Which is precisely why JBL did away with the Loudspeaker Component Series more than twenty years ago. Nobody knew what to do with the drivers they were buying and it wasn't a profitable venture. There's no point in selling a $100 driver if you then need to follow up with $500 worth of customer support for it. JBL is privy to the application of these drivers as are the Pro end users.Originally Posted by Zilch
I presume you mean "too loud."
The answer is "No."
If you read and understand Rob's posts, you'll see that 10 - 15 dB of the compression driver's SPL capability is consumed in performing the requisite compensation to achieve the desired frequency response with constant directivity horns/waveguides....
My one experience with a Tractrix was that it didn't cut it in the VHF. You make one for 2435, and there are several members who would likely be pleased to measure it for you.
The Engebretson horn works for 1" drivers. It might also be worth scaling that design for the 1.5" exit 243x series.
Here is a round horn I turned for the 2435s, sort of tractrix like.
http://www.audioheritage.org/vbullet...28&#post140628
Even if I clean the wax out of my ears, I can't hear 15kHz as it is.
Well, we've got to keep perspective here, too. Kartsmart wants to build a two-way with 2435. Presumably, that means having a reasonably useable and uniform dispersion pattern across the spectrum, hence, constant directivity, I would think....
That is correct Zilch, at least the goal
O.K., Rob and I both like the PT-H1010, and I have the similar-response PT-Fs, as well.
Looks like I have most of the parts to build Rob's filter, so I'll do that and compare the results with all three.
I've already built a biased version of the Timbers filter:
http://audioheritage.org/vbulletin/s...808#post143808
My initial work was done with AM6212 filter, so I have those on hand, including a biased version.
Reading through this I have to ask what is the point? Surely you are going to get superior results using these fine drive units as intended?
Tell us what that means, Merlin.
In Pro, they were intended for use in Vertec HF clusters on narrow waveguides.
In Consumer, a similar equivalent is used in K2-S9800, three-way.
I'm no expert Zilch but it seems to me that in neither application are they "pushed", nor expected to cover more than half the audible frequency range. Doesn't it make sense to use something more suited to the top octave and beyond? Genuinely interested.
The advantages inherent in two-way designs are well known. With each advance in technology, like the availability of 2435 and 435Be, comes a re-assessment of what is possible, which tradeoffs are reasonable in accomplishing it, and which design approaches produce the optimal result.
See David Smith's sidebar ("2, 3, or 4 Way") on this subject here:
http://www.audioheritage.org/html/pr...bl/4430-35.htm
Hmm, I do wish Giskard would leave his posts up - sometimes they are an oasis of reason!
Zilch, I don't disagree with the advantages of two ways provided the right tools are available for the job. Certainly the 435al sounds rough as a badgers arse if it's left to run out to my uncultured ears - the 435be seems to fair slightly better. But for the best HF performance, certainly in my limited experience, I'd say JBL got it right when utilising the 045's. I look forward to the 476be -a major step up in every way.
What horn are you using? What filter?Well, let me go listen more closely, then.
[They're playin' in the other room....]
I'm using the 4338 horn at the moment and crossing over at 750hz with the digital filter in a Lyngdorf TDA2200. I'm applying no EQ so it's not really a fair comparison. I'm not clever enough to do my own passive filters!
I need to build up some spares, then, apparently....
There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote