I think the Quads are a bit better on the vocals but when I listen to Jazz and Rock, I wonder if the JBL would be better fit. Thank you for your tireless hard work, it truly helps when trying to purchase new speakers in the $2000 range.
the quads sound a little too clear and airy also but because its clearer you also hear more fine details but its just overdone. jbl is also known for hitting the right mids with a crisp sound its just a little muddy at times on some speakers i guess. jbl is like flat but the quads are refined so like mixing playback
Well, I have to be contrary to the majority of opinions here but I have to give it to the JBL's. They're just a tiny bit more articulate. The Quads lack clarity compared to the JBL's. The JBL's sound more alive and engaging, and the Quads sounded colored. I like to hear what was recorded more than the color that has been built into a speaker.
both are very good speakers. I am a Quad owner so i am biased but i'd pick the JBLs in a heartbeat for a house party. anything else the Z2s. There should be a lot more Quad S and Z series reviews out there to let people know what terrific value for money they are. Thanks Terry!
The star of the show is that ribbon tweeter Terry. It just had a nicer presentation, l didn't mind the bass. With that particular speak you can always add a sub, but if you can't get the mids and the top end right you're buying a different speaker 🔊.....nice🙂👍🎧
I've owned high end JBL horn speakers for years, and recently bought Quad S2 speakers. I am continually shocked how much more sheer enjoyment I get from these Quads and now considering buying Z2's and replacing my JBL horns...
Track 3 - JBL reproduced a more enveloping presentation with demse and arriculate sub-bass. Apart from that, the Quad's airy presentation invokes precise seperation with natural tone and timbre of the superb mid range vocals and instrumements.
I came here for the JBL's which are quite possibly my next speaker purchase, actually an end-game speaker purchase, but I have to say the Quads impressed me greatly. I don't think you could go wrong with either of them. At this point I've narrowed it down to the JBL HDI-1600's and Martin Logan XT B100's. The competition at this level is fierce to say the least. Decisions, decisions.
Very difficult because both sound very good! The quad bikes brought me a certain emotion, the ribbon has the particularity of going very high. This brings an aereation, more pronounced details. But ... JBLs are fun, maybe they don't have the perks mentioned above, but they have a warmth that Quads don't. The lower midrange is very good. I find the choice difficult, because it will also depend on the music you listen to. But it seems to me that the very musical side of the JBL is an asset, because in the end, when you listen to music in general, shouldn't it rhyme with pleasure? sorry for the bad translation
The Quads sound like Quad, the JBLs dont sound like JBL. That ribbon is killing it, just so much more resolution and air. The JBL sounded stiff and trapped, the Quads laid everything out.
If you want cheap speakers that don't sound stiff and trapped, just put a 5" FR driver on top of the box, open! And run it with a woofer in the box. You can do it with any 2-ways with bi wire capability. Just connect the woofer and piggyback connect the open FR driver, directly. The only hard part is MOUNTING the FR driver on top. For a start just use a lot of Blue Tack. And slope the open driver back a bit. Best speakers you will ever hear! 😅
Achter 3 years searching ,i going to buy the JBL as my front speakers. I love them , not to big , fantastic sound , Nice looks for my small living room . Greetings from Belgium , thanks for the great review . Please listen to the last cd's from Lana del Rey, they're unbelievble .
Well, the Quads airy tweeter seems to dance for you, the vocals are so more alive and the sound eminates around you whereas the JBL sound seems to stay in front of you. I liked the bottom end of the JBLs better. Need more comparitive listening if I were to purchase. But here the Quads win.
Quads sound more natural to me .. could imagine the artist and band is there on stage .. Jbls sounded like ..... erm.. a hifi system. .. Great series of demos , I'm always looking forward to the next ones 😀 👍
I'm a dealer of both.... Better be right on. ertical axis with the Quad. The vertical dispersion/decay is poor duento the physical limitations of the ribbon. The JBL Synthesis HDI stomps it for movies and multi channel use.
Thanks for the info. I'm here due to me considering the JBL HDI-1600's and the Martin Logan XT B100's as my end-game speakers. The competition at this level is fierce and I have to say the Quad Z2's sound very impressive in this demo.
The interesting thing about the Quad Z series is the exceptional room-friendliness of the two floorstanders Z-3 and Z-4. Both of them feature a relatively limited low frequency extension for their respective size. Fade-out is rather steep with both models, just presented with an 8 Hz shift. Z-3 is considered sweet spot from that range for small rooms. On the contrary, even Z-4 won't fill large rooms with perceivable bass output below 42 Hz. The only thing from my experience is these tweeters don't like to be hammered. Low to upper medium volume listening, that's when they really shine. edit: To me the JBLs "won" that "competition" with a more consistent, unfettered and relaxed presentation, plus some easy flow and across the band.
Quads sound so alive, rich, better highs, more tonally engaging. I didn't expect to like them so much more than the JBLs. Switching back and forth back and forth on the same segment of several of the clips the JBLs eventually started to sound uninspiring. And the JBLs are nice speakers, but just don't have the musical engagement and scale of the Z2s for me.
I agree on vocals much better on quads .k have to politely disagree about the instruments though .my son is a professional musician to me the instruments sounds so natural on the quads .that sound of the sticks on the skins to me is so natural sounding on the quads same goes for strings .that's what's great about audio we all get pleasure in maybe slightly different ways .
I agree. Voice detail is a bit better on Quads but my god, instruments are much better in JBL s. Impressive JBLs, separation is better, deeper. JBL for me.
Sounds of quad z2 is a little better, but for the price you cannot beat jbl hdi1600! I got mine for $950 + tax! I paired them with martin logan dynamo1000 sounds great!!
Quads sound way more immersive. They sound more expensive ... if that is a way to say it. The last song really nails it. The JBL does a wall of sound, the Quads put you inside.
Quad delivers smoother mids and highs. The JBL is definitely the party speaker (last track). JBL does deliver decent details and dispersion. On this one it's a matter of preference. Both are decent stand mounts. The soundstage dynamics seem to be good for standmount speakers on both sets. Since I'm not a fan of AMT tweeters, or Horn waveguide, neither is to my personal taste. However, both sets of speakers are viable options for those who enjoy their sound signature. Thanks Terry.
Quad is technically in another league listening normal levels. But i can hear Ribbon tweeter have some problems and that can cause some problems with ssssssses that protrude even in midrange. This cause some problems with bad recorrding or overprocesed modern songs, espepecially on higher volumes. But if this may not be such a problem if you listen from far away in room which tame those esesssss good and you have smooth and warmer amplifier and other electronics behind this speaker.
We are outnumbered by a majority but I share that perception with you. I just wouldn't say "bass heavy" but simplified and quite specious bass response by the Quads.
"Fever" sounds fantastic with the JBLs here. Even better than the Arendal 1723 in the previous sound demo. On other songs, I prefer the JBL 4309 or the Arendal from the other demo. Weird that it is so song dependent, I would so much like to find one speaker that plays everything to my liking. (And the Quad Z2 are not for me, listening fatigue sets in quickly). Thanks Terry.
Hi, so my question for you because you seem to be the only one that has reviewed and demoed the Quad speakers is are the Quad z2 a major improvement over the Quad s2 which is what I own?
Song 1 - Quads had better vocals Song 2 - JBLs had better impact and separation of drums Song 3 - ???? Toss up Song 4 - Quads but not by much Song 5 - JBLs had clearer vocals Really hard to pick a clear winner.
The second set I thought presented better although they came across a little boxy. Probably not the best way to describe them but they were better than the first set.
Well, yes... everything below crossover frequency sounds just a little bit "clinging to membrane" with the Quads. In other words, there is that well-known "Pph-pph"-sound signature each time e/g drums hit or other impactful impulses are reproduced. I think that could be agreed on.
It's funny, I currently have two pairs of horn speakers in my house (Volti and Klipsch) and love how dynamic they are, but these JBLs scream horns in a bad way. Quads all day long for me between these two.
I’m disappointed how stuffy HDI 1600 sound, it’s like some vintage speakers sounded like from a can, it doesn’t really feel like it’s a pair of JBL, which is usually bright, dynamic and lively.
the quads have a huge advantage on micro details and presence and attack on my ears :D jbls has slightly wider stage while quads deeper and with a better reverb of sounds.
Stredy sú lepšie na JBL , ale vyšie stredy a výšky už nie sú pekné , horn zafarbuje zvuk. Tie biele bedne presne opačne. Stredy sú príliš tvrdé a ploché dynamicky, ale od stredu vyšie je to nádhera.
Can you recommend a track from an album that can be used for experimenting with speaker placement to fine tune the phantom vocal centre channel? Something that would be on Apple Music.
Interesting feedback- there is a little more going on with the Quad treble which I think puts a bit more sound in the middle - the JBL have a better in room spread of sound but are a bit rolled off at the top which makes them sound less dynamic and you can hear that in my room really easily cos of all the treatment
I really do appreciate your channel for the information you provide us with and the real tests. Unfortunately I always hear a "boxy" sound like there's an enphasys in the mid range. I think it depends on the recording system or resonance in the room. for comparison I found this channel: maybe you can understand better what I hear: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-dmKnUOgL878.html
I listened to the sound demos on the other channel and it sounds like they used a close micd to the speaker setup which is not the truth of what you would hear in person in the room. I also found the sound demos totally 2 dimensional which is how I know they close micd the speakers as your not hearing that much room on the recording which is always not true if the mice are at the listening position because of how mics work. For me my recordings show you how the speakers sounded in my room you can hear much much more of the sound stage in my room and I am getting no mid range push in fact the difference between the tracks for vocals is vast and how it is in real life. What can I say your hearing it different to me. My room at this time had over 50 acoustics treatments in it with dsp too so it’s unlikely what your hearing is my room.
Sounds over damped don't want my speakers sounding like a dead pair of closed back headphones could be your room or the narrow dispersion of the ribbon tweeter the jbl sounded much better
