JBL 4311,4312,L100,etc.

Posted by: JSF13

JBL 4311,4312,L100,etc. - 03/10/04 10:14 PM

Anyone here have experience with these "studio monitor" JBL's?How do the m-60/m-80'S compare to these?
Posted by: JAS1

Re: JBL 4311,4312,L100,etc. - 03/10/04 10:53 PM

I replaced the JBL S312 Studio Series Towers, the S38 Studio Bookshelves, and the JBS S-Center with M80s, VP150, and the QS8s. The JBL speakers are not even close to the sound quality of the Axioms. I believe the JBLs you refer to were the replacement models for the ones I had.
Posted by: joema

Re: JBL 4311,4312,L100,etc. - 03/11/04 03:50 PM

I formerly owned Pioneer HPM-100 speakers, designed specifically to compete with the JBL L100/4310. I've heard L100s a lot, and have asked myself your exact question many times.

Unfortunately I can't do an A/B comparision since I no longer have the HPM-100s. But I've played the exact same stereo material on my Axiom M60s that I played many times on my HPM-100s, trying to determine are the Axioms better, just different, etc.

There's no question the L100 and HPM-100 were very impressive speakers for their time. With two 12" woofers (per pair), you definitely didn't need a sub. They were very efficient, probably equivalent to M60s in this regard. Overall my impression is my M60s are more accurate and playing the same material I hear things I never heard on the HPM-100s or L100s. OTOH those old speakers had a "kick you in the chest" impact that the M60s don't have (by themselves).

Augmented with my Hsu VTF-3R sub, the M60s are better in every way -- more accurate, better base, etc. JBL never published response curves for the L100, but I think other people tested them and they weren't stellar. It's the old controversy -- which counts more, good subjective sound or good numbers?

The NRCs research shows that a scientific objective approach to speaker design produces good sounding speakers. The L100 and HPM-100 certainly sounded impressive, and some people prize them even today. However given the choice I'd take my M60s over the L100 or HPM-100 any day. One caveat: if you're used to speakers like those old ones, you should probably have a sub, even with M60s.

Some related links:

HPM-100 pix:

History of L100:
L100 Owner's Manual:
Posted by: JSF13

Re: JBL 4311,4312,L100,etc. - 03/11/04 07:26 PM

Thanks for the responses.Joe,sounds like you know exactly what I'm going through Thanks for the links also.
Posted by: Scottinwa

Re: JBL 4311,4312,L100,etc. - 08/20/14 12:59 PM

I was never impressed by the HPM except for sweet-ish treble. Ok sounding midfi. Overrated "vintage" speaker. I have owned the JBL 4312A (bad imaging, bass rolloff at 60hz) L80t and L100t.

The strong points: The aquaplas midrange was very detailed and transparent.
The bass was tight, and controlled. Extended treble. Very strong into the 30's.

The bad points: The Ti tweeter sounded AWFUL unless you have no-kidding quality solid state or tube front end. The bass sounded boxy unless carefully positioned. The speaker REALLY needed a STRONG 200wpc + to shine.

IIRC, the crossover used mylar caps or electrolytics with mylar bypasses. I'd swap out all equal value metallized polypropelene.

JBL never made a tweeter that I liked, certainly not as praiseworthy as what Axiom is using now.
Posted by: Scottinwa

Re: JBL 4311,4312,L100,etc. - 08/20/14 03:56 PM

Example: this is the crossover from the l100t. Note the small value mylar bypass caps.

Swapping all the caps out for metal poly will REALLY wake these speakers up.


Sibilance has nothing to do with multiple drivers or arrangement. It's usually poor parts or stereo components.