Increasing HF attenuation on S3100 MKII network

I'm no expert but to my untrained eye, other than reducing the overall SPL I can't really see a difference in those sweeps.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Earl K

Hi Ian,

Here are the two different padding scenarios illustrated by XSim ( using real measurements and impedance files ).

First up is the single resistor located at the HF input terminal.

https://www.audioheritage.org/vbulle...1&d=1707697294

Next pic shows attenuated curves using full LPads located before the HF crossover section.

https://www.audioheritage.org/vbulle...1&d=1707697362

Either approach to padding ( at that location ) has its merits ( & drawbacks ).
- Ultimately, the ears need to decide.

To be clear, I have no dog in this race.

In fact, I would simply EQ the Low-end and call it a day ( as has already been suggested ).

:)

---

Yes l can see the horn in the second attachment is pulled down in more a linear leveller from 1-4 khertz than the first attachment. The former has a soft tilt from 1-4 khertz

Thanks Earl.

Kelossus,

The fixed pad approach might be work looking at when time permits because it’s an overall reduction of the horn output.

This can be seen by reference to the left side db scale when comparing the purple and the pink curves.

Chiming in,I had the S3100 and I do understand why Kelossus wanted to pad the horn. Unfortunately that would muddle up the crossover region and caused the bass to be indistinct. The 1dB is JBL’s practice for fine adjustment only, and the speakers have been tuned to be correct at the crossover region. I would instead suggest experimenting with RC circuit to get a more pleasing slope for the horn.

Thank you

We will look at this more closely.

I'm thinking that this may be the better slope. You loose as much at the top end reducing fatigue, while retaining the detail through the upper midrange.

https://www.audioheritage.org/vbulle...1&d=1707697294

Hi Todd,

I am sure your thoughtful and generous contribution will be much appreciated.