4430 drivers?

[Figge]

i have a pair of 4430 dated at 1989. as i understand there was changes made to these speakers during the 19years it was manufactured. what compressiondriver/diaphragm do i have? LF is 2235H that much i know!

[4313B]

The 4430 started out with the sweet little 2421A (http://www.jblpro.com/pub/obsolete/2421ab.pdf). Interim versions used the 2425H (http://www.jblpro.com/pub/obsolete/2425hj.pdf) and final versions used the 2426H (http://lansingheritage.org/html/jbl/specs/pro-comp/2426h.htm) .

Tech Sheets here - Discrete Sales Models (http://www.jblproservice.com/navigation/Discrete%20Sales%20Models.html)

[Figge]

were there sonic diffrences between them?

[4313B]

The aluminum sound better overall. The titanium take the punishment and have a slightly extended top end. The aluminum will shatter if abused. You can run either diaphragm in any of the cores.

[Hofmannhp]

Originally posted by Figge
.............. LF is 2235H that much i know!

Hi Figge,

congratulations for your 4430.....I think it's a lot easier to buy them than to built them :)

As I know, the LF is the 2234, thats the 2235 without mass ring.
I am no friend of the usage of mass rings for LF speakers. For my opinion they generate a lot of reinductions in the voice coil which has hardly to be controled by the induction rings round the pole piece of the speaker motor.

HP

[Figge]

well this proves how much i know :)

[Figge]

Originally posted by Giskard
The aluminum sound better overall. The titanium take the punishment and have a slightly extended top end. The aluminum will shatter if abused. You can run either diaphragm in any of the cores.


witch one am i most likely to have?

[4313B]

You are most likely to have the titanium.

Incidentally, I contacted JBL on Friday about the continued support for the D8R2421 and D16R2421 diaphragms and was thrilled to hear they not only had hundreds currently in stock but had an additional production run scheduled for the fall. :nutz:

[Figge]

are one of those what i have? if so its great to hear that i can find parts when they one day will die!

[4313B]

Here's a little matrix available from the JBL (http://www.jblproservice.com/pdf/Systems%20Reference%20Charts/Studio%20Monitor%20Series.pdf) site. As you can see they have the 4430 information incorrect in that the 4430 actually used the 3134 (http://www.jblproservice.com/pdf/Network%20Schematics/3134%20Network.pdf) network instead of the 3135 (http://www.jblproservice.com/pdf/Network%20Schematics/3135%20Network.pdf). You might do better to download the Tech Sheets from here:

4430 (http://www.jblproservice.com/pdf/Studio%20Monitor%20Series/4430LR.pdf)

4435 (http://www.jblproservice.com/pdf/Studio%20Monitor%20Series/4435LR.pdf)

[4313B]

Originally posted by Figge
are one of those what i have?No, you probably have the D8R2425 titanium diaphragm which goes in both the 2425H and 2426H.

[4313B]

Originally posted by Hofmannhp
For my opinion they generate a lot of reinductions in the voice coil which has hardly to be controled by the induction rings round the pole piece of the speaker motor.That's interesting. I've never heard anyone talk about that. Usually they dislike the mass ring simply because it tends to smack on the pole piece when driven excessively. I always thought the mass ring was sufficiently high up on the former that it wouldn't be an issue but measuring one right now I see it is only 0.018" above the coil. If they were a huge problem though I would think JBL would skip using them in the latest systems such as the S2K-1000.

[Figge]

how about D8R2425 availability in the future?
do i have to stock up? or will they be available when i need them?


as i se in one of G:s posts they have already judged the 4411, L96,L112,L150A to meet their doom some day.

[Hofmannhp]

Originally posted by Hofmannhp
......As I know, the LF is the 2234, thats the 2235 without mass ring......
HP

as you can see.....I know nothing.
My driver database is ready for trash.
Of cause Giskards list is correct.
The 4430 houses the 2235.
But my statement for mass rings is what I stay for.

HP

[4313B]

Originally posted by Hofmannhp
as you can see.....I know nothing.
You know HP, I just don't think that is true. I think one of our endeavors here is to sort through all the JBL misprints. As for being able to spew out what driver went where, even the guys who actually built the systems sometimes quote the wrong part numbers. There's just too much information...

[4313B]

Originally posted by Figge
how about D8R2425 availability in the future?
do i have to stock up? or will they be available when i need them?I wouldn't fret about them for now. Of course the price is probably only going to go up.

[Hofmannhp]

Originally posted by Giskard (edited by HP)
..... Usually they dislike the mass ring simply because it tends to smack on the pole piece when driven excessively. I always thought the mass ring was sufficiently high up on the former that it wouldn't be an issue but measuring one right now I see it is only 0.018" above the coil. If they were a huge problem though I would think JBL would skip using them in the latest systems such as the S2K-1000.

Hi Giskard,

I think you talk about the mechanical limits.....I talked about the electric/magnetic limits. I try to explain it in my words....the pole piece induction rings have to be compared with a shock absorber in your car. The ring has to shorten the reinduction of the cone (with heavy mass), in your car the motion of the wheel base.
It's right to say....the 2235 is one of the best drivers for low freq use....also in cause of his very low fres. But I think a low fres is not all to look for. I.e. it's easy to push a driver down to 10Hz fres with more mass.....but as it is with compromises.....the pulse delay and efficiency may be negative influenced.

Just my opinion......

HP

[4313B]

Originally posted by Hofmannhp
Just my opinion......

HP No you're right. Various drivers are designed for various applications and compromises are required. The 1500SUB is designed for significantly lower frequency response than even the venerable 2235H. It has double the moving mass of the 2235H. It is entirely unsuitable for response extending up into the triple digits. That doesn't mean it won't try, but something like a 2234H would spank it bad up in that frequency range.

I think at the time JBL definitely chose the best LF driver for the 4430. Sure, I'd have preferred to somehow make the LE14H work instead but it lacks a bit of efficiency for the specific task at hand.

Currently I am reworking my 4430's to use the 2234H instead of the 2235H and will leave the lowest stuff to the 1500SUBs. I've been told the original 4435 prototype used dual 2235H's but the preponderance of bass caused the engineers to rethink using the mass rings, hence the 2234H was born. Good solution.

[Hofmannhp]

Originally posted by Hofmannhp
Hi Giskard,
....... But I think a low fres is not all to look for. I.e. it's easy to push a driver down to 10Hz fres with more mass.....but as it is with compromises.....the pulse delay and efficiency may be negative influenced.
HP

I cannot be right 100%.......cause I'm very happy with the sound of my " heavy" 2234.

HP