What are you using with your JBL 4345?

[dkalsi]

I am current building a JBL 4345 Clone (-a project which is moving super slow since work is super busy now a days - i.e., 65+hours a week).

I was just curious what equipment other 4345 owners are using with their JBL 4345s. What you may have tried in the past and would/would-not recommend.

I have the following list of components on hand at the moment:

- Vintage Scott 296 Intergrated Amplifier (Serviced by NOSValves)
- Vintage Eico HF-85 and HF-87 (Both serviced by NOSValves).
- Plinius SA100 MKIII + DIY Hifi Supply Django TVC Preamp with S&B Trannies
- Benchmark USB DAC1
- Ashly XR2001 x-over (currently not in use)

The Plinius+Django are currently hooked up to my Klipschorns.
The Scott 296 and the Eico are hooked up to pair of Cornwalls.

The above is what I have at my disposal to try with the 4345s whenever I do get to completing them.

I was wanted to get an idea what others are using or would recommend I try down the line.

[BMWCCA]

FWIW, I have a pair of 4345 clones, too. Cabinets by Reissen, new or re-cone drivers, crossovers from the CC design in the 4345 DIY threads so they must run bi-amped. I plugged them into an existing system in my living room, with the addition of an Ashly XR1001, consisting of:

Soundcraftsmen Pro-Control Four pre-amp
Soundcraftsmen Pro-EQ 44
Crown D150A-II for upper section
Crown DC300A-II for the 2245s

:cheers:

[remusr]

McIntosh C41 PreAmp & MC352 (350wpc) Amp. Speakers need to be used frequently to stay "warm". System needs 2-3 hrs on before sounds stable & good bass. Acoustics of basement 17'x25' room have not been optimized, pool table kinda inhibits that.

[dkalsi]

McIntosh C41 PreAmp & MC352 (350wpc) Amp. Speakers need to be used frequently to stay "warm". System needs 2-3 hrs on before sounds stable & good bass. Acoustics of basement 17'x25' room have not been optimized, pool table kinda inhibits that.


No one is using tubes with the system?

Remusr, are you not bi-amping?

I would imagine tubes on the high-end, with solid state on the bottom end would be a good combination. Just guessing though. I personally have not owned/tried enough equipment to come to a conclusion regarding which I prefer more (solid state, or tubes)

Components I have tried are: NOS Valve VRDs, and Welbonre DRDs, Baldwin Tube Amp, Juicy Music Blueberry and Juicy Music Merlin.
Of the above components, my favorite were Welbonre DRDs and Juicy Merlin.

[Ducatista47]

No one is using tubes with the system?

Remusr, are you not bi-amping?

I would imagine tubes on the high-end, with solid state on the bottom end would be a good combination. Just guessing though. I personally have not owned/tried enough equipment to come to a conclusion regarding which I prefer more (solid state, or tubes)

Components I have tried are: NOS Valve VRDs, and Welbonre DRDs, Baldwin Tube Amp, Juicy Music Blueberry and Juicy Music Merlin.
Of the above components, my favorite were Welbonre DRDs and Juicy Merlin.

I bi-amp and use tubes all around. I have an extremely nice small tube amp I use for the top. You will find that the top of the 4345 needs very few watts unless you want to misuse it as a PA. A tube amp will not destroy the components if it clips now and then and the sound quality is much better. I would not doubt that the Welbourne sounds great, outstanding gear.

If you want to audition your small tube amps for this role, might I suggest using very good headphones if you have them (until the speakers are completed). They will reveal more about the amp's all important first watt than any speaker will. At 98dB/watt/meter, the top of the 4345 is pretty much a first watt speaker. An ideal setup for this would be a used Stax SRX Mk3/SRD7 adapter box setup, because it uses the speaker outputs. About $200 US used, it will also be a great thing to have anyway. A little light on the bass (they were studio monitors like the 4345 was, and some recording engineers prefer slightly recessed bass; you can hear deeper into the mix) but very accurate.

I used to use a big solid state amp for the 2245H, but with time I came to prefer a 60 watt JoLida 502B I had around for that duty. It sounded more natural musically. This is one speaker I do not think benefits from the death grip a big solid state amp imparts. Too much damping.

Clark

[Mr. Widget]

This is one speaker I do not think benefits from the death grip a big solid state amp imparts. Too much damping.Not to argue, but I'd suggest this area of the speaker's performance is too room dependent to make such a statement. I don't doubt that in your room the additional bloom of the JoLida is complimentary, but I am sure this isn't a universal truth.


Widget

[Ducatista47]

Not to argue, but I'd suggest this area of the speaker's performance is too room dependent to make such a statement. I don't doubt that in your room the additional bloom of the JoLida is complimentary, but I am sure this isn't a universal truth.
Widget
You are probably correct, but as a woofer the 2245H is unusual. It has a light cone for its size and doesn't develop as much inertia as some other eighteens. So it needs less braking/damping. The 502B amp is a pretty solid push pull unit and controls it pretty well.

It could be my room, but after months of exposure to both a giant UREI and the 502, I found the 502 much more musical/less clinical and dry. It sounded more like live music, at least the acoustic music I crave. I was higher than a kite on the SS sound until I switched back on a lark. I was floored how much more pleasing the tube driven rendition was to me. String bass was like night and day. The big SS amp sounded like the bass was coming out of a shoe box by comparison. Just choked off. YMMV! It is possible a better SS amp might help, but I could tell that the problem was not amplifier quality, but rather damping. The notes died too fast to sound natural.

I guess it is all what you are used to hearing, but the tubes sound a lot more like live music and I can't think of anything else that matters after that.

Clark

[Ralph856]

I was higher than a kite on the SS sound until I switched back on a lark.

Clark, I love that statement in a sort of poetical sense....above and beyond its relevance to the 2245H.

[speakerdave]

Clark,

How are you compensating when biamping?

[Ducatista47]

Ralph, the truth is the 4345 is not at all hard to amp. The real issue is that it rewards quality, so the better the source and amplification the better the experience. Some will certainly prefer big solid state on the bottom, I used to myself. In fact, I kind of started the ball rolling here on that issue with the suggestion of small tubes on top and big SS for the 2245H.

The 4345 does not lack for the typical big JBL monitor ability to play really, really loud without distortion and that would need big power. Likewise, if it is going to be SS on top be sure to use more amp than you would need for tube drive. SS overdrive (clipping) could kill the transducers. The 4345 comes from the era when Pete Townsend used stacked 4350s in the studio to monitor playback. The results of that sort of foolishness are 1) his famous tinnitus and 2) the otherwise absurd power recommendations from JBL for these monitors.

I am really liking your Sun Ra signature.

Clark

[Ducatista47]

Clark,

How are you compensating when biamping?
Do you mean levels, as in shelving? Or between amps? Life is a bit tough here right now and I am not understanding simple things. Could you rephrase the question so a brain dead individual could understand it?

Sorry, Clark

[speakerdave]

I believe neither the woofer or the midrange cone are level at crossover. Off the shelf slopes will not match up well. I've tried it. It doesn't sound right. I tried a crossover with separately selectable slopes on the high pass and low pass and that sounded better, but I can't remember what the difference was I had dialed in; it was probably 6 dB, 18 LP and 12 HP. That sounded pretty close. I also tried the 5234A with correct cards. You could definitely hear the improvement in the crossover region, but the overall sound was grungy, and I could not leave it in.

The point of my question was that if you were not compensating, the improvement you are hearing with the tube amp on the woofer may be related to the rebalancing of lower and upper bass.

I like tubes on the upper three elements also, but I've had to scale down my pile of electronics crap in the LR for awhile, and am listening full range again.

[Mr. Widget]

I believe neither the woofer or the midrange cone are level at crossover. Off the shelf slopes will not match up well. I've tried it. It doesn't sound right.Yeah, there is a thread here on which Bo describes in detail how he has his Bryston 10B setup. It certainly was not a straight up second order butterworth...

Clark, on your comments on the dry sounding bass from SS amps, I can understand wanting a less dry sound, though my preference tends to be on the dry side. I like my champagne that way as well. ;)


Widget

[Ducatista47]

Thanks, Dave, now even I get it. Biamping crossover issues. My answer is of little help. A friend is building a unique crossover of superb quality tailored for the job.

In the meantime I have my full range augmented rig and my Stax Omega II headphones. Unfortunately my life is so crazy these days I have to steal time from sleeping to listen. I am very tired but musically satisfied. :)

Widget, a good reason to ignore everything I say is that I am a green tea and dark ale guy. Just not at the same time. Like my Stax/Hammer Dynamics split personality. :duel: If I were not me I would listen to you before I would listen to me!

Thank goodness Bill Evans sounds great no matter what rig I use.

Clark

[speakerdave]

Yeah, there is a thread here on which Bo describes in detail how he has his Bryston 10B setup . . . .

I believe I've read that recently, and I don't think the special tailoring Bryston did for him was described.

[speakerdave]

. . . . Thank goodness Bill Evans sounds great no matter what rig I use.

Yeah, and Renee Fleming . . . . wait, no that's not right. There's definitely a payoff there with a system that's working.

[BMWCCA]

Yeah, and Renee Fleming . . . . wait, no that's not right. There's definitely a payoff there with a system that's working.
Even if I never try tubes on the top of my 4345s, I'll always be indebted to Clark for the pointer to Bill Evans. Quintessense is still one I reach for to show-off how delicately the 4345s can handle soft volume. I haven't owned a tube amp in almost four decades though I still have my C-20 Mac pre-amp.

Not a devout Renee Fleming fan from what I've heard. Maybe more interest in Dawn Upshaw who is the Artistic director for the graduate program in Vocal Arts where my daughter is currently an undergrad singer studying under Rufus Muller, FWIW.

[speakerdave]

I like Dawn Upshaw too. I recently got a copy of Voices of Light because of my interest in Messian, and she was a bonus discovery. I've been listening to lieder and the difficulty is finding recordings in which the song is not spoiled by the performer's penchant for bravura. She is one who does not do that, and I'm really grateful.

The bravura business is what you may have heard about Renee Fleming. That's what you get with albums of aria's. The aria's are in the operas to show off the voices. It's all well and good, but it gets old, unless you listen to the whole opera, which who does anyway? I heard R. Fleming in recital at Zellerbach a couple of years ago. The program was almost all lieder, and it was exquisite.

[4344]

Excuse me for my jump in.....
Totally agree "the truth is the 4345 is not at all hard to amp". I use JBL 6290 before and found that the sonic performance is acceptable.

[speakerdave]

. . . . I use JBL 6290 before and found that the sonic performance is acceptable.

I like that amp. I don't use mine much for experimenting because I don't like moving it around.

[Ducatista47]

The 6290 is the big UREI I was referring to. I am afraid that acceptable is how I consider it as well. Next to what I use now, it sounds like sound reinforcement gear, not hifi. It has always been thus. I love what I hear until I hear something better. :D

Dave, I remember someone here describing how they went through their 5235 and upgraded everything but the chassis. Might be worth a try.

Clark

[speakerdave]

The 6290 is the big UREI I was referring to. I am afraid that acceptable is how I consider it as well. Next to what I use now, it sounds like sound reinforcement gear, not hifi. It has always been thus. I love what I hear until I hear something better . . . .

'Pends what you want. Using an amp like the 6290 you can work the 4345 for slam and drive, wailing guitar, screaming vocals. You know--rock and roll, fusion, Mahler. All the things that make your neighbors miserable. You can do this with tubes; it's just that tube amps that big are many bucks. With an amp like the VT60 ( I wouldn't call it a sweet fart amp) you can listen to music that offers nuance and subtlety. With a proper crossover you can use both amps and get both. Using a crossover, the gains in the bass are usually readily apparent. The problem comes with the added layer of electronics in the treble, and the non-standard slopes in the handoff.

I've long been a sceptic of the dotage for ss for bass, tubes for treble. I think it's more important to operate amps well within their power capacities, both tube and ss. I think the best full range compromise I've tried is adequately sized 2nd generation Autoformer McIntosh. Later is probably much better.


. . . . Dave, I remember someone here describing how they went through their 5235 and upgraded everything but the chassis. Might be worth a try . . . .

I just found the thread (5235 mod) and read it. Unfortunately it descended into perfectly pointless squabbling. The issue seem to be whether posters should be guided and encouraged to take a step forward that may not be SOTA or whether they should be told their proposed measures are a waste of time and money because something else exists which is better. I think there is confusion here between that idea and heading someone off from a mistake, which should be done, if you can.

Someone once remarked that a sign of intelligence is the ability to hold in mind more than one idea at once, whether they are contradictory, complementary or unrelated, without melding or confusing them. The lack of that ability is what often leads to the ridiculous bickering.

I happen to own a Bryston 10B, and I have tried it in the circuit for my 4345. Sure it sounds better in a general way than the 5235--on the used market it costs about ten times as much--but it does not exactly fit the bill. It's very close, but it does not do as well in the handoff from woofer to midrange as the correct card in the 5234A. If that device can be improved, since it is ubiquitous and inexpensive, and card loads are known for some of the various legacy speakers we all are so fond of, it is a very suitable project for these forums, and I hope more members will work it and share their experiences.

Meanwhile, I would be interested to hear from 4344 or --45 owners who have tried running the upper three elements without HP roll off as suggested by Ian in that thread. I should think it would take some EQ or a digital process like the Velodyne subwoofer controller.

[Mr. Widget]

Meanwhile, I would be interested to hear from 4344 or --45 owners who have tried running the upper three elements without HP roll off as suggested by Ian in that thread. I should think it would take some EQ or a digital process like the Velodyne subwoofer controller.There are two commercially available "active" crossovers that are set up that way. Both the LP-1 from Dahlquist and the Symmetry AC-1 or AC-2 crossovers designed by John Curl used a simple passive 6dB filter for the high pass and an active low pass. They both offer variable turnover points for the low pass and it is quite possible either could be made to work quite well in this application. I will say that both are absolutely top drawer sonically, especially the Symmetry.


Widget

[Ducatista47]

That is terrific stuff, 4313B. I had an email exchange with Mr. Elliot once and he is as helpful as he is knowledgeable. One of his articles I find a nearly definitive myth dispelling treatise on bi-amping. It also reveals bi-wiring to be a nearly complete waste and I agree.

http://sound.westhost.com/bi-amp.htm

I really love this take on break-in of audio components:
either allow the system to 'break in' (which actually means that you get used to the new sound after a while)

Clark

[speakerdave]

That looks helpful if, the 4345 actually does not need a non-standard crossover, which is not what I understand GT's 4345 post to say, and one has concluded that the 5235 is nothing more than a project box.

Otherwise, maybe I'm missing something.

I've just spent an hour at Rod E's website. I've been there before and find it helpful reading.

As for biamping the 4345, for the time being it looks more promising to filter through the 5235 mod thread and try to isolate the useful information. The 4345 is not the only speaker under consideration for this. If a clear path to improving that device can be shown, then improved biamping will be accessible to everyone who has a legacy speaker for which card loads were worked out by JBL--4345 and 44, 4355, 4430/35 come to mind; I don't know if there were others. Besides that there are all the standard cards for which the loads have been published. Then it also might be possible to devise cards for other combinations of drivers. The 5235/DX-1 concept seems like a very useful one to me if implementation could be improved (and we could rebuild coral reefs with something else).

The voltage drive graph looks like 24 dB/ octave to me, unless I'm misreading it.

[Mr. Widget]

One of his articles I find a nearly definitive myth dispelling treatise on bi-amping. It also reveals bi-wiring to be a nearly complete waste and I agree.

http://sound.westhost.com/bi-amp.htm "Myth dispelling"??? What myths?

As for biwire? I feel it should go by the acronym BS. :D The only situation where bi-wire is really a success is if you use brand XYZ unobtainium cables costing well over a grand each... then considering the typical 70% mark up of cables.... you've made the dealer extremely happy. :):):)

Seriously though, there are very good reasons to go passive and equally though different good reasons to go active multi-amp. While I do tend to agree with Mr. Elliot, "Biamping is not a simple tweak, and is not to be taken lightly. Make no mistake though, its application will improve almost any loudspeaker available, with very few exceptions." His first statement about it not to be taken lightly hints at the care one must take in "getting it right." Bi-amping with crap electronics, like the 80's era pro audio crossovers or less expensive modern digital models can easily be a giant step backward. More over simply buying good gear won't make a better system. Great care must be taken. In many, many cases due to these reasons, while an active system might technically be potentially better, there are no guarantees.


Widget

[Ducatista47]

Widget, I totally agree with you and did not mean to imply otherwise. The main myths I was thinking about were it being simple or inexpensive. Like Ian once said, it is a great idea but it is next to impossible to get your hands on an active crossover that is hifi enough to make it worth while.

As I once posted here, I wince when I read a post that begins with "I am starting a speaker project. It will be a four way and I am going to tri-amp it with..."

Clark

[speakerdave]

. . . . Just make the cards . . . .

Dat wascally wabbit.

[Ian Mackenzie]

I think both the amp and the active filter have a profound effect on bass (and HF) sonics.

The chips used in these Pro active filters tends to scrub the sonic texture out of the music. The sound quality is very dependant on the actual gain devices. With the NE5532 or the TL074 they have dozens of transisters and bifets that produce massive open loop gain that is reduced to a gain of (1) when 100% negative feedback is applied. Its intuitive to compare the tonal differences of these chips...neither are right...therefore both are wrong.

Its generally acknowledged that over zealous use of feedback simply hammers the life out of the bass and everything else and it becomes sterile. Of course if your CD player uses these types of chips then its all downhill after that...

With right equipment its not hard to make music with the 4345.

I have found Pass labs to work very well and there is no going back once you have tried these amps.

[pos]

I knew I should have saved this post before 4313B delete it :( ...

[4313B]

I knew I should have saved this post before 4313B delete it :( ...It was irrelevant to this thread.

[hjames]

I knew I should have saved this post before 4313B delete it :( ...
:banghead:

Why?
What did he say now?
C'mon, share with us,
we are all fans ...
:applaud:

[4313B]

:banghead:

Why?
What did he say now?
C'mon, share with us,
we are all fans ...
:applaud:It was Greg's active solution suggestion for the 4344/4345.

Basically any decent 12 dB/octave or 24 dB/octave LR filter wherein the voltage drive is 6 dB down at the target crossover frequency of 200 Hz to 400 Hz. I believe his specific combination of capacitor/resistor values resulted in a crossover frequency of 310 Hz. Or maybe that was Rod's. Whatever works in a specific room in the 200 Hz to 400 Hz range.

I didn't want to get into another argument about specific brands. And if some folks want to trick out older electronics it could be fun.

[hjames]

It was Greg's active solution suggestion for the 4344/4345.

Basically any decent 12 dB/octave or 24 dB/octave LR filter wherein the voltage drive is 6 dB down at the target crossover frequency of 200 Hz to 400 Hz. I believe his specific combination of capacitor/resistor values resulted in a crossover frequency of 310 Hz. Or maybe that was Rod's. Whatever works in a specific room in the 200 Hz to 400 Hz range.

I didn't want to get into another argument about specific brands. And if some folks want to trick out older electronics it could be fun.

Okay, but - maybe you could post it in the 4345 Tech ref thread instead?
worst case just say that its a potential solution as of Oct 2009 -
Some of us can't move on new ideas quite as quickly as we'd like, but we still appreciate knowing about the ideas!

[joelcwu]

Just found this thread, I've been owner of 4345 for 2 yrs, bought from another forum member from a S.Carolina recording studio. The experience with the 4345 are both rewarding and hard on the money, you need a deep pocket to bring out the best of these sensitive studio monitors. Here is a list of what I use:

Pre: ARC SP11 MKII
Crossover: Bryston 10B Standard, RCA, set at 300HZ
for high,140 HZ for low, both on 12db slope.
Power: Top: Canary 303 (18W, 300B PP)
Bottom: Bryston 4B ST
Source: Digital: Pioneer universal DVD player DV989
Analogue : Micro Seiki BL91/ FR64FX/ EMT JSD5G
Accessory: PS Audio PS1000 power conditioner

The 4345 is quiet sensitive to what you use in the system, every cable change, component swap,would bring a profound effect to the sound, not to mention playing with crossover frenquency or slopes.
If there's complain about 4345 will be the 2405, mine unit barely wispers, but set it at plus 2, it brings correct sound image. For the moment I am keeping it stock, modification to the crossover is tempting. On the Bryston 10B, since it doesn't have a 290 HZ setting, I don't know how it has impact the sound by setting the highs on 300HZ. If it's somthing I can live with, it will be a project for the future.

[4313B]

On the Bryston 10B, since it doesn't have a 290 HZ setting, I don't know how it has impact the sound by setting the highs on 300HZ. If it's somthing I can live with, it will be a project for the future.Whatever works in your room between 200 Hz and 400 Hz...

[dkalsi]

All,

I am still in the process of finishing my JBL4345 clones. Just wanting for network/crossovers to be finalized.

Once the speakers are done, I was planning on bi-amping them. I have been given the opportunity to purchase a McIntosh MC7270 for a very fair price. It is 270wpc. I wanted to know whether you guys think it would work well for my intended purpose (i.e. simply running the 2245Hs in my JBL 4345s).

Thanks,
D

[BMWCCA]

Once the speakers are done, I was planning on bi-amping them. I have been given the opportunity to purchase a McIntosh MC7270 for a very fair price. It is 270wpc. I wanted to know whether you guys think it would work well for my intended purpose (i.e. simply running the 2245Hs in my JBL 4345s).Not that I have anything to compare them to, but my 4345s continue to impress and I use either a Crown DC300A-II or PS-400 on the 2245s. They're just under 200-watts-per-channel at 8-ohms. :dont-know

[yggdrasil]

I have a Nelson Pass'ish DIY amp driving mye 2245's. It is ~160W/8Ohm.

I find it sufficient when I want to crank up the volume, and simply wonderful at any volume.

[boputnam]

Still working on the 4345 Me too. It never stops...

Current config has:

Bryston 10B, Linkwitz-Riley -24dB slope
2245's are being driven by a QSC CX502 (300 w/ch 8 Ω)
Upper band passes are driven passive by a Lab Gruppen fP3400 (1000 w/ch 8 Ω). I know, it's about 5x what I need, but is the only spare LG I had sitting around, I love the way they sound and I set the MLS switch to -5dB = 300 w/ch 8 Ω).
The Widget stopped by the other day, and we both (re)marvelled at how good this simple 2.0 system sounds. The tonality thru the 2245's is a real marvel; the highs through the TAD TD-2002's is matchless; transients real.

I probably should go Class A on the upper band passes. Maybe some day...

[Chas]

The Widget stopped by the other day, and we both (re)marvelled at how good this simple 2.0 system sounds. The tonality thru the 2245's is a real marvel; the highs through the TAD TD-2002's is matchless; transients real.


I probably should go Class A on the upper band passes. Maybe some day...

I agree with you and Widget, the TAD's transformed mine too. Hey Bo, before you jump to class A, about a year or so ago, I put a Bryston 2BSST(squared) on the top of mine and had very positive results. So much so, I decommissioned my DIY fully balanced high end tube stuff, pronto. I use a 4B SST2 on the bottom.

To add icing on the cake, I recently added a second 2B and now run them as balanced monoblocks for even better performance. No need for the extra power, of course, but the advantages of running fully balanced differential config. works very nicely.:)

[boputnam]

...I put a Bryston 2BSST(squared) on the top of mine and had very positive results. Yeah, the Widget was suggesting the same. I'm keen on that idea - everything Bryston sounds excellent, and they are not priced like their stratospheric peers...

[Triumph Don]

All,


Once the speakers are done, I was planning on bi-amping them. I have been given the opportunity to purchase a McIntosh MC7270 for a very fair price. It is 270wpc. I wanted to know whether you guys think it would work well for my intended purpose (i.e. simply running the 2245Hs in my JBL 4345s).

Thanks,
D
Well vintage amps don't look much better than a 7270. BMW guy loves his 160ish WPC Crown, I have a 350WPC Crown, someone said their 60 watt tuber sounded best. Then again my best bud in Texas runs a 7270 through his 45's by itself and loves it [has had a sheltered life]. Personally, I would love to have the 7270 to match my 2125 [top] and Mc preamp just for the looks. Rumor has it that there are more modern reliable amps that would work better, at a lesser cost. Yes it will work. Buying public is nuts over old McIntosh, so if it doesn't work for you, sell it and move up!

[BMWCCA]

Well vintage amps don't look much better than a 7270. BMW guy loves his 160ish WPC Crown, I have a 350WPC Crown, someone said their 60 watt tuber sounded best. Then again my best bud in Texas runs a 7270 through his 45's by itself and loves it [has had a sheltered life]. Personally, I would love to have the 7270 to match my 2125 [top] and Mc preamp just for the looks. Rumor has it that there are more modern reliable amps that would work better, at a lesser cost. Yes it will work. Buying public is nuts over old McIntosh, so if it doesn't work for you, sell it and move up!

I'm certainly not suggesting the Crowns as the ultimate here. There are several other amps I'd love to try. I suggest the Crown PS and D-series amps as low-budget alternatives. (I'm paying for private college educations for three daughters, and non-renewal of my employment contract last year put a crimp in that, keeping me a "bottom-feeder" for some time yet.:o:)

The latest PS-400 cost me $100 in perfect condition from a studio in a Maryland suburb of DC off Ebay. The PS-200 was only a bit more but came in Crown packaging direct from a recent factory performance check and service with all the receipts from Crown showing twice what I paid for it as the invoice cost of the check-up and service.

Good advice above, though. Macs are always easily re-sold if bought in a reasonable range. Certainly easy enough to try it and decide. I still keep my C20 around for fun since we've been together for over forty-years now.

[4313B]

The Widget stopped by the other day, and we both (re)marvelled at how good this simple 2.0 system sounds. The tonality thru the 2245's is a real marvel; the highs through the TAD TD-2002's is matchless; transients real.Yeah, too bad JBL couldn't make a nice 1" exit compression driver. Oh well. :o:
I probably should go Class A on the upper band passes. Maybe some day...I'm using grungy old Citation 22's on the top and bottom and they sound just fine (And I've heard some seriously expensive gear over the years.) My next choice would be the Brystons mentioned above.

[Ian Mackenzie]

Me too. It never stops...

I probably should go Class A on the upper band passes. Maybe some day...

Good idea.

The 1st watt of power is the most important in terms if fine detail and resolving power.

Although I can vouch for highly biased class A solid state amps sounding superior in the mid and upper bass.

A lot of people go through life thinking all amps sound the same.

As was once quote by an American..." a fool's paradise is a wise man's hell".;)

Passlabs 2.5
Passlabs X250.50 250+250
Passlabs AX100.5 (diy-mono blocks)
Passlabs high low pass Xover(diy)


:)

[dabass]

Are you for activ or passiv amplification for drive your 4345 ?

If you make activ "bi amping" with external x/over , can you say what's frequencies do you use ? , JBL recommends 290hz/18db ; i see many persons use 24db filter but with wich frequencies cuting?

What's the lower frequencies that the 2122 H in 4345 charge can be use ?

(sorry for my bad language)

[Ian Mackenzie]

You are probably correct, but as a woofer the 2245H is unusual. It has a light cone for its size and doesn't develop as much inertia as some other eighteens. So it needs less braking/damping. The 502B amp is a pretty solid push pull unit and controls it pretty well.

It could be my room, but after months of exposure to both a giant UREI and the 502, I found the 502 much more musical/less clinical and dry. It sounded more like live music, at least the acoustic music I crave. I was higher than a kite on the SS sound until I switched back on a lark. I was floored how much more pleasing the tube driven rendition was to me. String bass was like night and day. The big SS amp sounded like the bass was coming out of a shoe box by comparison. Just choked off. YMMV! It is possible a better SS amp might help, but I could tell that the problem was not amplifier quality, but rather damping. The notes died too fast to sound natural.

I guess it is all what you are used to hearing, but the tubes sound a lot more like live music and I can't think of anything else that matters after that.

Clark

Absolutely correct.

[jamdel]

Just some update to my 4345 system. Just added two Nordost power cords on my Marantz CD10 and my Chord power amp. Also added the Nordost Frey speaker cable to my 4345. RESULT :... More dynamic, airy and also superbly detailed....

[dkalsi]

Yes - believe it or not - my DIY 4345s, after a year in construction, are still not complete - but hopefully soon.

I think to begin with, I will be using the following components with my JBL System (which is what I currently have on hand):

Preamp: HiFi Supply Django TVC Preamp (w/ S&B MKIII)
Active Crossover: Marchand XM9 - Crossover Frequency Set to 290Hz
Amp on the Top End: Plinius SA-100 MKIII 100 watts per channel - Class A (can be set to A/B)
Amp on the 2245: McIntosh MC 7270 (270 Watts per Channel)

We will see how things turn out - might end up swapping some components over time. But the one component that is not moving is the Plinius SA-100 MKIII.

[jamdel]

Do you think McIntosh MC2600 will match with a 4345 ?

[grd022000]

I'm currently powering my 4345's with McIntosh solid state amps but giving some consideration to going with an all tube setup. My system consist of a MA-6600 at 200 wpc, MEN220 crossover, and a MC-302 at 300 wpc. The 6600 is powering the top half and the 302 takes care of the 2245H. I have the MEN220 set to cross over the 6600 at 300 Hz and the 302 to cross over at 350 Hz to help ease the drop off at the transition. I've yet to hear a system that I like better except for my friend's 4350's powered by all McIntosh tube amps.