Refoam answer from OC speaker repair (over/under)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 4313B

'Street cred'!? Good grief... :rotfl:

I think you might want to read over your first post, determine the kind of message it might be sending and then ask a moderator to whack the whole thread... I mean really, what was the point? All we know is that you have a pair of effed up LE8's and that you're trying to make the best of it. Start a bad refoam support group I guess. :dont-know

---

What's unclear? It clearly states that they were supposed to be on the back, but that for my usage, it's not going to mess up the alignment. So, to my way of thinking, while the foam location isn't ideal, it certainly doesn't invalidate the quality or performance of the driver. Effed up to me means that it looks bad or interferes with performance, neither of which are true here. You, however, chose to put statements on me that were not there.

None of us really cares where you glue your foam just so long as you don't try and dump it on us as original or desirable. :) We don't pay JBL prices for crap jobs. :)

Did I try and dump anything on anybody here? And if I'd done the foam it wouldn't be a crap job. I'm an experienced techie which is why I wanted LE8Ts in the first place, because I have some knowledge of speaker motors and wanted the unique underhung motor they offer. I did already point out that I relocated foams on 122As to be in-line with original spec. I'm not willing to take that step with these, given their age, value, and delicacy, until necessary, at which point, I'll probably spring for a full-on recone if I retain these as long as I expect, given the performance.

Or don't; Whatever... :rotfl: We're all familiar with the "it's good enough" attitude. :yes:

Why would you assume that to be my attitude? If it were, I wouldn't have sought out LE8Ts, I would have used any of the many drivers within my collection. But I am a perfectionist, insofar as my speaker building is concerned. Not so much in terms of preserving originality. The value for me is mostly in the motor. The performance of the 123A is why I got 4311s and sold the mids (one tweeter was fried, I gave the other, and the very rough cabinets to a forumite).

Note how much personal rancor is reflected in your posts. My ONLY point was that the performance will be largely unaffected, but you've taken it to mean that I'm okay with shoddy workmanship, am trying to dump these here, and I take issue with that. I don't appreciate people attributing statements and attitudes to me that are untrue.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rdgrimes

I'd be betting that OC did call the owner of the drivers and got his OK to front mount the surrounds. That's been my experience with them. I've also had this conversation with them and was told that they sometimes do front-mount especially when the cone has tears or issues on the edge that one might want to cover up, or with specific drivers where it's closer to spec. But in any case, they've always done what was asked of them and I will continue to use them. Getting rabid over what is "to spec" and what isn't is always a bit silly. As a wise person once said: a difference that doesn't make a difference is no difference. Enjoy your fine drivers. ;)

---

I very much will enjoy my fine drivers, thank you! The above is essentially my attitude too. I wasn't there when the foams were re-done, and they may have gotten approval and/or had blemishes to cover. In any case, I was glad that my research and discussion turned up no performance compromise due to the relocation, and wanted to share that with other like-minded folks. Certainly the refoam was well-done assuming that the top mount wasn't just a lazy error.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by badman

Note how much personal rancor is reflected in your posts.

---

No. I did note your second post though. Earl got it right. You didn't.

I agree with rdgrimes, go enjoy your drivers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by badman

Foam on top is not original to be sure, but to my way of thinking, still very desirable. The big motors, excellent build quality, etc, are still present, it's just not 'original' from a collectors standpoint.

---

Those will never be origanal from any standpoint.

:duck:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 4313B

No. I did note your second post though. Earl got it right. You didn't.

I agree with rdgrimes, go enjoy your drivers.

---

So your first post wasn't meant to be sarcastic? That's what snarky means. Odd that both I and JBL Canuck would interpret it that way, if not. And if not, what was the meaning? You obviously were attempting to make a point about my posting being irrelevant, and I called you on it.

Then you went on to accuse me of not caring about quality, attempting to dump my crap on the forumites, and doing a crap job, none of which are even remotely near to true, or to what I said. But then, you weren't paying attention. If you were you would have seen- they're not LE8T-H, but LE8T. And that I didn't do the foam job, which was REALLY clear from the get-go.

I haven't seen anyone talk about what influence mounting the surround over or under has other than "that's original" or "that's not stock", and thought some people who seek out vintage JBL for sound quality and not collectibility might like to know that it doesnt' really hurt things from a performance standpoint.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by John

Those will never be origanal from any standpoint.

:duck:

---

Careful with those dirty words! :p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by badman

So your first post... <snip> ...from a performance standpoint.

---

One last time... #18 #7

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 4313B

One last time... #18 #7

---

Funny how that's the first time #7 has shown up. And, perhaps with Klippel analysis available now but not in 1960, the top is the better location to mount it? I've seen some cases referenced where JBL supposedly said that relocating was better for performance. I don't know if that's the case here, but it certainly isn't a large effect either way.

And, your sarcasm began with your first post, followed up with a bunch of rudeness. Lose the attitude, you've been here long enough to be civil.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by badman

Funny how that's the first time #7 has shown up. And, perhaps with Klippel analysis available now but not in 1960, the top is the better location to mount it? I've seen some cases referenced where JBL supposedly said that relocating was better for performance. I don't know if that's the case here, but it certainly isn't a large effect either way.

And, your sarcasm began with your first post, followed up with a bunch of rudeness. Lose the attitude, you've been here long enough to be civil.

---

You're now entering troll territory... drop it. I don't have time to get into some inane protracted conversation with you explaining everything that I mean in lurid detail, or why I post what I post. This topic is a very simple topic and I'm pretty confident most people got the gist of it.

http://www.audioheritage.org/vbullet...ad.php?t=18586

I don't understand the arguments that keep coming up about refoaming. These arguments are pure hard-headed stupidity.

Start your own forum on how you'll make it better. There is no other way to do it if you come here to participate.....period.

The spirit of Lansing Heritage...like any other item that deserves to be well kept and maintained...is to do it as the original was done, unless there is a factory specified change in it's design.

Is that so effing hard to understand?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by badman

And, your sarcasm began with your first post....

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 4313B

You're now entering troll territory...

---

Both of you are beginning to making this a personal issue. Frankly the points on both sides have been made and are not really interesting enough to continue the dialog so I am going to close this thread.


Widget