Short answer: the Wharfedale Super Denton for better sound quality, the JBL Studio 530 for the lower price. The Wharfedale Super Denton ranks #11 of 56 bookshelf speakers at $1499. The JBL Studio 530 ranks #23 at $399, $1100 cheaper.
The case for the Wharfedale Super Denton: A 3-way design with a 1” soft dome tweeter, a 2” soft dome midrange offset to the side of a centered 6.5” woven Kevlar woofer - a more compact alternative to Wharfedale’s own Linton 85 with a similar overall character. The tradeoff: A mid-range scoop from about 200-800Hz and a separate upper-midrange scoop were both audible in direct ABX comparison against a reference-neutral speaker, giving aggressive-sounding material a more subdued character.
On the JBL Studio 530 side: CEA2034 spinorama shows a fairly flat on-axis response. Set against that: A peak around 1.4kHz is attributed to a tweeter resonance, and shows up as a distinct spike in harmonic distortion at that frequency along with a second resonance-driven bump around 2kHz.
Buy the Wharfedale Super Denton if sound quality matters more than the price. Buy the JBL Studio 530 if the price matters more than sound quality.
Specifications Side By Side
| Wharfedale Super Denton | JBL Studio 530 | |
|---|---|---|
| Price | $1499 | $399 Discontinued |
| Ranked | #11 of 56 in Medium Size Bookshelf Speakers | #23 of 56 in Medium Size Bookshelf Speakers |
| Drivers | 1" soft dome tweeter, 2" soft dome midrange, 6.5" woven Kevlar woofer | 5.25" (130mm) PolyPlas™ cone woofer with SFG magnet, 1" (25mm) compression driver with Teonex® diaphragm on Bi-Radial® horn |
| Sensitivity | 86.6dB (measured by Erin’s Audio Corner) | ~85dB (measured by Audio Science Review) |
| Woofer Cabinet | ported | ported |
| Dimensions | 14.2"H x 9.7"W x 10.8"D (360 x 246 x 275 mm) | 18.4"H x 8.4"W x 8.7"D (467 x 214 x 222 mm) |
| Weight | 20.3 lbs / 9.2 kg (20.2 lbs) each | 17 lbs / 7.7 kg each |
| Impedance | 6 ohms nominal, 3 ohms minimum (measured, Erin’s Audio Corner) | 6 ohms nominal (4 ohms minimum, measured by Audio Science Review) |
| Frequency Response | 52Hz - 20kHz (±3dB, manufacturer specified); -6dB to 40Hz | - |
| Bass Extension (-3dB) | 61Hz (measured, Erin’s Audio Corner) | 88Hz (measured, Audio Science Review) |
| Bass Extension (-10dB) | 41Hz (measured, Erin’s Audio Corner) | 65Hz (measured, Audio Science Review) |
| Crossover Frequency | 940Hz, 4.6kHz | 1.5kHz |
| Discontinued | - | Yes |
Related Speaker Comparisons
More useful head-to-heads from the same speaker class:
- KEF LS50 Meta vs Boston Acoustics A25
- Revel M105 vs Klipsch RP-500M II
- KEF LS50 Meta vs ELAC Debut 2.0 B5.2
- Revel M105 vs JBL Studio 530
- JBL Studio 530 vs Dynaudio X14
The Two Speakers In Full
Wharfedale Super Denton: $1499 Crutchfield
Pros: A 3-way design with a 1” soft dome tweeter, a 2” soft dome midrange offset to the side of a centered 6.5” woven Kevlar woofer - a more compact alternative to Wharfedale’s own Linton 85 with a similar overall character. Measured sensitivity around 86.6-87dB with on-axis linearity within about ±3dB. No cabinet or box resonances turned up in impedance testing, and there are no spike feet to install. Harmonic distortion looks good at both 86dB and 96dB, with about 20dB of usable dynamic range up to 96dB before compression starts to affect the midrange more noticeably near 102dB. Because bass rolls off starting around 60Hz, placing it closer to a wall (about 1-2 feet) than usual boosts low-end punch without the midbass bloat a deeper-extending speaker would get from the same placement. In the reviewer’s own comparison, its estimated in-room response actually measured more linear than the pricier Linton 85’s, despite being a bit less linear on-axis.
Cons: A mid-range scoop from about 200-800Hz and a separate upper-midrange scoop were both audible in direct ABX comparison against a reference-neutral speaker, giving aggressive-sounding material a more subdued character. A resonance around 660-700Hz shows up in measurement, though the reviewer couldn’t reliably hear it with real music in his own blind-ish A/B testing. The offset tweeter-and-midrange layout makes horizontal off-axis response noticeably asymmetric - response drops as much as 8dB more to one side than the other at wider angles - so the reviewer recommends aiming the speakers directly at the listener (not toed out, which loses upper treble) and suggests sidewall absorption to control uneven reflections. Must be listened to with the grille on - measurements are noticeably worse with it off (wider 2-4kHz dip, extra treble bump). Horizontal soundstage width felt a bit narrower than the reviewer personally prefers, likely related to the same offset driver layout. Multitone distortion gets high in the midrange at 96dB/1m, a concern mainly in larger rooms where you’d need to play louder.
Full Wharfedale Super Denton review and specifications →
| Bass Extension (-10dB) | 41Hz (measured, Erin's Audio Corner) |
|---|---|
| Bass Extension (-3dB) | 61Hz (measured, Erin's Audio Corner) |
| Crossover Frequency | 940Hz, 4.6kHz |
| Dimensions | 14.2"H x 9.7"W x 10.8"D (360 x 246 x 275 mm) |
| Drivers | 1" soft dome tweeter, 2" soft dome midrange, 6.5" woven Kevlar woofer |
| Frequency Response | 52Hz - 20kHz (±3dB, manufacturer specified); -6dB to 40Hz |
| Impedance | 6 ohms nominal, 3 ohms minimum (measured, Erin's Audio Corner) |
| Sensitivity | 86.6dB (measured by Erin's Audio Corner) |
| Weight | 20.3 lbs / 9.2 kg (20.2 lbs) each |
| Woofer Cabinet | ported |
As an eBay Partner, we may be compensated if you make a purchase.
- Links
- Reviews, Comparisons and Sound Samples
- Head-to-Head Comparisons
- Wharfedale Super Denton vs Klipsch RP-500M II
- Wharfedale Super Denton vs Wharfedale Diamond 12.1
- Wharfedale Super Denton vs Revel M105
- Wharfedale Super Denton vs Arendal 1961 Monitor
- Wharfedale Super Denton vs KEF Q150
- Wharfedale Super Denton vs KEF LS50 Meta
- Wharfedale Super Denton vs Ascend Sierra 1 v2
- Wharfedale Super Denton vs Wharfedale Diamond 220
- See all 15 comparisons
JBL Studio 530: $399 Discontinued
Pros: CEA2034 spinorama shows a fairly flat on-axis response. Predicted in-room response is very smooth aside from the high-frequency roll-off.
Cons: A peak around 1.4kHz is attributed to a tweeter resonance, and shows up as a distinct spike in harmonic distortion at that frequency along with a second resonance-driven bump around 2kHz. Response rolls off in the high frequencies and the tuning is a bit bass-shy overall. Cumulative spectral decay (waterfall) shows the same 1kHz-region resonances lingering in time. Discontinued.
Full JBL Studio 530 review and specifications →
| Bass Extension (-10dB) | 65Hz (measured, Audio Science Review) |
|---|---|
| Bass Extension (-3dB) | 88Hz (measured, Audio Science Review) |
| Crossover Frequency | 1.5kHz |
| Dimensions | 18.4"H x 8.4"W x 8.7"D (467 x 214 x 222 mm) |
| Discontinued | Yes |
| Drivers | 5.25" (130mm) PolyPlas™ cone woofer with SFG magnet, 1" (25mm) compression driver with Teonex® diaphragm on Bi-Radial® horn |
| Impedance | 6 ohms nominal (4 ohms minimum, measured by Audio Science Review) |
| Sensitivity | ~85dB (measured by Audio Science Review) |
| Weight | 17 lbs / 7.7 kg each |
| Woofer Cabinet | ported |
As an eBay Partner, we may be compensated if you make a purchase.
- Links
- Reviews, Comparisons and Sound Samples
- Head-to-Head Comparisons
- JBL Studio 530 vs ELAC Debut 2.0 B5.2
- JBL Studio 530 vs Boston Acoustics A25
- JBL Studio 530 vs Sony SS-CS5 M2
- JBL Studio 530 vs Paradigm Monitor SE Atom
- JBL Studio 530 vs Wharfedale Diamond 220
- JBL Studio 530 vs Dynaudio Emit M10
- JBL Studio 530 vs KEF Q150
- JBL Studio 530 vs ELAC BS U5
- See all 19 comparisons