JBL 708P review

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. Read 4470 times.

dburna

Re: JBL 708P review
« Reply #20 on: 13 Dec 2018, 04:30 am »
People that are interested in the 708P might be interested in these links.


https://www.sausalitoaudio.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/JBL-708P-Charts.pdf


https://www.sausalitoaudio.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/Interpreting-Spinorama-Charts.pdf

Remarkable similarity between the 708P measurements and the measurements of Speaker B (excellent studio monitor) in the second pdf. It's almost like they could be the same speaker.   :lol:

-dGB

JLM

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 8939
  • The elephant normally IS the room
Re: JBL 708P review
« Reply #21 on: 13 Dec 2018, 10:47 am »
Thanks for the links Jason.  Floyd Toole is my audio 'hero'.

WD, I agree with you 100%.  I too don't understand why audiophiles buy vertical arrays, dipoles, omni-directional, MTM, and other non-monitor type speakers.


poseidonsvoice

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 3588
  • Science is not a democracy - Earl Geddes
    • 2 channel/7 channel setup
Re: JBL 708P review
« Reply #22 on: 13 Dec 2018, 12:25 pm »
People that are interested in the 708P might be interested in these links.


https://www.sausalitoaudio.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/JBL-708P-Charts.pdf


https://www.sausalitoaudio.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/Interpreting-Spinorama-Charts.pdf

Great reads, thanks! It’ll save me a ton of time explaining this to people as they are getting tired of me saying “Buy Floyd’s book!!!”

That being said, the third edition is excellent.

Best,
Anand.

macrojack

  • Restricted
  • Posts: 3824
Re: JBL 708P review
« Reply #23 on: 13 Dec 2018, 09:32 pm »
I have the 705P. Bought from Sweetwater along with Pro Jax and Mogami XLR interconnects. I'm driving them with an OPPO Sonica. They differ from the 708P in size and weight and woofer diameter, as well as in lower extension. 3 db down point is 45 hz. for the 705 and 41 hz. for the 708. Only other difference is ultimate SPL. The 705 is 101 db. and the 708 goes a little louder. That's it. If you are in a small to average room you might prefer the 705 if you will be using a sub anyway. I don't need one with these and many of you might not either.

Don't get around much myself so my basis for comparison is my own large hybrid horn system in the living room. In an auditorium the AH 300 horns would obscure these little guys but in a residential system, the JBL 705P may be the equal of my large system, which incidentally, has an OPPO UHD 205 working as preamp DAC. In other words, both systems have the same DAC. Big horns are driven by a Crown XLS 1500. I find I really like living without outboard amp and speaker wires.

For just under $2K you can buy a pair of excellent amps, cables and speakers. Add a streamer and forget about everything else. My speakers and all electronics weigh about 35 lbs. total. Speakers are 12.5 each and the Sonica is 10.2 lbs.

dburna

Re: JBL 708P review
« Reply #24 on: 13 Dec 2018, 09:36 pm »
I have the 705P. Bought from Sweetwater along with Pro Jax and Mogami XLR interconnects. I'm driving them with an OPPO Sonica. They differ from the 708P in size and weight and woofer diameter, as well as in lower extension. 3 db down point is 45 hz. for the 705 and 41 hz. for the 708. Only other difference is ultimate SPL. The 705 is 101 db. and the 708 goes a little louder. That's it. If you are in a small to average room you might prefer the 705 if you will be using a sub anyway. I don't need one with these and many of you might not either.


Two quick follow-up questions for you, MJ:

1. What is your listening room like for the 705Ps? I'm curious primarily how far away you sit and whether you have noticed any problems with listening further away than midfield (approx. 6-8').

2. Did you compare the 705s and 708s? If so, what were your direct impressions?

Thanks in advance, -dGB

macrojack

  • Restricted
  • Posts: 3824
Re: JBL 708P review
« Reply #25 on: 14 Dec 2018, 12:19 am »
705P are located in small bedroom (115 x 140 x 96 inches). When my son moved on, I commandeered it as the TV room/mancave.
I find the bass to be reinforced too much unless they are away at least 18 inches from the front wall. My speakers and I comprise an equilateral triangle, seven feet per side. They are on B&W stands that I had on hand. Between the speakers and stands, I have a product called ProJax. They are some soft material that seems to kill vibrations. 8 adjustable pucks for $50. They definitely work out here in Colorado. Never heard either 705 or 708 before I installed them here. Bought on the strength of confidence in brand and recommendation of friends. They even contain DSP and DACs. You really only need a digital XLR source. Simply cannot imagine more bang for the buck under $2000. Find a real review to read or call Sweetwater and ask all the questions you want. They were very nice and very patient with me, a geezer who looks the part. 

danvprod

Re: JBL 708P review
« Reply #26 on: 14 Dec 2018, 01:56 am »
This is helpful. I am considering a pair of 708ps or 705ps to replace a larger pair of open baffle speakers in my room. With the 705ps, the only negative I noticed about this was a SoundOnSound review, which highlighted an organ-pipe resonance ~ 750 Hz. I do see that in JBL's spinorama plots as well (linked above). It does seem to be  mostly reduced on the 708s. 

Plan is to run these out my PS Audio DS Jr. at about ~9 ft in a relatively small room. I do plan on augmenting the 705 or 708 with a dual-opposed 12" sub. Certainly the 705s would save me a fair bit of $, but I am concerned about that organ pipe resonance vs. the 708. 

charmerci

Re: JBL 708P review
« Reply #27 on: 14 Dec 2018, 02:33 am »

Plan is to run these out my PS Audio DS Jr. at about ~9 ft in a relatively small room. I do plan on augmenting the 705 or 708 with a dual-opposed 12" sub. Certainly the 705s would save me a fair bit of $, but I am concerned about that organ pipe resonance vs. the 708.


These puppies are only 12 lbs. As I've said in other threads (on the 305 and 705), that the cabinets seem to be the weak spot. I braced the walls (lodged in some cut to size dowels) of my 305P's and it made a huge difference in making them have tighter/less boomy bass.

dburna

Re: JBL 708P review
« Reply #28 on: 14 Dec 2018, 03:10 am »


These puppies are only 12 lbs. As I've said in other threads (on the 305 and 705), that the cabinets seem to be the weak spot. I braced the walls (lodged in some cut to size dowels) of my 305P's and it made a huge difference in making them have tighter/less boomy bass.


At the price point of the 7-series (vs. the 3-series), I assume the cabinet construction is substantially better, is it not?

-dGB

JoshK

Re: JBL 708P review
« Reply #29 on: 14 Dec 2018, 03:24 am »
https://www.soundonsound.com/reviews/jbl-7-series

There is the link you are referring to.   I scanned it briefly as I don't have much time at the moment but it looks as those this is very close up measurement on the port's addition.  Since you are planning to add subs, might I suggest plugged the port with something lending to a more, I forget the name, but quasi-sealed design for lack of a better word.  That will help with blending with the subs as well.

JoshK

Re: JBL 708P review
« Reply #30 on: 14 Dec 2018, 03:27 am »
It isn't the cabinets that leads to that graph, it is the port noise.  See the measurement.   I don't know how audible this is at distance.

Jonathon Janusz

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 796
Re: JBL 708P review
« Reply #31 on: 14 Dec 2018, 04:11 am »
I too don't understand why audiophiles buy vertical arrays, dipoles, omni-directional, MTM, and other non-monitor type speakers.

(I'm going to assume you mean a bookshelf-sized near (mid?) field studio monitor like the 708p since that is the topic of the thread.)

Vertical arrays: because they load the room differently than other speaker types and can fill a large room with a very big sound that makes big, powerful music enjoyable for folks in such big rooms (and can easily handle doing double duty for home theater), moving air in quantities no small monitor could possibly match if put to the same task...

Dipoles (open baffles?): because they load the room differently than other speaker types, can potentially (OB) do away with box colorations monitor speakers can minimize but not completely avoid, replacing them with subjectively more pleasing (or perceptionally closer to "live" or "real" music) reverberant sound intentionally and strategically fired into the room in addition to that coming from a radiation pattern a monitor type speaker can produce that a monitor type speaker just can't do, as well as likely move air in quantities no small monitor could possibly match if put to task...

Omnidirectional: because they load the room differently than other speaker types, can create a possibly less intense for one listening chair but more homogenously enjoyable sound for a larger group of people moving casually through a room which by design and intent a monitor type speaker can perhaps try to broaden but just can't (and won't) do...

MTM: because efficiency gained through paralleling woofers creates a speaker that plays more effectively with less amplifier power required at a chosen moderate volume level, allowing a wider variety of upstream electronics choices both to suit subjective listening tastes and greater opportunities for enjoyment through hobbyist audiophile tinkering in a package that produces a reasonable frequency range in a small footprint in-room and (in a small floorstander) does not require stands and might be somewhat safer for pets, kids, etc., providing some advantages (again, including moving more air) in comparison to a monitor-type speaker...

Look, I'm glad you're very happy with your newest speaker purchase, and there are a lot of people in a lot of places saying these speakers do a lot of things very right, but to answer your own (probably intended to a be rhetorical) question would be as simple as asking why you bought the speakers you did along the way before settling (for now?) on what you've got now, which if memory serves were decidedly not powered studio monitors.


People that are interested in the 708P might be interested in these links...

Thank you very much for these links!  This is the easiest to follow explanation of how to interpret Harman's spins I've read yet (and I dragged myself through pages of AVSForum trying the last time I took a stab at it without much success). 

I know it is probably heresy in this thread (no Klipsch pun intended considering the conversation about JBL) but the 708p data presented really gets me wondering again what the 708i looks like plotted without its DSP correction.  Sure, it won't be as good on paper as after DSP or as the powered 708p, but I wonder again if with a little judicious massaging of the passive crossover in the 708i that the basic design could get say 95% of the good stuff this speaker has been praised as doing into the hands of the masses in audiophile-land that aren't ready to sell off their whole systems and start over.  Kind of like the 4367, from most accounts having heard both, isn't quite the M2, but it is still a pretty darn fine speaker and gets a lot of the big-picture magic from the method in a more audiophile mainstream package.

poseidonsvoice

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 3588
  • Science is not a democracy - Earl Geddes
    • 2 channel/7 channel setup
Re: JBL 708P review
« Reply #32 on: 14 Dec 2018, 05:47 am »
It isn't the cabinets that leads to that graph, it is the port noise.  See the measurement.   I don't know how audible this is at distance.

Agreed.

The author also said:

Quote
However, pink noise and music are different beasts, and with the constantly changing character of most music, it would be very hard consistently to pin down and identify the effect.

It was almost as if he had seen the measurement first and then backtracked and found some subjective way of discovering it.

It seems that unless you were in the immediate nearfield, like computer speakers, this “resonance” may not be audible. I think macrojack’s input would be important to consider since he owns the product and seems pleased with it.

Best,
Anand.

macrojack

  • Restricted
  • Posts: 3824
Re: JBL 708P review
« Reply #33 on: 14 Dec 2018, 11:54 am »
A few comments:

Danvprod - I can't address your organ pipe concern but I will say that the 705P is all you would want in a small room. I speak privately by phone with JLM pretty regularly about our respective speakers and our incompetence in the face of making digital audio consistently useful. He said that the 708P was actually quite a lot of speaker for his purpose built dedicated listening room which is nearly 3x the volume of my room. After noticing that neither the ability to reach 4 hz. lower or play a few db louder were not things I need in my setting. Additionally, anyone using a subwoofer would not need to discriminate between the two as lower reach concerns would be obviated in either case. The 708P is quite a lot larger and heavier and I think it looks more "commercial" (industrial?) with its recessed carrying handles. Save the two grand and buy705P.

Charmerci - You come off like a crackpot. JBL appears to have created their best effort at grabbing a big piece of the studio monitoring business with these active studio monitors. They broke new ground by designing them with compression drivers. They designed them with installation fly points. They voiced them to perfection and marketed them to the most important ears in the recording industry, people who will not be tricked by gimmicks, ads or oversights. And here you come, never having seen nor heard either speaker, with a pronouncement that the cabinets appear to be the weak link. Are you a clairvoyant?

dburna - I have not seen a 305 in the flesh so cannot comment on cabinet construction vs. 705P. However, I think all genuinely professional gear is well constructed as they are tools - not toys.

JoshK - I have recognized no sound from the ports and will not listen for it. Don't believe in creating dissatisfaction. My listening is for enjoyment, rather than a furthering of the speaker design trade. It does seem to me that extreme nearfield (like a desktop) listening would be at a commensurately lower SPL, making any port breath proportionally less evident. As you move out to my 7 foot distance no port sound is apparent.

Anand - I am not merely pleased with my speakers. I reached that point before I plugged them in. Currently I'm nudging the lower edges of the ecstasy spectrum. These little guys will outperform anything limited to conventional dome tweeter passive 2 way design. JBL has been designing around and designing compression drivers for more years than I have been processing oxygen. They have created a game changing compact monitor with heretofore unsurpassed versatility and proficiency. Everyone who uses monitors should investigate. Glad I did.
« Last Edit: 14 Dec 2018, 02:03 pm by macrojack »

OzarkTom

Re: JBL 708P review
« Reply #34 on: 14 Dec 2018, 02:49 pm »
How do these sound at very low listening levels? Say 55-65db?

macrojack

  • Restricted
  • Posts: 3824
Re: JBL 708P review
« Reply #35 on: 14 Dec 2018, 03:12 pm »
My 705P are in a small room used for my computer, my TV, and my streaming system. Typically these are playing at or below the range you asked about. They are sublte in detail, forceful in delivery and surprising in bass texture and location of instruments. Wonderful sense of precision. Very relaxed delivery of the quiet jazz or folky content I listen to when not really listening. Doubtful you could find anything to fault despite the fact that you appear to be well versed in the liturgy of speaker criteria and listening. The big question for me is: "Can they make you forget about Acoustat?". Probably not, given the size difference. The side panels measure just less than 11 inches both ways and the front width is under 6 inches. Bass out of these little guys will surprise you.

JoshK

Re: JBL 708P review
« Reply #36 on: 14 Dec 2018, 03:43 pm »
... the 708p data presented really gets me wondering again what the 708i looks like plotted without its DSP correction.  Sure, it won't be as good on paper as after DSP or as the powered 708p, but I wonder again if with a little judicious massaging of the passive crossover in the 708i that the basic design could get say 95% of the good stuff this speaker has been praised as doing into the hands of the masses in audiophile-land that aren't ready to sell off their whole systems and start over.  Kind of like the 4367, from most accounts having heard both, isn't quite the M2, but it is still a pretty darn fine speaker and gets a lot of the big-picture magic from the method in a more audiophile mainstream package.

I own both the 708i (side surrounds) and 705i (atmos)**.  They require that you load the tuning files into the crown DSP amps just like you would with the M2.  So whether or not you are powered or passive they get the same treatment.    I haven't looked into how much shaping is in that DSP file, but it is somewhere on AVSforum that folks were talking about it.

**[This is extreme overkill in my apartment.  I bought before I moved when I had a large dedicated HT in my basement.]   

Quote from: macrojack
JoshK - I have recognized no sound from the ports and will not listen for it. Don't believe in creating dissatisfaction. My listening is for enjoyment, rather than a furthering of the speaker design trade. It does seem to me that extreme nearfield (like a desktop) listening would be at a commensurately lower SPL, making any port breath proportionally less evident. As you move out to my 7 foot distance no port sound is apparent.

You are far better off with this frame of mind as the issue is really a non-issue IMO.   I think that SoS (don't really know that publication) reviews a lot of gear and tries to be objective in their critique.  It looks as though they found one minor quibble.  However, given all the research Harmon does and the extent they go to figure out what is and is not important, I doubt very seriously they overlooked this if they thought it was significant.   The fact that one can hear it with pink noise means little in terms of audibility with music.   My addition was just that if it bothers you stuff the port a bit, even the reviewer did the same and said it took it away with pink noise.

My days of worrying about things that make absolutely no difference in perceived sound quality are virtually over (it is hard to completely divorce oneself of all biases).  The more I understand the science of sound reproduction the less I believe in most audiophilisms.   Don't get me started on cables!   I participated in a non-scientific but eye(ear?) opening single blind test with 4 home theater oriented speakers.   It really reinforced how easily our biases creep into our evaluations until you take the knowing what  you are listening to away.   Some of us could definitely hear differences between the speakers, but it was a lot harder to be consistent of which is which than one might imagine.    Speakers [and room] are objectively easier to distinguish the difference from than anything else in the playback chain.

charmerci

Re: JBL 708P review
« Reply #37 on: 15 Dec 2018, 12:08 am »
At the price point of the 7-series (vs. the 3-series), I assume the cabinet construction is substantially better, is it not?

-dGB


Very possibly. I guess I should have tempered my response by saying I've never seen/experienced the 705/8P - again, at only 12lbs with amp and with the "organ-pipe" resonance - and my experience with my 305P's that everyone said was fabulous - which at their price point are excellent - but I wasn't that thrilled with them. A lot of wooly (not tight) bass that I didn't care for, until I braced and put non-drying clay on the woofer baskets. They were just SO much better on the low end.


Was just throwing my .03 out there. I could very well be wrong.

dburna

Re: JBL 708P review
« Reply #38 on: 19 Jan 2019, 07:08 pm »