Short answer: the JBL Stage 2 250B. It ranks #30 of 56 bookshelf speakers by sound quality at $349.95; the KEF Q100 ranks #38 and costs $550, so there is not much of a tradeoff to weigh.
On the JBL Stage 2 250B side: Consistent, EQ-able dips in the frequency response mean the tonal issues are at least correctable if you’re willing to use equalization. Set against that: The reviewer was “even less enthusiastic” about this one than its disappointing floorstanding sibling.
What the KEF Q100 offers: 5.25” Uni-Q coaxial driver keeps the tweeter and woofer point-source aligned for consistent imaging. Watch for: CEA2034 spinorama shows broad, audible deviations from flat rather than narrow peaks: a lift from 700Hz-1.5kHz and again from 5kHz up, plus a cancellation notch around 1.4kHz from port/cabinet interaction.
Buy the JBL Stage 2 250B. It ranks higher for sound quality than the KEF Q100 and costs less, so there is no real case for the other one.
Specifications Side By Side
| JBL Stage 2 250B | KEF Q100 | |
|---|---|---|
| Price | $349.95 | $550 Discontinued |
| Ranked | #30 of 56 in Medium Size Bookshelf Speakers | #38 of 56 in Medium Size Bookshelf Speakers |
| Bass Extension (-10dB) | 50Hz (measured, Erin’s Audio Corner) | 65Hz (measured, Audio Science Review) |
| Bass Extension (-3dB) | 64Hz (measured, Erin’s Audio Corner) | 85Hz (measured, Audio Science Review) |
| Drivers | 1" anodized aluminum dome tweeter with HDI waveguide, 5.25" polycellulose woofer | 5.25" Uni-Q aluminum coaxial driver, 1" aluminum dome tweeter |
| Weight | 12.3 lbs / 5.6 kg (12.4 lb) per pair | 13 lbs / 5.9 kg each |
| Sensitivity | 86dB (2.83V/1m, measured by Erin’s Audio Corner) | 85dB (2.83V/1m, measured, Audio Science Review) |
| Output Power | 75W RMS | - |
| Impedance | 6 ohms nominal, 3.3 ohms minimum (measured, Erin’s Audio Corner) | 8 ohms nominal |
| Dimensions | 12.6"H x 7.9"W x 9.5"D (321.0 x 200.0 x 241.0 mm) | 11.8"H x 7.1"W x 10.7"D (300 x 180 x 272 mm) |
| Woofer Cabinet | ported, rear | ported, rear |
| Discontinued | - | Yes |
| Frequency Response | - | 49Hz - 40kHz (+/-3dB) (Manufacturer specified) |
Related Speaker Comparisons
More useful head-to-heads from the same speaker class:
- JBL Stage A120 vs ELAC Uni-Fi 2.0 UB52
- ELAC Uni-Fi 2.0 UB52 vs Q Acoustics 3020i
- Paradigm Monitor SE Atom vs ELAC Uni-Fi 2.0 UB52
- Paradigm Monitor SE Atom vs KEF Q100
- KEF Q100 vs Q Acoustics 3020i
The Two Speakers In Full
JBL Stage 2 250B: $349.95 Amazon
Pros: Consistent, EQ-able dips in the frequency response mean the tonal issues are at least correctable if you’re willing to use equalization. Horizontal dispersion is reasonably wide and controlled (~50-60 degrees). The tweeter itself holds up fine under compression testing - it’s the midwoofer that gives out first.
Cons: The reviewer was “even less enthusiastic” about this one than its disappointing floorstanding sibling. A confusing, hard-to-place tonal signature - a lower-midrange dip creates a recessed, lacking-attack character that’s then partly offset by a rebound around 2-4kHz, so it reads as recessed and forward at different times depending on the material. Treble falls off sharply above 6-7kHz, same issue as the larger 280F. Multitone distortion at 96dB is genuinely poor - well over 3%, reportedly around 10% at some frequencies. Limited bass extension (F3 64Hz, F10 50Hz) means a subwoofer is basically required if used as main speakers. Compression sets in early on the bass/midwoofer at higher output. The reviewer explicitly recommends the similarly-priced Polk Reserve R200/R100 instead for anyone who wants a more linear, EQ-free sound.
Full JBL Stage 2 250B review and specifications →
| Bass Extension (-10dB) | 50Hz (measured, Erin's Audio Corner) |
|---|---|
| Bass Extension (-3dB) | 64Hz (measured, Erin's Audio Corner) |
| Dimensions | 12.6"H x 7.9"W x 9.5"D (321.0 x 200.0 x 241.0 mm) |
| Drivers | 1" anodized aluminum dome tweeter with HDI waveguide, 5.25" polycellulose woofer |
| Impedance | 6 ohms nominal, 3.3 ohms minimum (measured, Erin's Audio Corner) |
| Output Power | 75W RMS |
| Sensitivity | 86dB (2.83V/1m, measured by Erin's Audio Corner) |
| Weight | 12.3 lbs / 5.6 kg (12.4 lb) per pair |
| Woofer Cabinet | ported, rear |
As an eBay Partner, we may be compensated if you make a purchase.
- Links
- Reviews, Comparisons and Sound Samples
- Head-to-Head Comparisons
- JBL Stage 2 250B vs ELAC BS U5
- JBL Stage 2 250B vs Dynaudio Emit M10
- JBL Stage 2 250B vs Dynaudio X14
- JBL Stage 2 250B vs Pioneer SP-BS22-LR (Philharmonic AAM Mod)
- JBL Stage 2 250B vs Paradigm Monitor SE Atom
- JBL Stage 2 250B vs JBL L52 Classic
- JBL Stage 2 250B vs Sony SS-CS5 M2
- JBL Stage 2 250B vs ELAC Debut 2.0 B5.2
- See all 18 comparisons
KEF Q100: $550 Discontinued
Pros: 5.25” Uni-Q coaxial driver keeps the tweeter and woofer point-source aligned for consistent imaging. 86dB sensitivity is reasonably easy to drive.
Cons: CEA2034 spinorama shows broad, audible deviations from flat rather than narrow peaks: a lift from 700Hz-1.5kHz and again from 5kHz up, plus a cancellation notch around 1.4kHz from port/cabinet interaction. Bass sensitivity drops to about 80dB and impedance falls below 4 ohms in the bass, demanding a capable amplifier. The reviewer heard boomy, buzzing bass that improved somewhat with the port plugged, and could not recommend it, calling the famous reputation more about looks than sound. Discontinued.
Full KEF Q100 review and specifications →
| Bass Extension (-10dB) | 65Hz (measured, Audio Science Review) |
|---|---|
| Bass Extension (-3dB) | 85Hz (measured, Audio Science Review) |
| Dimensions | 11.8"H x 7.1"W x 10.7"D (300 x 180 x 272 mm) |
| Discontinued | Yes |
| Drivers | 5.25" Uni-Q aluminum coaxial driver, 1" aluminum dome tweeter |
| Frequency Response | 49Hz - 40kHz (+/-3dB) (Manufacturer specified) |
| Impedance | 8 ohms nominal |
| Sensitivity | 85dB (2.83V/1m, measured, Audio Science Review) |
| Weight | 13 lbs / 5.9 kg each |
| Woofer Cabinet | ported, rear |
As an eBay Partner, we may be compensated if you make a purchase.
- Reviews, Comparisons and Sound Samples
- Head-to-Head Comparisons