JBL Studio 530 Speaker Review

[edechamps]

I added the JBL Studio 530 to Loudspeaker Explorer where it can be compared to other speakers.

Good consistency within listening window, except at crossover. You don't want these below ear height as the +10°V looks especially bad.

 

[maty]

Quick Review of the JBL Studio 530
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/quick-review-of-the-jbl-studio-530.10215/

-> https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...ick-review-of-the-jbl-studio-530.10215/page-2

YouTube Modifying the JBL Studio 530 with Danny Richie! by Ron Brenay and Danny Richie

 

[tuga]

Would it be easy to produce an image identical to this one to visualise the effects of the waveguide?

You can easily see the shape of the rectangular "horn."

 

[thewas]

The M30 in-room curve has a higher pitch and the response of the port is much better integrated.

Higher pitch? The M30 is much darker tuned, i.e. falling to the high frequencies. Also don't really see in your plot why its port should be much better integrated, the JBL port is just tuned lower which has also advantages.

 

[maty]

Amir with expensive Klippel

Ron Brenay with CLIO (as Danny Richie)

The CLIO System
http://www.audiomatica.com/wp/?page_id=8


The differences are evident to me. Maybe the mic?

 

[maty]

 

[maty]

 

[tuga]

Higher pitch? The M30 is much darker tuned, i.e. falling to the high frequencies.

Edit: I meant pitch as in tilt slope or angle (pitched roof). In this case it would be a higher negative pitch from bass to treble than the JBL.

Olive's curve is steeper than the JBL's. And "darker" is subjective, a matter of taste.

Also don't really see in your plot why its port should be much better integrated, the JBL port is just tuned lower which has also advantages.

It looks like the port is tuned too low for the mid-woofer and this in my listening experience sometimes stands out or sound des-integrated if that makes sense (the port becomes more obvious).

The M30's port is tuned to an identical frequency, around 45Hz:

 

[QMuse]

Can you please re-post a few more graphs from the 1st page? It brings incredible value to this forum.

 

[tuga]

It looks like the M30's port is producing a broader peak whilst the 530's is much sharper.
The JBL mid-woofer is down by ~5dB at 80Hz (though there's a strange discontinuity at 100Hz), the Harbeth's is down by ~5dB at 70Hz.

 

[QMuse]

It looks like the M30's port is producing a broader peak whilst the 530's is much sharper.
The JBL mid-woofer is down by ~5dB at 80Hz (though there's a strange discontinuity at 100Hz), the Harbeth's is down by ~5dB at 70Hz.

And there is the reason for that resonance around 1.4-1.5 kHz that is troubling this speaker.

 

[andreasmaaan]

It looks like the M30's port is producing a broader peak whilst the 530's is much sharper.
The JBL mid-woofer is down by ~5dB at 80Hz (though there's a strange discontinuity at 100Hz), the Harbeth's is down by ~5dB at 70Hz.

The M30's broader measured peak port output is quite odd. I suspect it may actually be due to measurement error as a result of its being located on the front baffle in closer proximity to the woofer, i.e. perhaps some woofer output leaked into the measurement there. Hard to say for sure though.

 

[QMuse]

The M30's broader measured peak port output is quite odd. I suspect it may actually be due to measurement error as a result of its being located on the front baffle in closer proximity to the woofer, i.e. perhaps some woofer output leaked into the measurement there. Hard to say for sure though.

But isn't this M30 LF measurement quite similar with Klippel's?

 

[tuga]

The M30's broader measured peak port output is quite odd. I suspect it may actually be due to measurement error as a result of its being located on the front baffle in closer proximity to the woofer, i.e. perhaps some woofer output leaked into the measurement there. Hard to say for sure though.

Here are two other different measurements:

M30.2
https://www.stereophile.com/content...-anniversary-edition-loudspeaker-measurements

M30.1 (previous post was from M30.2)

 

[andreasmaaan]

But isn't this M30 LF measurement quite similar with Klippel's?

The summed response is similar, sure, but the Klippel system doesn't measure the port independently of the woofer.

Anyway, I'm not really confident about this, it's just speculation as to why the peak might be so broad.

EDIT: on second thoughts, perhaps not. If the woofer's output really were bleeding into the port measurement, you'd expect to see it higher up in frequency, too.

 

[QMuse]

The summed response is similar, sure, but the Klippel system doesn't measure the port independently of the woofer.

Sure, but my point was if the summation result is similar to Klippel's than probably port response was measured correctly.

 

[tuga]

This is from the larger Studio 590 floorstander:

 

[Tangband]

Thank you for the review Amirm !
I own a pair of Jbl 530, and in passive mode they are good loudspeakers, but not excellent. The main problem is the crossover frequency that is set to low i frequency , thus showing the tweeters resonance without enough suppression made in the crossover.

I have modified my Jbl 530 to be driven fully active with a Dbx dsp crossover.
The optimal crossover frequency after two years of modifying and carefully listening is 1,8 kHz with, at least, 24 dB /oct linkwitz Riley crossover, acoustically.

With those modifications plus a couple of other small ones ( lowering 1,5 dB at 125 Hz with q=3, boosting the tweeter beyond 12 kHz and some more eq for the waveguide ) , this standmount speaker is one of the best sounding speaker regardless of price, considering the size of the loudspeaker.

 

[QMuse]

Thank you for the review Amirm !
I own a pair of Jbl 530, and in passive mode they are good loudspeakers, but not excellent. The main problem is the crossover frequency that is set to low i frequency , thus showing the tweeters resonance without enough surpressing made in the crossover.

I have modified my Jbl 530 to be driven fully active with a Dbx dsp crossover.
The optimal crossover frequency after two years of modifying and carefully listening is 1,8 kHz with, at least, 24 dB /oct linkwitz Riley crossover, acoustically.

With those modifications plus a couple of other small ones ( lowering 1,5 dB at 125 Hz with q=3, boosting the tweeter beyond 12 kHz and some more eq for the waveguide ) , this standmount speaker is one of the best sounding speaker regardless of price, considering the size of the loudspeaker.

Do you have any measurments you can share?

 

[maty]