• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required as is 20 years of participation in forums (not all true). Come here to have fun, be ready to be teased and not take online life too seriously. We now measure and review equipment for free! Click here for details.

JBL SRX835P Reviewed (Powered Monitor)

AlexanderM

Member
Joined
May 1, 2021
Messages
86
Likes
46
First of all: Thanks to @amirm for testing such systems.
I would LOVE more such measurements.

In Pro-Audio dispersion is arguably even more important than at home due to listeners being spread all over the place.
Many manufacturers advertise with precise dispersion but many speakers sadly don't shine here.

Against some other posters here I think PA speakers should totally be flat with good dispersion.
I do a lot of sound reinforcement and with often limited time for setup you just want a neutral speaker.
You then can quickly compensate for the usecase or the enviroment, but only if the speaker isn't up for some funny business.
Air attenuation is normally a non issue with such small systems. Listeners are typically close to the Speaker (<20m or even <10m at the farest point of interrest).

I am a little bit disappointed of this speaker.
Many flaws here are designed by choice.
They even used FIR filters, wich would make it more than easy to correct the frequency response.

Some other things may not be the speakers fault.
The chewed up response of the tweeter may very well be (in part) caused by the grill. Of course the large compression driver also does it's part.
I am currently designing simmilar speakers and while I am not finished, I still quickly compared the response with and without grill some time ago.
I use a custom made hex-grill very similar to the one JBL uses.
Here is how that looks. Without smoothing it is even worse. Please note that this is indoor and heavily gated.

View attachment 144374

You can even see the reflection in the impuls response (green with, yellow without grill). I am not shure about this, but I use FIR-filters for flat phase response, which might make this more visible than usual. The JBL speaker also has linearised phase. Maybe this shows in your measurements too @amirm :)
View attachment 144377

I also have problems with abnormal bass response due to the large enclosure.
It takes some real effort to to something here and I am still not there by far.
This is also visible in other large speakers measured here. For example the large JBL Monitor with the 12" woofer I think.

For reference, this is the speaker measured. Just imagine a grill similar to the JBL :)
View attachment 144380

Lastly:

Please don't say that. Read up on how the NFS actually works.
The NFS is more than suitable, as it generates real far field responses, wich are otherwise really hard to obtain for large speakers.
On the Klippel website you can even see Photos of the NFS with some D&B V Linearray cabinets on it, wich should have an immensly complex soundfield :)

While I am interrested in PA speakers for PA use, there are reasons to look at them from a Hifi standpoint.
There is a lot to learn und I would (and probably will :)) totally listen with my big speakers at home if I had the space.

Edit: One question that is bugging me: Why is this thing so damn large?
As a designer I would not want that much space for a modern 15" even if I had no restrictions there.
Even 15" PA Subs are often smaller, including my own designes.
Bass extension is quit good for a fullrange PA speaker, but 40Hz are totally possible with a smaller footprint while still getting enough output.
What speaker is that in the photo?? If it's stated or obvious I'm missing it, but it looks 3-way?
 

jones

Member
Joined
Jan 4, 2021
Messages
8
Likes
30
Location
Germany
What speaker is that in the photo?? If it's stated or obvious I'm missing it, but it looks 3-way?
It is one of my own builds. 3-Way design with Limmer 042 waveguide and 15" Woofer.
I did not get into details here because I just wanted to make the point about the influence of the grill.
I didn't just want to post some wiggly line graph without at least some rough reference.
 

More Dynamics Please

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2020
Messages
389
Likes
490
Location
USA
I think what @amirm experienced in his listening test is that with proper EQ a live performance speaker's biggest strength shines through, and that's the dynamic performance that's rarely achieved in home audio speakers. As Greg Timbers once said:

For me, Dynamics will make or break the loudspeaker system.

https://positive-feedback.com/interviews/greg-timbers-jbl/
 

richard12511

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 23, 2020
Messages
4,241
Likes
6,226

Dj7675

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 12, 2019
Messages
1,256
Likes
1,485
I took the time to listen to this speaker and added my notes to the review. I am very glad I did as you see:
A great example in the importance of listening and/or EQ as well as low distortion and play loud. Interesting with narrow dispersion and pretty bad frequency response.
 

Dave Tremblay

Member
Manufacturer
Forum Donor
Joined
Sep 23, 2020
Messages
65
Likes
334
Location
Boulder, CO
As an Engineer, I would have liked to see better measurements along with everyone else. But as a musician, dynamics are more important to me than a perfectly flat response. I’m not at all surprised that Amir liked listening to this speaker once he EQ’d it flatter. If a speaker can’t hit 110dB peaks with relative ease, you can tell. And don’t confuse that with nominal listening level. It’s easy to hit 110dB peaks with an 85dB reference level. Not going deaf here, I just enjoy dynamic content.
 

Zvu

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
May 1, 2020
Messages
555
Likes
862
Location
Serbia
^Now all you need to do is try to explain that to a few blockheads around here who think that low eff 83dB/W/1m and high eff 95dB/W/1m loudspeakers sound the same if both are eq-ed flat and playing 85dB at >=3m listening distance :)
 
Last edited:

sarumbear

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Aug 15, 2020
Messages
1,805
Likes
1,628
Location
Southampton, UK
The NFS is more than suitable, as it generates real far field responses, wich are otherwise really hard to obtain for large speakers.
On the Klippel website you can even see Photos of the NFS with some D&B V Linearray cabinets on it, wich should have an immensly complex soundfield :)
I’m not sure I will call NFS “measuring” far field response. It extrapolates a far field response from near field measurements. I have not yet seen any comparison of NFS and real-time (anechoic or outside) charts of large outdoor speakers to be convinced that their math works. As to the line array measurements, it’s again mathematically created from multiple physically offset driver measurements.

Don’t get me wrong, for the majority of transducers it’s an excellent system. However, there must be a reason why Kippel called it Near Field System. :)
 

jones

Member
Joined
Jan 4, 2021
Messages
8
Likes
30
Location
Germany
I’m not sure I will call NFS “measuring” far field response. It extrapolates a far field response from near field measurements. I have not yet seen any comparison of NFS and real-time (anechoic or outside) charts of large outdoor speakers to be convinced that their math works. As to the line array measurements, it’s again mathematically created from multiple physically offset driver measurements.

Don’t get me wrong, for the majority of transducers it’s an excellent system. However, there must be a reason why Kippel called it Near Field System. :)
It is not a Near Field System, it is a Near Field Scanner. This has nothing to do with your listening distance but rather with the measurment methode.

The math behind this does not care how large the speaker is and it has been shown to works great.
Klippel even advertises the system for large, heavy speakers that are otherwise difficult to handle. It is one of the selling points. :)

Even if you, whyever, don't believe this, look at the great correlation between amirs measurments and the datasheet.
JBL did those measurments in farfield.

Do you have any factual arguements on why the NFS should not work for large speakers?
 

sarumbear

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Aug 15, 2020
Messages
1,805
Likes
1,628
Location
Southampton, UK
It is not a Near Field System, it is a Near Field Scanner. This has nothing to do with your listening distance but rather with the measurment methode.
Semantics. After all NFS is a system. Besides, I have never mentioned listening. My topic is about measuring.

Do you have any factual arguements on why the NFS should not work for large speakers?
Nope. It is just that I have not seen any comparisons of anechoic and NFS charts for large outdoor speakers, yet. And, I am always sceptical for mathematical calculation in software...[/QUOTE]
 

More Dynamics Please

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2020
Messages
389
Likes
490
Location
USA
For the benefit of those who didn't go to the Greg Timbers interview link in my previous post here are his direct quotes dealing specifically with dynamics taken from a long interview that's well worth reading in its entirety:

I am a dynamics guy and very few loudspeakers take that into consideration, in my opinion. Two Engineers that I do admire are Bill Decanio and Charles Sprinkle.

In my opinion, it is necessary to have an acceptable degree of frequency and power response accuracy. I do not feel that these measurements need to be perfect. For me, Dynamics will make or break the loudspeaker system. Live music is dynamic as hell and this is one of the most difficult attributes to reproduce. Compression exists at all stages of the reproductive and recording chain. Of course, loudspeakers have the most but it is apparent in electronics as well.

I believe that solid Dynamic behavior is most important to get lifelike sound. Dynamics require high efficiency since transducers are pitiful in energy conversion. I also believe that sound staging is extremely important. I think natural midrange and bass presentation precedes the treble range. Of course all things have to be balanced!


Speakers have generally become smoother, more 3-dimensional and much smaller. This means that they are less dynamic on the whole and rather toy like compared to good stuff from the 60s and 70s. Unlike electronics, miniaturization is not a good thing with loudspeakers. There is no substitute for size and horsepower. Nothing much has changed with the laws of physics in the last 100 years so what it takes to make dynamic life-like sound is unchanged. There have been some advances in magnet materials and a bunch of progress in adhesives but not much else. The cost of a 70s system in today's economy would be considered unaffordable and the system would be deemed unnecessarily huge. The large highly efficient systems of old came at a time when 15 – 30 watts of power was the norm. Today's stuff would choke on those amplifiers. Now that power is cheap, size and efficiency has been thrown out the window because you can always apply more power. Unfortunately, more power does not make up for lack of efficiency. Today's speakers range between 0.1% to maybe 0.5% in efficiency. (On a good day) 60s and 70s stuff was more like 1% to 10%. With most of the losses gong to heat, turning up the power on a small system with small voice coils and poor heat management is definitely not equivalent to a large high efficient speaker.
 

jones

Member
Joined
Jan 4, 2021
Messages
8
Likes
30
Location
Germany
Nope. It is just that I have not seen any comparisons of anechoic and NFS charts for large outdoor speakers, yet. And, I am always sceptical for mathematical calculation in software...
You could trace the graph in the JBL datasheet und compare it to the NFS. It is right there in Amirs post :)
The JBL data should be good farfield data other than smooting.
If it works for one axis, it should work for all axis, as the NFS is not directional.

The speaker was also measured in the "Production Partner" magazine by Anselm Görtz.
He uses a large halfspace and groundplane measurements with nearfield measurements below 100Hz.
https://www.production-partner.de/test/jbl-srx-800-im-test/
His measurements look different to those of Amir and JBL, but are still similar overall.
 

sarumbear

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Aug 15, 2020
Messages
1,805
Likes
1,628
Location
Southampton, UK
@jones Here are three graphs. Tested by @amirm, JBL's data and the German magazine's test. Can you say they are "identical"? If yes, I need an eye test!

JBL SRX835P Frequency Response Measurements CEA2034 PA DJ Monitor Speaker.png


JBL SRX835P Company spec Frequency Response Measurements CEA2034 PA DJ Monitor Speaker.png


835815-F.jpg
 

levimax

Major Contributor
Joined
Dec 28, 2018
Messages
1,088
Likes
1,533
Location
San Diego

sarumbear

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Aug 15, 2020
Messages
1,805
Likes
1,628
Location
Southampton, UK
These look very similar to me.... Amir's measurements have less smoothing and the German measurements look to have some type of room bass reinforcement but otherwise similar.
How can you say that? On @amirm's chart the narrow dip is at around 150Hz. On JBL's chart it is at 600Hz and there is no narrow dip at the German magazine's chart.
 

sarumbear

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Aug 15, 2020
Messages
1,805
Likes
1,628
Location
Southampton, UK
Smoothing
I'm sorry, I don't want to be rude but it seems to me you do not understand what smoothing is, or unable to read a frequency chart.

Smoothing means reducing the deviations from the average. It does not move a dip at 150Hz to 600Hz!
 

levimax

Major Contributor
Joined
Dec 28, 2018
Messages
1,088
Likes
1,533
Location
San Diego
I'm sorry, I don't want to be rude but it seems to me you do not understand what smoothing is, or unable to read a frequency chart.

Smoothing means reducing the deviations from the average. It does not move a dip at 150Hz to 600Hz!

You are nit picking beyond the limits of comparing different measurements done using different methods. Overall the shape of the FR is very similar, small sharp dips are much less audible than the overall shape of the FR. The outlier are the German measurements as you would expect. Amir's and JBL's are similar except for the "150 Hz dip" which is most likely a combination of smoothing and some measurement issues. Not sure what your point is, there is plenty of agreement between the measurements to get a feel for how the speaker performs.
 

sarumbear

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Aug 15, 2020
Messages
1,805
Likes
1,628
Location
Southampton, UK
You are nit picking beyond the limits of comparing different measurements done using different methods.
Six times difference in frequency response of an almost 5dB dip is not nit picking. If it is why do you think @amirm corrects them with an EQ?
Not sure what your point is, there is plenty of agreement between the measurements to get a feel for how the speaker performs.
My point should be clear if you read the sub-thread. There is no correlation of large outdoor speaker frequency responses done with NFS and at anechoic or free-field environments.

I do not want to highjack this thread. If anyone wants to continue they can either message me direct or create a new thread. I will participate. I repeat my point in parting: I have not yet seen a comparison of any large outdoor speaker measurements done with NFS and in anechoic or free-air environments. I am not yet satisfied that the extrapolation used by NFS is reliable for large outdoor speakers.
 

jones

Member
Joined
Jan 4, 2021
Messages
8
Likes
30
Location
Germany
@jones Here are three graphs. Tested by @amirm, JBL's data and the German magazine's test. Can you say they are "identical"? If yes, I need an eye test!
Have I got the thing for you :)

VituixCAD SPL.png

This is Amirs measurment vs the datasheet.
Pretty close I would say :).

The blip at ~150Hz is a resonance (cabinet height), which is heavily influenced by damping.
I have almost the same problem and this could very well be tolerance between speakers.
Smoothing does wonders and we are talking ~2dB here.

I don't know what Anselm Görtz did to get the curve he got, but he is spot on with the 815P compared to the datasheet.
This may very well be a difference in the speaker, together with the different measurement methodes below 100Hz.
Above 500Hz, the measuments agree with amir and the datasheet.
 
Top Bottom