วีดีโอ

Hell yeah, THIS kind of content will destroy subjective audiophile "reviewers"

He bases this test on his listening environment. No one has the same room as him. Add to that the fact that the placement of the monitors in the test location was not the most appropriate, as being in the center of the room favors phase cancellation. Perhaps for the size of his room the JBL excites some frequencies less than others, which is why the Neumann did not win, since it has a punch or more prominent bass compared to the JBL. The JBL is good in the stereo field, but weak in the low range (Low End). If your room is not acoustically treated, it does not matter how much the monitor costs, it could be an ATC, PMC, Genelec, Focal, Barefoot, Grimm, Meyer, Kii Three, etc., it will sound bad anyway because they are not in a listening environment treated for the sound pressure and frequency response that they are made for. So Neumann costs more money it is true, but Neumann does NOT only sell you the studio monitor..., it also sells you the scientific testing to which the monitor was subjected to provide a better perfect integration according to the dimensions of each room and the size of the woofer 4.5", 5.25", 6.5", 7", 8", etc... It also gives you technical data such as THD, SPL, Frequency Response Fidelity, Input Ohms, Input Sensitivity, the directivity of the tweeter in vertical and horizontal, to make a decision based on information, something that JBL lacks due to lack of transparency. Neumann's construction material is of greater durability and quality, bass ports on the front panel to place the monitors closer to the back wall for those who do not have enough space in their room. Grilles to protect the woofer and tweeter from accidents for those who have children and pets. Let's say that at the moment you do not have enough money for acoustic treatment Neumann offers you a DSP that adapts to your room correcting those anomalies in each room. JBL is for beginners, but Neumann is for those who are serious about their profession and work. Neumann is the truth. Blind test for whom...? - Blind, deaf, and mute people! 🤣 Ahhh and let me not forget to mention the importance of the tweeter and woofer material since depending on the material they will respond differently depending on the environment. For example, the JBL tweeter is made of silk which is susceptible to humidity unlike the Neumann which is made of titanium, the same material used in dental implants which is resistant to corrosion, and to humid and cold environments. With a useful life of 15-20 years. That means it will work well in a humidified environment. The JBL could reach its breaking point faster in its useful life and its frequency response could be affected due to humidity. Therefore it will be more disastrous in cold environments. People want the best cheaply that is impossible ..., good things cost. The Neumann woofer is made of several layers of sandwich effect polypropylene. Therefore it has better punch in the low frequencies 👊🎧🎚🎶 (45Hz - 250Hz). The Neumann..., PUM PUM PUM PUM PUM PUM PUMNN!!! The JBL..., Ploff ploff ploff ploff plofffffffbrrr...🤣

I could have told you this simply by looking at the specs of the speakers and have already done some research into speakers. The truth is the reason JBL sounds better is not the slight variation between bass freqencies, it's based on the bandwidth of the high end.

Well, first of all monitor should be a monitor and not speaker with a maximum low extention. Low on jbl is a disaster anyway, slow and loose. I'm surprised that monitor most suitable for work doesn't come last though.

For the difference in price and not a lot difference in sound quality I would buy the Edifier

I have JBL mark 3 Amazing

WoW!!!

What were the equalization settings used for the Edifier? I noticed they sound way better with eq too.

I appreciate your dedication, but it seems kinda wrong to test near field monitors in an untreated room with a blanket in front potentially altering the sound. I've listened to most of these speakers and while I would agree that the JBL and the Neumanns are the best out of them, your experiment seems wrong. I'd suggest redoing the experiment with vision blocking glasses instead of a blanket and of course in a well treated room. There definitely are sound differences that only become clear under these circumstances.

Also, this video is way too short for the depth of information.... the carousel itself is a video on its own...

I did similar test of various speakers (bw dm601, canton small satellites, elac 5", nht classic3, bose cubes, energy c50, maybe some others I forgot), but I ran the test with same subwoofer, and switched just the speakers. Because it was very apparent just the presence of lower bass skewed the perception of how good the speakers are. I think this is important for smaller speakers that should be used with sub anyway.

Great video

Why did you choose the smaller Neumann with 4" driver to compare to the JBL 305p mk2 with a 5" woofer? It would have been interesting to see the results comparing the similarly sized Neumann KH120 compared to the JBL.

Of course the difference in the image between two JBLs and Neumann's is night and day. I think you were correct that the JBLs extra bass helped it win out over the Neumann.

hi and thank you for the very interesting test usually powered speakers have decent amplifiers inside the weak parts being the cabinet and the drivers My poor guy approach is to buy a speaker with decent amp and cabinet and replace the drivers with better ones Woofers in particular The results can be impressive indeed just replacing the usually cheap woofers Cheap but good tweeters are not difficult to find especially if crossed close to 3kHz

I think the test is biased by the room acoustics. If, for example, I choose the JBL from this test and after installation doesn’t work well with my room acoustics, then the proof is not useful. This is why we look at frequency response curves, spinoramas, harmonic distorsion, etc. And even with all those measurements nobody ensure that the room will match the speaker.

Cool. I was shopping on Amazon to find the cheapest powered monitor speaker to use as a stage monitor. The winner was the JBL 305 mkII: used, like new for $70. I was hoping to find something with a parametric EQ so I could try to avoid feedback but that seems to start at $250 and that's more than I wanted to spend. My fallback was the cheapest with XLR inputs and I decided that JBL was a safer bet than Pyle or some other private label China speaker. The thing that sealed the deal was that JBL's 65 watts produces higher SPLs than the 300 watt peak to peak rated Pyles and similar. The only things I don't like is it doesn't have a grill and it's not a floor wedge style speaker. Hopefully it won't get kicked by a drunk karaoke singer and it can tolerate a drink getting spilled on it (my two major fears). It seems like the thing I really don't have to fear is sound quality.

At the end of the video, you can hear just how reverberant the lsitening space is. No wonder they couldn't pick the difference between the speakers.

Great to see that expensive speakers doesn't really matter. It matters more what kind of sound each individual themselves prefer more.

Liked the video but just like to say that if the room shown in the last few seconds of the video was the listening room for the tests then it's not surprising that the results were so close. That highly reflective and quite small room would have had a huge similar effect on the sound of all of those speakers.

scientific af

Thanks a lot for putting so much effort into this! 👏

Pretty amazing engineering feat. Thanks!

I also tried a pair of the ayra 80s and while they appear to offer bang for buck, I never really thought much about them. Save your money.

Wait a minute. To his credit, this was an opinion survey of friends. Not surprisingly, they have different listener preferences than a professional, so these results are valid. That said, the best budget monitors IMO are the Adam's T7's. They far exceed the JBLs and are worth every cent of 250.00 each

great work

Naturally. Edifiers were cheap computer speakers from Shenzhen.

Did you level the SPL also in the second test with the rotating table? If so, how? Without it, the test isn't worth anything. Also it doesn't look like a double blind test. Main issues here: you tested studio monitor loudspeakers or alike ones 1.) MONO, in an obviously 2.) ACOUSTICALLY UNTREATED ROOM, with listeners 3.) SITTING FAR MORE AWAY as the use of this kind of speakers intends to. So, as as result, this is one of those good examples how to get results from a test without any value. 1. Studio monitors and loudspeakers in general have to be used as a pair for spatial sound and stage. Sweetspot, stereo image - LOL. How do you want to judge about this aspects (you mentioned by yourself btw) without it? 2. Set a pair of highend loudspeakers in an acoustically untreated room (like the one in the video with lots of blank walls and a huge window. Do you think, it will perform like the manufacturer has meant it to perform - after measuring and tuning it while standing in an unechoic or heavily treated room? What do you think will the differences between loudspeakers be, when all has heavy reflections, delay, phase cancellations, modes... Perhaps they will more or less sound alike, huh? 3. Testing studio monitors mean to sit about 2 - 6 feet in front of you with listeners sitting somewhere far from this...okay, so what's the point then, when this monitors have a narrow radiation pattern to avoid first reflections from the side walls? You should test them in a way they are meant for. They have also be levelled (each one separately as every model is different concerning the perfect height for chassis-ear-angle). And a different model also reacts differently when it comes to modes and reflections (measured with REW?). You can't just listen to 5 different monitors all positioned the same. That's ridiculous. And additionally, some of them have far more features (Neumann with it's DSP) to set the sound performance perfectly via Mac/PC or iPad. The Neumann is also a far more professional product not trying to do something a loudspeaker this size cannot. For full range, there is a matching Sub from Neumann. Also a measuring mic for setting the DSP. All little and cheap monitors may produce bass, but far away from resolving and precise. And: features and build quality and support and and and are important to explain prices. JBL plastic beginner monitor is better then a professional product with far more features to dial in the sound in a Studio, yeah sure... All in all, it's an entertaining video. Perhaps the purpose was to lead us astray right from the start? 😉 You write that you are a tech geek who likes to learn. Well, way to go, I think.

I think it's laughable people think they are valid critical listeners... if this guy isn't a professional listener.. like a working sound engineer with some years under his belt... his subjective opinion is worth not as much and I could not take him seriously beyond some basic attributes that anyone with good hearing could easily discern... having trained ears and a good understanding of basic acoustics and loudspeaker design goes a long way...

Total trash review too much talking and very little actual listening..

well done… I am happy to see more and more blind testing… I guess it is hard to get enough data to have meaningful results… perhaps setting something like this up at an audio show with lots of attendees might be a good idea… just to get more data… keep up the good work!

Your conclusions about a flat frequency response sounding "neutral" are not accurate. What a flat on-axis response does is make all the imaging cues in the recording work. What you hear on axis is first-arrival. That is where you pick up all your imaging cues (other than "space"). Tonality which is where neutral comes into play, is not purely on-axis but heavily dominated by room response. Whether a flat on-axis speaker had a good room response is dependent on the speaker and room. This is where the regular off-axis comes into play. Further into this, tonality changes with listening volume due to Fletcher-Munson curves, so any given preference curve for room response is influenced by listening level.

great test, please do more speakers ( passive vs active is rarely done, would to love to see the results of jbl 305 vs sony sscs5+aiyima a07 at the same total price of $230-$260)

I’m actually reading Toole’s book now. Brings me a step closer to understanding audio.

yes, the mouth likes to speak on its own for all there is, be it sense or the world, just like children do. It takes a significant measure of self-control and awareness development, to go beyond our instincts and against our fallacies, especially, when delving into subjective taste. I love suggesting people try the home made 'pepsi challenge', in other words, a blind test, but rather than audio, anything with a smell in the house: garlic, oranges, poop, a rose, etc. It's also less frustrating than listening to a "black cloth" hehe, although not entirely free either of a certain modicum of fatigue and annoyance as our visual language struggles to find the words for what we know without a doubt to recognise and have experienced since ever. great video, and sorry for the 'essay'

What settings were used to equalise the edifers ?

"Let?"" 😅😂

I’m enjoying my JBL 306p MkII. Need a subwoofer tho.

Interesting gig...how does JBL stack up to Kali?

How come Genelecs weren't in the line -up?

I honestly want to buy another pair of jbls just to make sure that if these go out I have a back lol. They sound soooo good!

i think the ending of this video kind a says it all. i give this an a for efford. however the overall results of this very execution are not to be taken serious. just to many assumptions

I have Edifier R1280DBs it's great speakers for price !

I love the idea and execution but miss something that I hope you address in the future. You can't judge a speaker individually imho. You need to listen to a pair of them. Somehow I find hard to believe that the Jbl are "better" than the Neumann having listened to them myself. The Neumann sounds more "boring" at first but is somehow still a pretty flawless speaker for the price and a very serious monitoring tool. The Jbl sounds "clearer" at first , but in the long run this can often become fatiguing.

I'm interested in how you set up that "slip ring" and how it works. Can you provide some links or video?

Audiophile and objectivity is like snake oil and water.

You had them listen to music in mono? Ew. That is so far off what musicians, engineers and producers intended as to be near irrelevant. Might as well test bluetooth speakers that actually are mono. Could have added Adam Audio T5V or Sony SSCS5. I suppose it tells you something though. But what a horrible way to listen to music.

clickbait

A pair of JBL's 305 and some DT770 PRO beyerdynamic headphones, and you can't go wrong for mixing music!!!

Can you please continue exploring the audio domain? I would be interested to see how close you can get with a budget setup + EQ-ing to an expensive system( for example, 1000-5000$ competing with 50000$; you could go with digital filters and a 2.2 system, bookshelf pair + a closed subwoofer for each channel).