E2 clone

[Ian Mackenzie]

I have been pondering for a while on a new speaker project.

Having bashed the idea of a two way there are some benefits.

They can be quite sensitive and usable on a range of amps.

A two way is also not so demanding of less than perfect recordings and can be easier to listen to.

So my idea stems from looking at some of the JBL 2532-3 1.5 inch horns and using the 2435 be driver as the horn/driver.

For woofers I was looking at 15 inch cores reconed as 2234's or similar.

There are other variations using eighteensound horns and drivers and even a Le leach horn. Other woofers might include GPA 416 drivers.

This should provide some interesting discussion.

Ian

[subwoof]

I have four PA cabinets that use the 2352 / 2450SL with the 2226H and they are the best vocal / playback set of cabs that I have used for PA in a long while. essentially a 4726A with lighter driver and bigger horn.

Simple 24db LW at 800 with a small delay and CD / box eq and these work for any project - bar none.

I did a quick compare with a 2435BE that has been coated and really did not hear a lot of difference but I felt the larger coil and somewhat affordable diaphram was better suited for outdoor / PA use.

In the storage room I have (4) 2225 cores ( to make 2234 or 35 ), a pair of 4648 cabs and 2 more horns. I was thinking about a HT stack using the 2435BE for the rental house I own since I can bolt the cabs to the floor and hide the processing in the basement.

Another thought was to make a set of cabs that are similar to the original everest and make a set of fiberglas horn inserts for directional but time is in such short supply I leave those thoughts for beer time.

:cheers:

sub

BTW - the 235X family is 1.5 - the altec stuff is 1.4

[4313B]

Having bashed the idea of a two way there are some benefits.The easiest combination is the LE14H-x with the 2435/435Be on a nice horn or waveguide. It sounds really nice and the LE14H-x has the "best" bandwidth of the newer woofers.

Greg's combination of 1200FE-8 and 476Be/H4338 is fantastic but the 1200FE doesn't go as low as the LE14H-x so alot of people would probably prefer subs as well.

I ended up going with the 1500AL and 476Be/H4338 in one pair and dual 1200FE-12's and 435Be/waveguide in another pair. I run the dual 1200FE-12's ala 4435 and Everest II and they are really killer. I like them better run that way instead of "K2-S5800 mode". I do not like the MTM arrangement and ended up with an MMT arrangement.


For woofers I was looking at 15 inch cores reconed as 2234's or similar.The 2234H's in 4435 or Everest II mode are really nice. The ME150 and 1500Fe should be as well.

A two way is also not so demanding of less than perfect recordings and can be easier to listen to.Yeah... Greg and I listened to a CD or two that were less than "ideal" and we both were really surprised at how damn good they sounded on his system. It was a shock. Honestly, most systems just don't sound all that appealing to me. It seems alot of people like really bright, forward, grating sounds that leave me weary of it all.

[grumpy]

Nice thread. Once I get Doc Mark to haul away those 4333 cabs, I might have some
room to work on this again :D

http://www.audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=12485

There's also some related DIY horn work going on that I hope to see here soon.

[4313B]

Those are some pretty large horns.

And I thought the H4338 was a PITA... :rotfl:

[grumpy]

yeah... that was at least part of why that exercise stalled. Acceptable visual
integration will require some creativity (or redefinition of "acceptable") :)

[4313B]

That's why I dumped the mini E2 design with the dual 1200FE-12's. I ended up with a very wide and shallow box to get the requisite volume while fitting in the H4338. To make the box appropriately deep I ended up with a really goofy visual design with a ton of useless volume and it had to go. Dan Ashcraft I am not. :rotfl:

I'm really not liking the Project May design either. I am not at all a fan of MTM's. But, it will end up as designed by the design team and that'll be that. It's basically an E2 gone MTM as opposed to the original Project of a K2-S9800 gone MTM. :barf: Don can run it as a true MTM or as a vertical E2, whichever he prefers.

[Ian Mackenzie]

Thankyou everyone,

There is some very nice information here.....a lot to think about!

I guess I should get out the tape measure out over the weekend and see what will fit before I get too ahead of myself.....but it sure makes fun reading

Edit. I have a bit over 1 metre..39 inches each side . The simpler route may be the more sensible one initially as offered by 4313B

[Ian Mackenzie]

Hi Grumpy,

Can you tell use more about your project? Pics, Impressions?

I figured the horn was agood place to start in terms of sorting out what I am planning to do.

I have been reading up on the 2352 from the JBL data and it look interesting.

Its is a big beast though. However having said that is would seem any CD bi radial doing 90 H x 30-40 V is going to be of those general proporitons.

In respect of the idea of a clone I have been simply looking at phyically similar horns without getting too bogged down in technical stuff.

There appear few side options with that type of pattern, the JBL 2353 mention in Grumpy's link , the DD CFD 1.5-90X Pro and maybe the Emilar Emilar MH-500. There are also some other diy horn developments. They are both in the 21 W, 14 H , 9 D sort of size. That is serious WAF control territory..LOL

CFD 1.5-90X Pro
http://www.ddshorns.com/catalog.php?page=CFD1590XPro.

CFD 1.5-110 Pro
http://www.ddshorns.com/catalog.php?page=CFD15110Pro



Then there are seriously large non CD horns like the Le leach at are a in the order of 400-500 mm in diameter but they seem to beam somewhat at higher frequencies. I susepct users are so engrossed by the size and their midrange prowess that the HF beaming is secondary consideration or they use teired horns for different ranges.
http://www.azurahorn.com/pages/jbl2420%20on%20340%20PM2A%20on%20AH50_jpg.htm


Still the indications are if you can put up with a large horn they tend to work better.

Odd as it may seem, the 9800 horn from what I can gather is tighter coverage pattern than the Everest Bi radial. I can only deduct that K2 was intended to be more toed in while the Everest is more a wall of sound.

I suspect all this suggests I have two roads to choose . The full on road to an Everest clone or the K2/ Array style option. The former being more complex and challenging and the latter being more sensible.

[4313B]

I believe the H9800 and E2 horns are functionally similar. If I recall correctly the larger size of the E2 mouth was for visual effect. Don or Steve would probably remember better than I would.

The measurements I have done with the H9800 and H4338 suggest that the 476Be was slightly better behaved on the H9800.

I'd really like to hear people's impressions of the 2352/2452H-SL though. It seems like a significantly more obtainable configuration.

I did mention bolting a 476Be up to a waveguide to Greg and he thought the result would be extremely smooth. Measurements seem to indicate that his supposition was right on. I think Zilch has been bolting 2452H-SL's up to waveguides to good effect. Mr. Widget might check a few out himself at some point. Maybe some TAD's too for those who like really good components. ;)

[Ian Mackenzie]

Hi 4313B,

It certainly looks interesting. The low end response looked much like the Everest horn from published data .

Is a 3 inch diaphragm stretching it on the larger horn or is this a SR levels problem?

A called the local agent yesterday and I can get them locally and they are avaiable by special order like a 3 month wait and the 2362 are Aud$625 each.

Less expensive here

http://www.directproaudio.com/shop/shop.cfm?section=5196

There there may be some on E bay or is SH dealers I will have followup.

As a matter of interest to others who may be looking at organsing something like this it would seem deciding on what you want to do is the easy part. Getting what you want in terms of available parts is the challenge.

Getting back to the horn I contacted DDS and they were quite helpful.

Of particular interest is the CFD 1.5-110 Pro or the CFD 1.5-90X Pro. The reason for introducing these devices into the discussion is that the dimensions are far more tolerant being 10'' 'H x 21''W x 8''D for the CFD 1.5-110 Pro as opposed to JBL 2352 18"W x 22''W x 10''D.

The 2352 is a nice horn but its dimmensions are somewhat awkward when you start looking at baffle layout and vertical positioning of the drivers relative to the listener ear height in the confines of a home listening environment. The CFD1.5-90X Pro is 14.5''H x 21''W x 9.5"D.

The data on the CFD 1.5-110 Pro is found here (below). Rusty, the dude who answered my call was quite user friendly when I said I was only looking for two horns. These horns are not toys or junk but they are reasonably priced. They are apparently verywell constructed with strategically placed thick wall sections to control resonances. DDS supplies a lot of oem manufacturers. Perhaps other members have heard of DDS.

http://www.ddshorns.com/catalog.php?page=CFD15110Pro

The CFD 1.5-110 Pro is a 1.5" entry throat, consistent "Q" horn with an optimum frequency response of 800Hz to 16kHz. It has a smooth wide response across its 110°H x 42°V coverage pattern, which makes this horn an excellent choice for high quality reproduction in critical monitoring situations, or in high level foreground or club PA systems.

[4313B]

Is a 3 inch diaphragm stretching it on the larger horn or is this a SR levels problem?I would just try your 2435's and see if you like them. You might be surprised.

Here's a quick snap of my 12-inch "2-way". I'm not real big on photos of works in progress, they are a long way from being done. Dual 1200FE-12's and a PT-F95HF with 435BE. The boxes are about the size of the old JBL L150 box, an inch wider and an inch or two deeper, and they are octagonal. Nothing special.

Originally I was going to just clone a pair of K2-S5800's but I really didn't like the stock horn (with 435AL and 045TI) in that system and I didn't like the MTM arrangement either. Then I considered putting the twelves side by side and using the H4338 and 435BE or 476BE over them like a small 4355 type box but I didn't like the result of that design either.

The H4338 and 476BE ended up going with the 1500AL. So I ended up with one pair of 12-inch 2-ways and one pair of 15-inch 2-ways instead of using the 1500AL's as subs.

[Ian Mackenzie]

4313B,

Thanks for the pic.

I can see what you are saying now and I am starting to think the horizontal configuration might not be such a good idea.

They are very nice. Pity I am got local I would grab'em off ya!

One thing about this stuff is you easily start planning a trip to like Jupiter when in reality your "only" going to the moon.

I found this box plan :

http://www.soundlabsgroup.com.au/bildgross/846_bzeichnung1.html

[Hoerninger]

I found this box plan :

http://www.soundlabsgroup.com.au/bildgross/846_bzeichnung1.html
It is a VISATON design. More details are here:
http://www.visaton.com/en/bauvorschlaege/3_wege/845/construction.html
http://www.visaton.com/bilder/fotos/klein/monitor890mk3.jpg (http://www.visaton.com/bilder/fotos/gross/monitor890mk3.jpg)
___________
Peter

[Ian Mackenzie]

Hi Peter,

I did not want to bring the brand into it but there you are.

At least the drawing is useful.

Ian

[Ian Mackenzie]

I found this article this afternoon.

http://www.genelec.com/learning-center/technology-tutorials/dcw/

One of the dumb ass problems with these larger than life horns is the time displacement from the compression driver to the woofer.

The real PITA about it is how to fix the problem. The above article provide a neato way of doing that and some useful spin offs like controlling diffraction and adding some useful gain.

Below is something I may introduce into my project in so far as the woofer goes. Its a shallow 15" octagonal entry throat and 5.75 inches deep that minimizes time synchronization problems with the high frequency horn (Gain is about +3.5 db)

I guess I will have to call this my JBL Suma now.

Ian

[Robh3606]

Hello 4315B

So how do you like that waveguide?? I have been considering trying a pair. I like the way your towers look.

Hello Ian

Glad to see you are working in this direction. I want to try a 2 way as well. Maybe the other waveguide can get low enough to work with an Le-14H-3



Rob:)

[Skywave-Rider]

Here's a quick snap of my 12-inch "2-way". I'm not real big on photos of works in progress, they are a long way from being done. Dual 1200FE-12's and a PT-F95HF with 435BE.

Curious as to whether or not that is a 2.5 way design?
And is that a sealed cabinet?

[4313B]

So how do you like that waveguide?? I have been considering trying a pair. I like the way your towers look.Thanks, I'll let you know what I really think about the waveguides after I live with them for awhile.
Curious as to whether or not that is a 2.5 way design?
And is that a sealed cabinet?It can be run as a 2-way or 2-1/2 way and it is vented (4 port x 5-1/4 duct).

[Skywave-Rider]

Thanks, I'll let you know what I really think about the waveguides after I live with them for awhile.It can be run as a 2-way or 2-1/2 way and it is vented (4 port x 5-1/4 duct).

Thanks; it's very interesting. I've been thinking about whether or not 2.5 can work in a sealed box.

Please keep us updated, that looks formidable!
:applaud:

[Ian Mackenzie]

Hello Ian

Glad to see you are working in this direction. I want to try a 2 way as well. Maybe the other waveguide can get low enough to work with an Le-14H-3

Rob:)


I am fairly open minded about my options at the moment.

Ian

[Hoerninger]

Below is something I may introduce into my project in so far as the woofer goes. Its a shallow 15" octagonal entry throat and 5.75 inches deep that minimizes time synchronization problems with the high frequency horn (Gain is about +3.5 db)

I guess I will have to call this my JBL Suma now.


It is about time for the JBL Suma ;), the first speaker I remember with a waveguide was around 1975, an ISOPHON dome speaker.

The above mentioned wave guide will produce some trouble when implementing:
It will only work for frequencies about an octave below were the speaker starts beaming for its own. It is debatable whether it works up to about 800 Hz. This implies that the deviding network will eventually have to attenuate in a passband for the woofer.
Manageable as a whole but complicated.

The usage of a waveguide is a good approach for controlling power distribution. But it works only fine down to a lower frequency which is correlated with the mouth opening.

What about an electronic time delay?
__________
Peter

[Ian Mackenzie]

Hi Peter,

Stop spoiling all the fun!

http://www.ddshorns.com/catalog.php?page=DVB15H

(Many woofers in this application have a rising response with frequency so perhaps its a good thing)


I am just throwing up examples of certain approaches at this point.

A little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing without constructing and measuring a working example...particulary when it comes to horns.

As I said I prefer to be open minded otherwise I would never entertain the idea of using a 12 or 15 inch driver up to 800 hertz.

None of the George Augsurger monitors using the Hartsfield horn were ever time aligned so I dont think its anything to get too excited about.GTTThye They do George Augspurger,eorGeorge Augsperger ge Augsperger

[Zilch]

2352 (rear) is still my favorite. "Transcendent," I have called it, on several occasions here. The WAF issue is major, though.

The little-known 2381 (front) comes in close in performance with more manageable dimensions:

http://audioheritage.org/vbulletin/attachment.php?attachmentid=22237&stc=1&d=1169689351

My dual-woofs using PT-F95HF have LE14H-1s, presently, and 2452H-SL HF drivers:

http://audioheritage.org/vbulletin/attachment.php?attachmentid=25910&stc=1&d=1182375046

Single-woof version is adaptive reuse of S99 Athenas:

http://audioheritage.org/vbulletin/attachment.php?attachmentid=32698&stc=1&d=1212055821http://audioheritage.org/vbulletin/attachment.php?attachmentid=32753&stc=1&d=1212440362

I've never considered deep horns a problem. Worst case, I delay the woofer.... :yes:

[4313B]

yeah... that was at least part of why that exercise stalled. Acceptable visual
integration will require some creativity (or redefinition of "acceptable") :)Have you thought of cloning the H9800 horn?

2352 (rear) is still my favorite. "Transcendent," I have called it, on several occasions here. The WAF issue is major, though.
What about your H4338 horns? Those do look nice.

[Zilch]

What about your H4338 horns? Those do look nice.Yes, of course, and I very much like the H4348 horns, which Ian has heard and I believe likes, as well.

There just seems to be more benefit for everyone to be working through the theory and application details of components that are more available here. If a $9.90 waveguide can kick up the performance level of a system significantly, that warrants more attention, in my view, as it has more general applicability than better components nobody can get.

I'm very interested in how well you've been able to make PT-F95HF work with 435Be/2435HPL, for example, as I haven't successfully made that happen, which is why I primarily use BMS 4555 or 2452H-SL with them....

[grumpy]

Have you thought of cloning the H9800 horn?

As well as the E2 horn (which looks nice hovering over dual 15s), yes.
Hasn't the H9800 horn been 'cloned' already (e.g., Matsj's nice project that's
currently in progress)?

I have what I need to do the E2 bendy-board part (vertical wall), others here
have gone quite bit further, but it is not my project to elaborate on...
checking on a CNC-mill shop that I might have an inside connection to.

If I can't sort out the aesthetics, it'll have to be the "E2-Brute" ;)

[Ian Mackenzie]

In the case of the 2352 I would call it the "Runt" but I think someone has used that for another system .....LOL

[Zilch]

In the case of the 2352 I would call it the "Runt" but I think someone has used that for another system .....LOL2352 is a "Mid-Format" horn, according to JBL.... :p

[4313B]

There just seems to be more benefit for everyone to be working through the theory and application details of components that are more available here. If a $9.90 waveguide can kick up the performance level of a system significantly, that warrants more attention, in my view, as it has more general applicability than better components nobody can get.Zilch, these guys can clone anything they desire. If they want K2 or E2 horns then they'll make them.

As well as the E2 horn (which looks nice hovering over dual 15s), yes.
Hasn't the H9800 horn been 'cloned' already (e.g., Matsj's nice project that's
currently in progress)?Yeah, Mr. Widget had all the H9800 measurements and I think another forum member has the H4338 measurements.

I'm very interested in how well you've been able to make PT-F95HF work with 435Be/2435HPL, for example, as I haven't successfully made that happen, which is why I primarily use BMS 4555 or 2452H-SL with them....Like I posted above, I like the waveguide better than the H5800 horn. Are you basing your lack of success with the PT-F95HF and 2435HPL on your posted graphs? The 2452H-SL and waveguide is a very nice combination.

2352 is a "Med Format" horn, according to JBL.... :pIt is a JBL Pro SR product... just use it and hide it behind a grille. No one needs to actually see it.

[Ian Mackenzie]

Pending what you expect out of a system like this there are perhaps some basics.

-Matching the dispursion of the woofer and horn at the crossover point.

-Proper loading of the driver down to the crossover point.

-A horn profile with a diameter / mouth size at least 1 wave length and shorter in depth than the width if using a horn that that does not sound.

That criteria really narrows down the choices and I guess its why we dont see many non compromise horn system made commercially.

Non of this is rocket science.

Today many designs appear to focus on directivity control and less on loading the driver because drivers are more powerful. That appears a fatal mistake if you want a high quality sound. Otherwise use a direct radiator system like a high quality 8 or 6.5 inch driver from 500-5000 then a small horn / tweeter for the midrange and HF.

On the basis of the above at the moment I am looking at a P Audio 1.5 inch bum horn much like the 4435 bi radial, an Azurahorn 550 T = 0.8/ 425 T = .7 9Le leach) really only useful up to 5-7000 hz before it becomes directive, one of the DDS CD 100- 110 x 40 1.5 inch horns.

The probability of a diy Everest horn happening in the near future is remote based on cost and finding a fabricator.

If I can find a 2352 locally or import at a reasonable price I would like to include that in my trials.

I have not defined the woofer yet and wold need to look at the LE14H4 and the 1200FE specs (pending availability). Otherwise a 2234 (recone) could be an option to use as a base line.

Ian

[pos]

Very interesting thread, thanks guys!
I particularly envoy reading about 4313's designs! :bouncy:

Ian, here are some simulations I made comparing the 2234H in its 4435 implementation to the new LE14H-4. The two curves (red and white) nearly overlap all the way!
The old LE14H-X where very similar to 2235's in their behavior, whereas this new one really looks like a 2234 alternative! :applaud:

[Hoerninger]

Somebody estimated 277 Liters. You get an A. We figure the active volume is around 270 l. As with all Japan intended systems, the low end is deliberately lean. The published curve is an anechoic curve which is very hard to interpret with regard to real in-room response. The system has 3 dB more output at 30 Hz than a S9800. It has the tightest and best defined bass reproduction of any JBL, ever.

Pos,
thank you for contributing.
Mister GT gave me an "A" but I have not had the data you do have.
It would be interesting to see how two LE 14H-4 would behave in a 270 l enclosure.
Or what would happen in a slightly reduced enclosure - the E2 is very huge.
(14 inch / 15 inch)power3 * 270 liter = 220 liter)
___________
Peter

[Ian Mackenzie]

Can someone tell me the internal flare rate of the 2435?


http://www.audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=121674&postcount=25
http://www.audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=121675&postcount=26
http://www.audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=121688&postcount=30

http://www.audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=14369

http://www.audioheritage.org/images/projectmay/driver-data/thumbs/1500al-435be-045be-imp.jpg
http://www.audioheritage.org/html/projectmay/technology/435be.htm


Well look and you will find:

Another unique feature of this driver is that it does not have a traditional throat. The phase plug terminates at the driver exit. It results in an effective flare rate of 550hz. Previously, virtually every compression driver made had a 180hz flare rate whose origin dates back to the original AT&T Labs designs from the 1930's. This low rate was necessary to accommodate the low cross-over points used in early two-way loudspeakers. However, this low rate compromised high frequency performance. Given that there was no need for such low frequency output for the 435Be, the flare rate could be optimized to result in a 6db drop in second harmonic distortion.

[Robh3606]

Hello Ian

There is no flare. It's a throat less driver. It opens up right at the top of the phase plug. To me that means no issues with changes in flare rate to generate Hom's ala Geddes. You just have to make sure that the horn is really well centered so the "edge" doesn't overlap the phase plug and form a discontinuity to cause difraction back into the driver.

Rob:)

[Ian Mackenzie]

Based on what I have gleen so far I am looking very closely at an Azurahorn AH 550

The AH-550 has a mouth diameter of 300 mm and an axial length of 205mm to a 1” throat. Throat sizes can be made from 1” to 2” or larger.
The Le Cléac’h flare rate is 550Hz at 0.8 T factor, calculated from a 1” throat size. Some modification mybe required to suit the 2435 Be.

I have no idea how it will meaure up and so that remains to be seen. The thought of using a small ribbon tweeter on a small wave guide has also crossed my mind

Pending what happens I may still look at other options but the opportunity of trying out one of these horns is very apprealing based on advice from a certain source.

[Hoerninger]

Hello Rob,

I would say there is a flare. The phase plug starts with very narrow slots which open up. If the areas at the beginning and the end would be known, the length is about one inch, then the flare could be calculated.

But more important is that there is no lengthy part with a not needed flare rate (180 Hz) which produces unnecessary reduced directivity.
___________
Peter

[Ian Mackenzie]

Thanks guys for the replies.

I have some really exciting news in the pipeline.

I got an email from the M.D local manufacturer tonight who is in the process of CNC machining some wood horns for hi end audio. This firm oem for people like Whise.

I have no further details as this stage.

The M.D has sent me data files of some very impressive kevlar based 15 inch cone drivers for studio monitor applications and a prototype in the works as a replacement for a Tad woofer!

When more details come to hand I will let you know.

Ian

[4313B]

Ian, here are some simulations I made comparing the 2234H in its 4435 implementation to the new LE14H-4. The two curves (red and white) nearly overlap all the way!
The old LE14H-X where very similar to 2235's in their behavior, whereas this new one really looks like a 2234 alternative! :applaud:
It would be interesting to see how two LE 14H-4 would behave in a 270 l enclosure.
Or what would happen in a slightly reduced enclosure - the E2 is very huge.The dual fifteen boxes have always been pretty big. :p

Dual LE14H-4's could be quite interesting.

My dual twelves are in 130 l which I'm pretty happy about. The footprint is quite nice.

[Robh3606]

Hello Peter



I would say there is a flare. The phase plug starts with very narrow slots which open up. If the areas at the beginning and the end would be known, the length is about one inch, then the flare could be calculated.


Your right, I believe that is where the "Effective 550hz flare rate" comes from.

Hello Ian


Based on what I have gleen so far I am looking very closely at an Azurahorn AH 550

The AH-550 has a mouth diameter of 300 mm and an axial length of 205mm to a 1” throat. Throat sizes can be made from 1” to 2” or larger.
The Le Cléac’h flare rate is 550Hz at 0.8 T factor, calculated from a 1” throat size. Some modification mybe required to suit the 2435 Be.


Yeah I was looking at the Edgar Salad bowls for a while. Not sure what the the directivity is for the horns you mention. From what I have seen in other forums it can get quite high in the upper ranges.

As long as you are able to match them through the lower crossover point you can still meet your posted criteria. The upper crossover point will be an issue no matter method you use but experience with the 4344/4345 has shown it's not nearly as critical as the lower crossover point.

Are you going to physically offset the horn to align the voice coils?? It sounds like the actual offsets may end up close too the 2122, 2425?2307 in the 4345. It seems from some of you more recent posts you want to move away from the offset to try to get a more coherent source in that 1-3K range??

Rob:)

[4313B]

I have some really exciting news in the pipeline.

When more details come to hand I will let you know.Ok, we all hope you end up with a system you really like.

[Hoerninger]

Yeah I was looking at the Edgar Salad bowls for a while. Not sure what the the directivity is for the horns you mention. From what I have seen in other forums it can get quite high in the upper ranges.

I do chime in here as the dimensions of this Le Cléac’h horn (AH550) are comparable with a Kugelwellentrichter (spherical). These are shorter than a comparable "Edgar salad bowl", which follows the tractrix contour.
So the AH550 spreads wider than an equivalent salad bowl.
http://audioheritage.org/vbulletin/attachment.php?attachmentid=20005&stc=1&d=1162186248
___________
Peter

[Zilch]

Like I posted above, I like the waveguide better than the H5800 horn. Are you basing your lack of success with the PT-F95HF and 2435HPL on your posted graphs? The 2452H-SL and waveguide is a very nice combination.Yes, and the most pleasant surprise for me once we worked out a suitable compensation filter for it here, I was able to dial the actual crossover frequency considerably lower without coloration than I imagined would be possible with so compact a waveguide.

It seems to be less about loading than about how low the driver will competently play under these conditions, and the 4" damped diaphragm would appear to be a significant factor in this.

I hope Rob and others will also pick up on working with this combination so that we may all learn more about it. My own results have been quite satisfying.

Does TechBot have 2452H-SL engineering specs to post for us, please?

[Ian Mackenzie]

Ok, we all hope you end up with a system you really like..

Well if there is something even remotely attractive on your door step it pays at least to have a look at it.

At the end of the day its all got to be viable and be at least better then what I already have. I mean if I can buy something that does the job for the value of the equivaltent cost of freight and shipping from overseas I have to at least look at it. But only time will tell.

FYI, a couple of files attached.

I have not runs any sims yet.

Ian

[Ian Mackenzie]

Hello Peter




Hello Ian

As long as you are able to match them through the lower crossover point you can still meet your posted criteria. The upper crossover point will be an issue no matter method you use but experience with the 4344/4345 has shown it's not nearly as critical as the lower crossover point.

Are you going to physically offset the horn to align the voice coils?? It sounds like the actual offsets may end up close too the 2122, 2425?2307 in the 4345. It seems from some of you more recent posts you want to move away from the offset to try to get a more coherent source in that 1-3K range??

Rob:)

Hi Rob,

Yes to your question.

I think its a case of balancing the compromises.

I want this to be a 2 or 2.5 way system. ie a swept up 4430/4435.

The woofer horn transition is key factor if this is going to be worth while at all. The alignment is part of it, the woofer/ horn dispersion and balancing what the compression driver likes to do.

A lot depends on how the woofer behaves in the 700- 1.5k area as well.

Your are right , sorting out the upper crossover point is not as hard as one would think.

To sum up ...the end result. When I heard John Nebel's 4435 along size his 4343B and the LRS the 4435 was the most life like and listenable system.

Pity JBL dont make a 1 inch Be driver!

I may end up with something quite different at the end.

Ian

[Ian Mackenzie]

Ok, we all hope you end up with a system you really like.

Thanks for posting the data on the 2452SL.


Comparing it with the 2435 the differenced become fairly obvious.

On what appears to be my rationalisation I am trying to work from a position of getting a horn/ woofer that will work within their capabilities rather than forcing them. Not that there is anything really wrong in doing that but there is alot more work to get a satisfactory result.

Ian

[4313B]

Thanks for posting the data on the 2452SL.Okie dokie. It's a nice driver.

2435H (http://audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=14369)

2452H-SL (http://audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=21706)


Comparing it with the 2435 the differenced become fairly obvious.Yep. The 2452H-SL is only $30 more though, $1,429 versus $1,399.


On what appears to be my rationalisation I am trying to work from a position of getting a horn/ woofer that will work within their capabilities rather than forcing them. Not that there is anything really wrong in doing that but there is alot more work to get a satisfactory result.Yeah. It's too bad that you might have to go with something as ugly as a 2352 but like I posted above, just hide it behind some grille cloth. Alot of people disliked the looks of the 2344 too and those were a bit harder to hide.

In hindsight this thread probably didn't need to go past post number two. All the components mentioned in it are available.

[Ian Mackenzie]

Great sounding (diy) loudspeakers are not for show.

Ian

edit; I should have qualitied that

[4313B]

Great sounding loudspeakers are not for show.If I'm going to drop $60,000 on a pair of loudspeakers they sure as hell better look damn fine because I already know that, regardless of price, a loudspeaker is never, ever, ever going to match the real thing. I don't suffer fugly stacks of loudspeaker crap very easily. I fully understand the limitations of it all. I think the E2 looks very nice. I'm sure there have to be some people out there that think it doesn't.

I had all the parts necessary to build a pair of Arrays. I think they sound really nice. I don't care much for their looks. So, hasta la vista! I know full well that I don't have to live with what I consider to be an unattractive looking loudspeaker to enjoy my collection of various media.

[Ian Mackenzie]

If I'm going to drop $60,000 on a pair of loudspeakers they sure as hell better look damn fine because I already know that, regardless of price, a loudspeaker is never, ever, ever going to match the real thing. I don't suffer fugly stacks of loudspeaker crap very easily. I fully understand the limitations of it all. I think the E2 looks very nice. I'm sure there have to be some people out there that think it doesn't.

I had all the parts necessary to build a pair of Arrays. I think they sound really nice. I don't care much for their looks. So, hasta la vista! I know full well that I don't have to live with what I consider to be an unattractive looking loudspeaker to enjoy my collection of various media.

I decided to quote this as I know you will edit it like all the other notifications.

We're not talking about spending $60K here.

If anyone was they would not be reading this thread.

I find the rest of your posting confusing .

What was the point?


Ian

[hjames]

If I owned a pair of Array speakers I think I'd make a cube of grill cloth to sit over the top part - kind of like those Ohm speakers Seawolf has. That would cover that Aliens horn-within-a-horn thing tastefully, with, hopefully, minimal alteration of the sound.

But I still don't like black-ash plastic wood look of many speakers today.




I had all the parts necessary to build a pair of Arrays. I think they sound really nice. I don't care much for their looks. So, hasta la vista! I know full well that I don't have to live with what I consider to be an unattractive looking loudspeaker to enjoy my collection of various media.

[4313B]

If I owned a pair of Array speakers I think I'd make a cube of grill cloth to sit over the top part - kind of like those Ohm speakers Seawolf has. That would cover that Aliens horn-within-a-horn thing tastefully, with, hopefully, minimal alteration of the sound.That could work. :)

[Hoerninger]

Ian: What was the point?

Header: E2 clone
Ian: Great sounding loudspeakers are not for show.
4313B: If I'm going to drop $60,000 on a pair of loudspeakers they sure as hell better look damn fine
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
When cloning a E2 it depends on the craftsmanship whether it will be for show or not. (We need not discuss its appearance otherwise there is no interest for cloning.)The outer appearance can be cloned within some millimeters. The sound of the original is wonderful. So the goal is to follow its performance or to take it at least as a guideline.

Here we are still at the level of discussing "augmented two-way". When following the approach to develop from scratch then a lot of details will have to be considered. When I talk about attenuation of a pass band than the fun starts for me. The coils will have an influence on RDC, this must be considered for the bass reflex alignment and so on ... ( The whole thing is a play for me, so I am not in a hurry.)

When choosing other woofers it must be seen whether the lower frequency limit of the E2 can be reached or dropped below. The original has an easy approach as Mr. Timbers pointed out: You only have to make some boost in the lower octave, there is enough place for cone excursion (1 inch as far as I remember.) It must be considered whether it is useful for oneself, for smaller Japanese rooms often not.
___________
Peter

BTW: what is Xmax for a LE14H-4 (http://www.audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=21501)?

[Ian Mackenzie]

Hi Peter,

Back on topic .....

I think its a long stretch to attempt cloning the Everest physically and expecting an enlightened outcome untill you can find identical drivers and horns...No..

As we are finding out the E2 works because of a very specific driver requirement.

The concept is sound and by adjusting the design to fit the parameters of most suitable available drivers will give the best outcome.

This will mean massaging the design a bit and will require a degree of techncial understanding beyond spl curves and voltage drives. ( In many cases a speaker that measures flat sounds absolutely shit house) .

You really need to get an understanding of the drivers you intend to use and their characteristics.

I have outsourced assistance on this at a higher level hence I have filtered down my options to what will most likley give a high probabilty of a sucessful outcome and what is within my capabilty and what is viable.

So some compromises will need to be made on the basis of using a very large horn and suitable driver like the 2441 or 2452 series if one wants to make the crossover at 600-750 hertz that are perhaps less than soa or accepting a somewhat higher crossover point around 900-1000 hertz with a some what smaller horn and using a soa driver like the 2435 be.

There is also the option of using twin 12 inch or 14 inch woofers that "may" be preferable on grounds of size and dispersion characteristics

I propose to try the latter first using the 4435 as a baseline as I have the 2435 be on hand. If I had the other driver (I wish I did ) I would go the other way first.

Some of you may want to look at a 3 way using crossover points of 650 - 3500 and using a small horn on the 2435 and the 2452 on a large horn.

I must say (not having heard the E2) I have never been impressed with two way high powered horn monitors with the exception of the 4435 and that uses a 1 k crossover point. Go figure. There is a very good paper on why this is the case.

There is some useful information here on making wave guides:

http://audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=123500/lpost123500

The big on axis dip in the on axis response of the symmetric oblate spheroid CD waveguides is not something I find particularly attractive though (expecially for diy applications)

I would rather make a 1.5 inch or 2 inch 2397 Smith horn which can sound really impressive and is straight forward to set up.

This type of horn has not been discussed here and I recommend it .

Some members have used a 1.5 to 2 inch conveter with apparently good results. on the Smith horn.

Visation also make a similar type of horn.

Ian


Ian

[4313B]

I decided to quote this as I know you will edit it like all the other notifications.

We're not talking about spending $60K here.

If anyone was they would not be reading this thread.

I find the rest of your posting confusing .

What was the point?


IanThe point was that you don't have to live with fugly to have a great sounding loudspeaker system.

BTW: what is Xmax for a LE14H-4 (http://www.audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=21501)?The same as for the LE14H-3. Looking at either EDS one can see the top plate thickness of 0.280 and the voice coil winding depth of 0.780. (Voice Coil winding depth - Top Plate thickness) / 2 = ~ 0.250

I think at one time JBL used the distortion method instead but I don't see that spec anymore. Xmech would be a bit more.

I think its a long stretch to attempt cloning the Everest physically and expecting an enlightened outcome untill you can find identical drivers and horns...No..I'd agree. The professional company that built the enclosures had a really tough time doing it and their process is proprietary.
There is also the option of using twin 12 inch or 14 inch woofers that "may" be preferable on grounds of size and dispersion characteristics.Very viable options. The concept is scalable.
I propose to try the latter first using the 4435 as a baseline as I have the 2435 be on hand.Excellent idea.
Some of you may want to look at a 3 way using crossover points of 650 - 3500 and using a small horn on the 2435 and the 2452 on a large horn.The 2435 works fine on any of the horns that used the 435AL or 435BE. 4338, 4348, S5800, S9800, SK2-1000, Arrays, etc. etc. G.T. even designed a special compensation filter for the 435Be that negated the need for the 045Be. That's fine for DIY but it would never fly for a Consumer system due to lack of specs. People really freak out big time if they don't see VLF response extending down to 20 Hz and below, or UHF response extending well above 20 kHz. Their whole world stops functioning correctly and they become disoriented and despondent. Remember all the whining about the published E2 specs? :rotfl: What a bunch of dorks! :p
I must say (not having heard the E2) I have never been impressed with two way high powered horn monitors with the exception of the 4435 and that uses a 1 k crossover point. Go figure. There is a very good paper on why this is the case.Yep, while it can possibly be entertaining to read all the crap on those other websites about how certain transducers don't do this or that alot of us just don't have the time and patience for it. Those interested might want to re-read posts by gtimbers and absorb the messages.

http://audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=109787

http://audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=110075

http://audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=124784

http://audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=94921

http://audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=213900


I would rather make a 1.5 inch or 2 inch 2397 Smith horn which can sound really impressive and is straight forward to set up.

This type of horn has not been discussed here and I recommend it .Well try it and post the results.

[4313B]

0.250 thousandths

if you want to edit, I'll pull my postThanks, I fixed it. True to form I started the post before 10:34 AM and am still goofing around with it at 11:21 AM as time permits. I'm doing four things at once here...

I decided to quote this as I know you will edit it like all the other notifications.I need to start doing like others do and stop posting in real time. :) Write it all up beforehand and do all the editing. Usually when I take that route I end up not posting at all.

[Hoerninger]

0.250 thousandths
Thank you all, I have got it. ;)
"Das kann jedem passieren" - "That can happen to anybody."
I know it from everyday experience.
__________
Peter

[4313B]

I know it from everyday experience.Thanks for bringing it up. It was for the benefit of everyone.

Of course, now you've got me thinking about dual LE14H-4's... :p

[Robh3606]

Some of you may want to look at a 3 way using crossover points of 650 - 3500 and using a small horn on the 2435 and the 2452 on a large horn.

Hello Ian

I have given that a try and it works using a passive compensation on the 2435. I need to get back to it after I finish up the L250 clone. I had 121'a and 2108's as the lower driver set. Had it running active, I want to refine it a bit and try to go passive between the 2108 and 2435 and biamp using the DX-1 between the 2108 and the woofer of choice.

Rob:)

[4313B]

Which horn are you using Rob?

[Robh3606]

The PTH1010 but I am looking for something different. I may bite the bullet for the 90X50 you have in your towers.

Rob:)

[4313B]

The PTH1010 but I am looking for something different. I may bite the bullet for the 90X50 you have in your towers.Let's talk about it.

[Don C]

Great thread, but what is an E2? Never heard of it.

[4313B]

Great thread, but what is an E2? Never heard of it.

DD66000 Everest II (http://www.harman-japan.co.jp/product/jblhome/dd66000.html)

[Zilch]

Of course, now you've got me thinking about dual LE14H-4's... :pLE14H-4:LE14H-3::2234H:2235H, i.e., it's a mass thing, best I can figure.

I've run the LE14H-1 pairs in 2.5 mode successfully, active. The cab design is weird -- two too-small chambers with a common port. The boxing issues for dual woofers (4435 vs. E-2, for example,) are not well defined.

In my Mini-E2s (SX2-1000), I used single-chamber, closed box, 2.5 mode.

I've also looked at the "correct" drivers for those cabs, but can't get better than SR bass extension out of them. :dont-know

http://www.jblpro.com/pub/tour/4894_90.pdf

http://www.jblproservice.com/pdf/Array%20Series/4894A-90.pdf


Let's talk about it.Help me, now, you just said there was nothing to talk about.

So little, apparently, even that has been deleted.... :p

[4313B]

LE14H-4:LE14H-3::2234H:2235H, i.e., it's a mass thing, best I can figure.I've gone over the 2234H/2235H thing countless times and I posted exactly what J.M did with the LE14H-4 at least twice so you shouldn't have to figure much of anything?

I've run the LE14H-1 pairs in 2.5 mode successfully, active. The cab design is weird -- two too-small chambers with a common port.I would think that running LE14H-1's or LE14H-3's in 2.5 mode would be pointless, they already have plenty of extension as is ( reminds me of G.T.'s comment with respect to the 250Ti - "Those things go damn near to DC in a large room." :yes: ). I would imagine that the room loading with such an arrangement would be attrocious. I know some guys love prodigious bass output but that seems above and beyond...

The LE14H-4 looks like a candidate for 2.5 mode, ala some type of scalable E2 design, and it could be a fun project for someone with the time and money to throw at it. I'd have to give it more scrutiny to personally commit though.
I've also looked at the "correct" drivers for those cabs, but can't get better than SR bass extension out of them.That's by design. JBL really does do complete system design and one size doesn't fit all. I don't have any of the data for that box you reference but you should be able to whip up reasonable data with your measurement tools. It simply may not be real suitable for much of anything beyond its original intent. :dont-know

The boxing issues for dual woofers (2435 vs. E-2, for example,) are not well defined.I'm not sure what you mean.
In my Mini-E2s (SX2-1000), I used single-chamber, closed box, 2.5 mode.SK2-1000?

[Zilch]

I would think that running LE14H-1's or LE14H-3's in 2.5 mode would be pointless, they already have plenty of extension as is. I would imagine that the room loading with such an arrangement would be attrocious. I know some guys love prodigious bass output but that seems above and beyond....The point mostly was to eek more bottom octave out of these too-small cabs. Current plan is to convert them to single-driver, though I'm now thinking there may be a significant advantage to be realized in working with lighter-cone drivers....

[4313B]

The point mostly was to eek more bottom octave out of these too-small cabs. Current plan is to convert them to single-driver, though I'm now thinking there may be a significant advantage to be realized in working with lighter-cone dirvers....Oh, yeah, they are probably just too small for those drivers or they are tuned all wrong. If the LE14H-4 would like the smaller volume then you might be good to go. I don't know what volumes you are working with and what they are tuned to and I haven't bothered to run the numbers on the LE14H-4. I do know the LE14H-1 and LE14H-3 are real solid in smaller boxes tuned a little higher at the expense of the lowest octave. I really prefer them in the tried and true three and a half to four cubic footer tuned to 28 to 30 Hz though.

[Zilch]

I'm not sure what you mean.Dual or single-chamber? Tuned how? 4435 (late) is dual, E-2 single, no?


SK2-1000?Well, it was a typo, but it's probably better that I not call them that, anyway.... ;)

[4313B]

Dual or single-chamber? Tuned how? 4435 (late) is dual, E-2 single, no?Oh! Yeah, "best practice" is one volume for one driver but sometimes one has to compromise. :D E2 is a single chamber. I think the K2-S5800 is too but I could be wrong. I can't remember and would have to look it up again. I went ahead and used a single volume for my dual 1200FE-12's. That doesn't mean though that somewhere down the road...
Well, it was a typo, but it's probably better that I not call it that, anyway.... ;)I thought you were using the H4348 horn instead of the K2-S5800/SK2-1000 type horn though. I don't remember which flavor of ten you ended up with.

[Hoerninger]

... to run the numbers on the LE14H-4POS gave an example for the LE14-4:
http://www.audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=215472&postcount=32
Volume 73 liter, tuning frequency 26 Hz in comparison with a 2234H with 140 liter and the same tuning frequency.
___________
Peter

[4313B]

POS gave an example for the LE14-4:
http://www.audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=215472&postcount=32
Volume 73 liter, tuning frequency 26 Hz in comparison with a 2234H with 140 liter and the same tuning frequency.
___________
PeterOk, so approximately a 5.2 cu. ft. footprint for both LE14H-4's as opposed to 10 cu. ft. for the dual 2234H's. That sounds exciting.

[Zilch]

I thought you were using the H4348 horn instead of the K2-S5800/SK2-1000 type horn though. I don't remember which flavor of ten you ended up with.Yes, that's correct, and it dictated the cabinet width. Ian (and others) heard them here, with Citation 7.4s under them for the LF. :yes:


Ok, so approximately a 5.2 cu. ft. footprint for both LE14H-4's as opposed to 10 cu. ft. for the dual 2234H's. That sounds exciting.My towers are about half that, if even, as I recall.

Not gonna happen with those, apparently.... :dont-know

Conceptually, it's an interesting approach -- the best (or worst, perhaps,) of both common and separate chambers, the volumes "leak" through the shared port coupling.

I've done the measurements, but haven't been able to make much practical sense of them.

[Guido]

Is this LE14H-4 available to the public?
If yes, where?

[Ian Mackenzie]

Is this LE14H-4 available to the public?
If yes, where?


Hi Guido,

That is a question I have. I see little point talking up what might be unless the drivers being discussed are truely available.

Ian

[4313B]

The PTH1010 but I am looking for something different. I may bite the bullet for the 90X50 you have in your towers.

Rob:)I had a few minutes tonight to set up LEAP and recover some files on my new CPU. Here are the 435Be and 476Be on that $100 PT-F95HF. These are raw curves without any filters between the amp and the driver.

If I remember correctly the 435Be needed two notch filters and the 476Be didn't need any to flatten their curves. Both required the usual high frequency boost, the 435Be was "good" to about 18 kHz and the 476Be was "good" to 20 kHz and beyond. It has that radical 20 kHz dip, much like the radical 14 kHz dip in the 435Be, before it snaps back up again and goes out to something like 40 kHz. I vaguely remember that 5 kHz to 10 kHz slope of the 435Be wasn't as easy to deal with as it looks. I also vaguely remember that once I got done with the 435Be it was right at the same efficiency as the 1200Fe's so that was a really close call; I was worried about running out of juice. When I get back into it I'll probably remember the details. :p It would also help if I could find the schematic files!

As I've mentioned before, these drivers with the attractive Consumer horns seem to need more notch filters to smooth the response out but they sound really nice when done.

[Zilch]

I had a few minutes tonight to set up LEAP and recover some files on my new CPU. Here are the 435Be and 476Be on that $100 PT-F95HF. These are raw curves without any filters between the amp and the driver.Not trying to "push" anything, but I'd certainly like to see 2452H-SL as measured by someone other than me on the same plot.... :yes:

[4313B]

Not trying to "push" anything, but I'd certainly like to see 2452H-SL as measured by someone other than me on the same plot.... :yes:Send me one.

[Ian Mackenzie]

Thanks for the recent data..it helps.

I am taking two road with this.

Attempting a traditional bi radial type horn as per the 9800 and perhaps the more purist Le leach.

At the moment I am talking to DDS to see if they can assist with the former. Their stock horns are not that expensive. Its a case of making sure the throat mate's with the exit of the 2435 correctly.

My plan is to shoot for a 800 hz crossover like the 9800 and work from there. I can simulate all the crossover stuff with Sound Easy digitally and with my adjustable analgue crossovers.

I expect I will end up biamping, again except with a purist approach.

ian

[pos]

Here are the two distortion graphs of the LE14H-4 and LE14H-3.
The LE14H-4 looks good in the VLF, but could not that 2nd distortion peak at 700Hz be a problem for a 800Hz crossover point?

[4313B]

Here are the two distortion graphs of the LE14H-4 and LE14H-3.
The LE14H-4 looks good in the VLF, but could not that 2nd distortion peak at 700Hz be a problem for a 800Hz crossover point?You can buy a pair of S4600's and see if they have a problem at 800 Hz. It looks like that's where Greg crossed them over.

http://www.harman-japan.co.jp/product/jblhome/s4600.html

http://audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=185958


OddNot really. If you've ever measured a series of transducers you'd see how they vary. In fact, measure the same transducer ten times in a row and see what you get.

Here is no notes in the data about it.Yeah.
My plan is to shoot for a 800 hz crossover like the 9800 and work from there. I can simulate all the crossover stuff with Sound Easy digitally and with my adjustable analgue crossovers.That sounds like a good plan. Just a few hours of simulations can reveal alot.

[4313B]

The Japanese probably have a liking for a lot of mid band 2nd TD.

It would help balance the lean bass they lean towards.
I'm not going to let that graph bother me and I'm not going to let it weigh in on my decision whether or not to use the driver for some nice project. If it stymies a few people oh well. :) I know the driver is a nice driver. :coolness:

I know that some of the graphs Zilch has posted over the years have caused pause for some people too. All I have to say is oh well, it's their loss.

[4313B]

I think it would be wise to research POS question rather than blow him off.

You know the drill.Seriously?

*****


Here are the two distortion graphs of the LE14H-4 and LE14H-3.
The LE14H-4 looks good in the VLF, but could not that 2nd distortion peak at 700Hz be a problem for a 800Hz crossover point?

Official response courtesy of Jerry Moro -


"Essentially the LE14H-3 and -4 are the same unit. Difference is that on the LE14H-4 we apply approx 13 grams less Aquaplas cone body damping mass. This was done as a request from our Harman Japan customer so that the woofer would have improved "speed". What it is also doing is basically changing the woofer parameter (Qts) for the new system application.

For the same 18.25 voltage drive for those distortion measurements shown, please note that the -4 version easily has 2dB more output than the -3 version. This is the Mms difference of the two units. I suspect if the voltage on the heavier Mms LE14H-3 version was increased for equivalent output of the LE14H-4, the distortion readings would be slightly closer.

We were aware that reducing the Aquaplas would reveal this 700Hz upper cone body resonance, but I believe in its new system application the crossover network would limit the woofer signal at this upper frequency. Even so, it was worth the slight "speed" improvement that Harman Japan was requesting for the new model.

Even if crossing over the -4 version as high as 800Hz, I am not sure how "audible" this very narrow band resonance would be (especially when subjected to typical music signal versus a sine wave test stimulus.....if you know what I mean)."

Thanks Jerry!


This thread is about an E2 clone, it did not state anything about using JBL components.Wow... you might want to read your sentence a few times.

[Mr. Widget]

This thread is about an E2 clone, it did not state anything about using JBL components.I've wondered about the thread's title since post #1. To me a clone would look a lot like this and have the same performance and parts in it...


Widget

[speakerdave]

"E2 derivative" would be better.

If I have a sense of the idea it is a double woofer 2- or 2 and 1/2- way with horn treble and beryllium CD, no supertweeter, and an anechoic Fsub3 of 40 Hz give or take 5 Hz. Some history and other options have been introduced into the thread, but I think this is the central idea. This is to be a music speaker, and as GT suggests in respect to the E2, if you want HT lows, use a subwoofer.

Woofer suggestions range from 12-15" ; crossover frequency from 600 to 1000 plus.

Phase, time alignment, axial offset issues have been raised.

The use of two woofers permits use of lighter-coned elements to improve articulation into the midrange. Some acoustic coupling effect aids LF.

Use of 2.5 configuration preferable to avoid combing effects in the midrange; this is especially true with higher crossover points, otherwise the sweet spot, if it exists, becomes very small.

Satisfactory preengineered renditions of this idea exist, but unfortunately components are difficult to obtain and sometimes very expensive.

Double woofer designs by JBL include E2, M9500, S9500, S5500, S5800, 4435, and SK1000 (?) using 1500Al, 1400nd, LE125s, 1200FE, 2234, and aquaplased 2251. There are SR designs using 1400PRO and 2217. Of these the E2 and 4435 are 2.5-way. There's the 4612, but I would considered that irrelevant.

[Mr. Widget]

You might be surprised at the end result.
I think working on a two-way or augmented two-way is a laudable goal. I also think this thread has quite a bit of interesting content. My beef is that I don't see the relevance of calling this body of work an E2 Clone.

I may be responding to this in a pedantic manner, but I'd be happier calling it, Everest inspired or something to that effect. Even if I triple the horsepower on my VW, it is still a VW and not a Porsche. ;)


Widget

[Hoerninger]

Clone Dolly:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/dc/Dollyscotland_%28crop%29.jpg/250px-Dollyscotland_%28crop%29.jpg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Dollyscotland_%28crop%29.jpg)http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/dc/Dollyscotland_%28crop%29.jpg/250px-Dollyscotland_%28crop%29.jpg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Dollyscotland_%28crop%29.jpg)

These are nice as well:

http://www.katzen-familie.de/images/Babies-R/MVC03827a.JPG


You might be surprised at the end result.Costs, work and difficulties are tremendous.
It would be easier to buy two S4600 (from Japan). ;)
____________
Peter

[Zilch]

I know that some of the graphs Zilch has posted over the years have caused pause for some people too. All I have to say is oh well, it's their loss.Like this one from over a year ago, showing the ugly-ass 10 dB suckout at 14 kHz using the 3" drivers on PT-F95HF?

http://audioheritage.org/vbulletin/attachment.php?attachmentid=25678&stc=1&d=1181498166
http://audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=17069

[Zilch]

I wonder what would happen if you did measurements ar 7.5 degree intervals off axis?You mean like Geddes's Summa? :p


The big on axis dip in the on axis response of the symmetric oblate spheroid CD waveguides is not something I find particularly attractive though (expecially for diy applications)

[Zilch]

What do you think!

I mean we have no way of telling A/ at exactly what angle you did that measurement?, B/ the power response of this combination.Well, somewhere close to the same angle Giskard used, apparently.... ;)


You should appreciate by now the sensitivity of the throat / driver intereface to hi frequency directivity or do you just point, shoot and EQ flat to 20K?For starters, yes.

Ask yourself why JBL never made a product using this combination.

I think that Button quote tells the story.

I'm not being critical of anything or anybody here.

I raise a legitimate issue, and the only answer appears to be that I'm an irresponsible, incompetent asshole whose measurements should be taken down.... :yes:

[4313B]

Like this one from over a year ago, showing the ugly-ass 10 dB suckout at 14 kHz using the 3" drivers on PT-F95HF?I believe at that time I asked you how the combination sounded and you replied that it sounded fine. I really don't care what you measure, it has nothing to do with what I do.

I think we've made it pretty clear that the 2452H-SL is the better bang for the buck at very nearly the same price as the 2435HPL.

Please review the following comments made well before your measurements posts:

the 435Be and 435Al (2430 and 2435 are similar) have a substantial response problem around 10 kHz on many horns and are ceratinly dead by 15 kHz.

There is no way we could have just used the 435 and had it dump at 15 kHz. We needed to do something at least to clear 20 kHz and we didn't want to make a toy add-on device for a product of this stature.

Does it really matter that we go to 40 kHz or even 60 kHz? Good luck in figuring that out because I'm not going to touch that discussion with a 10 foot pole.

The 2435H is finicky as to what wave guides it works with because the phasing plug is so short.

Now, despite all that Greg decided to remove the 045 from his personal system and run the 435/H4338 all the way out. He designed a filter to facilitate that. Is it flat to 20 kHz? No. Did other people have a problem with that fact? Yes, they seem to freak out without that "flat to 20 kHz" spec. Does Greg care? No, it's his personal system and he felt that the gains were significant. Did he live with it forever? No, several years later he replaced the 435's with the 476's in his front left and right 2-ways (He left the 435's in the rear left and right 2-ways). He has stated that the 476's were a considerable improvement. Don and I both have heard his system with the 435's and I can't seem to express just how damn good it sounded. Outstanding comes to mind. I can only imagine what it must be like with the 476's, new electronics and better EQ on the four 1500AL subs.

I should probably add that the 045 is a really nice sounding driver and, as Doug has stated, it adds a degree of airy openess on the top end that one just can't get from running the larger compression drivers all the way out. So there's definitely a legitimate plug for the folks who like 3-ways and 4-ways.


Ask yourself why JBL never made a product using this combination.I don't need to, I have all the information I need.

Despite the fact that the 435Be has an "ugly-ass 10 dB suckout at 14 kHz" on the PT-F95HF I ended up using the combination in my dual 12-inch two-way. Like I stated before, I personally didn't care for the K2-S5800 horn. Two reasons, I didn't like the way it looks and I didn't plan to use an 045. Since I wanted a two-way that means I also wasn't going to be using the S4600 horn either.

I decided on the cheap little PT-F95HF because it fit well into the enclosure design and I wanted to compare it with the 2344/2425. I already knew that the 435Be was a very nice sounding driver, once again, despite the "ugly-ass 10 dB suckout at 14 kHz". I also know that the 476Be is a bolt-in should I ever bother.
I raise a legitimate issue, and the only answer appears to be that I'm an irresponsible, incompetent asshole whose measurements should be taken down.... :yes:No, the answers were provided above quite some time ago. I know that you love listening to your graphs. I don't think anyone thinks your measurements should be taken down and I know some people take them for exactly what they are without judgement. Other people will need to do their own measurements for their particular projects.

My reaction was based on the post comparing the LE14H-3 and LE14H-4 and the question with respect to the distortion curves. I know that both drivers are very nice sounding drivers. And my thought was "here we go again..."

Anyway, Ian has some 2435 drivers and I guess he'll either use them, sell them or throw them away. :dont-know

[pos]

My reaction was based on the post comparing the LE14H-3 and LE14H-4 and the question with respect to the distortion curves. I know that both drivers are very nice sounding drivers. And my thought was "here we go again..."This post was a question, and you and Jerry Moro answered it very well. Thanks for that. :)


Now, despite all that Greg decided to remove the 045 from his personal system and run the 435/H4338 all the way out
I personally didn't care for the K2-S5800 horn. Two reasons, I didn't like the way it looks and I didn't plan to use an 045. Since I wanted a two-way that means I also wasn't going to be using the S4600 horn either.
So the H4338 can be run higher than the H5800 or H4600?
Is it also the case for the H9800?
What are the fundamental differences between the H4338 and H9800?

[Robh3606]

Oh hell I missed all the fun;).



Originally Posted by Zilch http://www.audioheritage.org/vbulletin/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=215891#post215891)
I raise a legitimate issue, and the only answer appears to be that I'm an irresponsible, incompetent asshole whose measurements should be taken down.... :yes:


Oh stop will ya! First of all, all the CLIO measurements posted on the forum have been on axis point and shoots. Yours, Widgets, mine, all of them. What we really should be doing is taking several measurements over our choosen listening window and have CLIO average them and give us a polar plot. That at least gives you a much more meaningful measurement.

Any of our measurements are severly limited in what they tell you about how a system will actually sound. I think we at times can place too much weight on these measurements. They are good for us becasue they help us move in the "right" direction and we can validate if the changes we are making are going the right way. They are of limited value to all others.

Even if we were doing a complete set like Geddes we would still have to sit down to see how it sounded. Measurements are just a tool they are not the end all and be all.

You have people who say they can look at the measurements and that tells them every thiing they need to know. Well good for them! I for one don't have the in depth experience and knowledge that these guys seem to have. No matter how my stuff measures I still need to listen to it to see if I am there.

Rob:)

[Mr. Widget]

I should probably add that the 045 is a really nice sounding driver and, as Doug has stated, it adds a degree of airy openess on the top end that one just can't get from running the larger compression drivers all the way out. So there's definitely a legitimate plug for the folks who like 3-ways and 4-ways.Phew! :rotfl:


First of all, all the CLIO measurements posted on the forum have been on axis point and shoots. Yours, Widgets, mine, all of them. What we really should be doing is taking several measurements over our choosen listening window and have CLIO average them and give us a polar plot. That at least gives you a much more meaningful measurement.I have been using CLIO for about 3 1/2 years now... not a terribly long time compared to how long I have been messing around with speaker designing and building, but it has proven a wonderful time saver. On occasion and as needed, I have run polar plots, distortion analysis, impedance plots, waterfalls etc., but I typically don't bother because they still don't tell me what sounds good and the time it takes to "really" measure a system can be considerable. However these measurements are incredibly useful in zeroing in on a problem which I heard in my listening to the system. I use these measurements to chase the causes of the "problem" more effectively, but by themselves without careful controlled listening, plots alone are just not that useful.

On the other hand, to help me slam a network together, or initially set up a system, taking a quick "point and shoot" (I like that phrase.) on axis plot of a system is awesome. I can quickly see if somebody is out of phase or some other wiring screw up occurred. An RTA is better than nothing, but having the power of a tool like CLIO once you begin to understand what you are looking at is simply wonderful.


Widget

[4313B]

So the H4338 can be run higher than the H5800 or H4600? Is it also the case for the H9800?I'm not sure that is the case at all.

I believe the SK2-1000, S4600, S4800, S5800, etc horns are all integrated HF/UHF types.
What are the fundamental differences between the H4338 and H9800?The H4338 is shorter and wider. Greg says it also loads better on the bottom end. Frequency response measures slightly different on both, I wouldn't say one is clealy better than the other in that respect at this point. I do know that some forum members don't like either one.

I was considering using the H4338 instead of the H9800 in Project May but preliminary measurements and listening evaluations have made that less likely.

Here are some more recent runs:

http://audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=215951&postcount=42 (http://audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=215951&postcount=42)

http://audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=215952&postcount=43 (http://audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=215952&postcount=43)

http://audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=215953&postcount=44 (http://audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=215953&postcount=44)

http://audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=215954&postcount=45 (http://audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=215954&postcount=45)

First of all, all the CLIO measurements posted on the forum have been on axis point and shoots. Yours, Widgets, mine, all of them. What we really should be doing is taking several measurements over our choosen listening window and have CLIO average them and give us a polar plot. That at least gives you a much more meaningful measurement.This came up again in conversation with JBL the other day. The DIY person is at a disadvantage with respect to meaningful measurements but that doesn't mean we can't come up with some really nice sounding systems.
Any of our measurements are severly limited in what they tell you about how a system will actually sound. I think we at times can place too much weight on these measurements. They are good for us becasue they help us move in the "right" direction and we can validate if the changes we are making are going the right way. They are of limited value to all others.As are JBL's measurements unless we are specifically cloning something. Even then, not all the parameters can be known or remembered, especially with respect to legacy systems.
Measurements are just a tool they are not the end all and be all.Yes, they are a tool.
You have people who say they can look at the measurements and that tells them every thiing they need to know.Yes, and we call those people delusional. They love listening to their graphs.

Which reminds me! Compare these graphs:

http://audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=10613

http://www.lansingheritage.org/images/jbl/specs/pro-speakers/1981-4345/page03.jpg



Phew! :rotfl:Hey now! 045 lovers pay the bills dude! :)
I use these measurements to chase the causes of the "problem" more effectivelyDefinitely.

On the other hand, to help me slam a network together, or initially set up a system, taking a quick "point and shoot" (I like that phrase.) on axis plot of a system is awesome.Another topic that came up yet again the other day. The success derived from LEAP is directly related to the quality of the data it is fed. The DIY person is at a disadvantage compared to the multi-million dollar facilities at JBL. Regardless, it is still quite fun and worthwhile results can be obtained. They use MLSSA and we use CLIO. The best we can do is take a ton of measurements and see what is real and what isn't. Probably the DIY systems with the best chance of long term success are those which deal with crossover points above ~ 1 kHz.

[Zilch]

Despite the fact that the 435Be has an "ugly-ass 10 dB suckout at 14 kHz" on the PT-F95HF I ended up using the combination in my dual 12-inch two-way. Like I stated before, I personally didn't care for the K2-S5800 horn. Two reasons, I didn't like the way it looks and I didn't plan to use an 045. Since I wanted a two-way that means I also wasn't going to be using the S4600 horn either.

I decided on the cheap little PT-F95HF because it fit well into the enclosure design and I wanted to compare it with the 2344/2425. I already knew that the 435Be was a very nice sounding driver, once again, despite the "ugly-ass 10 dB suckout at 14 kHz". I also know that the 476Be is a bolt-in should I ever bother.Yes, and by now, everybody knows that I have worked with it quite a bit and like that waveguide as well. With 2452H-SL, there's a recalcitrant little response dip at I forget exactly what frequency. I don't hear it, so I'm willing to ignore it. I can't say I hear the big one at 14 kHz with 2435HPL, either, but I'm less willing to ignore that, when other options are readily available.

I followed the earlier experiments and discussions relating to 435Be two-way on H4338 with considerable interest. There weren't very many members willing to pony up the admission fee to participate, as you know. Problem was, when it came time to actually work with it, all of the curves had disappeared except Guido's approach extending the VHF out to 20 kHz. Very frustrating. I'm still waiting for 476Bes here for that project.... :dont-know

[4313B]

I can't say I hear the big one at 14 kHz with 2435HPL, either, but I'm less willing to ignore that, when other options are readily available.I have no doubt at all that you can't hear the dip at 14 kHz. And don't ignore it, that's your prerogative. No one is faulting you at all for using the 2452H-SL. It's a slam dunk and you'd have to be pretty goofy to mess it up.

I believe that I have stated several times now that the 2452H-SL was the best bet for most people. I sincerely hope people buy tons of them.

Early on in this thread I erroneously posted my little project and your response was "I'm very interested in how well you've been able to make PT-F95HF work with 435Be/2435HPL, for example, as I haven't successfully made that happen, which is why I primarily use BMS 4555 or 2452H-SL with them...." well... I got four little 1/4-20 x 1/2" bolts and bolted the 435Be to the PT-F95HF then I bolted that combination into my enclosure. I took some preliminary measurements and put that data into LEAP and played around with LEAP for a bit to verify earlier solutions (I also took measurements of the 476Be on the PT-F95HF during the same session and played around with that data in LEAP as well). Early on this project was going to be a K2-S5800 (http://manuals.harman.com/JBL/HOM/Owner%27s%20Manual/K2%20S5800%20OM%20Final%20PDF.pdf) "clone" with the 435Al replaced by the 435Be and 045Ti replaced by the 045Be. I made some changes.

I think the dual twelves are really nice and the 435Be's sound as good as I knew they would. Right now I am working on other projects though so I haven't built the charge coupled networks yet and probably won't for another six months or so due to lack of time.
I followed the earlier experiments and discussions relating to 435Be two-way on H4338 with considerable interest. There weren't very many members willing to pony up the admission fee to participate, as you know.No, and I'm not sold on this thread either. I think the admission fee is too high for much interest. I think there were seven people total that bought all the components to emulate Greg's system.
Problem was, when it came time to actually work with it, all of the curves had disappeared except Guido's approach extending the VHF out to 20 kHz. Very frustrating.It isn't time to actually work with it. I removed all the information so it wouldn't sit there for a couple years doing nothing. I already know how it all goes together and when I get the time I'll get it done.
except Guido's approach extending the VHF out to 20 kHzGuido knows what he is doing and he's gotten the hang of Greg's filter designs. And this is a great example of a nice project - http://audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=195205

I'm still waiting for 476Bes here for that project.... Mr. Widget and Guido are waiting for their pairs too. And I have to say that I can't imagine what you would want with 476Be's. They are very nice compression drivers initially designed specifically for the 60th Anniversary DD66000. I hope your goal isn't to bolt them into a pair of old Lancer 55's in some garage with some lockjawed LE14A's and proclaim that you've just designed the perfect 2-way...

On the other hand, if you're going to do something real nice, that others like Guido or John H or Mr. Widget have done for example, then we're all eyes and ears.

Can we move on from this?

[Guido]

.....except Guido's approach extending the VHF out to 20 kHz.

I'm very pleased with the results.
I modified the GT network with a little HF boost LC combination ala 4430/35 and an additional notch. It sounds amazing.
I sure have extension to 20kHz. Lows go down to 30 Hz in room. 5.5 cuft tuned to 34 Hz.
Woofer network is from K2-9800. HP is 12uF. Series resistor I have to look up. Was it 21 Ohms??
Components
H4338
2435 aquaplased
1500AL

[4313B]

I'm very pleased with the results.
Components
H4338
2435 aquaplased
1500AL
:thmbsup:

[Robh3606]

Originally Posted by Ian Mackenzie http://www.audioheritage.org/vbulletin/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=215888#post215888)
I wonder what would happen if you did measurements ar 7.5 degree intervals off axis?


On my waveguides, PTH1010 the 2435's rolloff above and below the horn. When I sit I am below the horns. That is why mine are "hot" out to 20K on axis. If I set them up rolled off on axis they don't sound quite right to me. Off axis they are very similar to the 16K roll off you would get with a 2344.

Rob:)

[Ian Mackenzie]

Yep.

See my comments in the compensation thread.

Ian