Jbl 4435 with 2405 and sub 1500

[JoeNelis]

Hi all

recieved my sub 1500's from guys on the forum ( thanx woody and darminder).

i have been playing around with them and put a pair in my new jbl's i built and
they sound great.

the system is bi amped with krell ksa 100s on the top end and 1200watt australian
monitor on the bottom end...big sound and dynamic with the modified crossover...
done by e friend on the forum aswell ( thanx jarrod !! ).

i just love these subs, the best i listened too !! i am enjoying them very much :):)
49524

[pos]

Hi
nice looking speakers!
But are these two 15 inchers in separate cabinets (I think the stock 4435 has only one cabinet for the pair of 15")?
The SUB1500 calls for a lower tuning, but more important its xmax is much higher than the 2235's and it might cause serious issues!

[JoeNelis]

Hi
nice looking speakers!
But are these two 15 inchers in separate cabinets (I think the stock 4435 has only one cabinet for the pair of 15")?
The SUB1500 calls for a lower tuning, but more important its xmax is much higher than the 2235's and it might cause serious issues!

Yes they are in separate enclosures, the tuning is done via external crossover. I'm just playing around, can't help myself. My friend has done the same with great results. He is happy with the sound....tri amped 4435's big sound !!!!!

[pos]

Then you must have one of the early 4435 that had a separate enclosure for each woof if I remember correctly. Lucky you!

By tuning I meant the reflex port tuning frequency.
It is @26Hz in each 140L enclosure.
The Sub1500 would more call for something like 20Hz in such big (for this woofer) enclosures. And you would have to tune as low as 15Hz to get the same response curve as the 2234 (ie have a flat summation), and have it go a full octave lower than the 2234. You even try it sealed, by blocking the port in the sub1500 cab.

EDIT: looking more closely to your photos it looks like the is not a stock 4435, but DIY that you made, so maybe my tuning frequency calcultations are wrong. What are your actual volumes and tuning freqs ?

[JoeNelis]

These speakers are the same measurements as original 4435's.... I have an original pair
I used for calculations.Cabinets volumes are the same I just added a 2405 tweeter to the crossover,they are original crossovers with better caps and other pieces like hovland caps.The result is a great inprovement.as for tuning I am yet to do this,not very technical minded or experienced at doing this.

[martin_wu99]

Hi all

recieved my sub 1500's from guys on the forum ( thanx woody and darminder).

i have been playing around with them and put a pair in my new jbl's i built and
they sound great.

the system is bi amped with krell ksa 100s on the top end and 1200watt australian
monitor on the bottom end...big sound and dynamic with the modified crossover...
done by e friend on the forum aswell ( thanx jarrod !! ).

i just love these subs, the best i listened too !! i am enjoying them very much :):)
49524
Such a beauty!:eek: I have enough patience to wait for it when you are tired of:confused::D

[jbl_daddy]

The 4425, 30, and 35's have always looked and sounded wonderful. On paper the 2405 is not needed but looks in my opinion great. Since you have an original pair and the new ones with the 2405, how do they differ in sound. My opinion, it looks great, almost like they were never originally finished now that I have seen yours.
Mark

[JoeNelis]

The 4425, 30, and 35's have always looked and sounded wonderful. On paper the 2405 is not needed but looks in my opinion great. Since you have an original pair and the new ones with the 2405, how do they differ in sound. My opinion, it looks great, almost like they were never originally finished now that I have seen yours.
Mark

They sound amazing, the tweeter in my opinion works well. Over stock 4435's these are a lot better, high quality crossover parts, 4 full recones on the 2234h, also double skinned,very heavy. Very happy.

[remusr]

Great idea to add the 2405! My 4430 & 4435's are very interesting sounding, almost sweet compared to my L300's, L100T & 4345's. But they definitely are difficult to distinguish instruments & detail as they have zero hi-end. I've never understood why these are liked so well by some on this forum. 2 questions - can you forward the top xover diagram and why did you add another top section rather than placing the 2405 on the horn level, similar to a 43xx?

[caladois]

Then you must have one of the early 4435 that had a separate enclosure for each woof if I remember correctly. Lucky you!

By tuning I meant the reflex port tuning frequency.
It is @26Hz in each 140L enclosure.
The Sub1500 would more call for something like 20Hz in such big (for this woofer) enclosures. And you would have to tune as low as 15Hz to get the same response curve as the 2234 (ie have a flat summation), and have it go a full octave lower than the 2234. You even try it sealed, by blocking the port in the sub1500 cab.

EDIT: looking more closely to your photos it looks like the is not a stock 4435, but DIY that you made, so maybe my tuning frequency calcultations are wrong. What are your actual volumes and tuning freqs ?

My 4435 were 1994 models and they have a seperate charge for each driver too. Are you sure that such design exist for the original 4435 ?
JoeNelis, your system is superb.

[4313B]

Great idea to add the 2405!Personal preference. The system really doesn't need it. And now that Be diaphragms for the 1.75-inch drivers are apparently going to be available in the near future...

But they definitely are difficult to distinguish instruments & detail as they have zero hi-end. I've never understood why these are liked so well by some on this forum.Because they are outstanding loudspeakers with plenty of top end and a low fatigue factor (especially compared with their older 43xx siblings)?

The 4430/4435 can be just as obnoxious as any other loudspeaker if the L-Pads aren't carefully adjusted, the room is wacked or the electronics aren't a good match.

It took me a long time to come up with something better but it finally happened with the 2234H/2235H replaced by the 1500AL and the 2425H/2344A replaced by the 476BE/H4338.

[JoeNelis]

Great idea to add the 2405! My 4430 & 4435's are very interesting sounding, almost sweet compared to my L300's, L100T & 4345's. But they definitely are difficult to distinguish instruments & detail as they have zero hi-end. I've never understood why these are liked so well by some on this forum. 2 questions - can you forward the top xover diagram and why did you add another top section rather than placing the 2405 on the horn level, similar to a 43xx?

Sorry don't have a drawing for the top end, I know it was made for me by a technician and was really simple design. I went with the top section after many listening sessions and ended up with this ......it sounded the best to me, other people may disagree and that's fine, but everyone is different. I was a my friends house today listening to his system... 4435's tri amped 2425 2234 and sub1500 and the sound on home theatre is unbelievable !!! Loud and very clean punchy sound.

[JoeNelis]

Personal preference. The system really doesn't need it. And now that Be diaphragms for the 1.75-inch drivers are apparently going to be available in the near future...
Because they are outstanding loudspeakers with plenty of top end and a low fatigue factor (especially compared with their older 43xx siblings)?

The 4430/4435 can be just as obnoxious as any other loudspeaker if the L-Pads aren't carefully adjusted, the room is wacked or the electronics aren't a good match.

It took me a long time to come up with something better but it finally happened with the 2234H/2235H replaced by the 1500AL and the 2425H/2344A replaced by the
476BE/H4338.

That system sounds very impressive !!! I would like to try some Be drivers in the future if I could obtain some and yes I agree electronics make a difference. :)

[martin_wu99]

That system sounds very impressive !!! I would like to try some Be drivers in the future if I could obtain some and yes I agree electronics make a difference. :)
Are the Be drivers really so superior?:confused: I don't think so:blink:
perhaps their curve maybe excellent,but we enthusiasts are only fond of old JBLs which with special temptation and sound tasteful:D

[4313B]

Are the Be drivers really so superior?:confused: I don't think so:blink:
perhaps their curve maybe excellent,but we enthusiasts are only fond of old JBLs which with special temptation and sound tasteful:DOkie dokie! :p

[Titanium Dome]

Are the Be drivers really so superior?:confused: I don't think so:blink:
perhaps their curve maybe excellent,but we enthusiasts are only fond of old JBLs which with special temptation and sound tasteful:D

As much as it pains me to write it (see my moniker), yes they are superior.

Some of us JBL enthusiasts are fond of newer JBLs with better drivers, crossovers, cabinet materials, and sound. :D

The old gear is enjoyable and distinct to its time and place. I'm just not very nostalgic, except for my L100s.

Joe, your work is impressive. Congratulations. It makes me want to get rid of the puny, stock 4430s in my office :).

[herve M]

Hello, JoeNelis,
nice system
and the everest DD55000 :)????

[caladois]

Are the dd55000 surround speakers for your hc ? :D

[richluvsound]

Are the Be drivers really so superior?:confused: I don't think so:blink:
perhaps their curve maybe excellent,but we enthusiasts are only fond of old JBLs which with special temptation and sound tasteful:D



The grass is not always greener on the other side , but , alas sometimes it is ..... :D

I have owned pretty much all the big sought after vintage JBL's - I miss the 4435 the most . Guido put a TD 2001 in his - I never heard them , but if I ever get to Athens I will surely knock on the door of the new owner for a listen .

I never had a problem with the top end , I did slap the the woofers a couple of times .

My opinion is simply this ..... the 2405 was around when the 4435 was designed and yet it was not used . I trust David Smith on this one - and my own ears . The 4435 enjoyed the longest production time of any JBL studio monitor . What other endorsement could anyone ask for ?

As far as Be is concerned , you should try it before making any judgement . In my experience ,its the most cost effective upgrade anyone could make . Just search the forum and read what the users of Be have said . There aint anyone going back , and there are one or two of us that would also consider ourselves enthusiasts .

For what you spent on the enclosure ,plus the cost of the 2405 and crossover mods , you could of perhaps purchased a pair of Be based drivers .

Just my opinion this , but nevertheless , opinion based on actual experience and not folklore !

Rich

[martin_wu99]

The grass is not always greener on the other side , but , alas sometimes it is ..... :D

I have owned pretty much all the big sought after vintage JBL's - I miss the 4435 the most . Guido put a TD 2001 in his - I never heard them , but if I ever get to Athens I will surely knock on the door of the new owner for a listen .

I never had a problem with the top end , I did slap the the woofers a couple of times .

My opinion is simply this ..... the 2405 was around when the 4435 was designed and yet it was not used . I trust David Smith on this one - and my own ears . The 4435 enjoyed the longest production time of any JBL studio monitor . What other endorsement could anyone ask for ?

As far as Be is concerned , you should try it before making any judgement . In my experience ,its the most cost effective upgrade anyone could make . Just search the forum and read what the users of Be have said . There aint anyone going back , and there are one or two of us that would also consider ourselves enthusiasts .

For what you spent on the enclosure ,plus the cost of the 2405 and crossover mods , you could of perhaps purchased a pair of Be based drivers .

Just my opinion this , but nevertheless , opinion based on actual experience and not folklore !

Rich
No experienced, no say(Chairman Mao once said):D
Since some people have tried Be drivers,and think they are better,just have a try:crying:
personally,I don't like JBL moderen products,if we pursue exact sound,there are a lot of brands could be chosen:DDynaudio;Genelec;Yamaha and so on.
We just like the sound of JBL 075,076,077,175,275,375,2235,D,K,E series,especially Alnico:applaud:

[richluvsound]

No experienced, no say(Chairman Mao once said):D
Since some people have tried Be drivers,and think they are better,just have a try:crying:
personally,I don't like JBL moderen products,if we pursue exact sound,there are a lot of brands could be chosen:DDynaudio;Genelec;Yamaha and so on.
We just like the sound of JBL 075,076,077,175,275,375,2235,D,K,E series,especially Alnico:applaud:
Hi Martin,
you have a point , but you mention Pro studio monitors, the most highly rated are the Westlake and Kinoshita ( Rey Audio ) both rely on Tad Be for the mid range . I like the Genelec stuff , It think it sounds great for Digital mastering, but I prefer horns and for horns there is not a better diaphram material.

Since I started to use Be I have heard things hidden for 20 years by other materials .

PS, I think you'll find Be in the top vintage Yamaha monitors !

Rich

[Titanium Dome]

Be all you can Be!

[remusr]

Rich - when you stated above that the JBL you most missed was the 4435 did you typo and mean the 4345? I can't see the 4435 in the same ballpark despite its undeniable "sweetness" and semi-great bass. I understand it had a long run but so did the Vdub Beetle and GM X-cars...
Roy

[Akira]

Great idea to add the 2405! My 4430 & 4435's are very interesting sounding, almost sweet compared to my L300's, L100T & 4345's. But they definitely are difficult to distinguish instruments & detail as they have zero hi-end.
The 4430-35 are rather unique to the studio monitor line as they are the only models that I can recall that are voiced differently--they lack the forward voicing renowned by JBL, The articulation that is inherent in the traditional JBL response is an integral part of what an engineer is listening for. The majority of decision making is based around this region of the sound spectrum as it tells you where to place and the degree of 'closeness' each instrument lies in the spatial spectrum. Or as you have said, "difficult to distinguish." I used to have a pair of 4430's-- hated to work on them but, found them pleasing to listen to.

[richluvsound]

Roy,

My point being , rather than do that to the cabinet I would have changed the CD for Be . The horn out performed the 2307 bugle even when I had TAD 2002 on it . Now, the 2002 on the butt cheeks would have been interesting indeed .

I think I was too hasty to dismiss my 4435 to Germany without exploring their potential more .
The bass was a little light - perhaps more of a placement issue than component issue .

The 4345 was more about " show and tell" than actual listening enjoyment.

I still crave a vintage blue baffle for nostalgic purposes, but after using a more modern JBL design , I could not allow a blue baffle into any so-called " reference system"

Just my opinion, Rich

[martin_wu99]

Hi Martin,
you have a point , but you mention Pro studio monitors, the most highly rated are the Westlake and Kinoshita ( Rey Audio ) both rely on Tad Be for the mid range . I like the Genelec stuff , It think it sounds great for Digital mastering, but I prefer horns and for horns there is not a better diaphram material.

Since I started to use Be I have heard things hidden for 20 years by other materials .

PS, I think you'll find Be in the top vintage Yamaha monitors !

Rich
Hi Rich,(I want to be rich too:D)
I'm also horns and big drivers lover(I once had a 18' 4698B).:applaud:
Are you sure Westlake and Rey all use Tad Be as their mid drivers?Besides,like Oceanway,JK(made in Taiwan),Orgue Archon, Augspurger etc. great horn systems ,they are too expensive for most of us:banghead:
Are you sure there is not a better diaphram material but Be?As I konw, Kharma use ceramic as HF diaphram.
High resolution and wide frequence response are important characteristics of moderen speakers,but as i'm not a studio master,i don't very care about these,i just want to please my ears.:p
BTW,as far as i konw,JM Lab uses Be in its UTOPIA speakers for many years.
Tomorrow night will be Chinese New Year's eve,Happy Chinese New Year!:bouncy:

[richluvsound]

Martin,

I guess this guy is behind the designs I rate highly .... The early Westlake and Eastlake used JBL large format CD's ..... they were superseded buy the TD 4001 and subsequently the TD 4003 .

I have heard Ceramic tweeters ,but not ceramic diaphrams for CD's. Perhaps the material is just not suitable .

I am, by no means, an authority on the subject , but have heard enough till feel my opinion has some grounding in experience . There are some people here that have forgotten more than I will ever know .

Happy New Year Martin and family !

Rich

[Mr. Widget]

Tomorrow night will be Chinese New Year's eve,Happy Chinese New Year!Happy New Year!



Are you sure there is not a better diaphram material but Be?As I konw, Kharma use ceramic as HF diaphram.Who makes the best tweeter and what type is certainly up for debate.

From a pure physics/scientific aspect the best material is undisputedly beryllium. For a high frequency device you want rigidity and low mass. Be is the fourth element on the periodic table of elements below Hydrogen, Helium, and Lithium... Magnesium is 12, Aluminum 13, and Titanium is way down at 22. These atomic numbers show the relative mass of these materials. The atomic number has no bearing on a material's stiffness, but in the case of these four elements the stiffness also follows with Be and Mg being the most stiff followed by Al and Ti being the least stiff... ceramics can be very good, but they tend to be more massive than Mg and certainly more massive than Be.


Widget