PDA

View Full Version : L112 vs 4411 voicing



pos
01-19-2016, 10:26 AM
A friend on mine is looking for 3-way studio monitors for his home studio.
He was initially looking for a pair of either 4410, 4412 or 4411, but he recently stumbled upon a nice pair of L112.
He cannot hear them before buying so he needs to be sure the voicing is adequate for studio monitoring applications.

The components are very similar to the 4411 (128H, 044, and two different iteration of the LE5 with 3dB sensitivity difference), but the networks are different.

LE5-9 vs LE5-12: http://www.audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?5706-The-LE5-Matrix
4411 network: http://www.jblproservice.com/pdf/Studio%20Monitor%20Series/4411LR.pdf
L112 network: http://www.epanorama.net/sff/Audio/Products/Speakers/JBL_Speaker_L112_Century_II.PDF

So, what do you guys thinks?
Are these speakers properly voiced for studio monitoring application, like the 4411 are?

SEAWOLF97
01-19-2016, 10:51 AM
A friend on mine is looking for 3-way studio monitors for his home studio.
He was initially looking for a pair of either 4410, 4412 or 4411, but he recently stumbled upon a nice pair of L112.
He cannot hear them before buying so he needs to be sure the voicing is adequate for studio monitoring applications.

The components are very similar to the 4411 (128H, 044, and two different iteration of the LE5 with 3dB sensitivity difference), but the networks are different.

LE5-9 vs LE5-12: http://www.audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?5706-The-LE5-Matrix
4411 network: http://www.jblproservice.com/pdf/Studio%20Monitor%20Series/4411LR.pdf
L112 network: http://www.epanorama.net/sff/Audio/Products/Speakers/JBL_Speaker_L112_Century_II.PDF

So, what do you guys thinks?
Are these speakers properly voiced for studio monitoring application, like the 4411 are?


The 4410 & L80T also shared nearly the same drivers, but different networks. There was a huge difference in sound (box size differed too). I found the 4410 much more to my liking. BUT the 4410 is a true studio monitor. Detailed, not as warm as many L series speakers are. Described by some as critical, analytical , sterile, cool. No bass except where the program material really calls for it. Liked them , but they got displaced by bigger JBL's.

I think a person has to consider a lot more than just the driver load & network (too bad he can't hear them)

Also HAD 4412's, but decided that they weren't keepers for home use.

Just sold my 4311B's. They were called "control monitors" and maybe sufficed in their day, but few would use as monitors today. :(

out of the above mentioned gaggle, I'd go for the 4410. maybe 4411 if demo available.

hsosdrum
01-19-2016, 12:12 PM
The job of a studio monitor is to tell you exactly what you're recording. To that end, you must be able to tell the difference between sonic artifacts created by your recording (caused by mic choice/placement, recording space acoustics, the instrument/voice you're recording and a ton of other stuff) and sonic artifacts imposed by the speaker. Therefore, IMHO the #1 most important attribute your studio monitors must have is your intimate familiarity with how they sound. It doesn't matter how accurate a speaker may be: if you aren't familiar with its sound there's no way you can tell if what you're hearing is on the recording or is being created by the speakers themselves.

Regardless of what speaker your friend chooses, he should not begin using them as monitors until he is intimately familiar with how they sound. He should live with them for a while as conventional music-listening speakers to get to know their version of "the truth" before he entrusts them to tell him the truth about what he's recording.

Ideally he should check his recordings on several different speakers of varying qualities to be sure that his mixes will translate well regardless of how they're listened to. My studio has 3 different sets of stereo monitors (Klipsch Cornwall IIs, JBL 4312Es and Sonance 622s—a low-sensitivity 6-1/2" 2-way), and I also check my mixes on another 2 sets of speakers (my THX-certified home theater and my factory-installed car stereo) before I commit the mix for mastering. Starting with my next project I'm also going convert the mix to a 128kbps MP3 file and audition it on iPhone headphones as another "fact-check" on my mix.

As for specific "studio-monitor" voicing, I can't make a recommendation between the L112 and 4411 because I haven't heard an L112 in about 30 years and have never heard a 4411, but in general, a speaker with more detailed, dynamic midrange performance makes it easier to "hear into" the mix and catch problems with vocals and the "meat" of most instruments. However, since it's now so easy to put lots of high-energy low-frequency content into a recording, it's also a good idea to have a speaker available that has accurate bass performance down to at least 30Hz, so your recordings don't wind-up with a build-up of low bass energy that smaller monitors simply won't reproduce. (My home theater's JBL 4641 subwoofer has been an immense help to me in cleaning-up the low-end in my recordings.)

BMWCCA
01-19-2016, 03:18 PM
L112 vs 4411 voicing.
So, what do you guys thinks?
Are these speakers properly voiced for studio monitoring application, like the 4411 are?
As an L112 owner for over 30-years, I've often wondered about that myself. :dont-know:

pos
01-19-2016, 05:23 PM
The 4410 & L80T also shared nearly the same drivers, but different networks. There was a huge difference in sound (box size differed too). I found the 4410 much more to my liking. BUT the 4410 is a true studio monitor. Detailed, not as warm as many L series speakers are. Described by some as critical, analytical , sterile, cool. No bass except where the program material really calls for it. Liked them , but they got displaced by bigger JBL's.
I had the same feeling when I heard the L100T: nothing like the 4412 IMO. That might partly be due to the 2214H tho...
Personally I just *love* the 4412 and 4410.

pos
01-19-2016, 05:29 PM
The L112 uses a simplified version of the 4313B network. ;)
The 4411 sounds different with near identical transducers due to its unique network. No real surprise, Greg Timbers did all of them except the 4411, which David Smith did.

4313, 4313B, L96, L112, L150 all use very similar network topology.
Thanks.
Who did the 4410/4412? I think it is GT, right?
I see a lot of similarities between the L112 and 4412 networks, which is reassuring...

The thing that got me worried was the 3dB sensitivity difference for the LE5, but thinking about I had to reduce mid and tweets by ~3dB to get my 4412 flat, and this is probably because these where tuned to be used in-wall (which is weird because they were rarely used that way).

pos
01-19-2016, 05:43 PM
The job of a studio monitor is to tell you exactly what you're recording. To that end, you must be able to tell the difference between sonic artifacts created by your recording (caused by mic choice/placement, recording space acoustics, the instrument/voice you're recording and a ton of other stuff) and sonic artifacts imposed by the speaker. Therefore, IMHO the #1 most important attribute your studio monitors must have is your intimate familiarity with how they sound. It doesn't matter how accurate a speaker may be: if you aren't familiar with its sound there's no way you can tell if what you're hearing is on the recording or is being created by the speakers themselves.

Regardless of what speaker your friend chooses, he should not begin using them as monitors until he is intimately familiar with how they sound. He should live with them for a while as conventional music-listening speakers to get to know their version of "the truth" before he entrusts them to tell him the truth about what he's recording.

Ideally he should check his recordings on several different speakers of varying qualities to be sure that his mixes will translate well regardless of how they're listened to. My studio has 3 different sets of stereo monitors (Klipsch Cornwall IIs, JBL 4312Es and Sonance 622sa low-sensitivity 6-1/2" 2-way), and I also check my mixes on another 2 sets of speakers (my THX-certified home theater and my factory-installed car stereo) before I commit the mix for mastering. Starting with my next project I'm also going convert the mix to a 128kbps MP3 file and audition it on iPhone headphones as another "fact-check" on my mix.

As for specific "studio-monitor" voicing, I can't make a recommendation between the L112 and 4411 because I haven't heard an L112 in about 30 years and have never heard a 4411, but in general, a speaker with more detailed, dynamic midrange performance makes it easier to "hear into" the mix and catch problems with vocals and the "meat" of most instruments. However, since it's now so easy to put lots of high-energy low-frequency content into a recording, it's also a good idea to have a speaker available that has accurate bass performance down to at least 30Hz, so your recordings don't wind-up with a build-up of low bass energy that smaller monitors simply won't reproduce. (My home theater's JBL 4641 subwoofer has been an immense help to me in cleaning-up the low-end in my recordings.)

Thanks for the very interesting perspective :)

He comes from small 2 way yamaha active monitors (HS8 IIRC), so the mid will definitely be something he will have to get used too... but then when you get used to that kind of thing it is difficult to go back ;)

I have another friend who works as a professional sound engineer, and he tends to do exactly as you describe, using multiple monitors, including lofi ones, like ipods or car sound systems.
His main working tools are genelec 1030, JBL 4301 and JBL 4425, and it looks like each of them shed a different light on his work and help him improve his recordings.

pos
01-19-2016, 05:43 PM
As an L112 owner for over 30-years, I've often wondered about that myself. :dont-know:
Let's hope this topic will solve the mystery once and for all then :D
Did you compare them to some 4410 or 4412?

BMWCCA
01-19-2016, 06:20 PM
Let's hope this topic will solve the mystery once and for all then :D
Did you compare them to some 4410 or 4412?
Sure. I have 4412As and L80Ts modded with T3 crossovers. The 044 in the L112 (and L96) is much smoother and more forgiving than the 052 in the 4412A and even more so in comparison to the 035Ti in the L80T. That's especially noticeable on program material like badly mixed early CDs that become irritating in the high-end. Bass response is about the same between the L112 and the 4412A and in both that's quite a variable depending on placement. Mids are balanced in both which is a good thing since the 4412A has no L-pads. I have found the L80T/3 to be just a so-so box and I'm glad I have only about a hundred bucks in either pair. Even with the mods to tame the titanium tweeter, they're easily overshadowed by my L96s.

I can't speak to Seawolf's love of the 4410 over the 4412 but have always suspected the 12-inch is far more susceptible to placement issues with respect to boomy-ness and bloated bass from boundary reinforcement than is the same size box with the 10-inch driver. That's from my experience comparing the L96 with the L112. When used as intended (ie. bookshelf speakers) they perform as expected with the better low-end coming from the 12-inch driver. I love the sound of both the 4412A and the L96 in the same room. Hard to choose a favorite. Until I power-up the L7 and then realize if you want some real bass slam, size really does matter.

The L112 has spent all their 31-year life in the bedroom, run from a Mac C20 tube pre-amp and my original Crown D150. That's likely to provide a smoother presentation, too. How that compares to the 4411 with the same tweeter is a question I can't answer and the 4412A with its titanium tweeter is probably not a valid comparison, anyway.
:dont-know:

pos
01-19-2016, 06:55 PM
Thank you, that is very helpful.
If the tonal balance is similar to the 4412a in the lows and mids then I think it is all good.

Regarding the 4410 vs 4412, when comparing the two side by side I was hard pressed to tell them apart at moderate levels (I did not try higher SPL).
I can see how the 4410 could be better as a nearfield monitor though, thanks to the vertical arrangement.
I quite like the "sparkles" the 035ti brings in the 4410/4412 (which by the way is my bedroom system :D).

hsosdrum
01-19-2016, 07:09 PM
Thanks for the very interesting perspective :)

I have another friend who works as a professional sound engineer, and he tends to do exactly as you describe, using multiple monitors, including lofi ones, like ipods or car sound systems.
His main working tools are genelec 1030, JBL 4301 and JBL 4425, and it looks like each of them shed a different light on his work and help him improve his recordings.

Exactly. For example, when monitoring my drumset on the little Sonance 622s I can hear that one of my floor tom-toms is sympathetically resonating every time I hit a bass drum, yet this is completely missing when monitoring on the Cornwall IIs and 4312s. (When checking the mix on my home theater and car stereo the resonance is definitely audible.) So I was able to insert a very narrow bandpass filter on the floor tom channel to eliminate the resonance from the mix. If I didn't have the 622s in my studio it would have taken me forever to diagnose what was going on and to fix it.

BMWCCA
01-19-2016, 07:24 PM
One comparison I didn't make which might be more applicable to the intended use, is my LSR305s compared to the 4412A. I can't imagine a better near-field monitor. The imaging is unreal. I would think for what the L112s should be worth your buddy could buy a pair of the larger LSR308s and likely be in monitor heaven. If near-field is how he works, I don't know why you'd even want a three-way with what these can do.
:bouncy:

DavidF
01-19-2016, 09:50 PM
A friend on mine is looking for 3-way studio monitors for his home studio.
He was initially looking for a pair of either 4410, 4412 or 4411, but he recently stumbled upon a nice pair of L112.
He cannot hear them before buying so he needs to be sure the voicing is adequate for studio monitoring applications.

The components are very similar to the 4411 (128H, 044, and two different iteration of the LE5 with 3dB sensitivity difference), but the networks are different.

LE5-9 vs LE5-12: http://www.audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?5706-The-LE5-Matrix
4411 network: http://www.jblproservice.com/pdf/Studio%20Monitor%20Series/4411LR.pdf
L112 network: http://www.epanorama.net/sff/Audio/Products/Speakers/JBL_Speaker_L112_Century_II.PDF

So, what do you guys thinks?
Are these speakers properly voiced for studio monitoring application, like the 4411 are?

The 4411 system will work better without boundary support. The L112 needs to be near a wall (not close) to get the bass response "right". The 4411 balance likely favors consideration by your friend. But...personally I would go with a more updated design, like the LSR32. Should be easier to locate, as well.

kelossus
01-19-2016, 11:45 PM
I have heard/owned both speakers in recent years.

The 4411, even though sharing similar components was a better speaker in my opinion.

When mounted horizontally as designed, the bass was tighter, faster and the L112's are just missing something in the mid-range. There is no sparkle.

The 4411's in my opinion are superior to the 4412's and 4410's which I have all owned.

Neither speakers image as well as L212s though which are of the same vintage.

Doc Mark
01-24-2016, 11:35 AM
Greetings, pos,

I, too, have a nice pair of 4411's, and like them very much! IF I didn't already have the L300's, the 4411's would suffice, nicely, as our main speakers. I'd probably bi-amp them and add a subwoofer, but they sound great just as they are. For what it's worth.... Good luck in helping your friend decide. Take care, and God Bless!

Every Good Wish,
Doc

pos
01-24-2016, 02:37 PM
My friend did buy the L112. They appeared to be in very good shape (cabinet and all), and though the surrounds was clearly wearing out and some peaces were missing, he was able to audition them at low volume and he told me he was blown away :D
Coming from small active 2-way speakers this is not a big surprise.

He will now have to change the surrounds to really hear the real thing. I already contacted Rick Cobbs (he does sell to Europe directly through his ebay shop anymore...).

Malefoda
02-09-2016, 12:51 AM
BTW, a bit OT and late, but if you or friends are around Tours please be welcome to have an hear to a 4313B. No 4410 but close I guess...

pos
02-09-2016, 01:42 AM
Hello Matthieu,

So you did replace your 4311's with a pair of 4313B.
How do you like them?

Thank you for you offer, but my friend lives in Lyon.

My friend is currently installing Rick Cobss' kits in his speakers :)

pos
02-19-2016, 04:36 PM
A little update: my friend did the ressuround job, but unfortunately he followed the advice given in this video and used alcohol to help removing the glue on the back of the cone: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3F2P-0wyAYA&t=775 :eek:
:barf:

That's my bad as I pointed him to this video. I remembered there was something fishy in it when I watched it a long time ago, but could not remember what it was exactly :dont-know:
I should have watched it entirely again...

Anyway, what is done is done, and beside a small mark on the cone from a soaked finger, it looks like the aqualas survived the process, and that the alcohol did not make it through the paper cone down to the aquaplas on the front.

Let's hope the aquaplas does not detach or crackle later one...