JBL Studio 530 Speaker Review

[ROOSKIE]

I am thinking about moving to M16s from 530, do you mind sharing more about the differences?

People's subjective assements are all over the place.
So much depends on your room and set-up and expecations/biases.

In my space the 530's(and most others I have/try) are about 8.5 feet apart and I am about 11-12 feet away. (12x23ft room)
In the farfield like this the 530's image very well and cast a very nice soundstage that often sounds much bigger than rivals.
I often sit side by side with my Gf and imaging is still very solid and not overly pulled to one side. (I aim one speaker at each of us, L aiming directly at the listener on the R)
They perform better in this reguard than something like the LS50meta.
By the way in 2.0 farfield the 530 is a better speaker for me than the LS50meta. I would not choose the meta over it even though I really like the meta and think it sounds great.

Best thing you can do is buy the M16's with a good return policy and spend a couple weeks with both sets.
I love the 530 and did appreciate the M16's even more. If I had to pick I would pick the M16's.
It was just a slightly more refined speaker that still has the intagible quality the 530 has that really makes me want to get into listening. They have more in common that not with the 530 having slightly more dynamic trebble and the M16 just giving a bit more overal clarity with a little more punch on dynamic upper bass passages(60-120hrz).
I consider the 530 to be one of the best/my favorite overall monitor speakers under $1000retail. M16 did not beat the 530 by that much in my expereince but it was notably consitent that I would choose it. Total hypothesis but I think in a blind preference test it would be close but I would pick the M16 buy a point maybe 6 or 7 out every 10 tracks. I prefered the M16 over the KEF R3 as well. IMPO the M16 is the 'best' under $1000 monitor speaker I have used.

FWIIW I did keep the 530's to always have around and sold the M16's because I picked up a pair of Revel m126be's. They are even better than the M16's but certainly at a huge price increase, proabily not worth the increase in price unless you really just don't care about the cash or simply want your money to go to hifi. I wish the suggested retail of the M126be's was more like $2500 rather than $4400. Oh well. I have seen M106's B-stock for $1000 a pair during sales. I wonder if there is much difference between those and my 126be's.

 

[goldark]

I am thinking about moving to M16s from 530, do you mind sharing more about the differences?

I don't have the M16, but I do have the F206 and use the 530 with an SVS SB-2000. The 530 seems more picky with placement but when set up well, it sounds very nice indeed. Tonality is similar between the 2 but the F206 sounds more open and spacious with a fuller midrange. The differences aren't drastic, however, and I can totally live with the 530. I have since moved the 530 to surround duty in a secondary setup with Studio 570's up front. The 570's are essentially just a bigger 530 and sounds very similar. I know it's not the M16, but might give you some insight into how it might compare to a Revel.

 

[gegegege]

People's subjective assements are all over the place.
So much depends on your room and set-up and expecations/biases.

In my space the 530's(and most others I have/try) are about 8.5 feet apart and I am about 11-12 feet away. (12x23ft room)
In the farfield like this the 530's image very well and cast a very nice soundstage that often sounds much bigger than rivals.
I often sit side by side with my Gf and imaging is still very solid and not overly pulled to one side. (I aim one speaker at each of us, L aiming directly at the listener on the R)
They perform better in this reguard than something like the LS50meta.
By the way in 2.0 farfield the 530 is a better speaker for me than the LS50meta. I would not choose the meta over it even though I really like the meta and think it sounds great.

Best thing you can do is buy the M16's with a good return policy and spend a couple weeks with both sets.
I love the 530 and did appreciate the M16's even more. If I had to pick I would pick the M16's.
It was just a slightly more refined speaker that still has the intagible quality the 530 has that really makes me want to get into listening. They have more in common that not with the 530 having slightly more dynamic trebble and the M16 just giving a bit more overal clarity with a little more punch on dynamic upper bass passages(60-120hrz).
I consider the 530 to be one of the best/my favorite overall monitor speakers under $1000retail. M16 did not beat the 530 by that much in my expereince but it was notably consitent that I would choose it. Total hypothesis but I think in a blind preference test it would be close but I would pick the M16 buy a point maybe 6 or 7 out every 10 tracks. I prefered the M16 over the KEF R3 as well. IMPO the M16 is the 'best' under $1000 monitor speaker I have used.

FWIIW I did keep the 530's to always have around and sold the M16's because I picked up a pair of Revel m126be's. They are even better than the M16's but certainly at a huge price increase, proabily not worth the increase in price unless you really just don't care about the cash or simply want your money to go to hifi. I wish the suggested retail of the M126be's was more like $2500 rather than $4400. Oh well. I have seen M106's B-stock for $1000 a pair during sales. I wonder if there is much difference between those and my 126be's.

Thanks so much for typing this, I really appreciate it. From what you described, I might just keep the 530s and wait for good price on M106.

 

[gegegege]

I don't have the M16, but I do have the F206 and use the 530 with an SVS SB-2000. The 530 seems more picky with placement but when set up well, it sounds very nice indeed. Tonality is similar between the 2 but the F206 sounds more open and spacious with a fuller midrange. The differences aren't drastic, however, and I can totally live with the 530. I have since moved the 530 to surround duty in a secondary setup with Studio 570's up front. The 570's are essentially just a bigger 530 and sounds very similar. I know it's not the M16, but might give you some insight into how it might compare to a Revel.

Thanks, I have to say 530 for surround seems like an overkill.

 

[tw 2022]

Thanks so much for typing this, I really appreciate it. From what you described, I might just keep the 530s and wait for good price on M106.

I wouldn't upgrade from 530s to m16s at retail.. Imo there are better options at $900 a pair, but at the last m16 sale price they are a good deal...if i was going to spend $900 I'd buy a pair of Philharmonic audio's new 2 ways coming out this summer..

 

[Alice of Old Vincennes]

Thanks so much for typing this, I really appreciate it. From what you described, I might just keep the 530s and wait for good price on M106.

Best Revel prices are in person or by phone with Dealer.

 

[tw 2022]

Best Revel prices are in person or by phone with Dealer.

or during crutchfield sales, which obviously don't happen much historically , but hey , the world has changed a bit the last few years...

 

[Chrispy]

Thanks, I have to say 530 for surround seems like an overkill.

I prefer them as surrounds. In one system I use 580s for surrounds, 530s for rear surrounds (590s for mains, but for center an Infinity RC263 pushed aside the 520). I might not have even gotten the 530s except for the very good deal on a slightly used pair also purchased at discount by the previous owner, in the neighborhood of $200 each delivered. I've not even tried the 530s on their own particularly, have used them as wides and rear surrounds mostly. I can't imagine paying $1000/pr for 530s at all....that's more than I paid for the 590s.

 

[AVKS]

I am thinking about moving to M16s from 530, do you mind sharing more about the differences?

I used both of them in theater (front L and R)and nearfield setups, and they're much more similar than different. The 530s/Studio 500 series are a bit pickier about placement and the 530s a bit leaner in stock sound due to the M16's midbass hump, and the M16s go louder with cleaner sound due to the larger woofer, but that's about it IMO and IME. The only real reason I have the M16s at all is because I was able to get the pair new for less than $400 total - that retail price is silly.

On a related note, I moved from Revel F35s to Studio 590s in the theater space and have been thrilled with them, zero loss of sound quality and gains in dynamics and 'holographic' qualities. Another example of 'more alike than different' to my ear.

 

[Masterasterix777]

I guess I'm missing something, because this doesn't even seem like a fender bender to me. Danny sounds pretty reasonable,, and his main criticism of the 530--the resonance at 1.4 kHz--is replicated in the Klippel measurements. I only cringed once at the point where he dismisses the woofer coils as "dental floss iron-core" inductors. First, they're no doubt steel laminate inductors, which have much better saturation properties than ordinary iron core units, and second they have much lower dcr than an air core of the same AWG. So a high AWG steel laminate inductor can match the AWG of a lower AWG air core. If you went to the expense and trouble of replacing them with air cores of the same dcr, any change you might notice would be poorer bass response because the large air cores would be eating up cabinet volume. I used steel laminates in the woofer circuits of almost all of my speakers, including the BMR and Philharmonic 3.

Though i write this nearly after 3 years of ur post. I would agree 1000% with what you have said. HATS OFF TO UR EXPERIENCE & UNDERSTANDING of components. What you have explained is exactly my situation now & i relate to it, I'm fascinated with the cheap JBL A130 speakers and wanted to enhance their output, so with the help of a knowledgeable FM here who suggested the parts to be bought i went ahead and made the mods. This is my first ever project & have no clue about how this works. So under his guidance i went ahead and completed it. Everything is just more than awesome...the highs and mids have sharpened and the soundstage is huge BUT without the hefty BASS that i enjoyed from these speakers. I went ahead and replaced the stock iron core inductor with a 1.5mh Dayton Audio air core coil & the BASS has magically vanished. Not sure what to do now as it's only 20-30 hrs since the mod & I'm not sure if things might improve after 100 hours of burn in. I have attached the pic below for your refrence. I have also bypasses the 16uf woofer cap with a .22uf Jantzen cap & a 3.3 ohm HTR resistor.
Kindly help me with your expertise and knowledge here as i would be really grateful to you. Should I change back to the iron core or keep the air core and wait for some more time. I really miss the hefty bass that these speakers produced before as it was extremely sounding awesome even without the need for a sub.PLZ KINDLY HELP ME FIX THIS and i look forward to your suggestion eagerly.

 

[Masterasterix777]

Though i write this nearly after 3 years of ur post. I would agree 1000% with what you have said. HATS OFF TO UR EXPERIENCE & UNDERSTANDING of components. What you have explained is exactly my situation now & i relate to it, I'm fascinated with the cheap JBL A130 speakers and wanted to enhance their output, so with the help of a knowledgeable FM here who suggested the parts to be bought i went ahead and made the mods. This is my first ever project & have no clue about how this works. So under his guidance i went ahead and completed it. Everything is just more than awesome...the highs and mids have sharpened and the soundstage is huge BUT without the hefty BASS that i enjoyed from these speakers. I went ahead and replaced the stock iron core inductor with a 1.5mh Dayton Audio air core coil & the BASS has magically vanished. Not sure what to do now as it's only 20-30 hrs since the mod & I'm not sure if things might improve after 100 hours of burn in. I have attached the pic below for your refrence. I have also bypasses the 16uf woofer cap with a .22uf Jantzen cap & a 3.3 ohm HTR resistor.
Kindly help me with your expertise and knowledge here as i would be really grateful to you. Should I change back to the iron core or keep the air core and wait for some more time. I really miss the hefty bass that these speakers produced before as it was extremely sounding awesome even without the need for a sub.PLZ KINDLY HELP ME FIX THIS and i look forward to your suggestion eagerly.

Also is the original stock iron core/steel core enough to be replaced back or would you suggest buying new Dayton Audio 1.5mh iron core inductors so that the bass improves and gets its heft back.

 

[Asking Dumb Questions]

The new Studio 630s have been release in the US, Have anyone bought one?

 

[enio nery]

I am thinking about moving to M16s from 530, do you mind sharing more about the differences?

id say the biggest difference is that the m16 has better bass extension and can get much louder without distorting. also the m16 is tiny bit smoother sounding imo. but imaging and soundstage for both is very good.

 

[enio nery]

i just found out that the tweeters jbl used on these (JBL 24114H 1) are the same tweeter they use in some of their EON active speakers . crossover recommendation for it is 1.9khz and the 530s have it set at 1.5khz. they may have gotten away with such low xover point because of the small woofer. but obviously there is still some ringing hence the very complicated filters for the tweeters.

 

[musicforcities]

Please excuse my density / ignorance here but I’m still trying to understand speaker impedance a bit. I understand that nominal impedance is just that—nominal. And that actual impedance will vary widely by frequency. But I’m still fuzzy on how to translate this into very roughly how much power an amp will provide. And how to specifically understand Amir’s test results of amps and speakers in this regard.

The 530 has a nominal impedance of 6ohm. Amir notes the speaker has a min impedance of 4 ohms. Which he calls typical. But there are also many spikes in his impedance curve far above 6 ohms.

In a recent topping amp review Amir called 8ohm speakers “rare” but of course I have many 8ohm nominal speakers.

So how do I very generally estimate what power an amp provides? For the 530s for example and an Amp that provides 130wpc at 4ohms or 65 watts at ohms. Should I consider more use the power delivered at 4 ohms, the lowest measured impedance or 8ohms to account tfor impedance spikes? Or split the difference and use the nominal of 6ohm? Because it would seem to me that the actual impedance would mean an amp could provided varied power at different frequencies and if so, the speaker freq response could change if the amp can’t deliver the needed power at certain frequencies. But I have no idea really. Thanks!

 

[tw 2022]

Please excuse my density / ignorance here but I’m still trying to understand speaker impedance a bit. I understand that nominal impedance is just that—nominal. And that actual impedance will vary widely by frequency. But I’m still fuzzy on how to translate this into very roughly how much power an amp will provide. And how to specifically understand Amir’s test results of amps and speakers in this regard.

The 530 has a nominal impedance of 6ohm. Amir notes the speaker has a min impedance of 4 ohms. Which he calls typical. But there are also many spikes in his impedance curve far above 6 ohms.

In a recent topping amp review Amir called 8ohm speakers “rare” but of course I have many 8ohm nominal speakers.

So how do I very generally estimate what power an amp provides? For the 530s for example and an Amp that provides 130wpc at 4ohms or 65 watts at ohms. Should I consider more use the power delivered at 4 ohms, the lowest measured impedance or 8ohms to account tfor impedance spikes? Or split the difference and use the nominal of 6ohm? Because it would seem to me that the actual impedance would mean an amp could provided varied power at different frequencies and if so, the speaker freq response could change if the amp can’t deliver the needed power at certain frequencies. But I have no idea really. Thanks!

You can drive the 530s to loud volume even with a budget avr....they aren't hard to drive at all.... As far as measured wattage needs and impedance i think any amp that delivers 50 wpc at 8 ohms will be enough, vintage amps may not even need 1/2 that rated wattage..... Using a sub is somewhat figured into my thoughts...

 

[goldark]

I mentioned this in the Studio 630 review thread, but Erin has also measured the Studio 530 but didn't publish it until his 630 review video in order to compare them. I've posted a screenshot below.

The 1.4 kHz spike is much larger in Erin's sample and then there is an elevated treble shelf after that which wasn't present in Amir's sample. This appears to be deliberate by JBL as both of Erin's L and R samples had similar measurements.

Evidently, there are some JBL Studio 530 pairs with a "showroom sound" built in.

 

[Beave]

Comparing Erin's results to Amir's results, they look so different on first glance.

But notice how Erin's results show the entire region covered by the woofer is maybe 3-4 dB lower than what Amir's results show. The woofer for Erin is at about 81dB up to 1.5kHz. For Amir, the woofer is about 84dB up to 1.5kHz.

Erin's treble results don't look too different from Amir's results in that range. They're both around 84dB give or take a dB or two. That apparent treble shelf Erin shows is actually a low woofer level for his particular speakers. Raise the woofer response by 3-4dB like Amir's, and suddenly the overall results look a lot more like Amir's results.

I'm surprised to see that much measured difference in the woofer output.

 

[AVKS]

I mentioned this in the Studio 630 review thread, but Erin has also measured the Studio 530 but didn't publish it until his 630 review video in order to compare them. I've posted a screenshot below.

The 1.4 kHz spike is much larger in Erin's sample and then there is an elevated treble shelf after that which wasn't present in Amir's sample. This appears to be deliberate by JBL as both of Erin's L and R samples had similar measurements.

Evidently, there are some JBL Studio 530 pairs with a "showroom sound" built in.

View attachment 337524

If that's the case and those got out into the wild, it could explain some of those scattered reports of the 530s being too bright/harsh. I know my pair did not have that kind of high-end response imbalance with the rest of the spectrum.

 

[longma]

My pairs are not bright or hash.