.33 dB Q 0.60
Filter 4: ON PK Fc 676.7 Hz Gain -1.71 dB Q 4.19
Filter 5: ON PK Fc 1133.3 Hz Gain -1.56 dB Q 4.97
Filter 6: ON PK Fc 4867.1 Hz Gain 1.60 dB Q 2.93
Filter 7: ON PK Fc 6422.9 Hz Gain -3.02 dB Q 0.76
Filter 8: ON PK Fc 13111.7 Hz Gain -2.39 dB Q 4.64

Spinorama EQ LW

Spinorama EQ Score

Zoom PIR-LW-ON

Regression - Tonal

Radar no EQ vs EQ score
small improvements?