ARRAY 1000 vs 4429 studio monitor

[DK11706]

Hi everyone,

This is my first post, so be gentle :)

I'm thinking about buying a pair of array 1000 speakers, but unlike the 1400 serie there is not much info on the 1000, so if you have any expirence with the 1000 serie, please share! Do they sound harsh, is the woofer output good enough a high volumes, and do they suffer under the same cabinet vibrations as the 1400 do?

Another set I'm looking at is the new 4429, they are using a lower series horn and tweeter but the woofer is the well know 1200FE-8, the array 1000 is using a "unknow pro" woofer unit but better horn and tweeter, does anyone know what's the best combination?

I've heard both speakers in a short demo, and liked both, but maybe one is better in the long run, which pair would you choose, retail price is the same in the offer I've recieved ?

Thanks, and sorry for my bad english, I'm Danish :).

Rasmus

[4313B]

I can tell you that the ten inch in the 1000 Array is nowhere near as nice as the twelve inch in the 4429. It isn't even a contest. The twelve costs hundreds of dollars more. Yes, hundreds of dollars. (3.56 times more to be exact)

But, in the end, it all depends on which you think sounds better.

[Mr. Widget]

Do they sound harsh, is the woofer output good enough a high volumes, and do they suffer under the same cabinet vibrations as the 1400 do?Did you actually hear these "terrible" vibrations, or did you hear about them... sorry, my use of English might not be clear... by that I mean do you have firsthand experience hearing the 1400s sounding poorly, or did you read about it or have someone tell you about it. I bring this up as, while the 1400 might sound a little better if the cabinet was even more inert, I have compared them to many other speakers, and they always come off very well in the comparisons.

Unfortunately I have never heard the 1000 Array and so I can not comment on them.

BTW: Welcome to the forum, and your English is just fine.


Widget

[DK11706]

I've never heard the 1400, and the cabinet vibrations I've read about in this forum and another one I can't remember the name of. When I auditioned the Array 1000 I did notice some vibrations from the cabinet when I put my hand on it, more than I would have expected at the given volume. I wasn't able to push the volume any further because of the sales guy watching me, so I can't say what happens when things get ugly :dont-know:. But anyway they sounded great.

[ronaltronics]

I have never heard any noise or vibration of a cabinet from a single Array 1400 I have ever sold since they were first introduced. Maybe someone dropped a few in shipping......... Ever since I read that on this forum I have been checking for this noise in all 1400's that cross my path, And as I said not one has ever had any low frequency cabinet vibration noise.

I cannot comment on the sound of the 4429 monitor because they are sold to us here in North America. But I can comment on the Array 1000's. They are no where near the Array 1400's but the fit and finish is as supurb as the Array 1400's. The smaller compression driver does not bother me because you get what you pay for.

As far as the sound they are a family member of the Array series and I would have to say they are one hell of a toe tapping loudspeaker at this price point. I also like the fact that there is no cabinet surrounding the Midrange and UHF for a more three dimensional soundstage.

[audiomagnate]

The Array 1400 is the most accurate full range transducer ever invented. YMMV

[ronaltronics]

I personally would say the Everest DD66000 is the best.

[4313B]

I like Greg's "if I could do it all over again" solution - 1500AL with the 1400 Array top end (476Be or 476Mg in place of the 435Al). I suspect the Array horn would have to be moved back an inch or two to align with the deeper 1500AL acoustic center. Anyway, that's for another day.

[ronaltronics]

Yah and brace the low frequency enclourse a little more and all for the $11,500.00 u.s. a pair price. Now that would be the ULTIMATE AUDIOPHILE BARGIN................

[spkrman57]

I like Greg's "if I could do it all over again" solution - 1500AL with the 1400 Array top end (476Be or 476Mg in place of the 435Al). I suspect the Array horn would have to be moved back an inch or two to align with the deeper 1500AL acoustic center. Anyway, that's for another day.

That would be sweet!

Regards, Ron

[JBLAddict]

I like Greg's "if I could do it all over again" solution - 1500AL with the 1400 Array top end (476Be or 476Mg in place of the 435Al). I suspect the Array horn would have to be moved back an inch or two to align with the deeper 1500AL acoustic center. Anyway, that's for another day.

so the 045Ti would stay in the array 1401? :D

[4313B]

so the 045Ti would stay in the array 1401? :DG.T. stated that it would be fine.

The Be version is double the cost. My 1400 Array horns currently have the 435Be and 045Be though. For some reason I was able to get quite a few pairs of 045Be's and only one pair of 045Ti's back when I purchased a bunch.

Same goes for the 435Be versus 435Al, I was able to get a whole bunch of 435Be's but no 435Al's at the time. If I remember correctly the 435Be was roughly three times the cost of the 435Al. The 435Al wasn't that much more expensive compared to the significanty more numerous 175Nd-3 which is used in a bunch of different of systems including the 800/1000 Array and 4429.

[ronaltronics]

The 175nd-3 is also in the new mini k2 (S-4700)

[Mr. Widget]

The 175nd-3 is also in the new mini k2 (S-4700)Mini K2 my... Let's not discuss that speaker. ;)


Widget

[JBLAddict]

I was able to get quite a few pairs of 045Be's

I was able to get a whole bunch of 435Be's

yeah, that's nice, just keep rubbing it in.....;)

[ronaltronics]

Mini K2 my... Let's not discuss that speaker. ;)


Widget

Ok I won't open that can of worms..........;)

[DK11706]

I got my McIntosh MA7000 today :D, It just sounds fantastic, even with my old "semi high-end" speakers, can't wait till I get my Array 1000 or 4429, though nothing has been decided yet:confused:, I just can't make up my mind:dont-know:, and it seems like we are short on Array 1000 owners inhere :banghead:. Array or studio monitors, which is best for music at high volume?

BTW: Great forum, at lot of useful information comes my way right now :)

[Mr. Widget]

Array or studio monitors, which is best for music at high volume?
If high SPL is very important, I'd seriously consider a vintage 15" based "real" studio monitor.


Widget

[DK11706]

If high SPL is very important, I'd seriously consider a vintage 15" based "real" studio monitor.


Widget

High SPL is important, but it has to be "good SPL", not just high, then I would have bought som cerwin vegas :). The old vintage speakers are hard to find in Denmark, and are heavily overpriced if they are in good condition, so thats not an option. My options right now are the array 1000 or the 4429, I got a good deal on my hands for both, the Array 1000 I can get for 45% of the retail price (4700$), and the 4429 for 75% of the retail price (5500$).

Should I go for the Arrays or do the studio monitors have so much more power and new technology that they are worth the extra cost.

[pos]

the Array 1000 I can get for 45% of the retail price (4700$), and the 4429 for 75% of the retail price (5500$)
At those prices I would choose the 4429 for sure! The woofer is so much better (especially if high SPL is wanted...), and it uses the same horns/drivers combo as the S4600 (the one GT said it sounded better than it had any right to ;)).

Some technical data from the library:

S4600:
http://www.audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?22656-S4600

the woofer is the array 1000 :skeptical:
http://www.audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?11980-ARRAY-10

the woofer in the S4600 :)
http://www.audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?21501-Le14h-4 (http://www.audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?21501-Le14h-4)

the woofer in the 4429 :D
http://www.audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?21713-1200fe-8

[martin_wu99]

At those prices I would choose the 4429 for sure! The woofer is so much better (especially if high SPL is wanted...), and it uses the same horns/drivers combo as the S4600 (the one GT said it sounded better than it had any right to ;)).

Some technical data from the library:

S4600:
http://www.audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?22656-S4600

the woofer is the array 1000 :skeptical:
http://www.audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?11980-ARRAY-10

the woofer in the S4600 :)
http://www.audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?21501-Le14h-4 (http://www.audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?21501-Le14h-4)

the woofer in the 4429 :D
http://www.audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?21713-1200fe-8

Thanks for your link,Pos,I Agree with you.
Then,How about 4338,4348,4365 comparing with array 1400? I personally Prefer 1400 more.

[tom1040]

Thanks for your link,Pos,I Agree with you.
Then,How about 4338,4348,4365 comparing with array 1400? I personally Prefer 1400 more.


I would love to hear those! Without hearing them, I still suspect the 4365 would move the 1400 Arrays from my room. Perhaps all of them would? However, I doubt I will get the chance so I am happy with the Arrays.:)

[martin_wu99]

I would love to hear those! Without hearing them, I still suspect the 4365 would move the 1400 Arrays from my room. Perhaps all of them would? However, I doubt I will get the chance so I am happy with the Arrays.:)
But we must take into accout that JBL first intruducing 4' 476Mg using in 4365,it is said that it's the first usage of 4' compressing driver to match a single 15' woofer:eek:

[ronaltronics]

How much would the 4365 be retail in the U.S.A.? Compared to the Array 1400's at $11,500.00 us.

[DK11706]

Had a long listening session with the Array 1000 today, they are more revealing than I thought :crying:. Good recordings sound great, and not so good recordings tends to get a little harsh in upper midrange and tweeter, and listener fatigue kicks in. I think I might be able to tame the tweeter with the correct interconnects, what do you guys do, and do you expirence the same?

[Goophy]

But we must take into accout that JBL first intruducing 4' 476Mg using in 4365,it is said that it's the first usage of 4' compressing driver to match a single 15' woofer:eek:

K2 S9900 uses the 476mg and a single 1500AL.

[timc]

K2 S9900 uses the 476mg and a single 1500AL.

End considering that the second woofer in the Everest only works in the LF, I would say that the DD66000 was the first.

[martin_wu99]

K2 S9900 uses the 476mg and a single 1500AL.
Perhaps the first usage of 4' compression driver with one 15' woofer is c70( i confused):375+?.
Whatever,the key point is how to evalue and rank them:15'(14')+HF+UHF
Let me try it first:S143<4338<4348<ARRAY1400<4365<K2S4800<K2S4600<K2S4700<K2S9800<K2S9800SE<K2S9900
My another rank is: 4430<S/3100<S3100MK2<K2S7500 (15+HF)
How about your rank?:confused:

[vettedrummer]

I use a set of 1,000's in my home theater along with the 880 center and I've never had a problem with them at all. I find the bass is much faster with the 1,000's vs the 1400's. It just depends how low you need it to go. I also have the Array 1500 sub so low is not an issue in the theater!

[DK11706]

Hi,

Thank you for all your input.

I finally made up my mind, and bought something else than JBL's, after my last session with the Array's and Mcintosh gear I realized that they annoyed me after about an hour. I think the Array's are great but to revealing for my taste, most of the music I listen to, is not that well recorded and the tweeter starts to sound harsh on the arrays. Good recordings sounds REALLY good, but I need an allround speaker. I ended up with a pair of ELAC FS 249 Black Edition (6400$), the best way of describing them is a combination of electrostats and powerfull JBL bass, ELAC is German and proberly not that well know in the US, but they are famous for their JET Tweeter, and insane SPL without compressing the music.

[martin_wu99]

I checked out,the model is C50SM S8(375+LE15A)ELAC is also very proud of its mushroom HF，but ELAC never has the loose bass that JBL does,in another word，ELAC's bass is too tight.

[hjames]

I checked out the model is C50SM S8(375+LE15A).
ELAC is also very proud of its mushroom HF，but ELAC never has the loose bass
that JBL does,in another word，ELAC's bass is too tight.

But - the C50Sm is a 2 way from 1967 - it predates the 4320
... why compare anything to such old tech?

[BMWCCA]

But - the C50Sm is a 2 way from 1967 - it predates the 4320
... why compare anything to such old tech?

Dates certainly could be right but the C50SM S8 is the three-way with the 075 added. About as good as they came back then. C50SM is just the cabinet number.

[hjames]

Dates certainly could be right but the C50SM S8 is the three-way with the 075 added.
About as good as they came back then. C50SM is just the cabinet number.

Perhaps as good as they came back then, but unless its been rebuilt,
crossovers from 1967 have probably aged and drifted quite a bit by now?

[BMWCCA]

Perhaps as good as they came back then, but unless its been rebuilt,
crossovers from 1967 have probably aged and drifted quite a bit by now?

No argument there. Best I can tell, Martin's comparison was purely theoretical, anyway. A bit hard to follow but wasn't his point to determine JBL's first use of a 4-inch-diaphragm compression driver with a 15-inch woofer in a two-way system? My point was simply that the S8 was actually a three-way. The two-way S7 used the smaller LE85 driver.

[martin_wu99]

But - the C50Sm is a 2 way from 1967 - it predates the 4320
... why compare anything to such old tech?
Oh，you misunderstood me.I just want to correct my mistake:4'HF+15'woofer already appeared in 1962's c50sm s8,but it's not in my comparing list.
I just want to PK JBL similar form modern spearkers.such as 15'+HF(compression driver)+UHF(compression driver)
BTW,I like PKING.:D

[martin_wu99]

No argument there. Best I can tell, Martin's comparison was purely theoretical, anyway. A bit hard to follow but wasn't his point to determine JBL's first use of a 4-inch-diaphragm compression driver with a 15-inch woofer in a two-way system? My point was simply that the S8 was actually a three-way. The two-way S7 used the smaller LE85 driver.
The japanese(stereo sound) said that S8 was JBL first usage of 15'+4'.

my rank:S143<4338<ARRAY1400<4365<K2S4800<K2S4600<K2S4700<K2S9800<K2M9800<K2S9800SE<K2S9900
4430<S/3100<S3100MK2<K2S7500 (15+HF)

[yggdrasil]

The japanese(stereo sound) said that S8 was JBL first usage of 15'+4'.

my rank:S143<4338<ARRAY1400<4365<K2S4800<K2S4600<K2S4700<K2S9800<K2M9800<K2S9800SE<K2S9900
4430<S/3100<S3100MK2<K2S7500 (15+HF)
What about the Hartsfield? From 1954: http://www.audioheritage.org/html/profiles/jbl/hartsfield.htm

[andywin]

Dates certainly could be right but the C50SM S8 is the three-way with the 075 added. About as good as they came back then. C50SM is just the cabinet number.

I had a pair of C50SM S8's at the same time I had my 4333's and IMHO they were more enjoyable. Definitely not outdated. I only parted with them because I purchased some Array 1400's.

[martin_wu99]

I had a pair of C50SM S8's at the same time I had my 4333's and IMHO they were more enjoyable. Definitely not outdated. I only parted with them because I purchased some Array 1400's.
It only means that you like modern JBL sound.:applaud:

[martin_wu99]

What about the Hartsfield? From 1954: http://www.audioheritage.org/html/profiles/jbl/hartsfield.htm

It's historical relic,it sounds great even in today's standard.:D

[andywin]

It only means that you like modern JBL sound.:applaud:

That's not what I said.

[Mr. Widget]

That's not what I said.I found that an odd interpretation myself... I guess sometimes we just hear what we want to hear. ;)


Widget

[andywin]

I found that an odd interpretation myself... I guess sometimes we just hear what we want to hear. ;)


Widget

Yes very strange, especially considering my latst toys :) http://www.audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?32555-Westrex-speakers

[DK11706]

It's been a while, time for an update!
I never really became good friends with the ELAC speaker i bought, so yesterday I got my new speakers......JBL 4429:D
The midrange and treble is still a little harsh and the bass needs to settle in, but oh boy they sound so good already. Right now Neil Young is playing southern man and the guitar is so rough but at the same very ear pleasing, nice:applaud:. They will be playing all night at low volume to exercise the units, can't wait to hear Neil Young twisting the guitar tomorrow:rockon1:.

[martin_wu99]

It's been a while, time for an update!
I never really became good friends with the ELAC speaker i bought, so yesterday I got my new speakers......JBL 4429:D
The midrange and treble is still a little harsh and the bass needs to settle in, but oh boy they sound so good already. Right now Neil Young is playing southern man and the guitar is so rough but at the same very ear pleasing, nice:applaud:. They will be playing all night at low volume to exercise the units, can't wait to hear Neil Young twisting the guitar tomorrow:rockon1:.
Forget ELAC,and concentrate on your 4429,it need at least several months to run in,will be better and better:D
by the way,l like Neil Young too:D

[bubbleboy76]

I was a bit surprised when you bought the Elacs, very different speaker... Good that you are on track now!

I am extremely satisfied with my 4429. if I remember it correcly, the Timberism was "sounds better than it has any rigth to do!" :)