JBL Stage A130 Review (speaker)

[abdo123]

If I set 100hz up whats about low-max level ? 50% less?

I can't really comprehend what you said.

 

[pio80]

I can't really comprehend what you said.

I see 2 knobs , I am interested Hi/low level min max . On mine is 50%..

 

[abdo123]

I see 2 knobs , I am interested Hi/low level min max . On mine is 50%..

Can you read your manual and figure out what each knob does?

 

[MarkWinston]

Crossover is in 60-50hz position..to be clear I need bass support , not completely replace it by sub

You should be able to get away with 80hz if you dont want to cross it over so high, that was my sweetspot when I had it. 80 - 100hz is still alright, 150 - 200 is way higher than I would even try.

 

[MarkWinston]

Yes maybe you are doing something wrong, why are you listening to speakers?

No, I buy speakers to lick. Especially the ports and the dust caps.

 

[hardisj]

In regards to my measurements being different than Amir's, let's not overlook the fact the A120 measured similarly (to my a130 measurements) as shown below.

And the A130 I measured again for quick reference:

Both share a boosted LF, cabinet resonance and peaked HF. Seems quite evident to me this is a design goal and not just a one-off. I can't help but wonder if they didn't secretly roll out a design change after the A130 measured by Amir in this thread. Both these came BNIB from Crutchfield so I doubt they've been sitting on a shelf in the back for a year.

 

[Erici]

Clearly you do not comprehend what Im saying here in this context. If it measures good, you still have to listen to it. Listening is the only thing left after all the measurements are known. Example, 2 different data is now shown for 1 particular speaker. 1 got a golfing panther, the other had a less than average review. What else can one do? Listen. As I did. And I hated the A130 uneqed even before Erin's review came out. Golfing panther? More like golf ball panther. Listen listen listen and listen, its way better than any preference score or panthers. Thats what I meant. Measuring good dont mean it will sound good. My apologies for not making myself clear.

Hey, no apology necessary Mark. Your earlier post made it sound like you thought measurements should be totally ignored. But without measurements we are stuck with subjective opinions only, and we know that our own opinions are always better than everyone elses. So in my opinion, measurements get us in the ballpark, but purchasing requires listening. It sounds like you agree with that?

 

[pio80]

I can't help you if you don't want to try what i'm suggesting.

I tried it and it seems to be working.. I didn't seal the ports, unnecessary. Thanks

 

[mcdn]

@hardisj how about you send these onwards to @amirm? It’s got to be either a design change or huge sample variation, but proof would be nice.

 

[hardisj]

@hardisj how about you send these onwards to @amirm? It’s got to be either a design change or huge sample variation, but proof would be nice.

Proof of what, though? It’s certainly not my measurements as I provided additional measurements for proof. So even if it is one of the two reasons you listed, it won’t change the result. If you want to prove anything you would need the sample Amir tested to be sent to me so I can test it on my NFS and then do ground plane and gated outdoor measurements. But then you’re making the assumption that his measurement is incorrect since it has not been validated via a ground plane and anechoic method like I did with mine. To be clear, I am not making that claim. I am just saying if you want 'proof' of anything, there is nothing left for me to prove about my sample. I've already done it all and provided the data.

 

[Sancus]

I can't help but wonder if they didn't secretly roll out a design change after the A130 measured by Amir in this thread.

Sometime during the summer, they rolled out a model number change for the A130. It was noted in this thread. Reportedly, Harman customer support claimed it was just a regional numbering change, but it's entirely possible they were mistaken and a real change was made. There are two listings on Crutchfield as well, the old one, and the new one.

Only way to be sure would be to measure multiple samples, of course.

 

[Sancus]

Where did that graph come from? That's not even that bad: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/pair-deviation-list-s-r.18058/

It's from this post, lol, a member did it. I forgot about your post on S&R's study! It's very useful, I'll have to bookmark it. Shame it's only monitors, though(of course, that's what S&R covers).

I suspect the deviations are worse among passive speakers in general because you don't have the ability to build individualized EQ compensation into each speaker. Though lower end actives probably don't have any either, since this requires costly additional technician time for each unit.

 

[More Dynamics Please]

Sometime during the summer, they rolled out a model number change for the A130. It was noted in this thread. Reportedly, Harman customer support claimed it was just a regional numbering change, but it's entirely possible they were mistaken and a real change was made. There are two listings on Crutchfield as well, the old one, and the new one.

Only way to be sure would be to measure multiple samples, of course.

Customer support at most companies is not a reliable source for technical data. It's often outsourced to companies that hire people at minimum wage who are not well educated on finer details.

 

[Sancus]

Customer support at most companies is not a reliable source for technical data. It's often outsourced to companies that hire people at minimum wage who are not well educated on finer details.

Yeah, totally agree -- that's why I mentioned it. I've also had poor experiences asking for technical data from CS, especially from larger companies. With the notable exception of Genelec.

 

[mcdn]

Proof of what, though? ...

Either Amir will get the same results on the same sample - proving that the sample variation is real and large, or his results will be different, proving that it's not just down to sample variation. In the latter case hopefully there might be some clues as to whether the difference is systematic, environmental, or something else.

 

[dfuller]

Either Amir will get the same results on the same sample - proving that the sample variation is real and large, or his results will be different, proving that it's not just down to sample variation. In the latter case hopefully there might be some clues as to whether the difference is systematic, environmental, or something else.

I would note that Erin's other NFS measurements match Amir's incredibly closely.

 

[richard12511]

Either Amir will get the same results on the same sample - proving that the sample variation is real and large, or his results will be different, proving that it's not just down to sample variation. In the latter case hopefully there might be some clues as to whether the difference is systematic, environmental, or something else.

99.99% it's not a measurement error. They've both measured the same speakers enough times for us to know that their results are incredibly reliable and produce nearly identical results. They are using the same machine after all .

It's gotta be either sample variation or a stealth design change.

 

[mcdn]

99.99% it's not a measurement error. They've both measured the same speakers enough times for us to know that their results are incredibly reliable and produce nearly identical results. They are using the same machine after all .

It's gotta be either sample variation or a stealth design change.

Oh I completely agree, the chance of a measurement difference is very small. But if it was found to be the case then it would be very valuable knowledge. Equally, proving that level of sample variation would allow the community to hold the manufacturer to account without any ambiguity - they'd be two different speakers sold as the same speaker.

 

[amirm]

Folks, not every puzzle needs to be solved. The opportunity cost of making another NFS measurement is over $1,000. So it is not "free" to test this and that. Same time can be used to test a fresh speaker than trying to solve this differential. The two measurements highly correlate already. Indeed my measurements routinely differ from Harman's anechoic measurements. That's not the reason to keep testing and testing the same thing.

With respect to this speaker, room will impact the bass anyway. So you have no choice but to measure in your room and apply EQ to your taste.

 

[abdo123]

I tried it and it seems to be working.. I didn't seal the ports, unnecessary. Thanks

Was it really unnecessary or you didn’t try it?

With the port opened you want the crossover to be at 66Hz.