• 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 Studio 520C Center review (by Erin)

jhaider

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 5, 2016
Messages
2,822
Likes
4,514
The more center channel measurements I see, the more it becomes apparent that the simple “buy one that is same as your other main speakers” advice is seriously flawed.

There may be 2 out of 10 center channel speakers reviewed here that get have good frequency response and decent directivity. That is pretty pitiful. :eek:

That’s still the best advice, i.e. if your left/right are Widget Model 1 your center should also be Widget Model 1, in the same orientation and hopefully at the same height.

“Buy the one marketed in the same line,” i.e. if your left/right are Widget Model 1 your center should be Widget Model C, never was good advice and it’s good to see the data is catching up to our ears. That may lead to a cosmetic match but it only rarely leads to a sonic match.
 

Matias

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 1, 2019
Messages
5,029
Likes
10,797
Location
São Paulo, Brazil

TimVG

Major Contributor
Joined
Sep 16, 2019
Messages
1,181
Likes
2,573
That’s still the best advice, i.e. if your left/right are Widget Model 1 your center should also be Widget Model 1, in the same orientation and hopefully at the same height.

“Buy the one marketed in the same line,” i.e. if your left/right are Widget Model 1 your center should be Widget Model C, never was good advice and it’s good to see the data is catching up to our ears. That may lead to a cosmetic match but it only rarely leads to a sonic match.

This is important and often overlooked. Having owned identical L/C/R speakers that I wasn't able to align vertically, the shift in timbre is just as bad as you would have with a different loudspeaker, imo. On top of this, unlike with the L/R speakers where placement is a bit less restricted, there are often additional factors to consider such as equipment cabinets, screens and a rear wall. It's something that's been on my mind lately: designing a speaker that still works well considering the above.
 

dannut

Member
Joined
Dec 31, 2020
Messages
75
Likes
75
Small identical speakers aligned vertically works wonders, if you have to have a non-transparent screen. I still wonder why coaxials are not more popular. Large, vertically oriented speakers are an eyesore, if not hidden in-wall.

Only drawback with small speakers are highish needed XO frequency and no way to have meaningful bass management in AVR-s.(flanking-sub solutions, flexible multisub routing)

KEF Egg (sadly discontinued) needed >120-150Hz crossover and only a tedious multisub solution could work that high in a lowish output reference-quality system (definition: no low frequency problems in-room, even Salons etc. are low-fi without some small-room bass quality mitigation scheme).

It is mind-boggling to watch reputable speaker companies churn out defective center channel solutions (toppled M-T-M). By definition a center needs to have even and wide horizontal coverage...
 

Rick Sykora

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 14, 2020
Messages
3,517
Likes
7,028
Location
Stow, Ohio USA
This is important and often overlooked. Having owned identical L/C/R speakers that I wasn't able to align vertically, the shift in timbre is just as bad as you would have with a different loudspeaker, imo. On top of this, unlike with the L/R speakers where placement is a bit less restricted, there are often additional factors to consider such as equipment cabinets, screens and a rear wall. It's something that's been on my mind lately: designing a speaker that still works well considering the above.

Yes, my experience as well.

Given what we see in measurement of vertical directivity though, this is not a huge surprise either. In any case, did not mean to take this thread so far off topic. Suggest we move off to another thread. :cool:

EDIT: created that other thread here: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...center-channel-experience.29936/#post-1049102
 
Last edited:
Joined
Mar 31, 2020
Messages
37
Likes
64
I feel pretty silly right now, I spent four hours yesterday measuring my JBL 520Cs, and had no idea that Erin measured them a week ago :p

I am including his measurements in this post (with credit) as well as mine, so you can compare and contrast.

N3ql1Op.png


This is Erin's measurement of the vertical polar response

UXsyO2U.jpg


This is my measurement of the vertical polar response

ckv2cZH.jpg


When I listened to the speaker subjectively, I found that the treble was shockingly "crunchy." I have owned some speakers with very good waveguides, including the Gedlee Summas, and my 'hunch' is that the waveguide on the 520C is making more High Order Modes than is ideal. The Geddes speakers were basically inspired by him owning a JBL speaker with a diffraction slot, and Geddes trying to figure out why the treble sounded sub-optimal.

With that in mind, I stuffed some polyfill into the waveguide, producing the measurement above. The polyfill reduces the output of the compression driver by about 1-2dB.

LP3aEfA.png


This is Erin's measurement of the horizontal polar response

uBE8WvG.jpg


This is my measurement of the horizontal polar response, with polyfill in the waveguide

JOTINUz.jpg


Here's my distortion measurement.

The performance of this speaker is a bit puzzling, because it measures quite well but that tweeter does not sound great. I'm not sure if I was just fatigued, or if the speaker could be improved by reducing the output of the tweeter by a decibel or two. I am inclined to say "no." I think the quality of the tweeter and waveguide simply isn't great.

8DhNxPm.png


I am not Greg Timbers, the designer of this speaker. But my hunch is that the "crunchy" sound of the treble is caused by a couple of things:

1) I think the waveguide has more HOMs than optimal. This isn't a deal breaker, because you can reduce HOMs. See my article on diyaudio titled "The HOMSTER"

2) The thing that's more difficult to treat, is that the tweeter seems to have a giant resonance in the midrange. Danny Ritchie observed that in his CSD measurement of the tweeter along, pictured above. I didn't do a CSD measurement on the speaker because I haven't cracked it open to measure the drivers individually.

AP81D200806G8PFE.jpg


The compression driver in the Studio 520C is basically a polymer dome tweeter with the world's tiniest neo motor, and a relatively basic phase plug. From what I can see, I think that they intentionally under-sized the motor to accomplish two things:

1) By undersizing the motor, it creates a resonant peak at the low end which increases output. Basically the same idea as putting a big woofer in a box that's too small; you get a big peak on the low end, and increased power handling because the enclosure is too small.

2) Undersizing the motor reduces costs dramatically

The Studio 520C is a really peculiar speaker, I can't recall the last time I've seen a speaker that measures this well, but sounds this "crunchy."

I have some JBL Control Now speakers that I bought ages ago, and I'm kinda tempted to measure them for similar reasons. The Control Now speakers suffer from a similar malady - they sound good but not great.

If you're looking for speakers in the price point of $100-$200 each, I would rank my purchases in this order:

1) Behringer B2030A

2) Kali LP6

3) JBL Control Now

4) JBL Studio 520C

5) Infinity IL10

Having said that, I think the 520C has a lot of potential. The cabinet is astoundingly good. It's as good as speakers costing 3X as much.

Also, keep in mind that there's absolutely no reason that you would use this center channel speaker as a center channel. The woofers are way too far apart to work as a horizontal MTM. The Studio 520C is basically a pretty decent vertical MTM that you can get on Amazon for $135 that happens to be marketed as a center channel. I would never use it as a center channel, it should be oriented vertically, as all MTMs should.
 

sword

Member
Joined
Oct 29, 2021
Messages
53
Likes
39
Having said that, I think the 520C has a lot of potential. The cabinet is astoundingly good. It's as good as speakers costing 3X as much.

Also, keep in mind that there's absolutely no reason that you would use this center channel speaker as a center channel. The woofers are way too far apart to work as a horizontal MTM. The Studio 520C is basically a pretty decent vertical MTM that you can get on Amazon for $135 that happens to be marketed as a center channel. I would never use it as a center channel, it should be oriented vertically, as all MTMs should.
Not sure how you would orient the 520C vertically, due to the tapered cabinet.
 

Attachments

  • 20220123_222317.jpg
    20220123_222317.jpg
    424.2 KB · Views: 93
Last edited:
Joined
Mar 31, 2020
Messages
37
Likes
64
I used the styrofoam packing that came in the box lol

Fits like a glove

Doesn't look great, unfortunately
 

Rottmannash

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Nov 11, 2020
Messages
2,969
Likes
2,606
Location
Nashville
Small identical speakers aligned vertically works wonders, if you have to have a non-transparent screen. I still wonder why coaxials are not more popular. Large, vertically oriented speakers are an eyesore, if not hidden in-wall.

Only drawback with small speakers are highish needed XO frequency and no way to have meaningful bass management in AVR-s.(flanking-sub solutions, flexible multisub routing)

KEF Egg (sadly discontinued) needed >120-150Hz crossover and only a tedious multisub solution could work that high in a lowish output reference-quality system (definition: no low frequency problems in-room, even Salons etc. are low-fi without some small-room bass quality mitigation scheme).

It is mind-boggling to watch reputable speaker companies churn out defective center channel solutions (toppled M-T-M). By definition a center needs to have even and wide horizontal coverage...
side note-bought second-hand a set of 5 KEF Eggs from a guy off Next Door a couple years ago-using them for rear surrounds.
 

More Dynamics Please

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Nov 18, 2020
Messages
562
Likes
752
Location
USA
Funny but over the years I've read many posts on various AV forums where some say they prefer what they describe as the "crunchy" sound of compression drivers so not sure if the 520C is "extra crunchy." :)
 

JohnnyN

Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2021
Messages
23
Likes
8
I’ve found that the Hsu CCB-8 makes a solid center speaker. But over time the best center speaker solution for me has been to just remove it and use L/R only. For me dialogue sounds most natural in stereo. Plus, for most movies/TV shows, most of the sound is being routed to the center channel and for me it all sounds better in stereo.

This said, the 520c is on sale again and I’m tempted to try it out because I very recently set up a pair of Studio 580 as my L/R. $100 experiment, maybe worth it…

Hope everyone’s having a great holiday!
 

Chrispy

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 7, 2020
Messages
7,751
Likes
5,910
Location
PNW
I’ve found that the Hsu CCB-8 makes a solid center speaker. But over time the best center speaker solution for me has been to just remove it and use L/R only. For me dialogue sounds most natural in stereo. Plus, for most movies/TV shows, most of the sound is being routed to the center channel and for me it all sounds better in stereo.

This said, the 520c is on sale again and I’m tempted to try it out because I very recently set up a pair of Studio 580 as my L/R. $100 experiment, maybe worth it…

Hope everyone’s having a great holiday!
Do you have a full set of CCB-8s? Always heard nice things about them, never any IRL experience.
 
Top Bottom