JBL 705P Studio Monitor Review

[thewas]

The only engineering mistake I see from Genelec is catering to the people who want loud, as their new speakers get louder, and are less accurate and less extended than their decade old 8260.

How many times do we have to repeat that better on-axis linearity with worse directivity doesn't mean "less accurate" and that a very deep linear bass doesn't really bring much in most rooms as due to room gain you have to "EQ it back"?

A sphere or Genelec style cabinets seem to be the best.
JBL, Focal, Adam, Dutch & Dutch, and many others use box shaped cabinets that are more likely to reflect internal sound and resonate, and purposefully
....
The Phantom, a lifestyle speaker product, could teach their engineers things in several areas.

Same here, how often will you ignore the fact that a sphere is from point of internal resonances is usually worse than a box as there is one huge internal resonance frequency instead of smeared to a large bandwidth of frequencies?

 

[LTig]

For some reason I thought Genelecs were a lot more expensive. The JBL 708Ps have 8" drivers and I just looked up the Genelec 8050B and its about the same price.[..]
There is also one more factor for me personally - Genelecs just look weird. Not that the JBLs are pretty, but they at least have a clean boxy shape.

There's also the Neumann KH310 in the same price range (at least in the EU). It's a box and other than the 708P and 8050B a 3-way which should give it an advantage when playing loud (less IMD). Not yet measured at ASR but at Sound & Recording.

As far as I can tell the QC of Neumann is comparable to Genelec. There was a problem with sometimes noisy power supplies (high frequency feep) in the first batches of KH420 which took them a year or more to fix but owners of affected speakers got them fixed for free.

 

[TimVG]

As for the shape of certain cabinets - it has zero to do with internal resonances and everything to do with mitigating diffraction.

 

[LDKTA]

I did rather get the feeling that here JBL and Revel are worship fodder and others, even the ones better than them, get faint praise, or critiscised in some way.
If there is any bias here it is very, very strongly pro anything Harman and anything which follows the suggestions of one single (if extremely good) book.

I don’t get that feeling one bit. It is the research that is well appreciated and for good reason. There are several other companies that make well designed loudspeakers. Not everyone has to like the same loudspeakers but those who do follow the science tend to.

 

[Frank Dernie]

I don’t get that feeling one bit. It is the research that is well appreciated and for good reason. There are several other companies that make well designed loudspeakers. Not everyone has to like the same loudspeakers but those who do follow the science tend to.

Clearly. You and loads of others have swallowed this particular view hook, line and sinker.
I am not saying it is wrong, only that it is not the only way, a view that seems only shared by those with a much wider experience than most people here.
There are members who have been involved in acoustics, speakers and rooms for longer than most here who, whilst valuing the work of Olive and others have a broader view and take more into account as well.

 

[Wombat]

It seems to ebb and flow. The 'GENuflect' guys have had a fair say.

 

[q3cpma]

98db isn't going cut it for me. My 705p are rated for 101db continuous, and they do not get quite loud enough.

If listened to in far field, it is reasonable. But the 8050B has the same continuous rating as the 705p with 120 dB peaks and the 8350A (which is more comparable to the 708p) is 103/121. Plus, these ratings have no meaning once you high-pass them with sub(s), which is why I really like those SAR SPL at fixed THD curves. The 8040/8340 make more sense with a sub, I think.

A pair of 708p is 4000 new at full price. They can probably be had new for less, and b-stock is half that price and essentially new. They go on b-stock sale every few months. So $2000 vs $5000 is quite significant. No way am I spending 5k on used speakers without a warranty.

I do think he meant $5000 for the pair, which makes them play in the same field.

I am not saying it is wrong, only that it is not the only way, a view that seems only shared by those with a much wider experience than most people here.

Saying that wisdom implies an open mind is at best fallacious, at worst wrong. But there is some Harman fanboyism in here; as seen everytime you discuss resonances and point to more recent research done on the subject.

The 'GENuflect' guys

I like it.

But yeah, it's hard not to get that @stevenswall likes his Genelecs (which he should, they are amazing). But it's quite obvious that his position isn't dialectic, here.

 

[hyperplanar]

There's also the Neumann KH310 in the same price range (at least in the EU). It's a box and other than the 708P and 8050B a 3-way which should give it an advantage when playing loud (less IMD). Not yet measured at ASR but at Sound & Recording.

As far as I can tell the QC of Neumann is comparable to Genelec. There was a problem with sometimes noisy power supplies (high frequency feep) in the first batches of KH420 which took them a year or more to fix but owners of affected speakers got them fixed for free.

I really wish somebody would send in some higher end Neumanns and lower end Genelecs to Amir, they’re a bit underrepresented with only one model from each brand in the database and deserve a bit more consumer visibility IMO. Both brands seem pretty concerned with making long lasting quality products, which unfortunately doesn’t seem to be the case here with the powered 7 series

The KH120, KH310, 8030, and 8040 would be interesting to see measured. I would send in a KH120 but they’re my only speakers and I’d go insane during this lockdown without them!

 

[LDKTA]

Clearly. You and loads of others have swallowed this particular view hook, line and sinker.
I am not saying it is wrong, only that it is not the only way, a view that seems only shared by those with a much wider experience than most people here.
There are members who have been involved in acoustics, speakers and rooms for longer than most here who, whilst valuing the work of Olive and others have a broader view and take more into account as well.

Hey man, I hear you. I’m aware of the other ways and I have no problems with them whatsoever. I’m not an acolyte by any means.

 

[Thomas savage]

Clearly. You and loads of others have swallowed this particular view hook, line and sinker.
I am not saying it is wrong, only that it is not the only way, a view that seems only shared by those with a much wider experience than most people here.
There are members who have been involved in acoustics, speakers and rooms for longer than most here who, whilst valuing the work of Olive and others have a broader view and take more into account as well.

It's good to aspire to as broad a spectrum of views as possible, as long as they are research driven .

 

[stevenswall]

But yeah, it's hard not to get that @stevenswall likes his Genelecs (which he should, they are amazing). But it's quite obvious that his position isn't dialectic, here.

I also like the Devialet Phantom Reactor, Kali IN-8, and Elac Navis, though they all have deal breaking issues. I've even recommended the JBL LSR 308 to people when they are on sale.

If I come off like a shill or fanboy justifying a purchase, consider a few things:

1. NOBODY that I know is invested enough to shop around for an entire year, including returning several things that aren't good enough instead of justifying purchases.

2. Genelec admits the one true shortcoming of a coincident speaker: they aren't used in their main monitors because of SPL issues. None of us here are talking about those, thus none of the companies have a legitimate excuse not to get great vertical dispersion.

3. Similar to above: I care about vertical dispersion, many haven't heard something that sounds noticeably more balanced vertically, so they don't know if they'd prefer it, see number 1 again, and number 4:

4: I'm a maximizer looking for the optimum thing within reason to me... For others, that's quite unreasonable. For example, shoe shopping is trying on or buying and returning nearly ten thousand dollars worth of shoes from different companies. Shirts are purchased after I've tried on at least fifty others. NOBODY else I've heard of ever does that.

If someone isn't as picky, there are excellent choices for them. If they are as selective and hell bent on not justifying purchases, and have tried multiple speakers in multiple rooms in their house, aren't afraid to return things, and value something ideal (Ideal sound quality, not loudness. Someone who would select an OLED because it has the best picture quality, not for brightness,) then I'd love to see what they landed on.

As arrogant as it sounds, there are maybe three people I know of who have more experience, plus avoid justifying purchases, plus regularly dish out critiques where it's deserved, plus confront typical or manufacture promoted false facts or bad traditions.

(Examples are things like "Devialet makes lifestyle speakers, therefore they cannot sound as good or accurate as my studio monitors," or, "coaxial drivers have issues with the frequency response because an ever-changing wave guy this presented to the Tweeter," or, "all of our speakers are shaped like boxes, and that's okay because it doesn't really impact the sound, and sound is subjective anyway."

Open to learning about issues with my current speakers, I'll concede that they do have volume limitations which I'm content with.

Anyone else with the same information, experience, and desire for extension and accuracy, would make the same choice if selecting for fidelity in almost every case.

 

[stevenswall]

As for the shape of certain cabinets - it has zero to do with internal resonances and everything to do with mitigating diffraction.

Doesn't it have to do with resonances and rigidity? A flat board bows if you stand on it. A dome of the same thickness doesn't now nearly as much.

Haven't seen direct measurements of internal reflections interfering with and coming out via the woofer, but that's something Rythmik and others focus on. If it's not an actual phenomenon that's good to know.

 

[beefkabob]

4: I'm a maximizer looking for the optimum thing within reason to me... For others, that's quite unreasonable. For example, shoe shopping is trying on or buying and returning nearly ten thousand dollars worth of shoes from different companies. Shirts are purchased after I've tried on at least fifty others. NOBODY else I've heard of ever does that.

With shoes, how it wears in matters as much as initial fit. Birkenstocks are a perfect example of this. Kind of mediocre when you get a new pair, but fantastic after a month or so.
Then there's opportunity cost. The time spent is not worth the amount I could save just working or doing something more fun. Now if you enjoy trying on 50 shirts and going to UPS to return speakers, more power to you. I can't imagine that, though.
There's a reason you don't know anybody who does that.

 

[stevenswall]

You don’t buy the “dynamics” argument? What? Do you not realize just how important dynamics are when it comes to sound reproduction? Do you not realize just how dynamic live music is? Compression also exists and it sucks. There’s nothing to buy into... Genelec loudspeakers are also designed to be very dynamic.

...If it isn’t audible to someone, why should they stress themselves out about it? They shouldn’t.

...No company makes a *perfect* loudspeaker.

Dynamics are important, but I haven't seen evidence of speakers doing a significant amount of dynamic range compression relative to each other. Do you know of a source that would show what speakers are more dynamic? Seems like they more or less scale with input power: Double the power, get +3dB. If there are speakers with a curve where you for example double the power and get +3dB, double it again and only get 1dB, and doubling it again only gets you .1dB (exponentially compressing) then I'd really want to know.

If something isn't audible to someone, it probably is, they just need to be taught to identify it: Hiss, port chuffing, vertical dispersion differences as they move. If they are physically incapable of hearing it, don't stress. If they think it's within acceptable limits, no problem either... Just acknowledge when another company solves the problem. (Like I'd give kudos to someone who made a $10k speaker pair accurate from 20hz to 20khz within 1dB that could go up to 146dB.)

How do you define perfect? For me, an OLED TV color calibrated and brightness adjusted so that it can display a color corrected photo of my window at night, without me telling that my window was replaced by a TV, is perfect, because it's transparent. To me, because the Genelec's play down to around the human ears ability to hear, and as high as the human ear can hear, with 1dB of deviation or less, it's transparent/perfect to my human ears and I can now focus on room treatment and other things.

 

[stevenswall]

Loud is good. Every been to a concert? They play loud. It allows dynamics, yes. Sure, the 705p will be loud enough if I'm listening nearfield, but I don't usually listen to music that way.

That seems to mix up recording loudness for overall volume. Recording loudness is when they just boost all the lows to the level of the highs, getting rid of dynamics and clipped throughout much if not all of the music. This kind of loudness is actually helpful in a loud car or with crappy headphones, which is what most people use. It sucks on a good stereo though. Overall volume can have very quiet lows and very loud highs.

1. Yeah, I've been to a couple, and they've been really, really bad. I think at both the live sound engineers were compressing the signals as much as possible, and playing everything as loud as possible. No dynamics except in the rare case of a song opening maybe, but then there is crowd noise. Concerts make me not want to go to concerts. Acoustic performances in a concert hall that paid attention to acoustics and doesn't have a ton of parallel surfaces are great though. Used to work as a stage and recording tech in the music department in college. That sounded great, but was also unpowered in many cases.

2. Recording loudness and compression is why I hate most studio engineers. Overall volume is why I hate them and live sound techs, even if they didn't compress things too much. In situations where compression is needed, like in cars, ideally the user could adjust that on their stereo or the manufacturer can compress everything, as they already "detune" many car stereos.

 

[Wombat]

I also like the Devialet Phantom Reactor, Kali IN-8, and Elac Navis, though they all have deal breaking issues. I've even recommended the JBL LSR 308 to people when they are on sale.

If I come off like a shill or fanboy justifying a purchase, consider a few things:

1. NOBODY that I know is invested enough to shop around for an entire year, including returning several things that aren't good enough instead of justifying purchases.

2. Genelec admits the one true shortcoming of a coincident speaker: they aren't used in their main monitors because of SPL issues. None of us here are talking about those, thus none of the companies have a legitimate excuse not to get great vertical dispersion.

3. Similar to above: I care about vertical dispersion, many haven't heard something that sounds noticeably more balanced vertically, so they don't know if they'd prefer it, see number 1 again, and number 4:

4: I'm a maximizer looking for the optimum thing within reason to me... For others, that's quite unreasonable. For example, shoe shopping is trying on or buying and returning nearly ten thousand dollars worth of shoes from different companies. Shirts are purchased after I've tried on at least fifty others. NOBODY else I've heard of ever does that.

If someone isn't as picky, there are excellent choices for them. If they are as selective and hell bent on not justifying purchases, and have tried multiple speakers in multiple rooms in their house, aren't afraid to return things, and value something ideal (Ideal sound quality, not loudness. Someone who would select an OLED because it has the best picture quality, not for brightness,) then I'd love to see what they landed on.

As arrogant as it sounds, there are maybe three people I know of who have more experience, plus avoid justifying purchases, plus regularly dish out critiques where it's deserved, plus confront typical or manufacture promoted false facts or bad traditions.

(Examples are things like "Devialet makes lifestyle speakers, therefore they cannot sound as good or accurate as my studio monitors," or, "coaxial drivers have issues with the frequency response because an ever-changing wave guy this presented to the Tweeter," or, "all of our speakers are shaped like boxes, and that's okay because it doesn't really impact the sound, and sound is subjective anyway."

Open to learning about issues with my current speakers, I'll concede that they do have volume limitations which I'm content with.

Anyone else with the same information, experience, and desire for extension and accuracy, would make the same choice if selecting for fidelity in almost every case.

#4 above. There is a likely reason you haven't heard of anybody who tries shoes and shirts, as described. It is because the behaviour is extremely obsessional and similarly unusual.

 

[stevenswall]

It’s clear that you’re serious... but seriously. Tradeoffs. Coincident drivers are not perfect in any way shape or form. And if you truly think these companies don’t care about what you’ve mentioned, it is because you’re delusional. Mistaken and misinformed. It isn’t easy or simple to design loudspeakers of such a high caliber. Do you legitimately think the designers don’t think about vertical dispersion? Diffraction? Internal reflections? Get real.

I get it, Genelec is great... but the bias is strong with you.

Could you please give an example where a coincident driver is inherently flawed? This is the only name calling I've experienced so far, and I get you're frustrated, but if you have a drawback I'd like to consider it.

Not inherent drawbacks:
-Air gap and ridges causing diffraction issues are solved by Genelec.
-Too much change in the waveguide presented to the tweeter is solved by Genelec, KEF, and others that make 3-ways.
-Can't go loud enough is not an excuse unless it's equivalent to a Genelec main monitor or louder than than a Genelec 8361
-Not able to be engineered to achieve accuracy is solved again by Genelec which seems to be as accurate as the M2, perhaps moreso with extension.

I'm sure other engineers and project managers *think* about it, but unfortunately not enough to have it reflected in their actions when trying to make a $10,000+ pair of speakers.

Definitely willing to concede that the compression driver and waveguide in an M2 or 708 is genius and superior/not lazy/not outdated for most uses at all if someone can demonstate:

-It has less dynamic compression and this is audible.
-It's more accurate across a wider range.
-It has less ringing and this is audible.
-It has less distortion and this is audible.

I'm sure it probably goes louder with less distortion, but that's where our values would differ: I don't value volume past a certain point, and distortion is low enough that it's not a problem to be solved like the glaring issues of vertical dispersion and soundstage consistency. Size too I suppose it helps with, but that's minor.

Oh, and I concede that for many, comparing used things to new isn't ideal, and they'd worry about not having a warranty. Valid concern.

 

[direstraitsfan98]

genelec best monitors are all 3 way not coaxil

 

[stevenswall]

#4 above. There is a likely reason you haven't heard of anybody who tries shoes and shirts, as described. It is because the behaviour is extremely obsessional.

I agree. It's obsessive. I literally wear one of 7 identical polos for three years, and then find another set of identical polos to wear for 3 years. All of my socks match and all of my pants are the same, and all of my shorts are identical to the pants except in length. My next pair of shoes is in my closet, and is identical to the current pair. I've paid a nutritionist to come up with three meals I can eat every day without lacking any nutrient. Zero pictures are hung in my house, and the entire living room would look nearly the same if you took a picture of it in color or black and white. I used to buy things that had red as an accent color if I had to because there were red accents on my laptop and I wanted to avoid having too many colors and buying into being fashionable or appealing.

People who obsess over things are exactly who I want to hear from, whether it's toaster oven reviews, speakers, or cars. (Or consumer reports, but for speakers and headphone's they either don't do it or I've outgrown them.)

Someone who simply accepts a decent product they purchased and hasn't extensively or exhaustively compared it to other options doesn't have a very meaningful opinion... which is why I love Audio Science Review and the rankings, and people like Tyll Hertsons who make lists and rank things and have many negative reviews.

 

[stevenswall]

genelec best monitors are all 3 way not coaxil

If you are talking about their main monitors that are three ways and don't have any coaxial drivers, I disagree. They are less accurate, just louder.

If you are talking about their currently flagships, to clarify, coaxial coincident drivers are used for the tweeter/mid section and they have accompanying woofers. I mean coaxial drivers in a three way speaker, not a "coaxial speaker" where it's only a two way like and LS50 from KEF.