JBL 705P Studio Monitor Review

[D700]

We had a whole (argumentative) thread on temperature already. All the speakers have been tested at around 55 degrees F. When the weather gets warmer, I can re-test a sample and see if there is a difference. We live just a few feet above sea level so that is your pressure. Humidity is rather high in winter (around 70%).

Subjective testing is done indoor at temps in low 70s (F).

I bet sample to sample variation is far more than any temperature effect.

Thank you! Looking forward to that.

 

[napilopez]

Thanks amir! That 1Kish bump is really weird given it's not in Harman's data but I have no good explanation for it =] Just seems like they definitely would've EQ'd out such a broad hump in DSP so I can't help but suspect something odd is going on. And again we see the shelving down in the bass...

While I understand not EQing out the small ripples, such a broad hump would absolutely be audible and it's hard to believe it would have passed the testing phase that way when it seems trivial to EQ it out since the DI curves are quite smooth in the region.

F10 of 40dB from eyeballing quickly. Looks like that means JBL quotes frequency response as the F10 point even on professional gear. Time to measure the JBL M2... I wonder how they fixed the issues with the 7 series which seems identical but smaller, with obvious problems like that crossover dip which is not present in things like an 8331/41 which is a scaled down 8351. Guess it's cheaper so that's the compromise they chose to make though.

...But even with the "cheaper" excuse, price to performance wise, the 5.1 score on a Kali IN-8, and a 4.7 on this... With an older brand that has more resources and hopefully more engineers, and more than double the price, I expected a lot more.

This model also hisses a little above my limit, and more than the $100 Harman Kardon Soundsticks I had in college and didn't notice. As much as I love Harman's research, and Revel seems great, the more I see about JBL, and the more I listen to their speakers, the less I like them as a company.

To be fair to JBL, they do quote the frequency range as being to the F10 point in their detailed spec sheets (PDF), and they generally specify it as F10 in all of the specs I've seen.

Also a gentle reminder against putting too much weight on the preference score, especially for speakers so close in predicted performance. Remember, accuracy is pegged at 86 percent, but that still leaves a whole lot of room for variation and outliers. And ultimately the score is referenced to listening, not the other way around. Granted, blind listening, but still.

To use an example from the preference study itself:

One speaker was predicted at roughly a 4.5, another at a 5, so pretty close to the 705P and the Kali. In actuality, the measured performance of the former was a measly 2, while the other was nearly a 7. You can also see there's another speaker that was predicted at a 5 but in actuality scored roughly a 3.5. There's a whole lot of wiggle room there so it's really just best to numerically compare speakers that perform really poorly and really well...

 

[MZKM]

Thanks amir! That 1Kish bump is really weird given it's not in Harman's data but I have no good explanation for it =] Just seems like they definitely would've EQ'd out such a broad hump in DSP so I can't help but suspect something odd is going on. And again we see the shelving down in the bass...

While I understand not EQing out the small ripples, such a broad hump would absolutely be audible and it's hard to believe it would have passed the testing phase that way when it seems trivial to EQ it out since the DI curves are quite smooth in the region.



To be fair to JBL, they do quote the frequency range as being to the F10 point in their detailed spec sheets (PDF), and they generally specify it as F10 in all of the specs I've seen.

Also a gentle reminder against putting too much weight on the preference score, especially for speakers so close in predicted performance. Remember, accuracy is pegged at 86 percent, but that still leaves a whole lot of room for variation and outliers. And ultimately the score is referenced to listening, not the other way around. Granted, blind listening, but still.

To use an example from the preference study itself:
View attachment 53531
One speaker was predicted at roughly a 4.5, another at a 5, so pretty close to the 705P and the Kali. In actuality, the measured performance of the former was a measly 2, while the other was nearly a 7. You can also see there's another speaker that was predicted at a 5 but in actuality scored roughly a 3.5. There's a whole lot of wiggle room there so it's really just to numerically compare speakers that perform really poorly and really well...

Yeah, I wish he had the infor for those models, would be interesting to see if they got a low score due to limitations of the formula (no weighting of different frequencies), if because they didn’t get loud enough, etc.

 

[amirm]

By the way, you don't need me to test effects of temperature

That 1Kish bump is really weird given it's not in Harman's data but I have no good explanation for it =]

The Harman data is for "i" version, not "p." So there is that difference.

I plan to measure the second sample tonight. Seems like the first sample had a high-pass filter active despite my attempts to set it to flat.

 

[amirm]

I think in general my measurements have more wiggles in them than what is published by Harman. That penalizes speakers in subjective score and could have led to different coefficients than what they used. At some point, we may have to invent our own formula!

 

[StevenEleven]

Thanks amir! That 1Kish bump is really weird given it's not in Harman's data but I have no good explanation for it =] Just seems like they definitely would've EQ'd out such a broad hump in DSP so I can't help but suspect something odd is going on. And again we see the shelving down in the bass...

While I understand not EQing out the small ripples, such a broad hump would absolutely be audible and it's hard to believe it would have passed the testing phase that way when it seems trivial to EQ it out since the DI curves are quite smooth in the region.



To be fair to JBL, they do quote the frequency range as being to the F10 point in their detailed spec sheets (PDF), and they generally specify it as F10 in all of the specs I've seen.

Also a gentle reminder against putting too much weight on the preference score, especially for speakers so close in predicted performance. Remember, accuracy is pegged at 86 percent, but that still leaves a whole lot of room for variation and outliers. And ultimately the score is referenced to listening, not the other way around. Granted, blind listening, but still.

To use an example from the preference study itself:
View attachment 53531
One speaker was predicted at roughly a 4.5, another at a 5, so pretty close to the 705P and the Kali. In actuality, the measured performance of the former was a measly 2, while the other was nearly a 7. You can also see there's another speaker that was predicted at a 5 but in actuality scored roughly a 3.5. There's a whole lot of wiggle room there so it's really just to numerically compare speakers that perform really poorly and really well...

At least with that chart, things thin out once you get up to a predicted rating of 6.7. The chart makes a predicted rating of 6.7 look like a very safe bet—everything from there on out is actually under-rated in terms of predicted rating as compared to listening test ratings.

A much tighter or more favorable correlation seems to begin at 6.

 

[BDWoody]

Question, I noticed the green light at the front of the speaker is on in the picture. That indicates the high pass filter is active...

First of all, thank you for sending these in...and congratulations on the excellent choice!

I noticed from the manual the following about the light:

GREEN LED – When illuminated, GREEN Color indicates one of more of the following user-settings are
enabled: BASS MANAGEMENT; ROOM EQ; USER EQ, A/V Delay

So, not to be overly picky, but just want to be sure @amirm knows it could be any of the settings being enabled. Should just be the white *spotlight* (damn that thing is bright in a dark room).

Looking forward to the head to head with the 708!

 

[stevenswall]

Why is vertical dispersion so important? Of course the IN-8 is going to have a better vertical dispersion, it uses a coincident driver. Prioritizing vertical dispersion over horizontal dispersion doesn’t sound like the best idea. Loudspeaker design is all about design tradeoffs and minimizing those tradeoffs to the point of little to no concern.

Personal bias: I own the JBL 708s. I’ve also played extensively with the KH80s and they are solid for what they are.
P.S. — We’ve spoken on social media, I told you to purchase the Genelec 8260As.

Ceiling and floor reflections. The score and the massive crossover null and poor vertical dispersion don't seem to be at the cost of anything other than engineering time, and the IN-8 doesn't seem to have poor horizontal dispersion at the cost of vertical... Just seems to be a cheaper speaker with fewer drawbacks besides hiss, and to me if something isn't the best in a few ways in, at, or above its price point, then it ought not exist.

As far as everything being a tradeoff, I don't believe that, as the only argument I've seen against coaxial drivers that wasn't disproved by a Genelec whitepaper was from Genelec themselves, and the compromise was massive volume levels on their main monitors.

The JBL 705 doesn't seem to have reached the limit of "needing" to not use a coaxial driver, and with my uses shouldn't exist because they are worse at vertical dispersion, more expensive than the IN-8, and don't go as deep. Smaller and less hiss, I'll give them that. Just feels like some rich automaker releasing a Yaris with a few engineering issues a user won't really notice, and selling it for as much as a Camry that doesn't have those issues.

If JBL were a company that employed 10-20 people and released something like this, I'd be really impressed. Maybe the JBL 708 doesn't have this issue, it's inaudible like you said, and I'd be impressed with the 705 I heard if it wasn't on a desk or was adjusted properly.

And yeah, I've talked to a few people about the 708, Genelec 8260, Dutch & Dutch 8C, and Kii Three. It's been useful, thanks. The latter three were always "unreachable moonshots" ever since discovering them over a year ago now (Sometime before November 2018 for the Genelec based on my notes, a bit after for the Kii/Dutch), but I think it was you or someone else who pushed me over the edge when I saw the specs on the 8260 vs the new models just going louder and not as low. That and finding a pair for $5,000 that I could try and return if needed, and being absolutely fed up with what I was experiencing with other companies speakers (JBL, Devialet, Elac, Kali, Mackie, etc.)

 

[amirm]

First of all, thank you for sending these in...and congratulations on the excellent choice!

I noticed from the manual the following about the light:

GREEN LED – When illuminated, GREEN Color indicates one of more of the following user-settings are
enabled: BASS MANAGEMENT; ROOM EQ; USER EQ, A/V Delay

So, not to be overly picky, but just want to be sure @amirm knows it could be any of the settings being enabled. Should just be the white *spotlight* (damn that thing is bright in a dark room).

Looking forward to the head to head with the 708!

He told me he had a high-pass active. I am testing the second one as I type this and did a factory reset which turned off that light.

 

[Sal1950]

Amir, I'd like to ask a purely subjective question if you don't mind. LOL
Since your very familiar with the sound of the TOTL speakers from Revel/JBL I wonder if you'd take a shot at this.
Excluding the expected and measured rolloffs that the bottom end and ablity to go loud, what would you say are the biggest SQ points you lose when comparing something like the Salon 2 or JBL M2 against the 705? I expect them to sound reasonably similar going by the measurements and house design goals, so where to you mainly pay the sonic price by going down to something like this.
TIA

 

[spacevector]

I think in general my measurements have more wiggles in them than what is published by Harman.

Is this due to your measurement being higher resolution?

 

[Jon AA]

Ceiling and floor reflections.

There are competing interests here though. A speaker with limited vertical despersion built into the horn may not have as smooth a response off axis vertically, but they have much less of it so it should be less audible. A coaxial will likely have a smoother off-axis vertical response...but it needs to because the floor and ceiling bounce will be much more audible.

 

[napilopez]

At least with that chart, things thin out once you get up to a predicted rating of 6.7. The chart makes a predicted rating of 6.7 look like a very safe bet—everything from there on out is actually under-rated in terms of predicted rating as compared to listening test ratings.

A much tighter or more favorable correlation seems to begin at 6.

Good catch! That's something I'll keep an eye out for going forward. It also intuitively follows from Dr Toole's comments that the best speakers are not necessarily the ones that sound the most amazing, but rather the ones that are the least flawed.

By the way, you don't need me to test effects of temperature

The Harman data is for "i" version, not "p." So there is that difference.

I plan to measure the second sample tonight. Seems like the first sample had a high-pass filter active despite my attempts to set it to flat.

Ah thanks, hadn't noticed that. hopefully those two things explain the discrepancies.

Is this due to your measurement being higher resolution?

While Amir's measurements shouldn't really be higher resolution assuming Harman is using 1/20th smoothing - Harman's are measured in an anechoic chamber, after all - it's possible Harman uses a gold sample speaker that measures slightly better than some consumer models, though I don't have a reason to really believe this to be true. But intuitively, Harman optimized for the best result they could get in their own chambers, so it stands to reason it would measure slightly worse in a different environment anyway.

 

[stevenswall]

There are competing interests here though. A speaker with limited vertical despersion built into the horn may not have as smooth a response off axis vertically, but they have much less of it so it should be less audible. A coaxial will likely have a smoother off-axis vertical response...but it needs to because the floor and ceiling bounce will be much more audible.

Maybe a Kali IN-8 2.0 could have a squashed horn to also limit the vertical dispersion while ensuring what does come out is relatively balanced. I wonder what that would do? (Putting a coaxial driver into a horn like the JBL M2.)

 

[BYRTT]

I think in general my measurements have more wiggles in them than what is published by Harman. That penalizes speakers in subjective score and could have led to different coefficients than what they used. At some point, we may have to invent our own formula!

Thanks all the great analyzed data and have best garage take-2 re-measure tonight, about wiggles or different coefficients in your measuements if you look below horizontal analyze using ASR spin data its a Harman problem upper one is JBL 705P take-1 and lower one is Genelec 8341A.

 

[jhaider]

By the way, you don't need me to test effects of temperature

The Harman data is for "i" version, not "p." So there is that difference.

The Sound & Recording measurements of the P version track with the published i measurements. The hump at around 1kHz in your tested is really a mystery. I know the EQ for the i model includes a substantial dip in that region.

 

[RayDunzl]

He told me he had a high-pass active. I am testing the second one as I type this and did a factory reset which turned off that light.

Does a factory reset load the "flat" factory preset, or is that an additional step?

Page 14 in manual:

 

[LDKTA]

Ceiling and floor reflections. The score and the massive crossover null and poor vertical dispersion don't seem to be at the cost of anything other than engineering time, and the IN-8 doesn't seem to have poor horizontal dispersion at the cost of vertical... Just seems to be a cheaper speaker with fewer drawbacks besides hiss, and to me if something isn't the best in a few ways in, at, or above its price point, then it ought not exist.

As far as everything being a tradeoff, I don't believe that, as the only argument I've seen against coaxial drivers that wasn't disproved by a Genelec whitepaper was from Genelec themselves, and the compromise was massive volume levels on their main monitors.

The JBL 705 doesn't seem to have reached the limit of "needing" to not use a coaxial driver, and with my uses shouldn't exist because they are worse at vertical dispersion, more expensive than the IN-8, and don't go as deep. Smaller and less hiss, I'll give them that. Just feels like some rich automaker releasing a Yaris with a few engineering issues a user won't really notice, and selling it for as much as a Camry that doesn't have those issues.

If JBL were a company that employed 10-20 people and released something like this, I'd be really impressed. Maybe the JBL 708 doesn't have this issue, it's inaudible like you said, and I'd be impressed with the 705 I heard if it wasn't on a desk or was adjusted properly.

And yeah, I've talked to a few people about the 708, Genelec 8260, Dutch & Dutch 8C, and Kii Three. It's been useful, thanks. The latter three were always "unreachable moonshots" ever since discovering them over a year ago now (Sometime before November 2018 for the Genelec based on my notes, a bit after for the Kii/Dutch), but I think it was you or someone else who pushed me over the edge when I saw the specs on the 8260 vs the new models just going louder and not as low. That and finding a pair for $5,000 that I could try and return if needed, and being absolutely fed up with what I was experiencing with other companies speakers (JBL, Devialet, Elac, Kali, Mackie, etc.)

The trickle down M2 waveguide in a loudspeaker the size of the 705 is bound to have issues. Speak with loudspeaker designers. All tradeoffs. You don't have to believe it. The residual noise in a lot of these studio monitors is negligible and also a preference thing (unless being listened to at distances where it is audible). You just happen to be very sensitive to the noise... You're cherry picking, although I do wish the noise wasn't there myself. Maybe you should attempt to develop a pair of Ioudspeakers and find out exactly what I mean when it comes to tradeoffs.

You're comparing a 5" woofer (in a small enclosure) to an 8" woofer (in a much larger enclosure)... Of course it won't go as deep. I never said that the IN-8 had a less than ideal horizontal dispersion by the way, I only commented about the prioritization of vertical dispersion because you randomly mentioned it as if it were a make or break decision.

Maybe you should listen to the 705 under different circumstances... And no, the 708 doesn't have this issue. You can setup the best loudspeakers in the world in a room they shouldn't be in and place them where they shouldn't be placed and odds are, you won't like them. I recently heard the Kii Three's sound horrible, however, the first time I listened to them, they sounded beautiful. I hear you though man, you chose some phenomenal loudspeakers.

 

[lszomb]

The very last contenders for current studio monitor reviews:
1) ATC SCM20ASL Pro
2) Focal Trio 11
3) Dynaudio Core 59
4) PSI A14/17/23
5) PMC Result 6 / twotwo5
6) Quested V3110
7) Barefoot anything...

 

[Jon AA]

Maybe a Kali IN-8 2.0 could have a squashed horn to also limit the vertical dispersion while ensuring what does come out is relatively balanced. I wonder what that would do? (Putting a coaxial driver into a horn like the JBL M2.)

Possible but I have no idea. I don't think I've ever seen an oval coaxial. I have no idea how that might work.

There do appear to be differing design philosophies throughout the industry regarding vertical dispersion. Even the non-horn Revels usually have a small waveguide on the tweeter that promotes wider horizontal than vertical dispersion. Is that because it's better or because they can get the drivers more closely spaced by squashing the waveguide and that's the tradeoff they had to make? I'm not sure. Makers that use AMT tweeters claim it's a feature.

Personally, for a near-field monitor, I would be pretty concerned about having wide vertical dispersion. I'm not at all for speakers listened to 3m+ away.