View Full Version : Here's my photo of my JBLs
06-16-2003, 07:34 PM
Here is the photo of my pile of JBL Studio Monitors. Since I had pairs of these four models, I decided to arranged these to mimic an old JBL brochure photo. Starting from the upper left is my 4312A, over to your right the 4333B sitting on top of a 4320 (2405 moved to center top) and at the lower left is my newest aquisition, one of my just completed pair of 4343s.
Finding these and painstakingly refurbishing them has been a great learning experience and has been very satisfying. They all sound sound slightly different from each other, but they all sound great!
Thanks again to all of you who shared your knowledge and help in these projects.
P.S. I just realized that I left the grille on the 4312A...oh well. Since I didn't do any work on the 4312s, I guess I got to know them with grilles, however I became intimately familiar with the others without grilles.
06-16-2003, 08:15 PM
Wow, Tom, very cool, you lucky dog! Thanks for the photos.
So, if you HAD to give them all up but one pair......??
06-16-2003, 08:39 PM
...on my keyboard.
OK, fine, but do us the courtesy of making them an attachment in addition to your to-be-envied Avatar! I, for one, need a closer, appreciative look at your handiwork!
Well done, man, well done!
We're assuming, of course, that you play this pile all at once, Grateful Dead like?
You go, boy!!
06-16-2003, 11:31 PM
You have done a great job on these classic JBL's. Congrats!
I hope to have some exciting news to post very soon. Will know on the 24th.
06-17-2003, 08:35 PM
They look great! Got any bigger ones we can look at?? Those 4343 worked out well for you.
06-18-2003, 07:58 PM
Guys, I've tried numerous times to attach a larger version of the photo of my JBL Studio Monitors, but I always get an "invalid" response. I've tried renaming it ending in jpg, jpeg, etc. as well as reducing the file size to under the 160K limit (which creates a small image) but still no luck!
If someone wants to post this for me you can e-mail me and I will attach the image to my return e-mail for posting.
Which model would be my "keeper"? That's tough because I've gotten to "know" them all so well...but I suppose I'd go for the 4343s. The 4312As have great imaging and, with the subwoofer, produce a very satisfing listening experience, but the 4343s deliver an effortless, smooth presentation...they're just easy to listen to at any volume level!
06-19-2003, 08:42 PM
... from an email Tom sent along:
Thanks for offering to post this in the Forum.
Attached is my "Full Size photo of my JBL Studio Monitors". Please add:
Here's a larger photo of my Studio Monitors as requested.
My special thanks to Giskard, Mr. Widget and JBLdog for their help during
these restorations. And thanks to Bo for posting this for me.
06-19-2003, 09:45 PM
I almost cried when I saw the pics :) He He
Bo and Tom, Thanks for your efforts.
06-19-2003, 10:07 PM
Very nice! :)
06-20-2003, 04:56 AM
Yes, Tom, VERY VERY NICE!!! :)
06-20-2003, 02:00 PM
06-25-2003, 04:59 AM
Well, the way you guys drool over these old monitors make me want to hear a setup of these more and more. I use the S3100 and that is all the JBL I have ever experienced. Have any of you heard these (s3100)? Is there anyone in Montreal who has a studio monitor setup that I can hear ? Much appreciated.
06-25-2003, 05:44 AM
Can you explain/describe the pros/con of the 10" midrange drivers othet the other model type 4333.
06-25-2003, 06:06 PM
I'm confused by your question. Re-state it and I will try to answer it.
06-26-2003, 08:40 AM
I would like to know what does the 10" midrange change to make the 4343 your prefered cabinets.
I am wondering about the pros/con of a 2 way systems vs 3way and 4way.
I would like to know if the 10" midrange make a big difference in clarity and dynamic for the mid frequencies.
06-26-2003, 02:59 PM
I think the 10" mid-bass speaker affords two advantages over 2 and 3-way systems. First, the 10" cone driver gives the low mids a body and fullness that isn't quite there in even the 3-way systems. Vocals on the 4320s and 4333s are slightly "stepped back" and if turned up, present themselves with a touch of harshness. The 4343s 4-way system allows the 2420 to come in around 1.2K instead of 800Hz, which seems to make the mids slightly less harsh or matallic sounding. Having a mid bass driver also allows you to tweak the level of the lower mids independently to get the body up to where you like it. On the other end of the spectrum the 2231 only has to go up to 300Hz, so the woofer, using the mass ring, can be optimized to work just in these lower frequencies. The second benifit of this 4-way system, when run in the bi-amp mode, is that the woofer level can be set to balance the low end with the rest of the system. In a 3 way, and especially a 2 way system, the woofer level adjustment greatly affects the mid balance as well.
How does it sound? I think my 3-way 3420s and 4333s sound very nice (I bi-amp them too), but when I compare them to the 4343s, I hear a slightly more natural sound, a more realistic, balanced voice from the 4343s. I set up my 4320s and 4333s with 2231s with out the mass rings because I wanted to get clear mids that joinded with the 2420 compression drivers, feeling clear, quick mids are very important to the sucess of the sound. I was willing to sacrifice a little of the low end to get this. The 4343s don't sacrifice ANY of the low end! Of course EQ can help minimize some of these concerns, but I like running my systems with out any preamp EQ. I try to balance my system by ear, rather then with a RTA and graphic EQ. I've also found that when I tweak my crossover and driver levels to get the balance "just right", I put on another CD and feel that I need to re-balance my system! I've come to a point where I try to get it close and smooth out any "jagged edges" and then let it alone. The 4343s make this a little easier.
Hope this helps.
06-26-2003, 07:54 PM
"I am wondering about the pros/con of a 2 way systems vs 3way and 4way."
G.T. points out what he thinks about 2-way systems. Although he didn't design the 4343, he did design the L300/4333 and 4315/4344/4345/4355.
06-27-2003, 09:47 AM
Great discription(s), and I share some of your angst - the higher we raise the bar with improved electronics and transducers, the more apparent are the differences (read: short-comings) of different producer's results. Some mixes are just plain bad. Much of this is less noticeable with lower-end or even middle-end(?) gear. But it becomes almost intolerable with higher-end gear - you just HAVE to fiddle with it! :p
and, Giskard -
That reference to Timbers is woefully brief! And, it seems in conflict that he would be the designer of such cabinets as the ("splendiferous") 4344's, and the 4345, and 4355's. :confused:
06-27-2003, 11:56 AM
Woefully brief! :p
I thought it was pretty succinct! :D
I don't think it's in conflict either. I thoroughly enjoy what I consider to be G.T.'s extremely well rounded approach to loudspeaker design.
Here's another fun link :)
06-27-2003, 12:24 PM
Ha! You're right - absolutely!
But thinking this over, I guess JBLPRo is telling us that:
extension of the classic two-way-design concept = three-way
So, hyper-extension = four-way?
And, clinical-extension = five-way?
06-27-2003, 12:33 PM
Sure! Extend away!
I just recently extended my little 4406 two-ways by adding subs :p
I used to extend the legendary point source LE8T-H by adding the 077. ;)
JBL went WAY out on a limb and extended the exceptionally excellent little 4-way L250 by adding a B460 :eek:
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.1.8 Copyright © 2013 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.