JBL 4411 Control Monitor score

[Gannon]

Hi everyone....... after owning a pair of L100's for a few years and using them in my home studio I had the itch to try the 4311's . Today I woke up and found an excellent pair of 4411's on my local Craigslist for a reasonable price. I need to refoam these which is no problem but until I do I was hoping for a bit of commentary on these as there is not much info out there on these. Lots of info on the 4311's but not much on these. Any info even subjective sound commentary is very welcomed in this thread. Cheers!

[majick47]

Pro version of L112 if I remember correctly, should sound just as good. Curious as to price you paid for them since I also have seen 4411 for for sale needing refoam.

[BMWCCA]

Lots of info on the 4311's but not much on these. Any info even subjective sound commentary is very welcomed in this thread. Cheers!Get your foam kits from Rick Cobb. The 128H woofer used in the 4411 had a couple different cone diameters and Rick will get you the right ones. Do it right and you'll love the result.

What you have is a far better monitor than the 4311 and as the owner of the consumer version L112, I can tell you they have a great sound. I'm told yours have an even better network than the L112 though I've never compared them. Enjoy!

[Gannon]

I paid $200... They are near mint plus I got a Marantz Model Thirty console amp(Integrated 60wpc) thrown in for $20 extra.... needs work has a hum probably a bad cap.

[Gannon]

Can't wait to get them re-foamed. I liked my L100's enough to keep an eye open for the studio versions when these fell in my lap today. I will probably have my speaker guy re-foam these as he has re-foamed dozens of speakers for me and always does a killer job. Didn't know there were different size foam kits for this model.

[Doc Mark]

HI, Gannon,

Like you, I found a very nice pair of 4411's for just $200. I thought that was a fantastic price, and after our very own Edgewound refoamed them, they sound very nice, indeed! Had I found them before we got our L300's, I would have added a nice subwoofer, and been done with my JBL needs. They sound that good! However, I got the 4411's after we'd already gotten used to our L300's, and both Sweet Bride and I prefer the sound of the L300's. This is not to say the 4411's don't sound great, because they do, indeed! It's just that we prefer the horns of our L300's, and the deeper bass, too. But, add a sub to your 4411's, just to help out with the LVB, and you'll have a combo that's hard to beat! Congrats on scoring yours, and have fun with them. May we see some photos of the, please? Take care, and God Bless!

Every Good Wish,
Doc

[BMWCCA]

I will probably have my speaker guy re-foam these as he has re-foamed dozens of speakers for me and always does a killer job. Didn't know there were different size foam kits for this model.Just make sure he knows they go on the back of the cone! Apparently JBL used two-different size cones. So far all of mine (4) have used the larger surround (larger than a "stock" 12" surround) but weren't all the same size! Here's how Rick describes it:
The standard 12" woofer cone diameter used in the loudspeaker industry is 9.50 inches in diameter.
The majority of JBL 12" woofers and passive radiators in the field that were produced over the years have incorporated a larger diameter cone.
Due to different production runs these "larger" JBL cones can actually measure anywhere from 9.60" ~ 9.75" in diameter. The majority of these larger type cones measure very near 9.75" in diameter.
JBL has also sold speaker systems with 12" woofers and factory replacement re-cone kits using "smaller" diameter cones that measure between 9.4" ~ 9.5" in diameter. These "smaller" JBL cones never measure over 9.5" in diameter.
This smaller 9.5" cone has been incorporated into in some of the woofers used in the L150 systems and into some 2214H woofers used in other various JBL systems.

[Gannon]

Thanks for all the info guys..... I will give my speaker guy the info and post some pics as soon as I can figure out how to do it here. I would love to find a pair of L300's for my main system but they would not fit for my small home studio application I purchased them for. My main stereo system/home theater has Polk SDA 1C's driven by a Sansui BA-5000 300wpc amp controlled by my Sansui AU-20000 170wpc Integrated which also drives pair of Infinity WTLC's with the famous Walsh super tweeters.

[majick47]

Gannon I'm sure you will love the 4411 and $200 was a great price.

[BMWCCA]

I will . . . post some pics as soon as I can figure out how to do it here.

:thmbsup:
http://audioheritage.org/vbulletin/faq.php?faq=vb3_reading_posting#faq_vb3_attachment s

[Gannon]

Ok here are some pics..... hopefully this works

[BMWCCA]

Beeeautiful! :applaud:

[MikeBrewster77]

Nice score - they look well cared for, and at $200 appear to be an excellent find!

[Gannon]

They are cosmetically very nice..... and I haven't even cleaned them up yet. There are a couple small scuffs in the veneer that I may try and touch up but otherwise they are great. I pulled the woofs today and should have them re-foamed and rocking out sometime soon.

[hjames]

Wow - they look very nice, refoams will be worthwhile - you did real good!


They are cosmetically very nice..... and I haven't even cleaned them up yet. There are a couple small scuffs in the veneer that I may try and touch up but otherwise they are great. I pulled the woofs today and should have them re-foamed and rocking out sometime soon.

[Gannon]

Thanks all! BMWCCA......so let me guess, you have a BMW motorcycle and live and ride near the Parkway in Virginia.... or am I totally off base?

[BMWCCA]

Thanks all! BMWCCA......so let me guess, you have a BMW motorcycle and live and ride near the Parkway in Virginia.... or am I totally off base?That would not be incorrect! ;)
Though most of us who live here avoid the Parkway other than off-season. There are plenty of other great roads where you don't have to battle the Winnebagos or what we lovingly refer to here as Honda-bagos; the parades of "touring" bikes with drink-holders and sound systems pulling trailers.

[Gannon]

There are lots of great places to ride there for sure. Wish I knew the roads a little better like the locals as there are some great twisties. I ride down there every year from Michigan and will be there in August with the GF on the back. I have an '04 R1150RT right now and have owned several other BMW's in the past, but am usually on a Guzzi or Triumph.

[Gannon]

I know I'm hijacking my own thread but BTW... please note I said "near" the Parkway. I guess I'm a tourist, but I usually come into Charlottesville for a night of fun and ride the Parkway the next day cause it's a straight shot down to Boone or Asheville N.C. then over to OBX for a few days of surfing!;)http://www.audioheritage.org/vbulletin/images/smilies/smile.gif

[BMWCCA]

That's funny! By the time August rolls around, we're usually on the way to Michigan to escape the Virginia heat and humidity. Crystal Lake in Frankfort is where my Mom is that time of year.

Come a bit earlier this year and you'll find some good riding along with these folks:
http://bmwra.org/rally/
http://www.bmwmoa.org/rally09
http://www.bmwmoa.org/rally09//bmw_moa_to_ra_american_heritage_ride

I know there's also a large Guzzi rally not far away from here every June, too, in Buena Vista, VA.

[Gannon]

Thanks for the tips. Crystal Lake is great.... been there quite a few times. Yes, it's funny but most of the summer we spend on Lake Michigan. Summer is the time to take m/c trips so a few days in the furnace until we get to Hatteras is bearable.

[Fred Sanford]

I just lead a ride for the Honda Hawk GT rally in Natural Bridge, VA yesterday (ECHR '09, our 13th annual). Yep, the BRP is scenic, but it's the backroads that provide the real fun. We took the BRP only to get between 43, 60 and 56 dropping down off the mountains.

The main circuit was Buchanan > Paint Bank > Bath > Lexington > Natural Bridge. These routes focused on scenery, sweepers, and scrappy mountain passes. The Hawk GTs are lightweight, low-powered sportbikes that just eat up the twisty stuff.

What a blast...

je

[groover]

Didn't see anybody specifically address the difference between 4311 and 4411. As the owner of a pair of each I'll say this. I like the 4311b's but I LOVE the 4411's. 44's have more bass and better, tighter punch. I just refoamed 4 - 4411's and agree that Ricks kits are great and easy. Right now I'm using the 4 - 4411's in the front and 2 - 4311b's in the rear of a home theatre setup.

[BMWCCA]

Didn't see anybody specifically address the difference between 4311 and 4411.Wasn't much need. The original poster figured it out. One has a real woofer and a real tweeter. The other has that L100 stuff. ;)

[badman]

Wasn't much need. The original poster figured it out. One has a real woofer and a real tweeter. The other has that L100 stuff. ;)

Hey waitaminnit!

The 123A/123A-3 are excellent drivers. The cone tweeter isn't the most extended thing in the world, but does allow a fairly low crossover relative to a dome.

So, take it easy! L100s weren't a great design, but the drivers used were very good.

[BMWCCA]

So, take it easy! L100s weren't a great design, but the drivers used were very good.No malice intended. But the original 123 was designed specifically for smaller cabinets, or in-wall mounting, as a compromise compared to other "more robust" 12" JBLs of the time. Certainly not a bad driver and (as Harvey says) it's an excellent guitar-amp speaker. But it's a bit of a stretch to call it a woofer in the ancient sense because JBL compromised on it's low-end purposely to realize other benefits. Similarly with the tweeter, which was most likely more of an economic consideration. Granted the drivers in any vintage JBL are usually "very good". But, in most cases, there are often better ones available—some of the same vintage—that will outperform those built for a compromised intended use, or other constraints. In this case a 128H does a better job producing low-frequency and an 044 does a better job producing high-frequency. Esentially the jobs of a woofer and a tweeter.

In answer to your question about why no one delineated the differences between the L100 and the 4411: The OP has the 4411s and had owned L100s. Most figured by now he'd understand the difference, as you seem to do, and that perhaps he'd now appreciate my tongue-in-cheek response to your statement. ;)

[Fred Sanford]

No malice intended. But the original 123 was designed specifically for smaller cabinets, or in-wall mounting, as a compromise compared to other "more robust" 12" JBLs of the time. Certainly not a bad driver and (as Harvey says) it's an excellent guitar-amp speaker.

Check yourself- I'm pretty sure it's not the L100 12"s that Harvey recommends for guitar use. Maybe the "D123", but not the woofer 123.

je

[BMWCCA]

Check yourself- I'm pretty sure it's not the L100 12"s that Harvey recommends for guitar use. Maybe the "D123", but not the woofer 123.Correct. But all derived from the same original space-saving design intended for in-wall mounting between the studs. I've never heard any iteration that performed the woofer function with the same authority as any of the 128H variants, which was the point of the original comment.

And, yes, I do own an original 123, and have plenty of experience with L100s, though I don't feel the need to own any of the latter! ;)

[4313B]

L100s weren't a great design, but the drivers used were very good.This is a point we've argued about since day two of the forum (day one was taken up introducing ourselves).

There was a whole community back then that had a completely different philosophy than JBL had - They had a fundamental problem with JBL building such 'high value' transducers and paring them up with such 'low value' filter designs. They thought the money was better spent on SOTA filter design paired with lesser quality transducers.

We've already seen what some enterprising folks have done with network redesign with respect to the L100/L100A/4310/4311 to what they consider positive effect.

Plenty of people still like these systems perfectly well in their original form.





With respect to David's 4411 - I personally think it's quite an improvement over the L100 or 4311. And why shouldn't it be?


Pro version of L112 if I remember correctlyKind of, I've answered this question many times before. Greg did the L112 (and the L96 and L150A pretty much mimicked it). David did the 4411. They had completely different network designs, and thus, a completely different presentation for what are essentially the same transducer set (4411 used the ribbon wire LE5 while the Consumer models used the round wire LE5).

[mike]

I just can't figure out why the mere existence of the L100 continues to upset so many people and why other speakers have to always be described in relative terms of how much better they are than an L100.

Mike

[badman]

No malice intended. But the original 123 was designed specifically for smaller cabinets, or in-wall mounting, as a compromise compared to other "more robust" 12" JBLs of the time. Certainly not a bad driver and (as Harvey says) it's an excellent guitar-amp speaker. But it's a bit of a stretch to call it a woofer in the ancient sense because JBL compromised on it's low-end purposely to realize other benefits. Similarly with the tweeter, which was most likely more of an economic consideration. Granted the drivers in any vintage JBL are usually "very good". But, in most cases, there are often better ones available—some of the same vintage—that will outperform those built for a compromised intended use, or other constraints. In this case a 128H does a better job producing low-frequency and an 044 does a better job producing high-frequency. Esentially the jobs of a woofer and a tweeter.

In answer to your question about why no one delineated the differences between the L100 and the 4411: The OP has the 4411s and had owned L100s. Most figured by now he'd understand the difference, as you seem to do, and that perhaps he'd now appreciate my tongue-in-cheek response to your statement. ;)

If the 123A was designed for smaller cabinets, then the designers were pretty stupid. The Vas is quite high (235L), and the Fs very low, neither of which are condusive to small cabinets. Further, it has a pretty healthy 7.87mm Xmax.

Compromised on its low end? 25Hz and .5 Qts is anything BUT a low end compromise. These drivers are more low-end capable (as far as alignment goes) than most modern subwoofer drivers, which will typically have a lower Vas (and reference efficiency) and lower Qts to allow smaller vented cabs. In most any alignment, the 123A will do better at reproducing the bottom octave than the highly damped 128H. The 128H in contrast has a very low Qts at about .24. The 128H DOES have higher reference efficiency but in getting the really deep stuff out, the 123A has the advantage.

In the L100, the 123A was crippled in the low bass by a too-high too-small vented cabinet. It was a god-awful alignment, but did reproduce the boomy bass sound that many people really liked. Add the minimalist crossover (which does have some benefits besides cost) and you have a speaker with a lot of personality and a sound that was very appealing to many people.

But any negative attributes of that personality aren't due to the 123A which is a superb woofer.

[BMWCCA]

Compromised on its low end? 25Hz and .5 Qts is anything BUT a low end compromise. These drivers are more low-end capable (as far as alignment goes) than most modern subwoofer drivers, which will typically have a lower Vas (and reference efficiency) and lower Qts to allow smaller vented cabs. In most any alignment, the 123A will do better at reproducing the bottom octave than the highly damped 128H. The 128H in contrast has a very low Qts at about .24. The 128H DOES have higher reference efficiency but in getting the really deep stuff out, the 123A has the advantage.

In the L100, the 123A was crippled in the low bass by a too-high too-small vented cabinet. It was a god-awful alignment, but did reproduce the boomy bass sound that many people really liked. Add the minimalist crossover (which does have some benefits besides cost) and you have a speaker with a lot of personality and a sound that was very appealing to many people.

But any negative attributes of that personality aren't due to the 123A which is a superb woofer.

I know the mantra here is "more data, less wank", or whatever. But I can't measure them. Nor does driver-spec data always correlate to the performance you'd think. But this is not some condemnation of the L100, in fact the question was comparing the 4311 to the 4411. The L100 is in a larger cab than the 4412A, and almost exactly the same size as the L112, yet one produces much less bass than the others.

The question shouldn't be why does everyone insult the L100, but should be why can't one say one driver is better than another without L100 owners getting insulted? How many L300/4333 owners get insulted when told their system would improve if they only would replace their woofers with a 2235? If you can't compare the drivers in one system to another without causing antagonism, then why not have every thread on this forum locked after the first post, too?

If your intent is to answer the question about driver differences between the two systems under discussion in the original post, then have at it. Tell us why one member posts that he likes his 4311b but loves his 4412s, and how his observations are wrong. :banghead:

Sheesh. If it wasn't Summer, I'd think everyone here had cabin fever!

[mike]

The amazing thing about the 123a-1 is that it combines a low free air resonance with a very extended upper range.

The early L100's with the inline drivers crossed over at 2500Hz and are surprisingly natural sounding in this region.

Mike

[badman]

I know the mantra here is "more data, less wank", or whatever. But I can't measure them. Nor does driver-spec data always correlate to the performance you'd think. But this is not some condemnation of the L100, in fact the question was comparing the 4311 to the 4411. The L100 is in a larger cab than the 4412A, and almost exactly the same size as the L112, yet one produces much less bass than the others.

The question shouldn't be why does everyone insult the L100, but should be why can't one say one driver is better than another without L100 owners getting insulted? How many L300/4333 owners get insulted when told their system would improve if they only would replace their woofers with a 2235? If you can't compare the drivers in one system to another without causing antagonism, then why not have every thread on this forum locked after the first post, too?

If your intent is to answer the question about driver differences between the two systems under discussion in the original post, then have at it. Tell us why one member posts that he likes his 4311b but loves his 4412s, and how his observations are wrong. :banghead:

Sheesh. If it wasn't Summer, I'd think everyone here had cabin fever!

The issue I took with your post was one of facts. You seem to be ignoring the fact that alignment changes have a significant influence upon the bass performance of a speaker systems. That's a design question, not a driver question. The L100 is vented MUCH too high, creating a boomy, 1 note bass, with nothing significant below tuning. You state that 123A is designed to work in small cabinets. Not really the case, it requires every bit the cabinet of nearly any 12", and more than the vast majority. Max flat sealed alignment is about 7 ft^3.

You talk about it's compromised low end. The L100 has a compromised low end due to a poor alignment choice. The 123A in a proper alignment has gobs of bass.

A couple more points- I'm not a L100 owner. I'm not getting offended, I don't think anyone is. And nobody's questioning the OP for his preference. He's welcome to his preference. But you're spreading inaccurate information. Don't do that!

Comparing drivers is one thing. Comparing drivers based upon their use in completed systems, one of which is very poorly designed, is akin to testing one brand of racecar fuel in a honda civic to another brand in a proper vehicle (I'm going to assume the 4412s were properly aligned).

Make no mistake, the 123A is NOT bass-compromised, it is a racecar fuel driver.

[4313B]

Just for grins I went ahead and checked what BB6P wanted to do with both drivers in a High Fidelity Closed Box, High Fidelity Vented Box and Extended Bass Vented Box:

It's fairly easy to see where JBL came up with the ~ 1.6 and ~ 4.0 cubic foot volumes for the L112 and L150/L150A.

[midlife]

Off topic and subjective, but I am looking to do some LF driver swapping to improve the sound and balance of my L65s. Would 123A drivers be a possible improvement? And I am not very technical, so what do the below graphs demonstrate?

[mike]

I have heard of people doing this and liking the results but I don't know if there are any theoretical wrongs in doing it. I would bet that it might improve the midrange.


Mike

[badman]

Just for grins I went ahead and checked what BB6P wanted to do with both drivers in a High Fidelity Closed Box, High Fidelity Vented Box and Extended Bass Vented Box:

It's fairly easy to see where JBL came up with the ~ 1.6 and ~ 4.0 cubic foot volumes for the L112 and L150/L150A.

A little different than some of my modeling (BTW: I believe accepted MMs for 123A is 100g, not 58, not that it really matters much here), but you see that the 123A tends to have excellent extension about an octave deeper than the 128H in any max-flat alignment. The 128H is definitely more of a small-box speaker due to the very low Qes (strong motor on that puppy). Glad we got that 'small box design' thing resolved.

As to the L65, the 128H would actually be more likely as a replacement since the original 122a was a very low Fs, highly damped driver, very similar in Thiele-Smalls to the 128H.

The 123A is excellently suited to open baffle usage, for those willing to break the 'maximum output' mold. This is my preferred usage of it, and it really sings in that app (mounted near floor level on a very squat baffle, similar in some respects to a trapezoidal variant of the JE labs style)

[4313B]

(BTW: I believe accepted MMs for 123A is 100g, not 58, not that it really matters much here)I suspect Harris Tech "fixed" it because an Mms of 58g is supported by the rest of the published parameters. My guess is that the JBL published Mms of 85g is correct and one or more of the other parameters was fat fingered. This is a perfect example of "measure your own specific driver". I'm not going to buy one to measure it, but if I had an application requiring one I would definitely measure it first.

The published parameters for the 2213 also appear to be jacked and JBL never published the 2212 parameters.

Here is the published parameters again for anyone who cares:

http://www.jblproservice.com/pdf/Thiele%20Small%20Parameters/Theile%20Parameters.pdf

Take them with a grain of salt, some of them are definitely off. For example, I think we went through this before with the E145.

The 123A is excellently suited to open baffle usageYep, could be. Someone who likes it should do a project and post a thread about it. :yes:
Off topic and subjective, but I am looking to do some LF driver swapping to improve the sound and balance of my L65s.That isn't going to happen with the woofer sitting right next to the floor unless you're going to cross it over really low (which isn't possible with that specific driver set). They are what they are.

If you want to improve the balance build yourself some nice mirror imaged L166 type boxes, put your components in them and get them up off the floor (Don't bother veneering the boxes until you know that you like the way they sound).

The 128H is the suggested replacement (in pairs) for the 122, 126 or 129.

[badman]

4313B:

I agree, the MMS is much more likely to be high. It's an awful thing to have to measure, either via subtractive motor strength or disassembly. While it's a lightweight coil assembly, the coated cones are quite a bit heavier than 'plain paper'.

The 2213 and 123A both appear to be accurate specs, as far as my testing was concerned. Fs, Qms, Qes, (and accordingly Qts), Re, Le, were all well within tolerance. I didn't test Vas but suspect it to be accurate based upon efficiency in-application.

Point taken re: post a thread. We'll see what sort of documentation I can pull together.

[Gannon]

I know it's an older thread but I am just reporting back that after re-foam and many hours use these speakers are FANTASTIC and have for the time being replaced my L100's in my home studio with these 4411's. I used them during the recording of my bands new album and couldn't be happier. Thanks to everyone here!

[Gannon]

Whoa... just went back and saw what got stirred up from my original thread. I took off for a couple weeks on my bike and started recording using these 4411's and never checked back on my thread until I had time just recently. Sorry to poke a hornets nest here.
BTW... my L100's went on loan to my old friend and bass player (for his new home studio) from my band after using the 4411's. Most Excellent!

[Akira]

The original poster figured it out. One has a real woofer and a real tweeter. The other has that L100 stuff. ;)
The LE20 is hugely under rated because of it's falling off response above 15K. (actually falling off from around 10K) But, it does exactly what it's original designers intended... a seamless extension of the mid driver that mimics the response of the Altec 604's upper compression driver... with the sweet sound of paper no less.

I like this tweeter. Applied in it's original application in the 4310 monitor it was a perfect instrument for the vinyl limitation of 15K in the golden age of rock. :)

I own a pair of 4411's and like them a lot. Evolution wise, they are probably the best of a series in a long line of pedigree that was spawned by the Great Grand Daddy of them all--the venerable 4310. BUT, for listening to Carly Simon's "No Secrets," Grand Dad takes all of his own off spring to school... after all, it was the 4310 that mixed those golden classic albums in the FIRST PLACE. Sorry, but in this case that 'L100 stuff' rules.

[Eaulive]

The L100 really has the power of heating up any thread :applaud:

I have a love / hate relationship with this speaker, it's hard to talk about it :D