JBL 4345 or 4350, Pros/Cons/best?

[lmfree]

I had been looking for a nice pair of JBL 4345's and finally found a pair. But after working out some of the particulars I found that the seller also had a pair of 4350's for sale. I can't listen to either because of the distance so I was looking for some feedback as to the Pros and Cons of each and if one would definitely be considered better than the other as far as sound quality. I plan on Bi-Amping the 4345's with one of the active JBL crossovers but not sure what crossover frequency to use. I would assume the same as the BiAmp only 4350 uses which is a 250HZ Xover since I can't find one rated for 290HZ. Looking for any and all feedback. Thanks

[hjames]

I had been looking for a nice pair of JBL 4345's and finally found a pair. But after working out some of the particulars I found that the seller also had a pair of 4350's for sale. I can't listen to either because of the distance so I was looking for some feedback as to the Pros and Cons of each and if one would definitely be considered better than the other as far as sound quality. I plan on Bi-Amping the 4345's with one of the active JBL crossovers but not sure what crossover frequency to use. I would assume the same as the BiAmp only 4350 uses which is a 250HZ Xover since I can't find one rated for 290HZ. Looking for any and all feedback. Thanks

Why not get an Ashly crossover and just set the crossover freq yourself? Got mine set at 290cps ...
Or if you must have a JBL/UREI crossover, get an M552
http://www.jblpro.com/pub/obsolete/M552%20Owners%20Manual.pdf

I've used both of them with my biamped 4341s ...
and I know others have used them with 4345s ...

[grumpy]

Might have a read here, regarding intended usage:

http://www.lansingheritage.org/images/jbl/catalogs/1982-pro/page05.jpg

4350 will be older than the 4355 in the 1982 catalog, but has the same
place in the 'family'.

No one can tell you which is "best" from the limited information given
and not knowing your personal preferences... side with finesse or side with loud?
neither is "wrong"...

[lmfree]

Why not get an Ashly crossover and just set the crossover freq yourself? Got mine set at 290cps ...
Or if you must have a JBL/UREI crossover, get an M552
http://www.jblpro.com/pub/obsolete/M552%20Owners%20Manual.pdf

I've used both of them with my biamped 4341s ...
and I know others have used them with 4345s ...

That certainly helps with the crossover issue of the 4345. Thanks I have a JBL/UREI for my 4435's

[lmfree]

Might have a read here, regarding intended usage:

http://www.lansingheritage.org/images/jbl/catalogs/1982-pro/page05.jpg

4350 will be older than the 4355 in the 1982 catalog, but has the same
place in the 'family'.

No one can tell you which is "best" from the limited information given
and not knowing your personal preferences... side with finesse or side with loud?
neither is "wrong"...

I'm into classic rock and I seem to always feel that most speaker issues for my taste, lack in the bottom end. So I guess maybe I could refine the question which has the better bottom end; I like when the pictures shake on the walls and the floor thumps from 25 feet away. The 4345 with an 18 inch woofer or the 4350 with twin 15's. Of course there are other variables than just the size and quantity of the woofer. I would suspect the horn and tweeter end of both these speakers should be similar.

[Krunchy]

I can't see how you would go wrong with either model, I've never heard the 4350s but I'm sure they kick ass!. Definitely would go with the Ashly X-Over regardless of which model you decide on. What kind of equipment are you intending to use to run them?

[BMWCCA]

Since you appear to be new here, if you haven't already, check out these links:

http://www.lansingheritage.org/html/jbl/specs/pro-speakers/1980-4350b.htm
http://www.lansingheritage.org/html/jbl/specs/pro-speakers/1981-4345.htm

I've never had the privilege of hearing the 4050s but I'm quite fond of my 4345s. I can only assume the larger one will play louder, but I don't know how you'd ever find out since either will likely blow you out of most rooms. The specs shown don't reveal any great differences but I can imagine any advantage in the larger speaker might be more in the 12-inch mid than in the double-fifteen woofers. :dont-know:

BTW: I'm bi-amping my 4345s with an Ashly XR1001.

[Robh3606]

Hello Imfree

I have bi-amped 4344 and have heard 4350's. One thing you have not talked about is how big a room you have. With the 4344 you can get in close because of the relatively tight and essentially inline driver spacing. The 4350 are going to take some distance to have the drivers integrate properly. The manual recommends an 8 ft minimum listening distance. Keep that in mind if you are looking at any kind or a "normal" livingroom space.

Find out what flavor or 4350's he has. If the woofers have white cones they are the originals which are rare but more difficult to maintain because of the 135A woofer. There are no recone kits for them, if they have 2231's you can use 2235 kits if the need arrises to fix one. As with all of these systems the recone kits may be hard to find or simply not available so keep that in mind if you are looking at a long term purchase.

As far as which is better it would be better if you could hear them.

Rob:)

[jbl_daddy]

The 2231's never really seem enough in mine, but doubling the number is the correct solution. Sitting on the insides of both of my 4340's lives a pair of b380. Bigger is always better if you have the room.
Mark

[Mr. Widget]

I'm into classic rock and I seem to always feel that most speaker issues for my taste, lack in the bottom end. So I guess maybe I could refine the question which has the better bottom end; I like when the pictures shake on the walls and the floor thumps from 25 feet away.Both of these speakers are well suited to the task you are providing. I prefer the 4345 and others prefer the 4350... they are similar but quite different so personal preferences tend to play an important role in determining which is "better" for your application.

I do think it is an objective statement that the 18" woofer in the 4345 offers slightly better bass than the doubled up 15s in the 4350. Both speakers are about the same size and need a large room to be fully realized though they can be appreciated in a smaller space. The 4" compression driver in the 4350 is superior to the 1.75" driver in the 4350, but the newer network in the 4345 almost makes up for that.

I imagine either will make you smile once they are properly set up.


Widget

[Triumph Don]

The specs shown don't reveal any great differences but I can imagine any advantage in the larger speaker might be more in the 12-inch mid than in the double-fifteen woofers. :dont-know:

Have to disagree there. Combination of the 12" mid base and the larger 2" throat driver and horn in the bigger cabs I think would make a pretty big difference. Never heard them, but I will soon!

[jbl_daddy]

Regardless 4340,41,43,44,45,50 they will all have the same flavor. You need to concentrate on source material and amplification to see if you like the way they sound. I listen to my 250ti's 90% of the time. My dad has a paragon and I really do not like the way it sounds on the mater. ps. the amplifiers make a huge difference in the performance of the
good luck

[BMWCCA]

Have to disagree there. Combination of the 12" mid base and the larger 2" throat driver and horn in the bigger cabs I think would make a pretty big difference. Never heard them, but I will soon!I don't think we're disagreeing at all. I figure the real difference between the two is in the top not the bottom end.

I'm guessing you mentioned "bigger cabs" just to differentiate between the two systems. I'm assuming cab size makes no difference to the horn and little to the mid which sits in its own box though, granted, that's a larger one, too. I've been told the 18" is more than equal to the two-fifteens by those who I figure know way more than I do (doesn't take much!).

I'd love to hear the big ones! Though they're both so damn big an A-B comparison in the same room could be tough to manage. Fun though! :bouncy:

I suspect someone will tell the OP that charge-coupling both would make a world of improvement.

[lmfree]

There have been many questions about my setup so I will try to be brief. The amps will either be twin Yamaha B-1 VFET amps at about 170WPC, twin Yamaha 101M amps at 500WPC or if no Biamping then a pair of Accuphase M-1000 Monoblocs.
The room is my rec room which is 30x35ft with 8 ft ceilings so space isn't an issue. The seller actually has two pairs of 4350's; one A and one B set, is one better than the other?. The 4345's are near mint and all speakers, both 4350's and 4345's have been thoroughly tested and repaired including refoams where necessary. The seller is steering me somewhat to the 4350's by telling be they are more balanced and easier to setup. He claims the 4345's are a little difficult to get just right. The 4350's are his favorite but his tastes are different from mine and I sort of had my mind made up I was looking for a pair of 4345's.
If I missed anything let me know and any other input is appreciated

[subwoof]

If you plan to listen to these at either high volume or over extended periods, I would suggest the 2" drivers. They have inherently lower distortion and more reserve for those dynamic peaks.

I have owned ( and still do ) nearly every 4 way monitor JBL made and prefer the 4350/5 for high power apps.

If you're gonna buy big monitors, you probably have resolved the SAF issue and of course, the visa card anyways.

Get PLENTY of real power ( not the digital switching DSP stuff ) and proper active crossovers to go with them.

THUMP.

[1audiohack]

If you plan to listen to these at either high volume or over extended periods, I would suggest the 2" drivers. They have inherently lower distortion and more reserve for those dynamic peaks.

THUMP.

Agree 100%!

[Triumph Don]

I don't think we're disagreeing at all. I figure the real difference between the two is in the top not the bottom end

Well yes, but that is where the music is, eh? I have to think the 4350's have to be more dynamic combined with the little faster working 15's.

[Rolf]

Well, I have never heard the 4345's, but I have heard 4550 many times. As most of you know I got 4343B's myself. I don't know the difference between mine and the 4345's. (Maybe someone can tell me?)

As I have understood Imfree, I believe the 4350's must be the right choice. They sounds good on low level, and can play incredible (dangerously) high.

They need much power, most for the woofers. 400W or more is good there, and maybe 250-300W for the rest. BUT, have a close look at the movement of the woofers. They can be blown.

I will also recommend changing the old passive networks with new CC ones.

[hjames]

Well, I have never heard the 4345's, but I have heard 4350 many times. As most of you know I got 4343B's myself. I don't know the difference between mine and the 4345's. (Maybe someone can tell me?)

Basically, the 4343 and 4345 are very similar with all parts except cabinet and woofer ... the '43 has a 15 inch woof, the '45 has the 18 inch woof ... and the larger cabinet it needs to play correctly. Crossovers were improved in the newer 4345s over the original 4343 design. They share the 10 inch mid-bass, LE-85 horn/driver, and the 2405 slot on top.

[4313B]

The 4344, 4345 and 4355 are very capable large format JBL Studio Monitors. Prior models are easily updated to these models and the results are well worth it. It goes without saying that the networks benefit from charge-coupling. The aluminum and titanium diaphragms respond well to a proper dusting with aquaplas. The most exciting thing on the horizon would be the pending introduction of the Truextent diaphragms for the 1.75-inch JBL compression drivers.

[Mr. Widget]

If you plan to listen to these at either high volume or over extended periods, I would suggest the 2" drivers. They have inherently lower distortion and more reserve for those dynamic peaks.I certainly agree that the 4350 is superior for high playback levels, but I think we need to define high playback levels. Most people consider 95-100dB as loud... and it is, but when I think of 4350s and high playback levels I am thinking of SPLs greater than 110dB. At these really LOUD levels, the 4350s, the Everests, the big Westlakes and a very few other loudspeakers are capable of holding their composure.

As for listening fatigue, I would rather listen to the 4345s for ten hours at 95dB than the 4350s under the same circumstances and I think it is more of a challenge to get the 4350s to sound neutral and well balanced than the 4345s. I suppose listening fatigue and what we perceive as neutral sound might both be considered subjective qualities.


Widget

[4313B]

As for listening fatigue, I would rather listen to the 4345s for ten hours at 95dB than the 4350s under the same circumstances and I think it is more of a challenge to get the 4350s to sound neutral and well balanced than the 4343s.The updated 4355's are pretty engaging as well. Especially at the low volumes I like. Outstanding for movies.

[lmfree]

The 4344, 4345 and 4355 are very capable large format JBL Studio Monitors. Prior models are easily updated to these models and the results are well worth it. It goes without saying that the networks benefit from charge-coupling. The aluminum and titanium diaphragms respond well to a proper dusting with aquaplas. The most exciting thing on the horizon would be the pending introduction of the Truextent diaphragms for the 1.75-inch JBL compression drivers.

The term charge coupling has been used several times in this thread and that is a new term for me. What is charge coupling all about? I am new to this web site and currently own a few models of JBL's. 2 pairs of L-300's, 250Ti, 4333's and 4435's. I did order an Ashly X1001 crossover last night but still haven't decided on 4345 or 4350. Referring to the 4350's, there is an A version which is Alnico magnet and the B version with ferrite magnets. If I understood correctly the Alnico's are better for sound quality but can degrade with age while the ferrite's do not. How important is this?

[4313B]

I would imagine that most people would prefer the AlNiCo versions because they can turn around and sell them for more money to people who think that they sound better than the SFG ferrite versions. :rotfl:

[grumpy]

Buy the 4350 you like best.
Pull out the bass drivers, crossovers, and 4" diaphragms.
Pack them away safely.

Put in 2235's.
Buy/install TruExtant Be diaphragms.
Build tweaked 4355 crossovers using fancy parts (if you like)
and dc bias the capacitors (now split into 2x nominal value units
in series) using large value resistors to introduce the bias between
the series capacitor pairs ("charge coupling").

You'll have to do some homework/reading here for this to
make much sense. :)

[JeffW]

The term charge coupling has been used several times in this thread and that is a new term for me. What is charge coupling all about?

http://www.audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?3555-Bypassed-and-Biased-Capacitors



If I understood correctly the Alnico's are better for sound quality but can degrade with age while the ferrite's do not. How important is this?

http://www.audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?4031-The-Great-Alnico-Ferrite-Debate

[Betiuxs]

Hi can someone help me? I would like to find someone that can build me a pair of crossovers for my 4350 project I have a pair of 22235h, a pair of 077's and the 2202H please heLp I see that there are better options than the originals