I cant its just too delicious
I would pay more for some better speakers than jbl 104 but i think i will stay with them due to low depth size.
-
WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
JBL One Series 104 Powered Monitor Review
- Thread starter amirm
- Start date
I would pay more for some better speakers than jbl 104 but i think i will stay with them due to low depth size.
Just a bunch of psychogustative bullshit.I cant its just too delicious
- Joined
- Jan 15, 2020
- Messages
- 6,871
- Likes
- 16,828
Where did I say which patent it was? A loudspeaker does not consists of just one part or patent and KEF is working on the coaxial design since 25+ years being now in the 13th generation and has mainly other cost pressure than a 3-way Genelec. Also have you seen the measurements of their latest generation, they are also very smooth and continuous, https://us.kef.com/pub/media/documents/rseries/rseries2018-white-paper.pdf
I think more than 25 years. I was selling the UniQ speakers like a C55 in the mid 80's. No idea how long before that KEF was offering this sorta stuff.
The measurements are good, yes, Genelec is just better in the frequency domain:
KEF Reference 5: (±3dB) 40Hz – 35kHz
KEF R11: (±3dB) 46Hz - 28kHz
Genelec 8260: (±1dB) 29Hz - 21kHz
Which is why it seems like KEF should be asking Genelec to help them design things, rather than Genelec licensing things, because most of KEFs work seems to be on their driver design, then maybe bracing and flexible ports... The Genelec I have doesn't seem to use any of their methods (no flexible port, not internal braces taking up space inside, no air gaps between coaxial driver parts,), and performs better in a smaller form factor.
- Joined
- Jan 15, 2020
- Messages
- 6,871
- Likes
- 16,828
Apple and pea comparsion, an active speaker has much more filtering inside than a passive crossover, trust me, the Genelec coax wouldn't much measure much different with a passive crossover like the KEF does and this isn't something negative as they are both the best engineered coax drivers on the market available.
The LS50W with DSP crossovers is (±3dB) 45Hz – 28kHz. I don't think it's just the crossover.
I don't see how both can be the best when it comes to flat frequency response when measurements seem to show the Genelec, a Neumann that isn't even coaxial, and a JBL M2 as having the flattest frequency response.
Maybe if they both worked together and made something that was more continuous like the Genelec with the "tangerine diffusor" thing from KEF, and beryllium for the diaphragm material.
- Joined
- Jan 15, 2020
- Messages
- 6,871
- Likes
- 16,828
The LS50W is not the latest generation of the coax and also a "poorer" cousin as its a full range driver which has to do much more displacement compared to pure mid-tweeter coax of the R series and Genelec.
Also its part of the company choices how much they want to smooth out responses with DSP, here you can see that with DSP its even possible to bring the passive LS50 to a similar ±1dB linearity. https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...shelf-speaker-review.11144/page-8#post-316128
You can actually bring almost any loudspeaker on axis to similar linearity on axis, that's nothing difficult, difficult is to make it having also smooth responses under angles (radiation/directivity) and these directivity curves of the current KEF drivers aren't really worse than the Genelec ones.
Also its part of the company choices how much they want to smooth out responses with DSP, here you can see that with DSP its even possible to bring the passive LS50 to a similar ±1dB linearity. https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...shelf-speaker-review.11144/page-8#post-316128
You can actually bring almost any loudspeaker on axis to similar linearity on axis, that's nothing difficult, difficult is to make it having also smooth responses under angles (radiation/directivity) and these directivity curves of the current KEF drivers aren't really worse than the Genelec ones.
Sounds like we'll have to wait for KEF to make an active version of their Reference 5 to see what they can do. and how it compared. Or even an R300 with more bass extension, perhaps by throwing another driver on the back like the Buchardt A400 active speaker. Unfortunate that they haven't made an active three way, as I'd like to see more things at or a step up from the LS50W, Elac Navis, Phantom Reactor, and B&W Formation Duo.
The LSX is even smaller and has less bass, but perhaps the next thing will be a step up.
The LSX is even smaller and has less bass, but perhaps the next thing will be a step up.
Nobody liked my psychogustative coining. The expectation of a certain flavor or quality changes your perceptions. In this case, the glass looks like a dodo, so... it's yummy!
- Joined
- Jan 15, 2020
- Messages
- 6,871
- Likes
- 16,828
I would also welcome an active 3-way KEF very much, but to also tell the truth even their passive Reference 1 doesn't measure considerably worse even on axis (and of course off axis) when compared for example to a Genelec 8351 if we compare measurements done from the same external tester (Prof. Goertz):
Sources: https://www.fidelity-online.de/2016/08/23/kef-reference-1-messungen/ & https://www.soundandrecording.de/equipment/studiomonitor-genelec-8351a-im-test/
True, but The Ones are less accurate, and less extended with bass compared to the 8260. I wish their 8361 could go as deep and they made it as flat as the 8260.
How does JBL 104 recreates sound stage and imaging? Especially in depth. Is coaxial driver helps?
Freaquency response is uneven of course but if using it as PC speakers you can always equalize it with REW+APO. I think it should helps a lot.
Just in doubt what to get. JBL 104 or Presonus Eris E5. Latter is more pricy of course...
Freaquency response is uneven of course but if using it as PC speakers you can always equalize it with REW+APO. I think it should helps a lot.
Just in doubt what to get. JBL 104 or Presonus Eris E5. Latter is more pricy of course...
Not a fan of nitpicking, but the 8351B should be way better than the A; especially for that astronomical price.
Well, you still have their own, which are usually accurate.
Skylinestar
New Member
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2020
- Messages
- 4
- Likes
- 0
Hello, users of JBL104. What is your volume level (knob position) when you are listening? 50%?
The noise floor for jbl 104 is quite high, I would set the volume to around 20 to 30 percent if possible.
AnalogSteph
Major Contributor
Somewhere around 10 o'clock to 11:30, usually.
(Onboard audio @ -3 dB into RCA in, Youtube @ 50% - at least from memory. This is at moderate volumes, I can't crank it unless I happen to be all alone in the office.)
There is an increase in noise floor at some point, but that's mostly past 12 o'clock I think...
Sound of these actually isn't too bad if not too revealing on my desk, and you do notice the treble peak, wherever that's coming from... They're not the most stable things I have to say, mine are a bit tilted and they fall over fairly easily as the area they are standing on isn't very big.
(Onboard audio @ -3 dB into RCA in, Youtube @ 50% - at least from memory. This is at moderate volumes, I can't crank it unless I happen to be all alone in the office.)
There is an increase in noise floor at some point, but that's mostly past 12 o'clock I think...
Sound of these actually isn't too bad if not too revealing on my desk, and you do notice the treble peak, wherever that's coming from... They're not the most stable things I have to say, mine are a bit tilted and they fall over fairly easily as the area they are standing on isn't very big.
Last edited:
AnalogSteph
Major Contributor
I finally installed Equalizer APO + Peace on this machine (note: restart sound device), placed the 104s horizontally angled ~30° up (no falling over like that if nothing else), and set out to come up with an EQ based on the measurements with fine-tuning by ear. I first matched the bottom end to on-axis/listening window response (+ a bit of bass extension), later added a low shelf to account for placement, and highs were based on measurements first but tweaked by ear later as they did not sound right (that dip at 10 kHz may be a measurement artifact). Highs still aren't 100% perfect and I'm debating shifting the low shelf to 600-800 Hz but in general things are one hell of a lot better than what they were.
Still not super revealing really but I mean what do you expect from some inexpensive 4" coaxes sitting on a desk unter a monitor in a lousy untreated environment?
Still not super revealing really but I mean what do you expect from some inexpensive 4" coaxes sitting on a desk unter a monitor in a lousy untreated environment?
Similar threads
- Poll
- Poll
- Poll