Vintage JBL Speakers vs Newer Offerings of Today - OPINIONS?

tommyjonBois

On the lookout always
If you had a choice of only having JBL Vintage or newer B & W / Focal Speakers what would it be? Not both and you had to live with your choice.....

I have been listening to JBL L100s and I have some L112s that I jam daily. I visited the local Stereo Hi-Fi Store here in Boise and listened on their 3000 dollar B & W speakers along with their 3,000 dollar FOCAL speakers. I found the Focal speakers to have more detail in the music but lacked the warmth and punch of the ole JBL Speakers from the 70s/80s.

If you had a choice of only having JBL Vintage or newer B & W / Focal Speakers what would it be? Not both and you had to live with your choice.....
 
For a big, effortless sound that can fill a huge space, the bigger JBLs are hard to beat with a modern speaker without spending gobs of cash.

For accuracy, no contest... Focal all the way.

Edited to add: If you are used to hearing actual acoustic instruments in your room, you'll never ever be tricked into thinking those instruments are really in your room with JBLs as they are just way too exaggerated. At least all the JBLs I've ever heard. The Focals are a bit brighter and more airy than reality but on occasion, with the right material... If you are at the exact right off-axis angle... You might just be fooled.

Not saying one choice is 'better' than the other but the locals are radically more accurate when hooked to appropriate ancillary gear.
 
Last edited:
Depends on the JBL's in question and the music you listen to. L100's and their derivatives are not my cup of tea. On the other hand, I may just be buried with my 1980's XPL series speakers.

My guess is that your music preference aligns with the strengths of the L100's better than the others.
 
I certainly wouldn't choose an L100 over just about anything. You could probably beat an L100 with $60 at K-Mart. The only thing they are good for is restoring and selling to someone gullible enough to overpay for them.

L112 on the other hand is one of JBL's best 3-ways IMO. I would be quite content with a pair of L112's, even if they were my only speakers.

If we could choose any JBL, the choice would be pretty easy. I'd especially like to get my hands on a higher-end 4-way at some point. Maybe an L250Ti or an XPL200A but I wouldn't mind an L5 or L7.
 
For accuracy, no contest... Focal all the way.

+1 - BUT:

To some folks "accuracy" = a very dry, analytical sound, and unlike some other French speakers, my Focals are anything but dry and analytical. When the material has a true bottom, it's certainly there.

L100s are certainly different, and lots of people love them - but they're the poster child for the "west coast" sound, and that's what many people want. I think B&W might be a tad closer to the sound of a JBL than a Focal would be, but that's just me.
 
Last edited:
I'd rather spend $3000 on vintage JBLs than the B&W/Focal. I don't know if it would sound "better" but my ears have been ringing for 30 years...
 
I'm presently enjoying my re-capped , slightly modded L100 t3s at moment and wouldn't trade them for ANY modern $3000 speaker.
As for the quote about K mart speaker equaling the classic L100 is a way over exaggeration.
 
!

I'm presently enjoying my re-capped , slightly modded L100 t3s at moment and wouldn't trade them for ANY modern $3000 speaker.
As for the quote about K mart speaker equaling the classic L100 is a way over exaggeration.

Yes, the L100 is not the speaker that I would represent JBL with in a comparison. As mentioned, the JBL L100t or t3, (or L80t, t3) are an entirely different animal from a different era. IMHO they are real sleepers. The same goes for the L7 and L5 or any of their better monitors which are highly coveted. B&W makes a fine speaker, but to my ear they seem to shine more with classical and classic Jazz.
The bottom line is what sounds good to your ear. My JBL L100t3 have remained my main speakers during the past 24 years while a parade of fine speakers (Polk, Infinity, B&O, ADS, Dahlquist, 70's JBL L100, Pioneer HPM100) have passed through my hands with no regrets. Sure there are better speakers out there but to my ear, the L100t3s are keepers. The L100 and HPM spent the least time with me. I wanted to love them but I found them quickly fatiguing. Best of luck to you! Pick the speakers that make YOU happy!
 
+1 - BUT:

To some folks "accuracy" = a very dry, analytical sound, and unlike some other French speakers, my Focals are anything but dry and analytical. When the material has a true bottom, it's certainly there.

L100s are certainly different, and lots of people love them - but they're the poster child for the "west coast" sound, and that's what many people want. I think B&W might be a tad closer to the sound of a JBL than a Focal would be, but that's just me.
Never cared much for the use of the word "accuracy". Play a cello in a living room, then play the same cello on a stage and ask yourself which sound is accurate? Neither, it sounds however it sounds in that environment and "how" it's played.

Now, if we're talking "realistic" or "natural" that's a different matter and a more believable assessment.

When someone describes a speaker as "warm" or "bright" I can follow this. When described as "accurate" I can only assume the person describing it as such was present when it was recorded and remembers exactly how it sounded.

Exceptions? Sure, how about the sound of a specific instrument, like a Fender Stratocaster (sp?). I guess one might argue that this guitar "could" be more accurately rendered by one speaker vs another, HOWEVER, the assumption is that the recording itself was "accurate" to start with.

Bang for buck, hard to beat JBL "L" series 4xxx series, etc. Haven't listened to them all and only owned L88 and L26 personally. I prefer, overall, my VA Haydn over my JBL with the only caveat being the JBL go a tad deeper, but not a whole lot, and matters NOT with most recordings I listen to. The Haydn are also a warmer sounding speaker, which I like for most of my listening.
 
I certainly wouldn't choose an L100 over just about anything. You could probably beat an L100 with $60 at K-Mart. The only thing they are good for is restoring and selling to someone gullible enough to overpay for them.
.
Im no
fan of L100's but 60 bucks at K-Mart? That's a bit of a stretch.
 
Hey $60 can go a long way these days. I paid less for my Insignia bookshelves a few years back and I'd take those over a pair of L100s.

I just feel it's a shame, the number of people who base their entire opinion about JBL on the failings of the L100.
 
Lots of folks enjoy the sound of the JBL L100s - its why they sold so many pairs over the years.
I bought a pair of CL a few years back, couldn't figure out the mystique, and sold them for nice money ...
but I've had plenty of other JBLs I prefer to the L100s.

Sell the L100s and find a newer pair of JBL L5s or L7s ...
 
Which models of JBLs sound the best/are the best?

Like under $1000 used???

Depends on where you are and what's for sale ...
Also depends on what you like ...
I've gotten to like Compression driver systems (horns and slot tweeters)
some folks can't stand them ...

My first pair of battered 4320s (2 ways) cost me $300 and a drive from DC to Philly back in 2005 ... and changed my ears from the L36 Decades I'd listened to since college ...
 
Never cared much for the use of the word "accuracy". Play a cello in a living room, then play the same cello on a stage and ask yourself which sound is accurate? Neither, it sounds however it sounds in that environment and "how" it's played.

Now, if we're talking "realistic" or "natural" that's a different matter and a more believable assessment.

When someone describes a speaker as "warm" or "bright" I can follow this. When described as "accurate" I can only assume the person describing it as such was present when it was recorded and remembers exactly how it sounded.

Exceptions? Sure, how about the sound of a specific instrument, like a Fender Stratocaster (sp?). I guess one might argue that this guitar "could" be more accurately rendered by one speaker vs another, HOWEVER, the assumption is that the recording itself was "accurate" to start with.

Bang for buck, hard to beat JBL "L" series 4xxx series, etc. Haven't listened to them all and only owned L88 and L26 personally. I prefer, overall, my VA Haydn over my JBL with the only caveat being the JBL go a tad deeper, but not a whole lot, and matters NOT with most recordings I listen to. The Haydn are also a warmer sounding speaker, which I like for most of my listening.

Your point is taken but like I said, within reasonable limits of scale, some speakers - at the right moment - with the right material - you might be convinced the instrument is being played in your room. In my 25-year experience of playing acoustic instruments, that is much more likely to happen with a pair of Focals or Vienna Acoustics than JBLs, this my answer to the OP. Personally, it's happened to me with Linns and DIY Etons more than any other speaker but Focal and B&W were the speakers the OP mentioned.

I've mentioned before, but I planned on being a music education major and I learned to play the strings and most of the woodwinds. I've played them in variety of rooms and halls and I know what they sound like in different rooms and I've never heard any JBL that even for once convinced me that a cello was being played in the room. That's what I mean by 'accuracy.'

That experience certainly doesn't make me any more of an authority of what 'sounds good' esp if a given listener prefers music recorded using a lot of tracks and a lot of compression, but I think someone with 20+ years of experience hearing acoustic instruments can have a pretty decent idea of what speaker is more accurate than another even if he or she wasn't in the room when a given performance was recorded. Hell, 99.99% of recordings aren't mixed in the room in which they were recorded, but I'm sure many folks that work on those recordings think they have an idea of what is or isn't accurate about a given recording but I digress...
 
Last edited:
L100s are certainly different, and lots of people love them - but they're the poster child for the "west coast" sound, and that's what many people want. I think B&W might be a tad closer to the sound of a JBL than a Focal would be, but that's just me.

That's not what I have as a experience.

IMHO, even the big B&W's (like the 800's series) put a lot of emphasis on a clear midrange and top end - but most of all - a more "balanced / flat sound".

I find that all these questions of sound quality are very dependant on the individual, the listening room and musical preferences.

Some loudspeakers like the JBL L100T are great at playing loud, while some european loudspeakers are voiced towards listening at lower volumes.

A loudspeaker that is very detailed at lower listening volumes can easily get too analytical at higher volumes (or even harsh with a lesser recording).
 
Hey $60 can go a long way these days. I paid less for my Insignia bookshelves a few years back and I'd take those over a pair of L100s.

I just feel it's a shame, the number of people who base their entire opinion about JBL on the failings of the L100.
You must be inferring that JBL sold a zillion L100s mainly because of the foam waffle grilles.
 
Back
Top Bottom