JBL LSR305 Low Volume

S

shkumar4963

Audioholic
The Lsr305 beats Q300 in this review. I have Q100 and my lsr305 does not even come close to beating it. Q100 is priced at $229 a pair and Q300 is priced at $400 a pair.


http://noaudiophile.com/Recommendations/

The KEF Q300 did decent at 6 of 27 for desktop.


Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
 
its phillip

its phillip

Audioholic Ninja
Different strokes for different folks :) By most accounts the LSR305s are very good. I haven't heard them myself but I was very impressed by the LSR308s.
 
S

shkumar4963

Audioholic
Different strokes for different folks :) By most accounts the LSR305s are very good. I haven't heard them myself but I was very impressed by the LSR308s.
Who did you compare lsr308 with? I am really intrigued my lsr305 sounds so ordinary.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
 
its phillip

its phillip

Audioholic Ninja
throughout the day there were danleys, alcons (these in a dedicated room), tektons, and possibly other speakers being used. the LSR308s did very well
 
KEW

KEW

Audioholic Overlord
Yes. Everyone is different. But for what I heard from my lsr305, I am really surprised that they even had a seat at the table.

That is what is most intriguing to me. I must be doing something wrong. But what? They just sound so ordinary, more like an eighties boombox.
I'm not sure you are doing anything wrong.

Just as beauty is in the eye of the beholder, good sound is subjective.

What type of music do you most often listen to?

I know among some of my favorite music, my speaker preference is not identical. For example the characteristics that would make a great speaker for listening to The Who are not the same as for listening to Melody Gardot:



A very good speaker will do a great job with both, but that gets expensive in a hurry! If your budget is limited, you pick and choose the speaker that best performs what you listen to.

For The Who, one thing I am definitely looking for the ability to play loud and hit hard! I want a speaker that stands the hair up on the back of my neck and kicks off a little adrenaline rush for a rim-shot! Since all of the sounds are generally electric or played loudly, I don't need delicate detail and nuance. Nor does the timbre need to be spot-on... I don't know the sound of the exact model guitar being played, and even if I did, there is a good chance it is being processed through some sort of sound effects box. Even the vocals, because they are being sung so loud, don't require the delicate detail of most other music - typically no subtle vibrato, lilt, or airiness to Roger Daltrey's voice!

Melody Gardot is pretty much the opposite. The sounds are mostly soft & smooth and full enjoyment of the music is dependent on the delicate details being properly presented! The timbre is critical - because the instruments are acoustic and I am extremely familiar with the sound of trumpet and sax. The intimacy of the vocals also requires a higher level of detail.
Percussively, I don't need loud powerful hits, just crisp detail when it should be there!

There are plenty other examples, but these two provide a good example because of the obvious contrast.

Edit: You'll have to excuse the quality of these YouTube videos. The Who doesn't have the energy it should (you can tell it is an energetic song, but the attacks of the notes are not so sharp as they should be). On Melody Gardot, the sound of the brushes being wiped across the drum skins are mostly lost (for example).
 
Last edited:
S

shkumar4963

Audioholic
I'm not sure you are doing anything wrong.

Just as beauty is in the eye of the beholder, good sound is subjective.

What type of music do you most often listen to?

I know among some of my favorite music, my speaker preference is not identical. For example the characteristics that would make a great speaker for listening to The Who are not the same as for listening to Melody Gardot:



A very good speaker will do a great job with both, but that gets expensive in a hurry! If your budget is limited, you pick and choose the speaker that best performs what you listen to.

For The Who, one thing I am definitely looking for the ability to play loud and hit hard! I want a speaker that stands the hair up on the back of my neck and kicks off a little adrenaline rush for a rim-shot! Since all of the sounds are generally electric or played loudly, I don't need delicate detail and nuance. Nor does the timbre need to be spot-on... I don't know the sound of the exact model guitar being played, and even if I did, there is a good chance it is being processed through some sort of sound effects box. Even the vocals, because they are being sung so loud, don't require the delicate detail of most other music - typically no subtle vibrato, lilt, or airiness to Roger Daltrey's voice!

Melody Gardot is pretty much the opposite. The sounds are mostly soft & smooth and full enjoyment of the music is dependent on the delicate details being properly presented! The timbre is critical - because the instruments are acoustic and I am extremely familiar with the sound of trumpet and sax. The intimacy of the vocals also requires a higher level of detail.
Percussively, I don't need loud powerful hits, just crisp detail when it should be there!

There are plenty other examples, but these two provide a good example because of the obvious contrast.

Edit: You'll have to excuse the quality of these YouTube videos. The Who doesn't have the energy it should (you can tell it is an energetic song, but the attacks of the notes are not so sharp as they should be). On Melody Gardot, the sound of the brushes being wiped across the drum skins are mostly lost (for example).
Thank you. I guess that must be it. In the past when I reviewed speakers, even the worst sounding speaker was a very good speaker. For example compared to my ls50, q100 is not as good but still it is a great speaker for all types of music. My 30 year old Allison CD 7 speakers also sound great.

BTW, I listened mostly to vocal jazz and singers like James Taylor, Steely Dan etc.

Thanks for your explanation. Still intrigued though.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
 
lovinthehd

lovinthehd

Audioholic Jedi
Yes. Everyone is different. But for what I heard from my lsr305, I am really surprised that they even had a seat at the table.

That is what is most intriguing to me. I must be doing something wrong. But what? They just sound so ordinary, more like an eighties boombox.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
Seat at what table? They're small powered monitors. Weren't you the one who could hear hissing at your seat with your setup?
 
S

shkumar4963

Audioholic
Seat at what table? They're small powered monitors. Weren't you the one who could hear hissing at your seat with your setup?
Yep. But then JBL replaced the monitor and this one is quiet. By seat at the table, I meant that they should not be in the running with likes of Q300.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
 
lovinthehd

lovinthehd

Audioholic Jedi
Yep. But then JBL replaced the monitor and this one is quiet. By seat at the table, I meant that they should not be in the running with likes of Q300.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
That's the point, who put them in the running with a passive speaker? They're very different purchases.
 
lovinthehd

lovinthehd

Audioholic Jedi
And according to the reviewer, they beat Q300 in sound equity. Like I said someone was smoking something.


http://noaudiophile.com/Recommendations/

The reviewer says and I quote, "Compared to everything I've ever heard these sound good."


Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
Sure, in the general sense that they're speakers. They just aren't particularly for the same purposes let alone used with the same gear necessarily and I don't find them that comparable. YMMV. Besides, sometimes maybe you should be smoking something when it comes to audio....it doesn't hurt. :)
 
newsletter

  • RBHsound.com
  • BlueJeansCable.com
  • SVS Sound Subwoofers
  • Experience the Martin Logan Montis
Top