PDA

View Full Version : Ashly XR1001 vs JBL M552



Jakob
06-25-2008, 08:42 AM
Hi!

Has anyone done a comparison between the two? I use the M552 as a sub x-over and thinks it does that job fine, but wasn't overly excited when I tried it with my ME150's and 2435 drivers with a x-over point of 800-1000hz. Is the Ashly better sounding?


Regards: Jakob

hjames
06-25-2008, 09:13 AM
Hi!

Has anyone done a comparison between the two? I use the M552 as a sub x-over and thinks it does that job fine, but wasn't overly excited when I tried it with my ME150's and 2435 drivers with a x-over point of 800-1000hz. Is the Ashly better sounding?


Regards: Jakob

I have used both when working with a biamp system and a crossover of approx 300Hz for my 2235s and 2122s in my 4341 systems. For me, the Ashley sounded better, and has the ability to change the slope shape at the crossover point ...
But thats not exactly the question you asked ...:o:

grumpy
06-25-2008, 10:52 AM
Hi Jakob,

Is the M552 the only device providing the crossover function?
If so, it might be that no generic crossover will provide satisfactory listening.
If I recall correctly, there was a fairly well worked up passive crossover for
the 435Be/H9800 here somewhere... Sorry if I may have missed details in
other threads, regarding your setup. -grumpy

Jakob
06-25-2008, 04:51 PM
Yes, sorry, I forgot to mention that. I use G.T's compensation circuit for the 2435's so I guess they should sound just fine. I'm interested in trying out the Ashly since they are reasonably priced, but no idea in doing that if it's no step up compared to the M552. I thought the M552 sounded dull and lifeless with limited dynamics. Maybe I should just go all in and buy the Marchand all-tubed XM26?

grumpy
06-25-2008, 07:19 PM
I've played with the M553 and did not have the same experience, but
our sensitivities could be different. Has consideration been given to the
combined 24dB/oct slope of the M552 when added to the compensation
network (i.e., any low freq rolloff components left out)? Have you considered
a full passive network, perhaps the LF portion analogous to the 3100 network?
(likely less $$$ than a full-on Marchand)

Jakob
06-26-2008, 03:43 AM
Thank You Grumpy for your replies!
I think both G.T and later Zilch used 24dB/oct filters in their work with the comp. circuit for the 2435. When listening the sound seems to be linear over the frequency spectra, and the imaging is great. However, compared to my all passive (using n333 filters) setup with E145, 2450 and 2405 the ME150 and 2435 combo seems lifeless and grey. So far I blame the crossover, 'cause I think if they are setup properly, these drivers should do as good a job as the others.

Just like You suggest I've considered going fully passive and if so use the LF part of the S3100. The problem is the HF part. Should I use the comp. circuit together with an ordinary 12 or 18 dB/oct crossover? There isn't a JBL 2435 passive filter I just can rip, and I'm not that good in developing my own filters...:o: Any suggestions? Maybe use a passive for the LF and an active + comp. circuit for the HF?

Earl K
06-26-2008, 06:19 AM
Hi Jakob,


Just like You suggest I've considered going fully passive and if so use the LF part of the S3100. The problem is the HF part. Should I use the comp. circuit together with an ordinary 12 or 18 dB/oct crossover? There isn't a JBL 2435 passive filter I just can rip, and I'm not that good in developing my own filters... Any suggestions? Maybe use a passive for the LF and an active + comp. circuit for the HF?

Some Thoughts :

- I'd suggest you keep a 24 db per octave electronic crossover on the woofer .

- Redesign GTs' "Key Filter" to include a 2 pole bump filter set to hipass at around 750 hz ( it first needs to buttress up the lower response of the 2435 on the H9800 before starting its LF roll-off ) .

- The Hipass Amp ( when Biamped ) only needs a simple in line filter ( capacitor ) whos' F3 is set 2 octaves below the chosen crossover point ( 150 to 200 hz is good ) . This approach has the advantage of one not listening to any extra electronics in the single chain . The disadvantage ? One needs to balance the horn circuit with a volume knob on the horn amp ( this must be present ) . Personally, I'd replace any amp ( without attenuators ) before giving up on this approach .



-Since you admit to not being able to develop a new HP filter more to your liking, I suggest you hire someone who can .

- The candidates need to have those components on hand with enough knowledge ( & motivation ) to proceed to a successfull conclusion . These prerequisites drastically limit the field of candidates to around three from what I see ( & I'm not one of them ).

- If after a complete redesign such as I'm suggesting ( & you are biamping in the method like I recommend ) & things are still a bit lifeless for you / then have the filter designer lessen the overall attenuation on GTs' filter in 1.5 db increments / until you hear something a bit less smoothed sounding .

http://audioheritage.csdco.com/vbulletin/attachment.php?attachmentid=22283&stc=1&d=1169842664

- ( There's no shame in admitting that you prefer to listen to a horn-driver a little less throttled back ) .
- For reference ; look at Zilches' voltage drives for this filter / at 20K it already has @ 6 db of attenuation built into it . That's quite drastic & should be audible .
- Myself ? I prefer a HF compensation filter ( for my Altec 288s ) that isn't attenuating much of anything after 10 or 12K . "Attenuation" also has a signature sound .

:)

4313B
06-26-2008, 06:44 AM
When listening the sound seems to be linear over the frequency spectra, and the imaging is great. However, compared to my all passive (using n333 filters) setup with E145, 2450 and 2405 the ME150 and 2435 combo seems lifeless and grey. So far I blame the crossover, 'cause I think if they are setup properly, these drivers should do as good a job as the others.Greg uses a charge-coupled DX-1 which is substantially better than either the JBL M552 or Ashly. I think I still have the voltage drives for the H4338 / 435BE and H4338 / 476BE active filters on an old hard drive. I'll have to look in a couple weeks when I have time (that computer is out of service right now).

Yes, sorry, I forgot to mention that. I use G.T's compensation circuit for the 2435's so I guess they should sound just fine.The circuit was designed specifically for the H4338 and 435BE. I posted it for Zilch to play around with because I was getting tired of watching him grope around in the dark post after post after post. You may need to play around with it as well to adapt it to your personal situation. If I remember correctly, there are actually several compensation examples available for study. And if I remember correctly the H4338 / 476BE compensation circuit is completely different. I think some of them use large shunt capacitors in the 100 to 200 uF range and that usually means using N.P.E.'s. Alot of this tweaking is simply beyond what most people want to dink with.

hjames
06-26-2008, 06:57 AM
Greg uses a charge-coupled DX-1 which is substantially better than either the JBL M552 or Ashly. I think I still have the voltage drives for the H4338 / 435BE and H4338 / 476BE active filters on an old hard drive. I'll have to look in a couple weeks when I have time (that computer is out of service right now).

I gather the CC DX-1 is a rarified bird ...

4313B
06-26-2008, 07:05 AM
I gather the CC DX-1 is a rarified bird ...Yeah, especially since some bright bulb in Singapore saw fit to dump the one hundred and eighty DX-1's still in stock into the harbor for use as an artifical reef. Both Paul and Greg were nearly as horrified as I was to discover that previously unknown tidbit of information. We were all set to buy a nice quantity of DX-1's at a great price Paul graciously arranged. Numerous forum members had already sent in their money and the big check was already made out to JBL.

I can't remember who it was who actually designed the filters. I think it was the Levinson team.

The DX-1 is nowhere near as versatile as the M552 or Ashly out of the box however. One actually has to design and build their own custom crossover cards.

Robh3606
06-26-2008, 07:34 AM
I use G.T's compensation circuit for the 2435's so I guess they should sound just fine.

Maybe not out of the box it depends on the horn. What horn are you using?? If it's the 9800 copies I would build up a 9800 crossover. At least use it as a baseline. You would have to modify it for 2 way use.

Rob:)

Earl K
06-27-2008, 06:04 AM
Hi Jakob,

Some additional thoughts about ( the dull sound that you experience );

- If you haven't already, you need to check out the relative health ( specification ) of your 2435h drivers ( I'm assuming you bought them on eBay from that Ca seller " Hector " ) . If you can't do this yourself, you'll need to hire someone to do it for you ( maybe Guido , for instance ) .

- There's a reason these 2435s are sold out JBLs' back-door / & that's because they are "factory seconds" that don't meet JBLs' "QC ( Quality Control ) standards" . I don't have any 2435s here , so I don't really know what it would take to bring them back into spec .. A complete cleaning of the gap ( with new ferrofluid installed ) would be a good first step .

- I own many 2431H drivers ( also purchased from Hector ) / & from my perspective, they all need new diaphragms to matchup to the glowing specs. that I've seen published here at LHF. Most have ferrofluid splattered about the inside ( including up under the dome ) indicating they were either "overdriven ( for the weight of the fluid )" / or / the fluid weight that JBL chose was a bit light for the sound reiforcement application ( they were designed for ) .
- A carefull cleaning of the gap & the diaphragm has improved the response of most of the drivers / though / I intend to purchase replacement daphragms before our Cdn dollar sinks back to 80 USD.

- I'd recommend checking the drivers before spending money on other crossovers ( though a better crossover than the 552 is still recommended ) .

<> :)

ps ;

- there's no free lunch when buying these "eBay specials" .

- also, custom designing HF contour filters for compression drivers that don't meet spec. / is well, pointless .

4313B
06-27-2008, 06:14 AM
- there's no free lunch when buying these "eBay specials" .That's a fact.

boputnam
06-27-2008, 08:45 AM
I thought the M552 sounded dull and lifeless with limited dynamics. Maybe I should just go all in and buy the Marchand all-tubed XM26?Or maybe a Bryston...


- I'd suggest you keep a 24 db per octave electronic crossover on the woofer.Second.

Mr. Widget
06-27-2008, 09:22 AM
- I'd recommend checking the drivers before spending money on other crossovers ( though a better crossover than the 552 is still recommended ) .
Yes, yes, yes!

As I read your post Jakob, my first thought was check your 2435s. Yes, many people have bought secondhand examples of them and have loved them, but most people here on the forum have no idea what they are actually supposed to sound like.

About three years ago Zilch and I measured a pile of JBL's 3" diaphragmed drivers on several horns. At that time we discovered that his pair of eBay 2435s measured quite differently from each other. This caused us to suspect them and Zilch sent them back to JBL for servicing. When they retuned they matched each other nicely and also closely matched a sample 435Be. If interested you can slog through this old thread:

http://www.audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=6050

I think the driver will be the cause of this lifelessness. As for the M552, I would seriously consider an upgrade here as well, but I am not sure it is entirely to blame. Most of the JBL crossovers I have heard have sounded hard and metallic, but I am not sure that dull and lifeless would be my first impression. (I am not including the DX-1. It is a very different animal than the typical pro-audio crossover.)


Widget

Jakob
06-28-2008, 08:27 AM
I would like to begin and thank all of You for taking time and helping me with this, so: thanks a million!

Earl and Widget: Very good points! I remember looking at those measurements and how many of the drivers weren't up to specs. I will let a friend of mine who is a certified JBL repairguy have a look at them. Before this, I used the ME150's together with my 2450's and 2405 in a passive setup, and the ME150 doesn't sound as good in the new setup. That is why I still think the M552 is the source of evil ;) . To be more precise it was like someone pulled down a curtain in front of the speakers. The dynamics, realism and timbre disappeared.


Rob: I think You gave a good advice: to look into a 9800 network and try to remake it into a 2-way. But it isn't easy and I haven't got a clue where to begin :o:. My friend the repairguy can fix any driver but isn't a crossover constructor. I guess I have some studying to do!

I'm beginning to understand how lucky I was when I used the N333 network with drivers and horns it were not designed for and got very good results (well I thought they sonded nice, they probably measured like a bose from hell :D). Had a thought that this would be even easier but I guess I've learned that there is a lot more to building speakers than throw together some drivers and connect them to a network. Greg Timbers and all the other constructers at JBL have my deepest respect. At least, THEY know what they are doing ;)

Would using the NS3100 be a complete disaster? I guess the 2435 is far from the 2426 specswise. Guido gave me the advice to use the NS3100 for the LF and build something like the 4430 for the HF. A bit puzzled about that since they cross their drivers at different frequencies, 750 vs 1000Hz. If You read this Guido, would You mind explaining a bit more?



Thanks all!

Earl K
06-28-2008, 02:42 PM
Hi Jakob,

(i) I'm glad you didn't interpret all my words as a scolding for buying used 2435s . ;)

(ii) Also, from my perspective, you've now turned the conversation back to ;
" How to successfully implement the ME150H within a tuned box ? "

- You apparently believe the problem is just the M552 ( giving dull , lifeless performance vs your passive setup ). I believe the problem can also be blamed as much on certain enclosure sizes ( & the tunings ) .
-What's the current box tuning ( & size ) that you are using ?

- I'd suggest that you look to the box sizes used in the 4344mkII or the S3100 for some inspiration .
- If need be, get in touch with current owners of these 2 systems to get some accurate inside dimensions ( to approximate how many litres the woofer prefers to "see" so that it'll recreate decent bass ) .

- Didn't you comment sometime within the last few months that you thought a tube amp on this woofer really helped it come alive ? ( or was that someone else ? )
- No matter , that approach makes some sense, since in my experience this woofer is electrically, very "tight".
- In other words it needs a special system alignment to help it "get the bass out " . That overt tightness can be "loosened up" either electrically ( such as with an amp with low damping characteristics / or / mechanically through either the use of oversize boxes or even ( heaven forbid ) a passive radiator .
- The addition of a second ME150H tuned ( a la the Everest II & 4435 ) as a helper woofer ( I have to imagine ) will have its advocates .


:)

ps ; I still recommend that you get a better crossover than the M552 for the bass frequencies in your two way setup .

Earl K
06-30-2008, 10:36 AM
Hi Jakob


Guido gave me the advice to use the NS3100 for the LF and build something like the 4430 for the HF. A bit puzzled about that since they cross their drivers at different frequencies, 750 vs 1000Hz. If You read this Guido, would You mind explaining a bit more?

- I have to imagine that Guido was speaking "figuratively" .
- ie; Meaning ? Have yourself designed, a hipass section that's inspired by some of the ideas found within the 4430 network .
- I wouldn't just duplicate the N3134 , part for part, value for value and marry it to the N3100 ) lowpass section and expect that to work .


Would using the NS3100 be a complete disaster?

- Seems to me that it would be a waste of money to build it , especially if you can't measure it's performance .


I guess the 2435 is far from the 2426 specswise.

- All the response plots I've seen say it's different enough ( I don't actually own any 2435s ) .
- The H3100 is different enough from the H9800 that it'll require different HF compensation, as well as different notch filters to smooth things out .

- I suspect that an effective custom HiPass network will need to borrow a bunch of design ideas from all of the following networks ;
N3134 ( 4430 ) , N3100mkII ( but not the original N3100 ), N9800, and maybe the N66000 .

- I've done just ( as an "on-the-benchmockup" ) with a single 2431H mated to a bunch of different horn flares ( unfortunately, not one of the horns used resemble the H9800 / so my notch filters aren't very relevant or useful to others ) .

:)

Jakob
07-02-2008, 03:33 AM
So, I guess my best (easiest) option is to get sure my 2435's are up to specs and use them with a good active crossover with G.T keyfilter and maybe modify the keyfilters to acompany the H9800 better.

Sorry Earl, I put you on the wrong track: I'm very pleased with the ME150's performance. I have used them in different setups but always in the same 3 cubic feet boxes. Have heard of people saying they lack low end, but I'm a bass junkie and I don't miss a thing.

Thanks: Jakob

pos
02-19-2009, 05:28 AM
Hi Jakob

How is your project going on?
Did you refurbished your 2435s?

frank23
07-21-2009, 12:59 AM
I started playing with my 2435's some weeks / months ago trying out different setups just for trying out.

Btw., I have read the whole quick & dirty 4430 thread and all about the 2435 etc.

But yesterday evening I found out that the 2435 / pt-h1010 combination seems to sound better on the m552 2380 eq setting than on the 2360 eq setting. Pity me as I have just dismantled my top source living room active setup so I can now only try this in the garage.

I have made a setup using the 2235 in the 4507 cabinet with the 2435 / pt-h1010 on top and having the m552 in the 2380 eq setting. It seems to sound ok. But you have to adjust the levels and crossover frequency to the dB.

But as I have posted elsewhere I find the JBL are very sensitive to source and cables so a lot of the system not sounding nice could have to do with previous components in your chain. I think the m552 in itself is no bad device as it still allows me to clearly hear the difference between two sets of top interconnects and is no big negative factor by itself.

Frank

ps. I know the specs in the manual about the different curves, but does someone know where to find the 2360 and 2380 eq curves of the m552 or m553 in a graph?

Zilch
07-24-2009, 08:58 PM
ps. I know the specs in the manual about the different curves, but does someone know where to find the 2360 and 2380 eq curves of the m552 or m553 in a graph?Only place I ever saw them was in measured voltage drives from FFBREQ vs. CCBREQ cards for 5235 crossovers. I may have measured them on M552/3 and posted those results here when I was trying them out, some thread, somewhere in this forum.

Regarding the Timbers "Key" filter, I did tweak it for H9800 and posted results with both the real thing and Widget's clone. Leads to that information may be found in John W's H9800 build thread, and more recently, one where I compared measurement results on various PT waveguides to find the optimum for PT-H95HF....

http://www.audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=14933

http://www.audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=24291

http://www.audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=135168&#post135168

http://www.audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=134899&#post134899

BAH, found them all!

Never got my 1.2 kHz CCBREQ cards built, tho.... :crying:

frank23
07-25-2009, 12:34 PM
thanks, there is allways more info to find about the Q&D 4430 and the 2435 on this forum

out of curiosity, what does FFBREQ and CCBREQ stand for?

Zilch
07-25-2009, 04:37 PM
out of curiosity, what does FFBREQ and CCBREQ stand for?80 Series is "Flat Front BiRadial," and 60 Series, "Constant Coverage BiRadial."

"EQ" is, uhmm, EQ.... ;)