PDA

View Full Version : Dynaudio/JBL Monitor Comparison


LSchefman
10-27-2006, 12:03 PM
So, just as I'm into putting the finishing touches on several pieces for this Epcot thing...

I get a call from a good friend in the studio biz. Seems he ordered a pair of JBL LSR 4328P monitors, and after they arrived he decided he didn't want to spend the dough. So would I be interested in taking them off his hands for a decent discount before he even opened the box?

I've been using a really nice pair of Dynaudio monitors of late (BM5A), and I really hadn't thought about replacing them. In fact, I'm quite happy with the mixes I've been getting. But at the price he wanted...well, let's just say it was worth a listen. I said, let's hook 'em up and let me have a day or three to listen and decide if I want them.

The JBLs are those 8" woofer speakers with the built-in DSP that automatically compensates for placement, room modes, etc. They have substantially more amplifier power than the Dynaudios, which I have said in this forum could use more power in larger rooms like mine. However, as I stated, I think the Dynaudios are very easy to mix on, perhaps the best I've used for this purpose, including my old Genelec 1031As.

Appearance: The JBLs are gigantic, taller even than my Genelecs were. I set them on ASC tube trap stands 40" off the floor, which is a little too tall for these speakers, but I figured this would be ok for this comparison. They have that JBL rubbery surface in the front, and are covered in other areas with a very hard dark gray stuff, whatever it is. In contrast, the Dynaudios have a nice painted wood veneer, and aren't gigantic. To me, compactness is a virtue, because I don't think speakers are particularly lovely items to look at.

Setup: The DSP conversion built into the JBLs is in my mind a drawback. Who needs another conversion at this stage of the playback chain? Still, I set them up on the stands, and ran the built-in analyzer. It's pretty easy; you set the speakers up, and stick the mic they provide at the mix position, and plug it into one of the speakers. They run some loud frequency sweeps (yikes!), and presto, you are done. The concept is that they calibrate themselves with their DSP to eliminate or reduce room problems, including placement issues if your room is not symmetrical.

Put the mic away, and time to listen and compare the two sets of monitors.

Listening impressions: I listened in my room, which admittedly is not a perfect sounding room. I've always had problems that I've compensated for in my mixes, due to a 7.5 foot drywall ceiling, and asymmetrical speaker placement necessitated by my odd-shaped room caused by having a circular staircase smack-dab in the middle. One of the main problems I always have had in this setup is that the left speaker closest to a corner is slightly louder than the right speaker, regardless of room treatments I've tried, so I've had to mix with this in mind, and double check my L-R balances with headphones. This has become second nature to me, but it is admittedly not the most desirable way to mix, i.e., it's a pain in the rear.

I listened to my own mixes, through the Neve summing mixer, then to some of my fave reference CDs, and I used both my own MOTU interfaces and a friend's Apogee Rosetta I/O when checking out my mixes.

My baseline reference is the Dynaudio BM5A, so I started with them. Fortunately, I also had the need to cut some tracks at another studio owned by the guy who bought my Genelecs, so by a quirk of timing I got a fresh reference on them as well.

The Dynaudios are warm in the lower ends, with a very nice midrange and top end. As expected, they handle mixes well, but as you pile on the tracks on thicker mixes, they do get a bit indistinct at (in my case 85-90 db or so in a very large room) volume. This blurriness shows up as a "halo" around vocal peaks and makes certain acoustic instruments backing the track, such as backing piano, a bit muffled/mushy. Again, this is in comparison to something like the 1031As, which are far more expensive. Other than this, which I attribute mostly to lack of amplifier power, they're pretty darn wonderful. I get really nice mixes with them.

The JBLs' DSP instantly solved the problem of the assymetry of my room. Boom, zoom, done. I don't know if I had any nasty room modes in the low end before, or not, because switching the DSP in and out (you can do this with the remote, kinda nice) didn't make a big difference in the low end. Yes it was there, but call it very subtle. But the asymmetry that bugged me for years was gone. Gotta like that.

On listening test, the JBLs in all honesty sounded a lot like the Genelecs in the midrange and upper midrange, which might be expected because they obviously checked out the Genelec waveguide in designing their speaker. The midrange, which I feel is the hardest thing to get right on a speaker, is simply excellent in every way. Vocals do not have that "halo"; they sound right there, and "right" to my ear. The low end is clear and tight, tighter than either the Genelecs or the Dynaudios. One would expect this with a JBL product, but the nice thing is that these JBLs don't have that zippy high end JBL products used to have.

Spatial placement is very pinpoint, especially the mids and highs. There is three dimensionality in the mids and highs. I think the Dynaudios have a warmer and maybe more realistic low end, but these speakers are fresh out of the box, and the Dyns are broken-in, so this may or may not be the case in a broken-in set of the JBLs. Certainly there is plenty of bottom in any event, it just lacks that warm "oomph". The low end on the Genelecs is a bit unpredictable in my room, which is why I sold them, so I can't really compare them all that well.

The Issue of the DSP: In looking over the literature that came with them, it appears the JBLs convert everything to digital and back before they output sound. They even have digital inputs, etc. Maybe this is one of the reasons the Dynaudios sound "warmer" and cozier to my ears. However, the DSP also solved a problem in my studio that has annoyed me for years, so I think it's a tradeoff.

In all honesty, I did not hear any audible problems created by the A/D D/A conversion, such as grittiness, paperiness, collapsed soundstage, reduced depth of field, etc. I do, however, consider this an important issue, and maybe even a dealbreaker for some studios. Caveat emptor. The tradeoff in the increased accuracy of one's room may make this worthwhile. If your room already sounds good...you don't need DSP.

Volume and Amplifier Power: In a large room, like mine, this is an important factor. I've generally powered my passive monitors with a lot of amplifier power, because even at lower volume levels, I've found that more power = cleaner sound. However, it can also seduce you in two ways: one, constantly mixing at high levels, where some speakers change tonally at different volumes, a problem I experienced with the Genelecs. Second, high powered systems sometimes make everything sound good, but when played on a typical home or car system, one that lacks the power/clarity of your monitoring system and therefore can't reproduce the dynamic range of your mix, you can get mush.

The JBLs played clean all the way from whispers to volumes higher than I'd use to mix or listen to music. One nice thing is that they seem to maintain a very consistent tone.

As stated earlier, the Dynaudios can get a little hoarse when played loudly, and the Genelec 1031As are inconsistent. But the Dyns are still quite excellent at what they do.

I have two sets of good headphones I also reference with: Grado HP1000s, and a pair of Stax electrostatic headphones. I prefer the Grados, incidentally. The JBLs sounded close to the Grados in terms of clarity and tonal balance. The Dynaudios sound a little warmer. I have always felt the Grados were extremely accurate phones, almost clinical in their accuracy, and these JBLs have that quality.

Build Quality: The Dynaudios are made in Denmark, and they are very nicely put together with no flaws. JBL got the price down to a list of $1700 on the 4328s (compared with their similar 6300 models) by making them in China. However they are very well put together, and a look inside the rear port with a flashlight reveals high quality parts assembly, with everything neat and tidy. The ones in my studio came with a very small scuff on the edge of one of the baffles, but you would only notice it on close inspection. Still, it bugged me a bit.

Conclusion: Objectively, the JBLs are cleaner sounding speakers that sound right to my ear, and solve some room problems. The Dynaudios are warmer sounding speakers that are amazing for their size and cost. The JBLs sound more like the $4000 Genelec 1031As than their cost would indicate, with fewer problems (I have not worked with the newer Genelec models).

As of today, I'm leaning toward going with the JBLs, for their pinpoint clarity and problem-solving room correction (This surprises me, because JBLs haven't been a first choice of mine in monitors over the past 20 years or so). This may change as I go back and forth between these 2 systems, because I do like the warmth of the Dynaudios, which sounds like "buttah". F'rinstance, I'd rather listen to music on speakers like the Dynaudios, but I'd rather track on speakers like the JBLs to hear the details.

Fortunately, I'm going to be mixing a project this weekend, and I'll have the opportunity to compare mixes done on both, using DP's Mix Mode, save the mixes, and decide which speakers I'd rather mix on (I will listen on several other systems for reference).

I guess it's good to have some choices. I'll decide over the weekend and report back.

sethmeister
10-27-2006, 12:29 PM
Nice review.

I really think for under $1000 the Dynaudio's are the best deal going.

The additional level of conversion on the JBLs would be a dealbreaker for me.

LSchefman
10-27-2006, 12:58 PM
>>I really think for under $1000 the Dynaudio's are the best deal going.<<

Yup. I agree, and I've said so in several threads on this forum.

>>The additional level of conversion on the JBLs would be a dealbreaker for me.<<

Would be for me, too, if it didn't solve a specific problem I have in my room. The question for me is, would I rather have a digital filter on the monitors (which doesn't really sound bad), or the filter created by room acoustics issues? Either way, it's a tradeoff. Fortunately, if I decide on the JBLs, I'd be getting them at a really low price, so that has to be factored in.

Since I'm in one of those "there is no perfect option" situations, I guess the only sensible thing to do is use 'em both together and see which set of speakers works better in view of the various factors.

Jarick
10-27-2006, 01:25 PM
Very cool review. I used to mix on a pair of 8" JBL 3-way bookshelf speakers with suprisingly good results. Also used their stuff at a radio station in college...they make great stuff.

dbeeman
10-27-2006, 01:31 PM
Les;

I don't really know about recording. I did use to build stereo speaker systems and fool around with some hi-end stereo stuff. ... so take this with the proper caveat.

Dynaudio makes great phase coherent speakers, but the material they use for the woofer cones is self damping. This has some benefits, but the trade off can be the extra midrange warmth you speak of and some lack of definition in the upper range of the woofer.

I would have a hard time with the extra D/A conversion at the JBL speaker - there has to be some loss and distortion introduced. But, it sounds like in your case the cure is not worse than the disease.

The Dyns may de-empshasize some things that can cause listerner fatigue in the typical consumer rig more than typical JBLs I have heard -but I have not heard the JBLs you are talking about

tac5
10-27-2006, 04:29 PM
I bought the JBL LSR 4328P monitors last winter and I have never looked back. If I can't get a good mix with these, it's nobody's fault but my own.

LSchefman
10-27-2006, 05:16 PM
>> But, it sounds like in your case the cure is not worse than the disease<<

My room has always had problems I've lived with. I just did some listening switching the DSP in and out, and the correction the DSP makes is a significant improvement in the L-R balance. There's also a subtle, but noticeable, improvement in low end accuracy.

What I can't tell at this point is whether the converters are causing a tiny amount of compression, or whether this extremely subtle compression is a result of using brand new speakers that need breaking in and loosening up.

If it's caused by the converters, though it doesn't thrill me, I do prefer this tiny bit of compression to having problems caused by the room. I've discussed the problems caused by a relatively low ceiling and asymmetrical placement with Russ Berger, and he felt that I'd need to do some significant remodeling (such as a purpose-built addition or commandeering & remodeling a room currently in use for what most people regard as "normal" purposes, such as a family room or den) in order to get an acoustical improvement. Obviously, these speakers are a lot cheaper than rebuilding my already too-large structure, or having my wife decide, that's it, I'm outta here. ;)

And yes, I've sunk several G's into trying to tame it with acoustical treatment, but basic physics dictate that room treatments aren't going to solve the kinds of problems my room has. So these speakers may be a good option. And they honestly sound really, really good.

LSchefman
10-29-2006, 06:27 PM
After a weekend of work, the decision (drum roll please):

It's good to have two sets of monitors.

Mondoslug
10-29-2006, 08:14 PM
I'll decide over the weekend and report back.
You took the easy way out! :)

Thanks for the review.

Scott Peterson
10-29-2006, 08:18 PM
Ha! You are keeping both?

I must plan a trip to come over and listen. Fascinating with the DSP setup on the JBL's. I'd be exceptionally interested to hear how my far more mundane Mackie 624's stack up. I was a Dynaudio BM6P guy for a loooooong time. Still would be if I hadn't hit a bad spot financially for the past few years.

elambo
10-29-2006, 09:25 PM
I really think for under $1000 the Dynaudio's are the best deal going.

They are good, no doubt, but with BlueSky monitors for under $1000 I can't see Dynaudio taking that prize anymore.

elambo
10-29-2006, 09:29 PM
Dynaudio makes great phase coherent speakers, but the material they use for the woofer cones is self damping. This has some benefits, but the trade off can be the extra midrange warmth you speak of and some lack of definition in the upper range of the woofer.

Good to know. I've heard these effects but never knew the cause.

LSchefman
10-30-2006, 10:09 AM
>>Ha! You are keeping both?<<

For now. The JBLs are definitely more accurate in my room with the DSP and everything, but I really do enjoy the Dynaudios.

>>I must plan a trip to come over and listen<<

You are ALWAYS welcome at my place!

>>They are good, no doubt, but with BlueSky monitors for under $1000 I can't see Dynaudio taking that prize anymore.<<

Until the Perfect Monitor comes along, seems to me that deciding which ones to use is a matter of simple preference.

Sub-D
10-30-2006, 10:49 AM
Keeping both is a good choice if you got the $......I am very curious
about JBL's DSP fixing room problems.......

elambo
10-31-2006, 01:32 AM
>>They are good, no doubt, but with BlueSky monitors for under $1000 I can't see Dynaudio taking that prize anymore.<<

Until the Perfect Monitor comes along, seems to me that deciding which ones to use is a matter of simple preference.

Of course, to an extent, but some things are not so subjective. Technics speakers circa 1985, for example, are not going to trump BlueSky or Dynaudio. Neither is anything by behringer. etc. etc.

sethmeister
10-31-2006, 08:54 AM
After a weekend of work, the decision (drum roll please):

It's good to have two sets of monitors.

:AOK

LSchefman
10-31-2006, 12:42 PM
>>Technics speakers circa 1985, for example, are not going to trump BlueSky or Dynaudio<<

Good point!

Bassomatic
11-01-2006, 07:46 AM
Thanks for the excellent review, Les. Tempting indeed, as I look at the physics and response of my current setup.

btw, weren't you using the Mackie 624s at one point? Wha'happen?

straticus
11-02-2006, 10:23 AM
Thanks for the time you spent on this review. I've been wondering about these speakers for quite a while.

I have base problems with my mixes. I've treated my room (bedroom :) ) and that helped. But I wonder what the DSP JBL's would do? Might need to check them out.

LSchefman
11-02-2006, 10:38 AM
>>btw, weren't you using the Mackie 624s at one point? Wha'happen?<<

I was, and thought they were really nice speakers. Then I switched to the Dynaudios, because I liked their lower-mid frequency balance a tiny bit better.

Now the JBLs, because they solve the problems inherent in my mixing room nicely.

In fact, I haven't had the Dynaudios hooked up to the system for a few days, and I'm starting to feel that they may be expendable now that I've gotten used to the JBLs.

I guess I like to experiment and change my speaker reference every so often.

Scott Peterson
11-02-2006, 10:44 AM
Well, Les is the man that coined, "More is.......more!"

:D:D:D

LSchefman
11-02-2006, 07:06 PM
Yeah, more is more...so...I....um....decided to hang onto 'em at least for a while.

LSchefman
11-07-2006, 09:36 AM
Just a note after another period of pretty intensive use of the JBL system:

These things are terrific.

I'm hanging onto the Dynaudios anyway, however, because it's nice to have more than one reference.

But these JBLs are extremely accurate, with pinpoint imaging, and an extremely good value for the price.