Stereophille Review XPL 160

[Robh3606]

Here is another one we can talk about. Seems they did listen to the comments.

Rob:)

[Robh3606]

The rest

[jblnut]

I somehow got a hold of the marketing lit for the XPL line back in the day and I was smitten. Just from what I read I knew they these would be fabulous speakers. I even had some money for them so I called JBL coprporate to find out where I could listen to them. "We're sorry sir but we have no dealers in New England. How about New York? " WTF ? I know JBL's are rare up here but they didn't even TRY to get these into the Boston market.

Fast forward to 2001 where I picked up a mint pair of XPL140's on ebay from Denver. These fully ignited my long-dormant audiophile tendencies and set off a cataclysmic chain of events that saw most of my equipment upgraded. They were so much more revealing than anything I had owned up to that point. Unfortunately that same upgrade bug took out the XPL's a year later when I found some L250's.

But...

The XPL's were a fabulous footnote in JBL history. That titanium midrange has to be heard to be believed - especially if you love jazz. You will never hear a sax or trumpet rendered with quite as much clarity as on these.
As the reviewer suggests, the three-way XPL's really didn't have the low-end totally covered, but the rest of the speaker was pure magic. It's interesting that even he mentions the 140 as having lower bass extension than the 160 ( I had heard that but never seen it confirmed). As we all know, the real gem is the XPL200 with it's 4-way design but they are super rare and no bargain (rightly so).

I still have the XPL140's in the basement (with the stands) and I may someday set them up again. But they're still available for the first person who coughs up $500 plus shipping. They're worth every penny and I need the pennies for more upgrades elsewhere :cool: .

jblnut

[Earl K]

Nice "personal-experience" review jblnut! ( very much appreciated )

Robh, Thanks for starting these "Stereophile- Review" threads.

,> Earl K

[4313B]

Here is another one we can talk about.I always thought the XPL160 should have run a 3-inch coiled LE10H variant. Frankly I was shocked when I pulled the XPL160's out of their boxes and found a 127H variant. Good Grief! :eek:

Oh well, easily remedied in the DIY realm. :D

The XPL140's were fine and the XPL90's were fantastic. Shake 'em out of the boxes and fire 'em up. The XPL200's should have been running a 4-inch coiled twelve or, preferably, an LE14H variant. Also remedied in the DIY realm.

[Don C]

Reviving an old thread here to post an additional review.
The Audio critic,
Issue number 16. Spring-fall 1991
By Peter Aczel.

JBL Consumer Products inc, a Harman International Company.
240 Crossways Park West Woodbury Long Island NY 11797.
XPL160A floor-standing 3-way loudspeaker system, $2498.00 the pair.
Tested samples on loan from manufacturer


A major paradox of the loudspeaker industry: JBL makes the best drivers, has the slickest production techniques, and is both progressive and honest in the R & D area-yet there seems to be no truly first-class JBL speaker system for home use (as distinct from professional sound).
The XPL series is supposed to be JBL's breakthrough in the audiophile market, but on the basis of the XPL160A I can't confirm that. It's a frustrating, self-contradictory speaker.
In my review of the L-40t3 two issues ago, I called the proprietary pure-titanium 1" dome tweeter in that system the best known to me, bar none. I have to reiterate that opinion now, after having tested an updated version of the same tweeter in the XPL160A. And that's not all. The midrange driver in the XPl160A is designed around a pure-titanium 3" dome, a tour de force never before attempted to my knowledge, certainly not as successfully as in this remarkable unit. How they got rid of all the standing waves is beyond me, but they did. The two dome drivers are mounted as close together as possible and crossed over at 4 kHz to form what functions, in effect, as a single seamless 1kHz to 20kH transducer of the utmost flatness and smoothness. The two voice coils are wired out of phase, probably as a concomitant of a second-order network. There’s no high frequency peak, the rolloff starts at 20kHz, but stops and reverses a bit after 30kHz. The older version of the tweeter went out a few more kHz on axis, wasn't quite as well damped, and the off-axis rolloff began sooner. The double-dome combination has just about the same response 30 degrees off axis as on axis, meaning almost perfectly flat (when the microphone axis is at the most favorable height) and showing much smaller squiggles-maybe 2dB from peak to peak-than I've seen in any other drivers. No trace of ringing of any kind, either. If I were in charge of a new project to design a conventional electrodynamic speaker system, these are the drivers I'd like to specify because they're simply the best; unfortunately JBL keeps them strictly in-house.
So far so good-indeed, fantastic. The 10" woofer in its vented box is another matter. The 33" high cabinet itself is gorgeous-high gloss black lacquer finish, subtly nonparallel side walls (trapezoidal cross section), neoprene-lined baffle step to time-delay the domes (very impressive craftsmanship), elaborate open grille frame, and so forth-but the tuning of the woofer enclosure appears to be less than optimal. The box frequency, (where the displacement of the woofer cone is at a minimum) is 34 Hz, but the maximum output from the rearward facing vent is at 44 Hz, and that looks like the effective low-frequency cutoff of the system. I've seen deeper bass out of smaller boxes at the same efficiency (between 88 and 89 dB SPL at 1 meter with 1 watt input).
The paper cone of the woofer is, as far as I can tell, the downfall of this speaker system. Its frequency response is extremely flat, but there are -you guessed it- energy storage problems. Tone burst tests revealed definite ringing in the octave just above the crossover frequency of 800Hz, where the 12 dB per octave rolloff begins. (The 3" dome actually comes in just above 1 kHz, also with a 12B per octave slope, but for some reason there's no hole in the summed response, perhaps because the midrange and woofer are wired in phase, despite the second-order crossover.) If the otherwise excellent woofer were only used up to, say, 400Hz, there would be no problem, but with the 800Hz crossover the ringing in the 1kHz to 1.5 kHz range is insufficiently attenuated and becomes the signature of the speaker. I have a feeling that a you-must-use-what-we-have corporate policy was imposed on the engineers here. For all I know, the woofer was conceived for a totally different application; it's very good, for example, in terms of linear excursion-the Q doesn't change at all as the amplitude of a step function is increased.
The sound that results from this mixed bag of design elements is intriguing but ultimately unsatisfactory. Above 2kHz or so, everything is utterly neutral, transparent, and smooth as silk, as good as you'll ever get out of a forward firing system. The barely attenuated ringing immediately above the woofer's passband, however, is a pervasive coloration at all times and on all types of music. It comes off as a breathy hollowness, and it's right there in the midrange where you can't get away from it. I find it to be a disqualifying fault of what would otherwise be a stupendous-sounding loudspeaker, albeit somewhat light on the bottom end. The top-of the-line XPL200, which has been promised to me for review, has a 12" woofer and a separate lower-midrange driver covering the two octaves from 300Hz to 1.1kHz, so it probably avoids the same pitfall. Those titanium-dome drivers deserve the best possible system design.

[Mr. Widget]

"A major paradox of the loudspeaker industry: JBL makes the best drivers, has the slickest production techniques, and is both progressive and honest in the R & D area-yet there seems to be no truly first-class JBL speaker system for home use..."

I felt that way back in 1980, and with a couple of exceptions still feel that way... they sure do make some damn fine drivers though!

Widget

[Titanium Dome]

Gosh darn it! That three incher was sweet. That's what proved that Ti could be more than just a tweeter. That's what converted me from a normal speaker guy to a Titanium Dome kind of guy. The only way it could be better was if it were 4" and an inverted dome with pistonic drive.

Oh wait! The 904TI is available now.

That poor ten incher was good, but as quoted, mismatched. Shoulda been smaller and mated with a bigger woofer.

Oh wait! How about the 908TI and an LE14H-3?

Man I wish JBL made something like that! That would be sweet. That would be an audiophile speaker, eh?

http://audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=3272 :rotfl:

[jblnut]

While the Performance Series is fantastic it won't be replacing my Ti Series or XPL Series loudspeakers.

Yeah, but just try to find two XPL200's let alone 5 ! And what are you going to use for a center to match that 250ti ? I love the XPL and Ti as much (or more) than the next guy but you have to admit for modern 5.1 systems it's hard to make the classic stuff work.

Unless you're a custom speaker and xover building guru or something....

:moon:

jblnut

[Don C]

OK, those are nice, but what about those vinyl clad cabinets?

[JBLnsince1959]

Well there's only one solution here.....own them all!!!

[Mr. Widget]

Since 1975.

That's funny... I started in 1975 too... didn't try JBL until 1977. Boy most of those early systems I built really sucked.:barf:

Widget

[Titanium Dome]

Gosh darn it! That three incher was sweet. That's what proved that Ti could be more than just a tweeter. That's what converted me from a normal speaker guy to a Titanium Dome kind of guy. The only way it could be better was if it were 4" and an inverted dome with pistonic drive.

Oh wait! The 104TI is available now.

That poor ten incher was good, but as quoted, mismatched. Shoulda been smaller and mated with a bigger woofer.

Oh wait! How about the 108TI and an LE14H-3?

Man I wish JBL made something like that! That would be sweet. That would be an audiophile speaker, eh?

http://audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=3272 :rotfl:

D'oh! :homer:

As Giskard kindly and privately reminds me:


104Ti and 108Ti
I think those drivers are the 904Ti and 908Ti.

Merci.

[Titanium Dome]

OK, those are nice, but what about those vinyl clad cabinets?

They never get water stained. :p

Also, no splinters!

[JBLnsince1959]

OK, those are nice, but what about those vinyl clad cabinets?

Just be carefull if Titanium Dome gets around the vinyl cabinets... he might want to do to those what he does with his performance series... you know... Touch, fondle and smell... :D

[Earl K]

Man I wish JBL made something like that! That would be sweet. That would be an audiophile speaker, eh?

http://audioheritage.org/vbulletin/...read.php?t=3272
__________________
I love the sound of Ti in the morning. It sounds like victory.

- Finally ( O.K. a very , very, belated nod :D ), someone who makes me feel good about using Titanium thing-a-ma-jigs !



*

[rgrjit8]

Yeah, but just try to find two XPL200's let alone 5 ! And what are you going to use for a center to match that 250ti ?

jblnut

That was MY plan. I've got 4 200s and a single 160 to use as the center channel. But I haven't had the scratch to advance to 5.1 processing. I became disenchanted with HT after screwing around with Pro Logic systems. The sound effects always seem to come at the expense of intelligible dialogue.
But back to the speakers.
In my opinion, a double pair of stacked (sacrilege. I know) XPL 200s rivals a pair of 4355s. Well....until the bass kicks in anyway. I think its got something to do with the large airy presentation delivered by a "tall" system. I'm fond of large Duntechs probably for the same reason.

[Titanium Dome]

That was MY plan. I've got 4 200s and a single 160 to use as the center channel. But I haven't had the scratch to advance to 5.1 processing. I became disenchanted with HT after screwing around with Pro Logic systems. The sound effects always seem to come at the expense of intelligible dialogue.



Can you show us those babies?

We're a long way from ProLogic these days, so it's a good time to take the plunge, or at least get your toes wet. There are lots of used, low-priced DD, DTS, PLII receivers on eBay, often for under $300.

[jblnut]

That was MY plan. I've got 4 200s and a single 160 to use as the center channel. But I haven't had the scratch to advance to 5.1 processing. I became disenchanted with HT after screwing around with Pro Logic systems. The sound effects always seem to come at the expense of intelligible dialogue.
.

Prologic was a primitive analog hack - if you've got 5 XPL's just hanging around you *have* to get a decent, cheap digital receiver just to hear it ! Once you hear a good DTS movie or concert you'll look back and laugh saying "what the hell was I waiting for". I know I did....

You can find a nice Harmon/Kardon AVR300 for about $200 or less on ebay. I bought one about 3 years ago now and I still like it a lot. It's rated at only 50 wpc, but being a high-current HK it seems to deliver a lot more than that. It's got dolby digital as well as DTS decoding which is what you really want. It's not fancy - there's no crazy DSP sound modes or component video switching, but it's all you need to hear what good digital surround sound is about. After you're convinced (and you want to upgrade), just ebay it and get your $200 back.

In the $500 realm you can get a real monster - the HK AVR7000. It's got a lot more power and would really make those XPL's sing.

If you ever decide to "downsize" your XPL collection *please* let us know. They'll go to good homes, we promise :) .

jblnut

[JBLnsince1959]

Can you show us those babies?



yes!!!! :bouncy: :bouncy:

If you ever decide to "downsize" your XPL collection *please* let us know. They'll go to good homes, we promise .

they would get very good homes :D

I've gone thru the surround sound phase and anymore I just listen to the movies and other stuff in stereo.

[Mr. Widget]

I've gone thru the surround sound phase and anymore I just listen to the movies and other stuff in stereo.

Really!?
I agree about music, I have yet to hear a surround mix that works for me, but for films... there is no comparison. With a properly set up 5.1 (I don't get the >5.1 schemes) system movies really come alive. It does work best with a projector and large screen, but even with our Sony Trinitron it adds a sense of dimension. It just takes more imagination.

Widget

[JBLnsince1959]

Really!?
I agree about music, I have yet to hear a surround mix that works for me, but for films... there is no comparison. With a properly set up 5.1 (I don't get the >5.1 schemes) system movies really come alive. It does work best with a projector and large screen, but even with our Sony Trinitron it adds a sense of dimension. It just takes more imagination.

Widget

Yes, and it's mostly because of my lack of room. Maybe I should make a trip to CA. and let you guys show me what a good system sounds like( seriously). I've got some good 5.1 stuff and possibly thinking of selling ( marantz AV9000 and ma700 mono blocks). Still debating in my mind if I will go 5.1. Of course what I use is different also. When I do stereo for movies, I use my dad's old C-35's ( with new E130's, 2425's 2402's - old stuff stored away) crossed over at 120 with 2235's for bass. If I do 5.1 then the C-35's take center ( split signal) and the 2235's are crossed ( 100)with the 4430's. Saw a thread somewhere where a guy was using C-33's ( I think for rears). I would like to build a pair with new stuff and use for rears. anyway here's a picture:

[JBLnsince1959]

as you can see I'm very limited by size of the room ( it's all she'll give me) so I'm open minded on 5.1 I just haven't had a good room to do it in. So mostly I put my money into 2 channel. If I do get the performance series it'll be mostly for 2 channel and music listening. ( pictures over two years old, some things have changed)

I really agree 100% with what you said about music and surround sound. I didn't get the quad thing in the 70's and I don't get it now. I'm a firm believer that the more processing they do to a signal the more they "mess" it up. But that's me... I may be old fashioned in this.

[Robh3606]

"I agree about music, I have yet to hear a surround mix that works for me, but for films... there is no comparison. With a properly set up 5.1 (I don't get the >5.1 schemes) system movies really come alive. It does work best with a projector and large screen, but even with our Sony Trinitron it adds a sense of dimension. It just takes more imagination."

Hey Widget

Have you heard the Iso Mike demo ??? It's uses straight DSD and a simple but ingenious isolation method for the microphones. I got hear it at the Stereophille show. It seems it got mixed reviews that were polorized love/hate. They used 4 of the big Tads and huge Pass Monoblocks 2 per speaker. The demo was good in the hotel and gave you an idea. The way it was set up was the big TADs in the corners with chairs in the middle. The dynamics where there but it sounded a bit thin/bass shy and the balance was on the bright side. They also gave us a pair of SACD's recorded with the technique pure DSD 4 channel like the old Quad systems. When I played the disk at home I got to really hear what was there and it was amazing!!! Best surround I have ever heard the rear aplause which is really hard to get right was spot on. It really sounded like there was an audience behind me and the ambiance was great too. A very realistic sense of space. If you can try to get your hands on a demo disk to see what you think.

Rob:)

[Mr. Widget]

I heard the Iso Mike demo a couple of years ago.. they were using some custom speakers and I thought it was interesting, but not special... maybe they have gotten it wired over the last couple of years. (Or maybe they just changed their wires...sorry.:D)

The TADs bass shy!!! I have heard their system as demo'd by TAD twice now. The first time they were using very large VTL amps and at this year's CES I heard them with the Pass Labs stuff. In both instances I thought the bass was a bit heavy. I guess it may be room dependent. Was this a TAD demo room too or did the Iso Mike folks set it up? It may be that Andrew Jones, the project leader at TAD prefers a heavier bass sound.

Widget

[Titanium Dome]

... I may be old fashioned in this.

:rotfl:

I love it when a man has a revelation. :bouncy:

[scott fitlin]

I like TAD woofers, I have heard them, and own them. They arent bass shy! Depends what your doing with them. At a TAD demo room at the AES in manhattan some years back, they had their studio monitors with the TAD 1601A and the 4001/wooden horn setup, and they sounded a bit bright and thin, but I was told they were designed for accurate studio monitoring! Conversely, I have heard the 1601A in many other cabinets, and they were very full sounding! TAD also had their push/pull speaker system set up comprising of TAD 1603,s and the TAD 4002 compression driver with the AFAST horn! These were not thin, and quite punchy, and dynamic! I like both the 1601,s and the 1603,s! TAD said much of the reason one punched and the other didnt was in the crossover! One speaker system was inteneded for sound reinforcement, the other studio monitoring!

They are a bit different sounding than JBL, but they are clean, and give great definition!

[JBLnsince1959]

You mean...C-35's aren't the latest and greatest innovation???? Is there some newer?, something I've missed the last 50 years? :D

[Robh3606]

"The TADs bass shy!!! I have heard their system as demo'd by TAD twice now. The first time they were using very large VTL amps and at this year's CES I heard them with the Pass Labs stuff. In both instances I thought the bass was a bit heavy."

"They arent bass shy! Depends what your doing with them. At a TAD demo room at the AES in manhattan some years back, they had their studio monitors with the TAD 1601A and the 4001/wooden horn setup, and they sounded a bit bright and thin, but I was told they were designed for accurate studio monitoring!"


I didn't say it was the TADS. It was the set-up. I was dead center in the room where the nulls would be. Most of the material was not bass heavy to begin with. Piano sounded nice and solid but on the orchestral material it was missing the last octave. There was more lowend at home than in the demo.

http://www.audiofederation.com/hifiing/2005/HE2005NYC/day3/track9/index.htm

I think the attached review is a bit harsh it wasn't that bad.

Rob:duck:

[JBLnsince1959]

"I think the attached review is a bit harsh it wasn't that bad."

they should have tried using C-35's instead...ah yes, nothing a 15" mid-range and exponential horn slapping you in face. :rotfl:

[Mr. Widget]

Scott,

The system we were talking about is the TAD home audio system. Here is the Model 1. They also have a smaller version with only one woofer. The drivers are not the same as the pro stuff but are equally over the top in construction.

Widget

[Regis]

Ahem.... Regarding the venerable and unbelievable PSB Stratus Gold Speakers mentioned in the review, I found a pair on Ebay selling for $700 the pair.


http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=61377&item=5771743830&rd=1

[Qoute from seller]

PBS STRATuS GOLD SPEAKERS $2699.00 new

Why not treat yourself to the best speakers you can buy for under $3000.00 at a previously owned price?

"In this three-way system, there is the same 10-inch woofer (with 40-ounce magnet!) that helped account for D. B. Keele's statement in Audio that: "Bass organ notes that had made my reference speaker stumble were handled without a whimper by the Stratus Golds."


That giant 40 oz magnet is lighter than a 7-11 Big Gulp, the L-110's I owned probably had a motor on the L-111 easily twice the size of these.

[Another qoute from seller]

There is also the same 6-inch midrange driver (with 20 ounces of magnet), crossed over from the woofer at 250 Hz, that led to the following characterization by Thomas J. Norton in his Gold re-review in March 1997 in Stereophile:

"The PSB builds on a solid foundation: a clean, uncolored midrange. Vocals were unfailingly natural — from the Fairfield Four ...blah-blah-blah..."

The LE5 has a magnet of similiar weight...
Doesn't include $240 packing. I'm sure they're somewhat nice speakers, but at $940 shipped so far, I'd get a pair of L-7's or the L-212's over these guys (IMHO of course...)

[scott fitlin]

Scott,

The system we were talking about is the TAD home audio system. Here is the Model 1. They also have a smaller version with only one woofer. The drivers are not the same as the pro stuff but are equally over the top in construction.

WidgetWell, you know how I get vocal and opinionated at times! Im sure the speakers are very well made too, like their pro stuff!

:D

[jblnut]

That was MY plan. I've got 4 200s and a single 160 to use as the center channel. But I haven't had the scratch to advance to 5.1 processing. .

OK - here you go - a nice AVR-300 for $40 - and the seller pays shipping. He's a newbie so there's risk, but it might be worth it...

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=39794&item=5774115964&rd=1

jblnut

[rgrjit8]

OK - here you go - a nice AVR-300 for $40 - and the seller pays shipping. He's a newbie so there's risk, but it might be worth it...

jblnut

Jeeze! You guys sure look out for your pals don't yas?:banghead:

Let me restate the hold up here. It isn't so much a money problem as a wife:scold: problem. She's convinced that "demon audio" is what's preventing her from bragging about a new chariot. I have to lay low lest my particular electronic-age Carrie Nation chooses to wield her axe.
For her birthday I bought a little Sansui AU-555A integrated to power her computer audio. (She brought it up herself!) Somehow I think I'd best hide it a while and try the flower routine instead.:help:

[Titanium Dome]

Jeeze! You guys sure look out for your pals don't yas?:banghead:

Let me restate the hold up here. It isn't so much a money problem as a wife:scold: problem. She's convinced that "demon audio" is what's preventing her from bragging about a new chariot. I have to lay low lest my particular electronic-age Carrie Nation chooses to wield her axe.
For her birthday I bought a little Sansui AU-555A integrated to power her computer audio. (She brought it up herself!) Somehow I think I'd best hide it a while and try the flower routine instead.:help:


Buy her a nice pre-owned vehicle, then put your newly-purchased AVR in the trunk. When showing her her new car, exclaim, "Oh my gosh! What's this?" when you open the trunk.

Everyone wins.

[jblnut]

Jeeze! You guys sure look out for your pals don't yas?:banghead:

Let me restate the hold up here. It isn't so much a money problem as a wife:scold: problem.

Ouch - it's all clear now....

Another avenue that has worked for some in the past - "Oops I seem to have spilled my beer into the receiver. Guess we'll have to get that fixed. Oh look, here's a better one on ebay for less than the repair cost...".

Where there's a will (or an audio addiction) there's a way ! Don't let something like a woman's aversion to small black boxes with lights get in your way :D .

jblnut

[Regis]

but ugly solution to WAF is to get rid of the "W". Been there, done that x2! The disadvantage... (well, we all know the disadvantageshttp://audioheritage.org/vbulletin/images/smilies/scratchchin.gif (http://audioheritage.org/vbulletin/misc.php?do=getsmilies&wysiwyg=1&forumid=2#).

The advantages. You can come home after work, fire it up, drop it in, sit down and let a pair of fine JBL's work your stress and worries away! No worrying about when the SigOther comes home freaking on the volume! No Pre-Wife-pulling-up-in-the-garage syndrome (OMG, gotta turn it down!). Yes, just let the music pour over you for hours and hours! Gotta get these L-300's running, c'mon Rick, where are those foam surrounds!

[Titanium Dome]

but ugly solution to WAF is to get rid of the "W". Been there, done that x2!


Only had to do this once, but got it right the first time! :p

[Playdrv4me]

I always thought the XPL160 should have run a 3-inch coiled LE10H variant. Frankly I was shocked when I pulled the XPL160's out of their boxes and found a 127H variant. Good Grief! :eek:

Oh well, easily remedied in the DIY realm. :D

The XPL140's were fine and the XPL90's were fantastic. Shake 'em out of the boxes and fire 'em up. The XPL200's should have been running a 4-inch coiled twelve or, preferably, an LE14H variant. Also remedied in the DIY realm.

I hate to dredge up an old thread, and frankly I waited so long for the validation of my account that I forgot exactly what I wanted to say about these fine beasts when I first found this old review, but I wanted to say that it does seem that the 140 is the "sweet spot" in the XPL line-up. I have still noticed a bit of a "boomy" character to the 8 inch driver with some amplifiers, but overall these XPL140s (originally recommended to me by a guy who bought a Sony TA-N77ES amplifier from me on Ebay some years ago) have been amongst some of the best purchases I've ever made.

I have considered upgrading to 800 Series Bowers and Wilkins (pre-owned, of course, probably 804s for their manageable size quotient and lower cost) but every time I see the prices of speakers I'm interested in, I simply can't justify how much more they'd run me versus the 4 or 500.00 I paid for the XPLs shipped from California back in '05 or '06 or whatever it was. They had already been refoamed by Orange County Speaker at that point and have been real troopers ever since. Speakers are SUCH a subjective grey area of the consumer electronics world, and when you find a dark musty corner of forgotten awesomeness like the XPL series, it's tough to take the leap to anything else that costs 5 or 6 times as much. I do think the review was put at a disadvantage by the XPL160, which seems like the least "dialed in" of the series.

Oh yeah, I looked after some Bang and Olufsen BeoLab 5s for a good while for resale, and the difference between the XPLs and the 24,000.00 Bang and Olufsens was laughably minimal.

[more10]

Digital reprint (https://www.stereophile.com/content/jbl-xpl-160-loudspeaker)