PDA

View Full Version : Blue vs Black (4343 vs 4435)



John Nebel
05-02-2004, 06:43 PM
Set up an extended A/B

http://www.csdco.com/blue_vs_black.jpg

Robh3606
05-02-2004, 08:16 PM
That's what Ian's walkin into!!!!:eek: Selling tickets???:p

What a set-up!!!!!!

Rob:)

Hofmannhp
05-03-2004, 08:40 AM
Originally posted by John Nebel
Set up an extended A/B

Hi John,

nice stuff.....I envy you not only for the cabinets...:scold: no...also for the wonderful Macs. :yes:
Please let us know what the comparision 4343/4435 says.
HP

Don McRitchie
05-03-2004, 08:40 AM
WOW! That looks really nice. However, it needs a bit more work to make sure that all four amp stands are matching.

4313B
05-03-2004, 08:48 AM
Looking good John! :yes:

Are you going to swap one of the 4435 positions with one of the 4343 positions for listening tests or are you going to leave the 4343's so far apart?

BTW, I thought you had 4430's...

Chas
05-03-2004, 08:51 AM
WOW! That looks really nice. However, it needs a bit more work to make sure that all four amp stands are matching.

:rotfl:

That was a classic!

boputnam
05-03-2004, 09:27 AM
Originally posted by Robh3606
That's what Ian's walkin into!!!!:eek: Now I'm jealous!! You didn't rollout that display for me!! It's simply amazing what an accent will do to some people... :rolleyes:

John Nebel
05-03-2004, 10:06 AM
Originally posted by Giskard
BTW, I thought you had 4430's...

Giskard,

Yes, I do and the original A/B was 4343 vs 4430. All things considered, the 4430 has to be close to ideal - DISCLAIMER - that is just personal prejudice, program material, the room, and size and weight issues.

In the 4343 vs 4435 A/B the 44s have to be padded down by 2db as they are noticably and measurably more sensitive than the 43s.

John

boputnam
05-03-2004, 10:10 AM
Now, you must get Ann or Tom to get a digital pic of you two with them two-two, too, and post it! :thmbsup:

boputnam
05-03-2004, 10:12 AM
I just noticed something...

Have you turned the room 180-degrees? That reminds me of what was the REAR of the room (sans the curtains), and that conduit running down the (now) left-hand wall is where the rack is, correct?

Maybe I'm goofed-up...

John Nebel
05-03-2004, 10:16 AM
Originally posted by boputnam
You didn't rollout that display for me!!

Bo,

Those were the result of a bout of insanity late last year. It took this long to get things set up half ways right. Audio is easy, right?

The black cloth was just to make the pic look good and confuse things a bit. The wire bundle for the signals is in the upper right.

See you on your next trip to Denver!

John

4313B
05-03-2004, 10:18 AM
Originally posted by John Nebel
All things considered, the 4430 has to be close to ideal - DISCLAIMER - that is just personal prejudice, program material, the room, and size and weight issues.Yeah well several engineers felt the same way. The 4430 didn't enjoy a nearly 20 year production run because it sucked... :D

Mr. Widget
05-03-2004, 10:20 AM
Cool setup. Nice amp stands.


Heck, nice amps too!

dieterj
05-03-2004, 11:45 AM
Hello John,

Wonderful Setup, also the Macs!:cool:

Dieter

boputnam
05-03-2004, 01:06 PM
So, John, if your'e still out here...

Tell us what the crossover set-ups are, and pre-amps and such. I don't remember your rack exactly. I do know it sounded great, but you've obviously gone through a mid-life crisis - or two ;) - since I was last there! :nutz:

John Nebel
05-03-2004, 01:49 PM
Originally posted by boputnam

Tell us what the crossover set-ups are, and pre-amps and such. I don't remember your rack exactly.

Hi Bo,

It's really simple - Mac pre-amp with balanced line outputs, inline pads before the 4435s' crossover to match levels to the 4343s, JBL 5235 crossovers, in-line transformers on the output to take care of the long run parallel to AC lines with SCR switching transients.

(It could all do quite a job on your hearing if turned loose.)

John

boputnam
05-03-2004, 01:57 PM
Originally posted by John Nebel
...in-line transformers on the output... Hey, John...

Something like those Aphex 124A...? Knowing your perspective, I'm guessing it's something much higher-up the food chain...

John Nebel
05-03-2004, 02:56 PM
Originally posted by boputnam
Hey, John...

Something like those Aphex 124A...?

Bo,

www.sescom.com

John

Ken Pachkowsky
05-08-2004, 11:32 AM
John

God bless you!

My wife thinks your more insane than I am!!! :cheers:

Nice system!

Ian Mackenzie
05-08-2004, 01:16 PM
Nice John.

Ian:eek:

John Nebel
05-09-2004, 10:38 AM
Originally posted by boputnam
obviously gone through a mid-life crisis - or two ;) - since I was last there! :nutz:

Bo,

Only two in months and months? If there is only one crisis in a week, it's considered

:smthsail:

John

Ian Mackenzie
05-13-2004, 05:21 AM
Well,

Had a very nice time in Boulder.

But Bo those Maks are really nice amps, not sterile like Joe was saying...........

Anyways, we had a good listen to the 4343/4430, its a tough call, if playing mostly classical stuff the 4430 are more mellow, but for jazz etc the 4343 are a cool system.

John's new LR32 are real nice, and appear to capture the best of both worlds.

Ian

boputnam
05-13-2004, 06:35 AM
Originally posted by Ian Mackenzie
John's new LR32 are real nice, and appear to capture the best of both worlds. :shock: You mean the LSR32...? John!! You, sir have a problem (not much different from mine on pro audio... ;) )

John Nebel
05-13-2004, 07:39 AM
Originally posted by boputnam
:shock: You mean the LSR32...?

Bo,

Nice specs. Ordered LSR32 and JBL actually shipped 6332. Didn't have time to hook them up until last night. Judging from a brief listen, JBL hasn't been asleep.

John

boputnam
05-13-2004, 08:59 AM
Interesting, 4th-order (24 dB/octave) Linkwitz-Riley filters... :hmm:

4313B
05-13-2004, 09:06 AM
Yep. And I'd love to measure the DCR's on the chokes...

Drew wan't blowing smoke when he suggested them for HT instead of his older designs using the "big stuff".

Ian Mackenzie
05-29-2004, 11:49 PM
John,

I am curious to know how the evaluation is progressing?

Speaking of hifi Rob and I did the Stereophile show in NY by the way.

Rob's setup standard setup pretty well smoked everything we saw and heard at the show although I did like the Joseph Audio demo using the Manley tube amps. But $$.

Interestingly they had the speakers position on a diagonal to the corners of the room, perhaps that made a real diffference.

Rob explained he has spent some months setting up and positioning his 2344a horns for just the right angle and position from the side walls, then carefully Equalising each channel.

In the sweet spot Robs sound stage was the best I've heard with the 2344a horn, the integration with the 2123h and E145 was perfect. Actually its the best balance in a diy JBL system l've heard to date. Perhaps Rob can elaborate.

Why JBL never did a commercial offering of the twin 2235, a 2123H and the 2344a/ 2426 combo is odd, the 2123H with that horn combo is just peaches and cream for me.

It will be interesting to gain Rob's impressions of his 4344 project
when its up and going.


Ian

John Nebel
05-30-2004, 02:34 PM
Originally posted by Ian Mackenzie

I am curious to know how the evaluation is progressing?


Ian,

No dramatic experiments or changes - I've just been listening to music. Do tend to favor the 4435s.

Quite enjoyed your visit.

The big project has been convincing the EVA that is should stop failing loop 1A and it has behaved itself for a whole week now.

John

John Nebel
05-30-2004, 07:26 PM
Originally posted by Giskard
And I'd love to measure the DCR's on the chokes...

Measured with the crossover disconnected from the system - three sets of readings: (1) ancient, but accurate Simpson VOM, (2) Fluke DVM, (3) repeat Simpson. No components removed from PCB.

ohms

L1 .30 .30 .30
L2 .33 .35 .35
L3 .30 .30 .30
L4 .30 .31 .30
L5 .14 .14 .15
L6 .25 .25 .25
L7 .25 .27 .27

John

Robh3606
05-30-2004, 08:15 PM
''In the sweet spot Robs sound stage was the best I've heard with the 2344a horn, the integration with the 2123h and E145 was perfect. Actually its the best balance in a diy JBL system l've heard to date. Perhaps Rob can elaborate."

Wow! You my friend are too kind! I am glad you liked them. I have just been plugging away for a while with placement, EQ and driver choices. I cheat. I use my XPL'S as a reference and play them against each other. For a while I liked the main set-up beter but since a chat with Giskard about the volume for the 115H-1 and putting in 2214's they really shine now. I like the big boxes but the XPL's are one hell of a reference to have and are still the ultimate image champs. I should have the 4344's up and running in about 2 weeks I still have to get an adaptor from JBL and get a 2416 rediaphramed. Thanks on the crossovers. Without them it would have put things back a bit. Looking forward to giving them a go.

Rob:)

Hofmannhp
05-31-2004, 03:21 AM
Originally posted by John Nebel (edited by HP)
Ian,

........... Do tend to favor the 4435s......
John :)

Hi All......thats what I mean..:banana:

HP

John Nebel
05-31-2004, 06:15 AM
The only way out of this one is to grovel...

They are not 4344s or 45s which are better.

A lot has to do with the type of music and the room, etc. as Ian pointed out.

John

John Nebel
08-09-2004, 04:01 PM
Blind A/B comparison...

http://www.csdco.com/bo_ab2.jpg

The speakers Bo is listening to intently are in front of him, the ones in the pic are not hooked up.

The cat just wants pats and is patiently waiting for such an opportunity.

http://www.csdco.com/bo_ab3.jpg

Mr. Widget
08-09-2004, 04:02 PM
and....??

Ian Mackenzie
08-09-2004, 05:20 PM
Enjoy Boulder and Fine Audio,

To the Lanky Yankee, ya got spurs on them boots Boy?

John, are you able to try the 4343 non-biamped, also the 4435 non biamped with all level pads flat?

Ian

John Nebel
08-09-2004, 06:03 PM
Ian,

Not yet.

John

boputnam
08-09-2004, 06:09 PM
Originally posted by Mr. Widget
and....?? Well, it was interesting, to say the least.

And, that stickler for scientific, completely subjective ;) , data, John withheld the Chateau Latour until I had selected my fate... :biting:

I chose to listen to all source material in MONO mode, to moot (as much as was practical) the impacts of speaker positioning. Viewing the Wall of Sound head-on, one will note the 4435's are centered, and the 4343's are outboard. This arrangement John and I agreed might have biased my impressions, but my preference was the...

...4343's.

The 4343's were "warmer" to me, less edgy, less harsh, and gave the impression of a much "deeper" soundstage. I felt, however, the UHF were not quite as pronounced as the 4435's, but that could relate to subtle EQ'ing (John does not use outboard EQ's, but had taken extra measures to balance the SPL's between to two set-ups). The 4435's were more "planar", and at times more loudspeaker sounding - more akin to what I encounter doing FOH. Hoever, the 4435's were notably more precise - i.e., they had greater definition. Not that definition was lacking in the 4343's - they were just less "edgy". I felt like I would enjoy the 4343's for longer periods. But, note that I live with a pair of 4345's and there would certainly be familiar ground with the 4343's.

It's worth noting, John has gone to great lengths to refurbish all transducers - everything has been reconed, re-diaphragmed and motors regaussed.

John lead me to the room blindfold, and I had no clue there was a kitty at my feet. The test was tedious, and the room ultraquiet.

And, when the finish line passed, the wine - and company - was superb. :thmbsup:

John Nebel
08-10-2004, 06:50 AM
Bo,

Attempting the test in mono obviated one of the 4435's strong points - stable stereo imaging. This I realized later on. That could explain why I've got a preference for 4435s over eight months of having both set up and almost never use the 4343s.

John

Ian Mackenzie
08-10-2004, 06:59 AM
John,

I bet you both had a lot of fun at any rate.

Without a doubt you have a very high calibre system.

Ian

Regis
08-10-2004, 07:11 AM
Gawd, if I had a pair of speakers like that, my neighborhood would be burning speaker grills on my lawn at midnight! "Run the evil tyrant out!". But really, I love those 4435's! They look like they could truly produce some serious SPL's! Frankly Bo, I'm envious!

boputnam
08-10-2004, 07:38 AM
Originally posted by John Nebel
...over eight months of having both set up and almost never use the 4343s. Well now, you only gave me four-hours! I'd have brought a bedroll if I knew I could take THAT long!

And, I worried the cabinet positioning was not best for a fair comparison - i.e., the pairs would have been better, staggered. Having what we had, mono was the only fair choice. But look, since you're not using the 4343's, well I AM still in Denver... :hmm:

:rotfl:

And Regis: This system is never run loud, far as I know. I think the max we had it was maybe 65dB, but that's only 'cause I had the remote...

John Nebel
08-10-2004, 08:32 AM
Bo,

We can continue the test this evening. Don't think you can be convinced, but the stereo image is an interesting aspect.

John

John Nebel
08-10-2004, 09:06 AM
Giskard,

Agreed on both your points. I did try staggered with the original 4430 vs 4343 tests and preferred the 4430s.

These systems are a bear to move around.

I think Bo has accustomed his ear to the 43x sound and without extensive listening that will not wear off.

John

mikebake
08-10-2004, 10:44 AM
Originally posted by John Nebel
Bo,

Nice specs. Ordered LSR32 and JBL actually shipped 6332. Didn't have time to hook them up until last night. Judging from a brief listen, JBL hasn't been asleep.

John

Please elaborate as you listen more, as I may be interested in a pair.
From whence did you order them?
And lastly, what again is the difference between LSR32 and 6332??!

mikebake
08-10-2004, 10:45 AM
Originally posted by Ian Mackenzie

John's new LR32 are real nice, and appear to capture the best of both worlds.

Ian

How about bass response? How about teaming a pair up with a pair of sub1500's?

speakerdave
08-10-2004, 11:33 AM
I'm following this development with great interest.

Mike, the 6332's have a bucking magnet on the tweeter. What other differences, I don't know.

David

Ian Mackenzie
08-10-2004, 01:43 PM
I would dearly love to compare the 4430 horn (2344) again with the 4343/ 4345 mid , hf and uhf.

I say this because I think its largely a matter of tonal balance, and based on recent experience getting 4 drivers just right requires vastly more precise adjustment than you can imagine. (Enclosure setup for best imaging then becomes the final arbitor.)

I did some research recently on perception of audible differences between loudspeakers. Apparently the human ear (and mind) is more responsive to broad band spectral differences (low Q dips and peaks) than narrow band irregularities (high Q dips and peaks).

Even more surprising is that random, or unevently scattered irregularities are less audible than evenly spaced irregularities.

Overall balance shifts of even 1/2 a decibal are above the perceptual threshold. So if you thought you had your system flat, think again.

Aside from that I recall it depended on what type of music you played. John likes classical mostly and I agree the 4435 gives a nice coherent projection.

On say jazz or percussive genre's, the 4343 is perhaps more dynamic and life like imho.

Ian

John Nebel
08-10-2004, 01:48 PM
I'm in big trouble here because I haven't listened to them enough to give an informed opinion.

The LSR32 and 6332 are pretty much the same and there is a forum thread on that issue. The 6332 is magnetically shielded for use near video monitors.

The lack of bass is not that noticible with classical music.

JBL has a good amount of information on www.jblpro.com

Anechoic Sensitivity 1: 93 dB/2.83 V/1 m (90 dB/ 1 W/ 1 m)
Frequency Response (60 Hz – 22 kHz): +1. -1.5 dB
Low Frequency Extension 2:
-3 dB: 54 Hz
-10 dB: 35 Hz
Enclosure Resonance Frequency: 33 Hz
Long Term Maximum Power (IEC265-5): 200 W continuous average; 800 W peak
Recommended Amplifier Power: 150 W - 1000 W (rating into 4-ohm load)

1 Mean SPL from 100 Hz to 20 kHz.
2 Describes anechoic (4p) low frequency response. Acoustic loading provided by the listening room will increase low frequency bass extension.


John

boputnam
08-10-2004, 09:43 PM
Originally posted by Giskard
I experienced the opposite. Side by side my 4430's were significantly less taxing than my 4343's. I'm not knowing what you do for EQ, but John does nothing outboard. My experience - quite model limited - tells the 43xx series four-ways benefit from modest EQ tweaking. This is audible, and as well quite visible on (as an example) SmaartLIVE. Maybe the 44xx series do, too...? I don't know. John's environment is quite acoustically controlled. If they would benefit, my impressions are not meaningful, because in this example the EQ was not optimized (my word) for room acoustics, or relative cabinet position.

boputnam
08-10-2004, 09:45 PM
Originally posted by Ian Mackenzie
...I say this because I think its largely a matter of tonal balance, and based on recent experience getting 4 drivers just right requires vastly more precise adjustment than you can imagine. Bingo.

Robh3606
08-11-2004, 04:14 AM
Interesting comments about driver balance and EQ. I agree about the driver balance a db hear or there across the whole driver band makes a big difference and it does take some time to get it right. With EQ I use virtually none above 1k with my mains where the 2344 is operating. There seems to be enough built into the 4435 crossover and basically have it set as flat as I can get it with the crossover pots. The 4344's are run, for now, without EQ and after careful adjustment sound just fine.

Rob:)

Figge
08-11-2004, 05:22 AM
Originally posted by Giskard
I still think it's funny and it was posted primarily for my own amusement.


:p

Ian Mackenzie
08-11-2004, 05:43 AM
Quote:Giskard

Yeah, gotta love G.T. doing all the dirty work for us with the L250 and 250Ti. None of that L-Pad bullshit to fuck with.

By the sound of it you didn't $%^&* with your 43xx & 44xx enough did you. Odd given the company you keep. :o

Perhaps this distinction between the pro and domestic users markets. The assumption that the studio will calibrate the monitors & then equalise the listener domain behind the desk.

The consumer versions however are factory set to suit most domestic listening environments.


ian:duck:

Ps Just for my own amusement

Ian Mackenzie
08-11-2004, 06:21 AM
Just an observation: perception is 9/10 reality after all.

But I prefer this response, funny how people say what they think on the intenet...LOL

Quote:Giskard
"What are you talking about? Because I think the 4430 and 4435 are more pleasing than the big 43xx 4-ways in the home means I didn't play with the L-Pads enough???"


So how did you go about setting your L Pads?

Okay, what I am saying is unless you sit there with mic and level off each driver with an FFT analyser (or similar test equipment) at near field (pre any room equ) I refuse be accept the 4 way system is in optimum balance. (You just can't do it by ear and hope to get it optimum.I tried for months)

To me that is the key to long term listener satisfaction with the 4345 and I assume the 4343. Looking at the threads many appeared puzzled about the right position of the Pads so I think its of significance which is why I rasied it here.

Since I adjusted my 4345 per above my listening pleasure has grown and so is my music collection, Eric Claption One More Car....One More Rider..excellent.

Pm me for details of the technique, software etc anyone.

Ian

John Nebel
08-11-2004, 06:22 AM
I couldn't stand all the negative numbers.

Nah, they are complex conjugates

Ian Mackenzie
08-11-2004, 06:34 AM
Quote:Giskard

Ian, I could never figure out what those little doohickies with the white dots and slots were for so I never used them. I left them turned all the way counter-clockwise and then scratched the numbers off because I couldn't stand all the negative numbers.

That id be right.

You wanna see my diy pads now, hand painted dots and numbers everywhere. I need a sign writer.

The hard bit was finding a white felt pen, I ended up using white out with a nail polish applicator.

Ian

Ian Mackenzie
08-11-2004, 06:40 AM
Hey,

We're just having a joke.....I know what your saying........my pms folder is filling up fast.

Ian

Ian Mackenzie
08-11-2004, 06:45 AM
Quote : Giskard

I get supremely frustrated with having to sit and type out what I could say a whole lot faster. I don't consider this forum good discourse at all.

Yeah, so I've noticed:cool:

Ian

Ian Mackenzie
08-11-2004, 06:48 AM
No,

Big brother laughing. (who else)

Ian

John Nebel
08-11-2004, 09:28 AM
Way back in the mid-80s a friend who is an EE and inventor was setting up an audio system and wanted to spend some time listening to my 4343s.

His conclusion was that JBLs were bad and he went off to listen to other systems. Then he came back to the idea that maybe JBLs were not so bad as perhaps the other systems were worse. He went down to Barath Acoustics in Denver where they happened to have the newly-developed 4430s and he bought them.

He didn't quite like the sound and rented an HP spectrum analyzer and mic and hacked up a passive crossover to go between the preamp and amp.

I listened to his 4430s and realized they sounded better than the 4343s but pride prevented me from doing too much other than trying the 4343s in four different rooms and playing around with carpets, dials, etc. (It's interesting to unroll a carpet from the opposite from the speakers' end of a room with a hard floor and hear the sound change)

Thanks to this group, I've learned that it is OK to like 4430's and 4435's and now I will live happily ever after having found THE TRUTH.

Thanks.

John

Mr. Widget
08-11-2004, 10:14 AM
Originally posted by John Nebel

Thanks to this group, I've learned that it is OK to like 4430's and 4435's ...


I thought Bo was there to teach you it is not OK.:D

I agree with Ian's point that careful adjustment of L-pads, or controls on an active crossover are paramount. If you were very dedicated you could do it entirely by ear, but it is an extremely time consuming process requiring more than a little skill. Even with some test gear it is a pain in the butt. I suppose some may like listening to test tones and pink noise but it isn't my idea of fun.

Once you get the speaker dialed in with a "flat" response curve, that is only part of the equation. There are many issues about loudspeakers that become evident when you really listen and their tonality is only the tip of the iceberg.

Simply discussing these two systems the 4343 and the 4435, they each have their share of issues. One issue with the 4343 is that you have many sound sources producing overlapping frequencies, coming to you at different times (slight phase issues) with widely varying polar plots. This will cause a smeared sound that is more apparent on some sources than others and to some extent is room dependent.

Cool the design of the 4435 directly focuses on just these issues. But then it has the demon of having a harsh top end due to the high frequencies being made up of distortion components due to the use of a compression driver in it's break up mode. It is often described as lacking air or extension. This is due to the less than ideal nature of it's UHF reproduction. Then there is the 15" woofer being asked to slog all the way up to 1000Hz. These problems can be addressed by adding a mid bass and true tweeter... uh oh, now we have the problems of the 4343.:)

They are all compromises. Pick your battles and fight valiantly.

Widget

John Nebel
08-11-2004, 10:35 AM
Widget,

I hate to admit it, but do have some test equipment around somewhere.

The 1/3 octave response is within JBL specs, but obviously not everywhere in the room.

+/- 3db

Should try measuring the 6332's sometime.

John

PS

Yeah, there is no free or ideal lunch to be found.

boputnam
08-11-2004, 11:10 AM
Goodness! I've caused quite a stir!! :o

Seems I've missed much of the exchange, that has since been evaporated - pity. There's some fantastic wit out here.

Truth is, gang, I liked the 4343's because the baffle colour was correct. :thmbsup:

There, I've said it. Only now can I start the Twelve Step Program... :slink:

Mr. Widget
08-11-2004, 11:32 AM
Originally posted by boputnam
Goodness! I've caused quite a stir!! :o



Trouble maker! :yes:

Zilch
08-11-2004, 11:52 AM
The big plus of 4430 and 4435 is that they are basically "Plug 'n' Play." (Unless you're Figge, of course.)

Most of the work has been done in the design and engineering, and the result is very forgiving.

I decided long ago I wasn't gonna spend the rest of my life re-tweakin' the "ideal" balance of a 4-way depending upon where the cat decided to sit, or the nature of the source material.

There's no "sweet spot" here. I'm just as happy listening from the other room....

[Too damn LOUD in there, usually, anyway. ;) ]

:rockon1: :bouncy:

Ian Mackenzie
08-11-2004, 12:08 PM
John,

Widget raises some exellent points and raising the bar with either design can add that final nirvana to your audio pleasure.

The 1/3 octave RTA is fine for averaged in room response and identifying a dip or peak here and there+- 3db.

However, the seemless integration of the driver set which is over 2 or more octaves each 35-300, 300-1200, 1200-9500, 9500- 20000 is imho far more exacting than +-3 db and you won't see this on an RTA mid field in the room.

For example, you may recall in the old days, a pre amp would have its RIAA response quoted at +-0.5 db and on the better upmarket models +-0.2 db. The significance here is on the perceptual tonal balance, thin, forward, recessed, edgy or muffled by the listener or reviewer.

The ear is unfortunately is quite sensitive to overall broadband spectral shifts and the 4343 having a larger portion of its response direct rather than reflected or reverberant makes this more critical.

For this reason the 4435 is undoubtably easier to setup and live with, needless to say the advantages in a control room.

But that does not mean to say the 4343 is a lesser loudspeaker, it and its later versions the 4344, and 4344mk11 did enjoy 2 decades of production for the elite Japanese audio buff.

What happened to Giskard? Seems he bugged out of the audio fire fly. Oh well, we caught him still frame with some amusing quotes.

Ian

Robh3606
08-11-2004, 01:39 PM
"However, the seemless integration of the driver set which is over 2 or more octaves each 35-300, 300-1200, 1200-9500, 9500- 20000 is imho far more exacting than +-3 db and you won't see this on an RTA mid field in the room."

Why not?? You set your balance at the "seat". I can see .5db if I change my resolution and I know its good cause of the comparison with Smart Live. It is paramount you have good driver ballance but what you measure at 1ft is simply not what you hear. It's the total of the on axis and power response. If the off axis is ragged and you are flat on axis the sum will be worse than the on axis. No amount of EQ will work because you cannot correct the off axis response and the EQ destroys your once flat on axis response. That was a driving design considerstion behind the 443x monitors. The flat power response allows you to really dial them in with EQ with some immunity to the room and power response irregularities present in most other designs. In that aspect the 443x have a distinct advantage over the 434x monitors. They don't have the same inroom power response as the 443x. Anyone have directivity plots for the 4343/4344/4345?? I would love to see what is going on with them. Even though they don't have uniform directivity they sound damn good off axis and seem to remain fairly well balanced. I wonder just how much improvement there is over the larger 4 way systems and the 443X's. In the developement paper they compare the 4331 2 way and the Urei 813 which the 4430 simply trashes off axis. Wonder if the same holds true for the 434x's. If you think about it above the 300 hz crossover the 10' directivity is close to the 2308. The really wierd one would have to be the transition to the 2405. Especially mounted off to the side.

That said I have my 4344 running behind me as I type and damn things are just awesome. What ever flaws are in the design of these 4 ways I can happily live with.

Rob:)

Chas
08-11-2004, 04:15 PM
My "Rookie" assessment, (with my 43XX, S-22-2 or 4430s full range or biamped at 100Hz to some vented Altecs) so far, is that the 43XX seems to take apart the music and reassemble it. I have never heard this phonomenen before. Does that make sense? Probably not.

The 4430 excels at "Audiophile stuff" like imaging, etc. Stand up, walk around, nothing changes much. BUT, no air and midrange definition The 43XX stuff, simply put. reproduces SOUND. To hell with imaging, depth, inner detail (what is that anyway?).

I think it was Ian who pointed out that the 43XX makes use of the energy differently, in term of focus and concentration. The 4430/35 uses it for different purposes. In my listening room, the jury is heavily favouring the 43XX to this point. But, I should add a qualification: I haven't opened my 4430's as yet, checked polarity, upgraded caps, etc. Lots of work to do here!:cheers:

Figge
08-11-2004, 04:46 PM
Originally posted by Chas
I haven't opened my 4430's as yet,


well...dont! :)

Ian Mackenzie
08-11-2004, 05:09 PM
Why not?? You set your balance at the "seat". I can see .5db if I change my resolution and I know its good cause of the comparison with Smart Live.

So do you put your Head in a Vice when your Done!

Muhahaha.

Sorry, What a meant was the shelving effect of the Pads should be set 1st with a tone or IMP test and measured (not an averaged pink noise).

If that is then flat then your job with the RTA/1/3 octave Eq will be purely for listening positon/room etc if any.

I'll bet your 4344's sound nice.



Ian;)

Robh3606
08-11-2004, 06:28 PM
What honey? I can't hear you! Oh crap I can't turn my head wait a minute! :banghead:

I got ya Ian. That way you can match the pair so the attenuation is the same for both cabinets which is a biggy. I find I use the EQ to help match the two speakers more than anything else so the imaging really dials in better through the lower midrange.

Rob :)

Figge
08-12-2004, 01:56 AM
Originally posted by Zilch
The big plus of 4430 and 4435 is that they are basically "Plug 'n' Play." (Unless you're Figge, of course.)


:cheers: :p

Ian Mackenzie
08-12-2004, 03:42 AM
Okay Robert,

I have not thought about the R/L symmetry and lower midrange Eq , I must try that then I borrow the Beringer Pro Ultra Curve.

Ian