What to do with my speakers

[j-man]

Brand new to the forum and the world of surround sound, hope I can get some help. I inherited a pair of JBL L5 speakers. Haven't listened to them enough to know exactly how good they are but so far I like what I hear. I would like to incorporate them into a surround sound system but don't know what kind of center channel speaker to get that might work with them. I was looking at the LC2 as an option (does that speaker need to be mounted on the wall?). Maybe I should think about replacing the L5's with three speakers that were designed to work together. I am also wondering if the receiver I get plays into this equation. I am looking at debating between an Onkyo SR875 and a Denon 3808CI.

Thanks for any advice you can give a newbie

[Mr. Widget]

I doubt you would notice much of a sonic difference between either of those receivers. In fact I doubt you would notice much of a sonic difference between either of them and one at half their retail price. I'd save money on the receiver and spend it on the best speakers you could afford. I'd set up the receiver in a 5.1 configuration (less speakers means each one can be a bit better) and use the L5s as your surrounds and buy three new speakers for the fronts.

Just one experienced voice... however there are plenty who would go about this quite differently. My recommendation on receivers would be to buy one that has full pre-outs so that you can upgrade and use separate amps later if you so desire. My opinion on these contemporary receivers is that most of them sound about the same once you get past the entry level and up until you have spent far more than most of us are willing or able to.


Widget

[jblnut]

I'd be on the lookout for L1's or L3's. If you like the floor-standing look (and have room), use the L5's as the fronts the L3's as the rears and a single L1 (or dual) as the center. A friend of mine had this as his config for a while. He's using L7 fronts and L1 surrounds now.

Since these speakers are all relatively common and affordable, I'm not sure I'd mix in newer JBLs and "waste" the L5's as surrounds. They are fantastic speakers and really great for 2-channel music listening.

Just my $.02...

jblnut

[Mr. Widget]

I'm not sure I'd mix in newer JBLs and "waste" the L5's as surrounds. They are fantastic speakers and really great for 2-channel music listening.

I agree. I didn't realize that L5s were floor standers. I am not familiar with that era of "L"s and thought they were a small two-way. Oops.

If they are "fantastic" then by all means move them up to the front. I'd still stand by the rest of what I was saying about the receivers and all that...


Widget

[j-man]

Thanks to both of you. One thing I forgot to mention is that I would also like to use this set up for a home theater set-up. That may have been obvious but given that would you change your advice on matching the three front speakers and the type of receiver I get. Since you mentioned 2 channel music listening I thought I better mention this.

[j-man]

Thanks to both of you. One thing I forgot to mention is that I would also like to use this set up for a home theater. That may have been obvious but given that you mentioned 2 channel music listening I wasn't sure. With that information would you change your advice on matching the three front speakers and the type of receiver I get.

[jblnut]

I just figured even in a 5.1 environment you may toss a CD in at some point and listen to just the fronts. Although there are far bigger and more expensive JBLs, I still really like the L5 for what it is and what it can do.
Mr. Widget felt the need to put quotes around "fantastic" but I feel that these are one of the best affordable JBL's out there on the used market, if you have the room for them. Where else you gonna get a 4-way with cast frame drivers for about $300 a pair ?

Enjoy your setup and heed Widget's words about the receiver. I'm still using an old HK AVR300 (<$150 on ebay any day of the week) and for a basic no-frills digital receiver with DTS decoding, it works great and has plenty of clean power. If you don't buy into all the HDMI hype (and hassle), there's really no need to spend silly money on an AV receiver. Yeah it's a few more button pushes on the remote to have the receiver switching audio and the TV switching video, but it's not that big a hassle in my book.

jblnut

PS - the JBL CL505 was the center channel sold at the same time as the L5. I have one and although it's not a perfect match sonically for the L5, it's pretty close. If you have the room, use an L1. If not, the CL505 might work out OK.

[Mr. Widget]

The quotation marks were because you said it. I didn't.
Oh, and because I am a speaker snob and don't think I have ever heard a "fantastic" speaker that cost less than my monthly mortgage. (don't ask)

But seriously, I have no idea how good they are. I don't think I have ever seen one much less heard a pair, but I do know that anecdotally there are several here who share your enthusiasm for the L5. That is good enough for me.

HDMI is the way of the future and unlike S-video which was all hype, there are good reasons to use it in certain applications. For most people's systems component video is fine. I would not use composite video on any set larger than 19" or so.

As for the receiver question, my comments were based on the assumption that you were talking affordable home theater surround sound. If you were after a 2 channel music only system, I'd steer you away from all of the contemporary receivers with DTS and Dolby Digital built in.


Widget

[Shane Shuster]

I doubt you would notice much of a sonic difference between either of those receivers. In fact I doubt you would notice much of a sonic difference between either of them and one at half their retail price.

I recently bought a Denon AVR-988 and would agree with this. I've owned several Onkyos within the last 12 years. The difference between the $500 and the more expensive receivers is features. Usually things like pre-outs, triggers, EQ, network connectivity, ect. You just need to decide what features are important and then check which models have them. Onkyo Vs Denon, they are about the same build quality, usually. They are easy to use, sound good enough, and the newest models have some cool features.

I have never had any luck with digital home theater preamps sounding different than receivers either, for what its worth. Maybe because they all have to use the same type of decoding chip sets they sound mostly the same?

[Mr. Widget]

I have never had any luck with digital home theater preamps sounding different than receivers either...

Widget

[BMWCCA]

Oh, and because I am a speaker snob and don't think I have ever heard a "fantastic" speaker that cost less than my monthly mortgage. (don't ask)

But seriously, I have no idea how good they are. I don't think I have ever seen one much less heard a pair, but I do know that anecdotally there are several here who share your enthusiasm for the L5. That is good enough for me.

I can't afford to be a snob but I have grown up with JBLs since 1958, still have my family's original 030s and the L112s I bought over twenty years ago. I've recently added (through reading this list) L150As and 4412As so that's my basis for saying——as an L-5 owner for three days——that the L-5 is an extremely impressive speaker for its size and current price range. Their low-end performance approaches that of a good JBL 12" speaker (128H, H-1) and the 4-way configuration gives a pleasant flat response. If anything, the 035TIA will show up more noise present in the source than my other UHF drivers, but usually only between passages (even from high-end analog recordings). That's the source's fault, not the speaker's. I'm not a home theater person at this time but will be some day and from those I've listened to you'll most likely want a sub to go with nearly any JBL under with woofers under 14". The L-5 is a very capable two-channel speaker but for thundering bass used in HT applications you could find some benefit from a sub. That's not a slam against your L5s, just the reality of home theater.

Your L-5s will benefit from as much power as you can possibly give them. I've seen plenty of people looking to replace blown 035TIAs and I'm assuming this is from driving them at high volume (HT setting) without adequate power. Mine really seem to shine with the Crown PS-400 which, given the 6-ohm rating of the L-5, must be providing something around 250 watts-per-channel. I think they're happy. For the $200 I paid for them I'd have to say they are definitely keepers. For the $200-to-$300 you could get for them if you sold them, I'd say you'd never be able to replace them with anything better for that kind of money. I looked down my nose at the L-series for years until reading about the experiences of others on this list. It wasn't until I jumped on a cheap pair of L20Ts recently I realized what a vintage-JBL snob I was and why I had a lot to learn. Now I'm figuring, if I don't present the two modern L-series pairs to my daughters as they move out into the world, the L20T pair might make a killer center channel for the L-5s at some time in the near future.

Good luck. I hope you enjoy your new L-5s as much as I'm enjoying mine, and find more clean power!

(P.S.: I use the appellation "L-5" as opposed to the conventional "L5" simply because it makes it easier to search that topic on this list. The software seems to ignore a two-digit search subject. In case you're looking for more info on your new-to-you speakers.)

[Mr. Widget]

...the L-5 is an extremely impressive speaker for its size and current price range. Their low-end performance approaches that of a good JBL 12" speaker... I'm not a home theater person at this time but will be some day and from those I've listened to you'll most likely want a sub to go with nearly any JBL under with woofers under 14". The L-5 is a very capable two-channel speaker but for thundering bass used in HT applications you could find some benefit from a sub.

An excellent point. For home theater you can always use a pair of floor standing full range speakers in the fronts omitting the center and sub, but this will never be ideal. At every price point and quality level this will be a compromise. Sometimes more of a compromise and sometimes less, but an actual center channel speaker (preferably very similar or identical to the left and right speakers) and a decent subwoofer are really necessary to maximize your experience.

Your L-5s will benefit from as much power as you can possibly give them. I've seen plenty of people looking to replace blown 035TIAs and I'm assuming this is from driving them at high volume (HT setting) without adequate power.

Most speakers will and this is why I suggested a receiver with pre-outs. The built in amps in all of the "affordable" receivers are gutless and don't sound terribly good... they may get loud, but they are really pretty poor... even in a $5K Denon. I regularly use the receiver's built in amps for rear channel duties and use external amps for the more important duties.

(P.S.: I use the appellation "L-5" as opposed to the conventional "L5" simply because it makes it easier to search that topic on this list. The software seems to ignore a two-digit search subject. In case you're looking for more info on your new-to-you speakers.)

That is a handy general tip. It never occurred to me to try. Bravo!

I can't afford to be a snob but...

Unfortunately neither can I . That is why 99% of my speakers have been DIY projects.


Widget

[Shane Shuster]

An excellent point. For home theater you can always use a pair of floor standing full range speakers in the fronts omitting the center and sub, but this will never be ideal.

Now this I disagree with. I think in most normal sized rooms the inclusion of a center channel is a mistake. Heres why, if you have a good size tv for home theater its parked right where the center channel needs to be. If you place it above or below the tv and angle it, it doesn't work. The voices never sound like they are coming from the center line of the video or match the mains on pans.

Now for very large rooms or for if you constantly have large groups of people a center channel is better. Obviously if you had a perforated front projection screen placement would be easy and a center would work very well.

If you look at the markup relative to mains its easy to see why the audio world pushes center channels as a must. I think a majority of people would have been better served by a 4.2 format, than by 5.1. Quite a few of the consumer subs have output above 80hz, and a lot of the smaller speakers today need help in the 100-200hz range. I don't understand why they thought mono bass was a good idea.

Regarding the amp sections of receivers, I think they are good enough for the vast majority. They sound good and you don't really need any thing much better unless you want to do audio as a hobby. I do have mine hooked up to an external amp, but its not a requirement to enjoy the system.

[Mr. Widget]

Now this I disagree with. I think in most normal sized rooms the inclusion of a center channel is a mistake. Heres why, if you have a good size tv for home theater its parked right where the center channel needs to be. If you place it above or below the tv and angle it, it doesn't work. The voices never sound like they are coming from the center line of the video or match the mains on pans.

If your audience is an audience of one, then you can argue that a center is not necessary. I don't know what a large or small room means, but most rooms that I have been in where people watch movies in a surround system there is typically room for at least one 3 person couch and additional seating. If you are not seated in the center of the couch, you need a center to properly hear all three channels of information even with good speakers that have a wide sweet spot. The phantom center image collapses off axis.

Now as for placement of that center speaker... I agree it can be problematic. I also agree that the industry pricing for center speakers is... well, favorable towards the manufacturers. In smaller rooms we have placed a pair of narrow center speakers on either side of the display. They are both operating and create an acoustic "phantom center" with out board left and right speakers. Typically three identical speakers below the display works well and most viewers do not notice that the sound is below the image. Unfortunately using a perfed screen adversely affects the audio and the video. The video works in very large rooms, but the audio still suffers.

As with everything else... you have to pick your battles.

Regarding the amp sections of receivers, I think they are good enough for the vast majority. They sound good and you don't really need any thing much better unless you want to do audio as a hobby. I do have mine hooked up to an external amp, but its not a requirement to enjoy the system.

They probably are "good enough", but if you are able to upgrade at a later date, it is nice to have the option. I think everyone can hear the improvement. The reason that most people don't do the upgrade is usually a matter of economics or space limitations.


Widget

[Shane Shuster]

I don't know what a large or small room means, but most rooms that I have been in where people watch movies in a surround system there is typically room for at least one 3 person couch and additional seating. The phantom center image collapses off axis.

By normal size room I meant 12x15 up to 20x30ft. I think those are roughly what most room sizes fall into. 30x50ft would be large. I somewhat see your point about multiple seating but you are just picking one axis over another as being bad. I must be in the minority for liking the audio to match the video height because I don't see it mentioned much on the internet.

The other thing I could never figure a work around is in multiple seating that is staggered in depth away from the screen. All the home theaters I've heard the surrounds are way too loud when you aren't in the first row.
To me it makes sense to build mostly for the primary dead center seat because the other seats are always compromised. (both in audio and video) The person who pays for it gets the good seat.

Regarding perforated screens, they do limit audio and video quality, but are very nice for a clean, hidden look.

Is an amp an improvement over a receiver, yes, but in most cases the extra cash would yield bigger results by improving the speakers. Unless you already went all out like Mr. Widget.