PDA

View Full Version : JBL 4435 vs 4343 Opinions?



DonBocadillo
05-19-2014, 06:36 AM
Hi all,

A set of 4343's have recently popped up for sale in the neighborhood and as an owner of a set of 4435's i'm wondering if the 4343's would bring anything extra to the table or would this be a lateral move at best?

Thanks for the feedback!

P.

Champster
05-19-2014, 12:48 PM
Hi all,

A set of 4343's have recently popped up for sale in the neighborhood and as an owner of a set of 4435's i'm wondering if the 4343's would bring anything extra to the table or would this be a lateral move at best?

Thanks for the feedback!

P.

I would, personally, consider the 4343 an upgrade, but I think it is largely a matter of personal preference.

Paul

richluvsound
05-19-2014, 01:12 PM
I would, personally, consider the 4343 an upgrade, but I think it is largely a matter of personal preference.

Paul

I miss my 4435s more than 4345s . 4435's had far better off axis sound for home use . Just my 2 cents worth .

I If I had them still i'd be looking to put a Be based CD in there .


Rich

HCSGuy
05-19-2014, 01:29 PM
I have 4343's and 4430's, and am generally more satisfied with the sound of the 4430's - they image much better. The 4343's have a smaller sweet spot and don't have good image focus even there. I also think the 4430's have more HF Detail, though they have less HF output. However, I am not in love with either in this regard, and so have a set of TAD drivers waiting to try in the 4430's and S3100's to see how much improvement I can get. However, up loud, the 4343's have more punch. If I were to get rid of one pair, it would be the 4343's, but I'm more of a HiFi dude and low level listener - not really the 4343's intended customer.

DonBocadillo
05-21-2014, 12:11 PM
Thanks for the feedback...looks like I'll have to hold out for a set of 4345's :-)

martin2395
05-22-2014, 09:06 AM
The 4343 doesn't image at all :D but the sound has a lot of depth (at least to my ears).
Yes, the sweet spot is very small but it doesn't matter to me because my listening position never changes.

The BiRadials sound smoother and throw a bigger soundstage but I like the older designs more, they are FUN!

I'd jump on em if the price is right and upgrade the units to 2441, 2122/23 and 2235H, probably a pair of new CC networks would make an even bigger difference.

Oh yes and for me the 4343's have the looks to die for :thmbsup:

ivica
05-23-2014, 06:01 AM
The 4343 doesn't image at all ...............
Yes, the sweet spot is very small but it doesn't matter to me because my listening position never changes.

The BiRadials sound smoother and throw a bigger soundstage but I like the older designs more, they are FUN!

................

Hi martin2395,

Are You using 2308 lenses on the mentioned 4343, boxes?
I have just opposite feeling while listening 4333.....
I have experience that 2308 lenses have wide dispersion angle in the horizontal plane.

Regards
Ivica

martin_wu99
05-23-2014, 06:28 AM
Hi all,

A set of 4343's have recently popped up for sale in the neighborhood and as an owner of a set of 4435's i'm wondering if the 4343's would bring anything extra to the table or would this be a lateral move at best?

Thanks for the feedback!

P.
I like the sound of 4343,the image of 4435.

martin2395
05-23-2014, 11:07 AM
Hi martin2395,

Are You using 2308 lenses on the mentioned 4343, boxes?
I have just opposite feeling while listening 4333.....
I have experience that 2308 lenses have wide dispersion angle in the horizontal plane.

Regards
Ivica

Hi Ivica,

Yes, I do have the 2308's but with H93 horns and 2441 drivers behind em. They sound big and spacious but that doesn't mean that they image good ;)

Maybe a different design of the lens would help?

ngccglp
05-23-2014, 11:53 PM
Go to jbl43.com and search for video clips for 4343 and 4430 or 4435. I'm sure you'll come to the same conclusion...

BMWCCA
05-24-2014, 06:20 PM
Go to jbl43.com and search for video clips for 4343 and 4430 or 4435. I'm sure you'll come to the same conclusion...

I conclude they all sound a lot like . . . my laptop speakers! :banghead:

ngccglp
05-24-2014, 08:55 PM
Haha, follow his instructions, plugged in your head/ear phones and crank it up. The difference between the 44 series and the 43 series is quite apparent, which is why the 43 still fetches a premium over the 44 series.

ratitifb
05-25-2014, 01:14 AM
Haha, follow his instructions, plugged in your head/ear phones and crank it up. ... what about the process of sound recording :confused:

BMWCCA
05-25-2014, 07:11 AM
Haha, follow his instructions, plugged in your head/ear phones and crank it up.

Unless you're hearing them both with your ears in the same room at the same time . . . :bs:

ratitifb
05-25-2014, 07:21 AM
Unless you're hearing them both with your ears in the same room at the same time . . . :bs:totaly agree with that and i'm always surprise how people can compare JBL monitor speakers from youtube even from the best PC sound card with the best earphones ... and without knowing the whole rec/play process!

hjames
05-25-2014, 07:33 AM
totaly agree with that and i'm always surprise how people can compare JBL monitor speakers from youtube even from the best PC sound card with the best earphones ... and without knowing the whole rec/play process!

Agreed - but I think I'd use the term "ludicrous" to think you could really
hear what a speaker sounded like via Youtube and your gear ...



I use youtube to see what a new band sounds like -
not to audition hardware at the other end!

Mr. Widget
05-25-2014, 09:26 AM
Haha, follow his instructions, plugged in your head/ear phones and crank it up. The difference between the 44 series and the 43 series is quite apparent, which is why the 43 still fetches a premium over the 44 series.I must admit that I thought you were joking, but since you aren't I would suggest considering that while you may very well hear differences between speakers via a carefully produced YouTube video with identical mic techniques etc., we have no way of knowing that two videos were carefully and identically produced.

More importantly, this test really only tells us which speaker works best via that recording chain and not necessarily through a pair of ears in a real room.


Widget

SEAWOLF97
05-25-2014, 09:39 AM
I can get some pretty good quality sound over the web ..streaming through a fine soundcard to a real amp and the ESS's + Sonance speakers, but I'd surely not even to pretend to evaluate others speakers from what I hear.

It's kinda like multi generation analog material copies, each time you get further down the chain from the original source ...the more it becomes different.

I have friends with computer flight simulators that think it's just like "real flying" ..err, not really..it's just a digital re-creation. And as others have said ... you don't know what's in the chain ahead of those speakers that were recorded as a comparison test.

martin2395
05-25-2014, 12:04 PM
Agreed^^

The is also another factor that most people tend to forget about - room acoustics

For example: if you have a room with concrete floor and walls you will probably get a bigger sound due to reflections but also more blurred image, shrill highs and bass with too long decay time compared to a room with more sound absorption that will give you a bit smaller but more precise sound.

I've owned many many speakers in the past and very often they turned out to sound entirely different in different rooms and way different than what people on the internet said about them.
That's the main reason I stopped reading reviews other than just for amusement.

From what I could hear on Kenrick's clips their listening room has similar room acoustics as mine - just like a small stadium :D

martin_wu99
05-26-2014, 02:08 AM
Agreed^^

The is also another factor that most people tend to forget about - room acoustics

For example: if you have a room with concrete floor and walls you will probably get a bigger sound due to reflections but also more blurred image, shrill highs and bass with too long decay time compared to a room with more sound absorption that will give you a bit smaller but more precise sound.

I've owned many many speakers in the past and very often they turned out to sound entirely different in different rooms and way different than what people on the internet said about them.
That's the main reason I stopped reading reviews other than just for amusement.

From what I could hear on Kenrick's clips their listening room has similar room acoustics as mine - just like a small stadium :D
Totally agreed with you,Martin,i think the most important factor is speakers itself,secondly is room acoustics,third is gears.but people usually throgh replacing gears to improve sound quality:crying:

ngccglp
05-27-2014, 06:21 AM
Haha of course I am not referring to a very precise comparison, the room and equipment seems like a constant, and Kenji does show you his camera gear. Having own many 43XX and 4430 I must say the videos at jbl43.com does generally gives you an idea of the characteristics of that speakers. But maybe because I did owned some of those speakers that I could relate to the sound I hear on youtube, but for someone without prior experience it would be a whole different matter. Point taken. ;)

DonBocadillo
05-27-2014, 07:36 AM
Thanks for the feedback folks! I have come to the following conclusions:

1. The 4343 would seem to be best once being upgraded to the 4344 configuration (driver replacement, crossover modification, etc.) which will obviously have a price tag attached and render the 4343's no longer original but obviously better.
2. The 4343 'may' sound better than the 4435 but definitely images less well and is not time aligned and had possible phase issues.
3. The 4435 is much more forgiving in terms of placement and perhaps more suited to a home listening environment.

Now all that being said the only remaining question is whether the 4343's at $4k represent a significant / tangible upgrade over the 4435's which i have less than $1500 invested in. Will I reap a $2500 improvement in quality... based on the above, I doubt it.

I may well have just reached a plateau in my JBL experience at least till a pair of 4345's comes along :-)

martin2395
05-27-2014, 09:07 AM
I indeed replaced all units in my 4343 except the alnico 2405's - out went the 2231/2121 and 2421B, in went 2235H, 2123H and "2441+H93.
Espescially the "2 upgrade is worthwhile, at the first listen they may sound no better than "1's because the "2 sounds much smoother and fuller.

ngccglp
05-27-2014, 12:48 PM
Hi Martin,

I noticed you used 2441 H93 for your 4343. I too am tempted to do the same for my 4345. Was it a drop in replacement ? Could you get the right balance with the lpad range?

thanks.

martin2395
05-28-2014, 05:16 AM
I never had the 2231. When I bought my 4343's they had 2225h baskets with pos chinese 2235 recones so these went directly do the bin.

Later on I bought a beauful pair of 2235H with fresh JBL recones.

ivica
05-28-2014, 05:47 AM
Hi Martin,

I noticed you used 2441 H93 for your 4343. I too am tempted to do the same for my 4345. Was it a drop in replacement ? Could you get the right balance with the l-pad range?

thanks.

Hi ngccglp,

In order to use 2441 into the 4345 box, You have to measure is it possible to do it easy, may be the size of the 2441 would make some problems correlated to the 'dogy-box' for 2122 mid-bass driver.
The holes for the 2311 (H93) would match the H91 holes.
May be 2441 would have larger efficiency, but using VHF L-pad , I think can compensate that.

regards
ivica

martin2395
05-28-2014, 06:05 AM
(AFAIK) JBL stated that both "1 and "2 could be used with the same netowork.
The holes match perfectly but you have to chip off quite a chunk of the dogbox to fit the 2440/2441. With 2445 I wouldn't even try.

ivica
05-28-2014, 07:56 AM
(AFAIK) JBL stated that both "1 and "2 could be used with the same netowork.

The holes match perfectly but you have to chip off quite a chunk of the dogbox to fit the 2440/2441. With 2445 I wouldn't even try.

But 2450 (2") + 2311 would be a good trial

2450 diameter = 167.5 mm
2441 diameter = 178.0 mm

But 2441 has aluminum diaphragm, while 2450 has titanium.

regards
ivica

ngccglp
05-29-2014, 06:47 AM
Thanks for the tip guys.

Mostlydiy
05-29-2014, 11:24 PM
Thanks for the tip guys.

You might want to have a peak at Giskards old 4345 project with 2445 and 2123

http://www.audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?27199-DIY-quot-4345-quot-Project/page7&highlight=4345+Giskard

It might give you some ideas

/Mostly

martin2395
05-30-2014, 06:47 AM
But 2450 (2") + 2311 would be a good trial

2450 diameter = 167.5 mm
2441 diameter = 178.0 mm

But 2441 has aluminum diaphragm, while 2450 has titanium.

regards
ivica

The safest option would be buying a pair of 2450 motors without or with blown diaphragms and buy Radians or Truextents
All of those drivers are PA drivers and you never know how good the diaphragms still are.

Fort Knox
05-30-2014, 06:49 PM
totaly agree with that and i'm always surprise how people can compare JBL monitor speakers from youtube even from the best PC sound card with the best earphones ... and without knowing the whole rec/play process!
What makes you think people aren't plugging the earphone jack into a large and capable playback sys.
(some people don't like headphones... anyway) and your right!! I'm afraid to know the rec./play process..

ratitifb
05-31-2014, 03:11 AM
What makes you think people aren't plugging the earphone jack into a large and capable playback sys.
(some people don't like headphones... anyway) and your right!! I'm afraid to know the rec./play process..while i was writting this, more than electronic performances and earphones vs headphones debat, my thoughts were actualy about stereo process vs binaural, mike arrangement vs dummy head, (infra) bass hearing without 15" or 18", room and source directivity ... and in such conditions how can we seriously evaluate or compare the monitor quality and the image of the sound stage :hmm:

Ian Mackenzie
05-31-2014, 05:18 AM
Why not just upgrade the compression driver in the 4435 to Tad 2002?