2. speakers
  3. 1413781790

Does JBL get a bad rap?

For years, all one heard regarding almost any JBL product, especially vintage consumer grade products was that they were all boom(bass) and sizzle( highs). I feel this is an unfair generalization. Surprisingly, I find much of their budget minded gear(80s-90s) actually soft in the treble and very non-fatiguing(titanium laminate tweeters). I also have experienced the L100T and found them fairly well balanced and nuetral. The midrange does lack some realism magic especially on vocals but so do other highly touted speakers. In short, I am a little late to the game in regards to the JBL, but as a mainstream maker I am impressed. And that doesn't even take into account their 4xxx studio monitors which are highly regarded. Back me up jbl fans!
128x128phasecorrect
mapman's avatar
Ag insider logo xs@2x
mapman
15,679 posts
 
Sometimes it does. I would not discount the line as a good option for many though.
mapman's avatar
Ag insider logo xs@2x
mapman
15,679 posts
 
"Most of those systems were not outstanding and the speakers were probably perceived the same way. Maybe this is where the "bad rap" comes from? "

I suspect that in many cases bad results with JBL speakers are not necessarily the speaker's fault, more what was done with them.

I was never a huge JBL fan back in the 70's when we carried them at the Tech Hifi I worked at for a time back in college, but I would like a chance to try them again with what is now available more readily and what I know now that I did not back then.
kiddman
341 posts
 
You bet they get a bad rap, and some of their speakers are truly amongst the best speakers out there, and are extremely refined in sound.

However, in the USA horns became taboo, and JBL makes a lot of horns. Even when they get a great review, folks ignore it. Also, JBL does not play the "I'm a rocket scientist from NASA, Bell Labs researcher, NSA Scientist" and other false claims that so many "high end" companies' founders claim. They don't play the "super exotica" claim.

Read this review: http://www.stereophile.com/floorloudspeakers/jbl_synthesis_1400_array_bg_loudspeaker/ along with John Atkinson's measurements and consider the magnitude of the accomplishment of the designer of this speaker. How many times does a Quad love say that another speaker equals or beats the Quad at what the Quad does well?

Many will dismiss this post, as they will dismiss the review I cited, and follow the trail of high end audio dogma. So be it. But don't condemn that which you have not heard just because you heard a model of a line 25 years ago and found it not to your taste.
kiddman
341 posts
 
To the OP, I did not direct the "do not condemn" statement to you, as you are speaking positively about them. So I am "backing you up"!

Rather, I'm addressing those who would dismiss JBL or any products because they heard something by the company long ago, or because the company has not been anointed repeatedly by the USA press.

Also, a correction, in the second to last paragraph "Quad love" should read "Quad lover".

dave_72
1,399 posts
 
Well, as far as the horns in the latest models are concerned, the horns use a material call Sonoglass. Which is a very inert compound. This translates to getting the power and realism from the horns and compression drivers without the squawk, blat, buzz, or rattle from lesser designs. And of course you have some of the best woofers in the business. All of the Synthesis models have great bass, to various degrees, but it's still there. You really need to go out and listen to the Synthesis line as I believe it will change one's negative view of JBL. I believe JBL for the most part did their homework on the Synthesis line up. They're not the best, for far from the worst.
More to discover