JBL 705P Studio Monitor Review

[AnalogCircuit]

Or just use Amir’s measurements as a basis for the EQ. Or use the automated ones of Pierre’s at Spinorama.org

How would one do that?

 

[Dj7675]

The Spinorama.org site takes the measurements from a variety of sources people like Amir provides, and runs an automated EQ based on the measurements. You would go to the site above and click on eq, search for the speaker you want and the EQ with the filters will be provided. Enter those values in to the device or software that accepts EQ.

Or you can “eyeball” any issues that seem to be evident in the Spinorama and create your own EQ. For example that hump between 800hz-1.7khz. After you create the eq for a problem, you can turn it off/on with actual content to see if it is a positive change and then keep it or not.

 

[AnalogCircuit]

The Spinorama.org site takes the measurements from a variety of sources people like Amir provides, and runs an automated EQ based on the measurements. You would go to the site above and click on eq, search for the speaker you want and the EQ with the filters will be provided. Enter those values in to the device or software that accepts EQ.


View attachment 256704
Or you can “eyeball” any issues that seem to be evident in the Spinorama and create your own EQ. For example that hump between 800hz-1.7khz. After you create the eq for a problem, you can turn it off/on with actual content to see if it is a positive change and then keep it or not.

View attachment 256705

This is awesome, thank you. Probably not as accurate with vintage speakers which would have many variables with aging components, weakening magnets, etc. but something newer and especially consistent and accurate like a modern JBL studio monitor, it seems like this would yield very good results - at least as a solid baseline before (if) you do any room correction. Thanks

 

[Rahan]

I've skimmed and searched and can't find much info on the 705P for nearfield listening - about 1M. How are they at this range?
Mostly the only references I hear about these speakers at that range is that some produce audible hiss? If that's true, I'd probably skip them.

I don't care about SPL - any 5" speaker will produce the SPL I need - I’m looking for 99% near field within .5 to 1.5M, non fatiguing for extended music listening

They really are made for this kind of distance. I'did not hear any hiss except when i put my hear on the horn! They are not fatiguing speakers. In any case the dsp will make them match your tast. I can't repeat enought how good are those speakers. The treeble is outstanding.

 

[AnalogCircuit]

They really are made for this kind of distance. I'did not hear any hiss except when i put my hear on the horn! They are not fatiguing speakers. In any case the dsp will make them match your tast. I can't repeat enought how good are those speakers. The treeble is outstanding.

Thanks for the reassurance!

I'm a bit confused whether I use DSP inside the JBLs or if DSP becomes a function of the RME ADI-2 DAC I'll be using... or a mixture of both?

 

[beefkabob]

Thanks for the reassurance!

I'm a bit confused whether I use DSP inside the JBLs or if DSP becomes a function of the RME ADI-2 DAC I'll be using... or a mixture of both?

You can use either, but I bet the RME DSP is more powerful and easier to control.

 

[Rahan]

You'll have plenty more bands on the 705's dsp but the RME will make it easier to set up.
ADI 2 + 705p you'll be an happy man.

 

[justice4c]

what about jbl 705p compare with genelec 8330a and 8331a

 

[beefkabob]

8330a < 705p < 8331a <708p when balancing max SPL and overall quality. I could see swapping the last two, but not the first two.

If SPL doesn't matter, and only even response matters, may as well get something cheaper than any of these.

 

[AnalogCircuit]

I'm absolutely loving music and general PC speaker use of these 705P's so far - emphasis on Nearfield and being very particular about accuracy, detail and fidelity without being fatiguing after a full day of listening. I initially just connected them with the cheap Apple DAC dongle and a 3.5mm to dual XLR cable and they sounded great even that way. I now have the RME ADI-2 DAC FS in place. It was initially bright but I did a factory reset and updated firmeware, then went through the basic setup following ADI's youtube videos and they now sound just incredible and I haven't tweaked any EQ yet. From a whisper, to the loudest levels I'd want to listen. I'm looking forward to trying the EQs in the DAC and separately in the 705's to see which I prefer in both sound and operation. (Will use spinorama data posted above)

Next steps is to automate them powering on and off. I bought some motion sensing power options with up to 60 minute shut off delay and will attempt to use those in my setup. This will save me from leaving them on all the time, or having to reach around to turn switches on or off.

With all that said, I would still like to do a bake off between these and the Genelec 8330A as dimensionally I like how the Genelecs are more shallow.
It seems the 8330A is the closest rival from Genelec (that or the G Three if not using internal DSP) The 705P's and 8330A's are about the same price points new and used. The 8331's are double the cost and might be better compared to the 708P when you look at frequency response, especially on the lower frequencies. At least, on paper.

 

[Maiky76]

@Tom C Here you are:


Here is my take on the EQ.
Please report your findings, positive or negative!
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: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...helf-speaker-review.11144/page-26#post-800725

The raw data with corrected ER and PIR:

Score no EQ: 4.7
With Sub: 6.7

Spinorama with no EQ:

• The very narrow anti resonance at 750Hz is decreasing the score by about 0.6...
• Good directivity
• Designed for near field listening (waveguide properties) hence the slope of the PIR a bit shallow
• Deviation form the original design (Harman own spinorama looks much better)

Directivity:

Better stay at tweeter height.
Horizontal very consistent up to +/-20deg at least.

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.
• A few very sharp EQ that might not translate well on random samples.

Score EQ LW: 5.6
with sub: 7.5

Score EQ Score: 6.1
with sub: 8.1

JBL 705p APO EQ LW 96000Hz
February142023-105631

Preamp: -1.6 dB

Filter 1: ON HPQ Fc 41.76,    0.00,    1.08
Filter 2: ON PK Fc 230.50,    -1.36,    0.98
Filter 3: ON PK Fc 1003.50,    -2.59,    4.75
Filter 4: ON PK Fc 1346.82,    -3.33,    5.90
Filter 5: ON PK Fc 2402.28,    -0.95,    6.99
Filter 6: ON PK Fc 6725.36,    -1.73,    4.91

JBL 705p APO EQ Score 96000Hz
February142023-105631

Preamp: -1.6 dB

Filter 1: ON HPQ Fc 41.96,    0.00,    1.08
Filter 2: ON PK Fc 237.53,    -1.44,    0.86
Filter 3: ON PK Fc 988.52,    -2.92,    4.88
Filter 4: ON PK Fc 1340.28,    -3.28,    4.33
Filter 5: ON PK Fc 2420.09,    -1.34,    6.95
Filter 6: ON PK Fc 6763.87,    -2.29,    2.17
Filter 7: ON PK Fc 12314.50,    -2.45,    3.54

Spinorama EQ LW

Spinorama EQ Score

Zoom PIR-LW-ON

Regression - Tonal

Radar no EQ vs EQ score
Some improvements

The rest of the plots is attached.

@Dj7675
FYI the EQ you provided (and if I did not make any mistakes):
Score EQ Pierre: 5.6
with sub: 7.5
I believe Pierre is targeting a better PIR fit which shows in the marginally better SMPIR parameter.

 

[Tom C]

@Tom C Here you are:


Here is my take on the EQ.
Please report your findings, positive or negative!
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: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...helf-speaker-review.11144/page-26#post-800725

The raw data with corrected ER and PIR:

Score no EQ: 4.7
With Sub: 6.7

Spinorama with no EQ:

• The very narrow anti resonance at 750Hz is decreasing the score by about 0.6...
• Good directivity
• Designed for near field listening (waveguide properties) hence the slope of the PIR a bit shallow
• Deviation form the original design (Harman own spinorama looks much better)

View attachment 264658
Directivity:

Better stay at tweeter height.
Horizontal very consistent up to +/-20deg at least.
View attachment 264667
View attachment 264674
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.
• A few very sharp EQ that might not translate well on random samples.

Score EQ LW: 5.6
with sub: 7.5

Score EQ Score: 6.1
with sub: 8.1

JBL 705p APO EQ LW 96000Hz
February142023-105631

Preamp: -1.6 dB

Filter 1: ON HPQ Fc 41.76,    0.00,    1.08
Filter 2: ON PK Fc 230.50,    -1.36,    0.98
Filter 3: ON PK Fc 1003.50,    -2.59,    4.75
Filter 4: ON PK Fc 1346.82,    -3.33,    5.90
Filter 5: ON PK Fc 2402.28,    -0.95,    6.99
Filter 6: ON PK Fc 6725.36,    -1.73,    4.91

JBL 705p APO EQ Score 96000Hz
February142023-105631

Preamp: -1.6 dB

Filter 1: ON HPQ Fc 41.96,    0.00,    1.08
Filter 2: ON PK Fc 237.53,    -1.44,    0.86
Filter 3: ON PK Fc 988.52,    -2.92,    4.88
Filter 4: ON PK Fc 1340.28,    -3.28,    4.33
Filter 5: ON PK Fc 2420.09,    -1.34,    6.95
Filter 6: ON PK Fc 6763.87,    -2.29,    2.17
Filter 7: ON PK Fc 12314.50,    -2.45,    3.54

View attachment 264664

Spinorama EQ LW
View attachment 264659

Spinorama EQ Score
View attachment 264661

Zoom PIR-LW-ON
View attachment 264663

Regression - Tonal
View attachment 264662

Radar no EQ vs EQ score
Some improvements
View attachment 264660

The rest of the plots is attached.

@Dj7675
FYI the EQ you provided (and if I did not make any mistakes):
Score EQ Pierre: 5.6
with sub: 7.5
I believe Pierre is targeting a better PIR fit which shows in the marginally better SMPIR parameter.
View attachment 264678
View attachment 264679

Will give this a go tomorrow. Its after 1 AM here right now.
Very excited you did this! Thank you so much! From what I take from reading the papers, this is the best quality way to do EQ. And the science works.

 

[Rahan]

Nice work. I was wondering, as this is a dsp speaker why doesn't the 705p come with a fine tuned eq already from the factory? The EQ spinorama looks pretty awesome except the directivity error at 2k Hz.

 

[Tom C]

That is the question of the ages. Anything that comes with a JBL badge and a strange FR course leaves you wondering. These folks are among the best, they certainly know the science, so what on earth was their thinking? Ive yet to see an answer to that question, so I guess just be glad the off-axis behavior is well controlled enough the unit responds well to EQ, and can be righted

 

[noiseconnector]

I've compared today some studio monitors - JBL 705P, KH150, EVE Audio SC2070, APS Klasik 2020 and some more budget ones and tonality between JBL and Neumann was most similar.

KH150 sounded more massive and full because of bigger cabinet, woofer and intended tonality before room eq, but 705P tweeter gave them edge in spaciousness and texture of high frequencies. Vocals, cymbals and guitars had more information and I was really impressed by 705P bass response. It's such a small (but somewhat deep) column, but with great sound. When we put them against 2070 and KH150 they were looking like toys, but sound serious. I don't know why they are not more popular.

I think 705P would be great idea for near field listening and with included DSP eq you can make it more as you like it. If paired with good sub it could be very competitive with higher end.

 

[BDWoody]

I think 705P would be great idea for near field listening and with included DSP eq you can make it more as you like it. If paired with good sub it could be very competitive with higher end.

I'm still as impressed with my 705Ps and 708Ps as when I got them several years ago.

I agree, they are consistently overlooked.

 

[Pio]

I'm still as impressed with my 705Ps and 708Ps as when I got them several years ago.

I agree, they are consistently overlooked.

Same here, use the 705Ps at work and have the 708Ps at home in a small set up.. absolutely love the 7 series..

 

[jhaider]

I've compared today some studio monitors - JBL 705P, KH150, EVE Audio SC2070, APS Klasik 2020 and some more budget ones and tonality between JBL and Neumann was most similar.

That sounds about right to me, given the comparators. I'm curious why 705P vs. KH150, though? Prices where you live? KH120II seems to be the more natural comparison.

KH150 sounded more massive and full because of bigger cabinet, woofer and intended tonality before room eq, but 705P tweeter gave them edge in spaciousness and texture of high frequencies.

Interesting. Neumann measures quite a bit smoother, though subjectively I can't say I've ever thought 705 (or 708) had less-than-smooth treble, and their directivity is wider than Neumann's target.

I'm curious, what was your listening distance?

I think 705P would be great idea for near field listening and with included DSP eq you can make it more as you like it. If paired with good sub it could be very competitive with higher end.

IMO the only serious knock on 7-series is JBL doesn't build them as well as they designed them. Find a well sorted pair and IMO they're magical. But alas we've seen examples (including Amir's 705P sample and his 708i sample) of less than well sorted speakers, unfortunately.

 

[Rahan]

True. They sound as good as they look cheap to me. I compare them with pmc two two 6 and psi a17. All sound great and at the end it's a matter of taste, but in the studio we all agreed that the jbl treble was really spot on. To be honest this CD is a step above every thing I heard to date. I plan to rebuild my 708i to make a more robust/nice looking cabinet.

 

[noiseconnector]

That sounds about right to me, given the comparators. I'm curious why 705P vs. KH150, though? Prices where you live? KH120II seems to be the more natural comparison.



Interesting. Neumann measures quite a bit smoother, though subjectively I can't say I've ever thought 705 (or 708) had less-than-smooth treble, and their directivity is wider than Neumann's target.

I'm curious, what was your listening distance?



IMO the only serious knock on 7-series is JBL doesn't build them as well as they designed them. Find a well sorted pair and IMO they're magical. But alas we've seen examples (including Amir's 705P sample and his 708i sample) of less than well sorted speakers, unfortunately.

When you consider prices 705P (1190 euro) is closer to KH150 (1460 euro) than KH120 II (800 euro) in Europe. Still it's a matter of quality of internal DSP (JBL has 192/32, Neumann 48/24), power (705P has 250W for either drivers), AES in/out in 705P and DSP control from column.

Listening distance was around 1 to 1,5m.

I don't get them as cheap looking at all. Waveguide which looks somewhat weird is different than everything we have on the market, but also technology of tweeter is different.