JBL 4430's - Do they lack mid-bass???

[kelossus]

Bought a pair of 4430's awhile back but they ended up in storage so I never really got to play them. With my 4350's getting the cabinets redone the 4430's are now front and centre in my room.

My first impression is that the speakers really lack authoritative bass. The bass is there but does not have the impact I imagine it would/should. Doing some research it was recommended that I bypass the rotary the switch. Upon doing this and upgrading some of the internal wire to a larger gauge I was excited to hear any improvement. The bass is more present now but still not what I expected. Especially in the mid-bass area, they just don't have the slam I was hoping to hear.

Maybe I am spoilt by the 4350's or maybe something is wrong? I don't expect them to be like the 4350's but I was hoping to be somewhat impressed.

Any input as to what may have gone amiss? Or maybe confirmation that 4430's being a two-way somehow robs the 2235 of delivering that slam I am used to.

I have plenty of quality power on hand so I can dismiss that as a culprit.

[macaroonie]

In my experience the 2235 has issues where it tries to play in the midrange. The 30 gram mass ring compromises the ability of that come assembly to move quickly and cleanly.
Excellent as a Sub and probably running out of steam at 3-400Hz. In the big 4 way systems the woof hands over at 290 or thereabouts that's where the snap or slam comes from. It's just that the 2235 can't move
, quickly enough to deliver the goods.
Others have found the 2216Nd to be an excellent solution to this problem.
The selector switch can cause problems in 4430.

[Titanium Dome]

I had a beautiful pair of 4430s that never fully satisfied me. I added a B380 sub, which helped the bottom end, but did little to help the floundering 2235s in the mid bass. It was hard for me to sell them because they were so pretty, but I didn't buy 'em to look at, so when I downsized my JBL hoard, they were easy to let go.

[markd51]

In my experience the 2235 has issues where it tries to play in the midrange. The 30 gram mass ring compromises the ability of that come assembly to move quickly and cleanly.
Excellent as a Sub and probably running out of steam at 3-400Hz. In the big 4 way systems the woof hands over at 290 or thereabouts that's where the snap or slam comes from. It's just that the 2235 can't move
, quickly enough to deliver the goods.
Others have found the 2216Nd to be an excellent solution to this problem.
The selector switch can cause problems in 4430.

Are you saying there are some who have swapped the 2235H for 2216Nd in the 4430?

Are these then just a simple swap that pop in, and how did these speakers then perform?

Investigating this particular speaker, it appears the 2216Nd is not by no means an inexpensive speaker.
Looks like it is used in many of the newer top tier JBL Monitors being sold.

[Robh3606]

Are these then just a simple swap that pop in, and how did these speakers then perform?


Not at all. You can't just drop them in and expect them to work without verifying the cabinet tuning as well as possible changes to the crossover network. Even dropping in a 2234 which is a 2235 less the mass ring would probably require an attenuation change and possible adjustment to fb.


Rob:)

[johnlcnm]

Are you saying there are some who have swapped the 2235H for 2216Nd in the 4430?

Are these then just a simple swap that pop in, and how did these speakers then perform?

Investigating this particular speaker, it appears the 2216Nd is not by no means an inexpensive speaker.
Looks like it is used in many of the newer top tier JBL Monitors being sold.

I have a pair 4333Bs that have been heavily reworked. New JBL diaphragms in the 2405s. New Radians in the 2420s. New charge coupled Nelson Pass crossover for the L300s. 2216nds replaced the 2235Hs. No mods to the crossover which was designed for the 2235. Boxes are close to the M2s in volume and tuning. The 2216nds have about 1/3 the inductance of the 2235s. That translates into much better damping at the upper range of the driver, and it is audible. IMO, the 2216nd blows away the 2235 in both the lower midrange and bass. IMO, the 2216nd is a perfect match for a horn midrange compared to the 2235. The thing that I really notice about these speakers is, the sound escapes the boxes and sounds like one driver. I am sure the Pass crossover is in part responsible for the effect. IMO. If you have the bucks give it a try. I think the 4430s would also benefit with the woofer mod. Time for someone to go out on a limb here with the 2235 to 2216nd modification in a pair of 4430s. All it takes is money -- ha ha.

[toddalin]

I had the 4430s and preferred the sound of my modified L200/300s, though the 4430s way out-imaged the L200/300s, so I passed them on. I don't care for the "edge" of the titanium diaphragms, though I do use 2425s in my four surround speakers. Neighter the 4430 nor the L300 really has "slam" but I get that from the Ethyl Mermans that use a 2241H, 2251J, and Heil AMT.

The reason I think is..., while a horn can be every bit as loud/louder than the 10", the sound of the horn is very directional such that little air is really being moved through the room. OTOH, the 10" moves a lot of air such that it can "pressurize" the room and this is what you feel and perceive as "slam."

[markd51]

I have a pair 4333Bs that have been heavily reworked. New JBL diaphragms in the 2405s. New Radians in the 2420s. New charge coupled Nelson Pass crossover for the L300s. 2216nds replaced the 2235Hs. No mods to the crossover which was designed for the 2235. Boxes are close to the M2s in volume and tuning. The 2216nds have about 1/3 the inductance of the 2235s. That translates into much better damping at the upper range of the driver, and it is audible. IMO, the 2216nd blows away the 2235 in both the lower midrange and bass. IMO, the 2216nd is a perfect match for a horn midrange compared to the 2235. The thing that I really notice about these speakers is, the sound escapes the boxes and sounds like one driver. I am sure the Pass crossover is in part responsible for the effect. IMO. If you have the bucks give it a try. I think the 4430s would also benefit with the woofer mod. Time for someone to go out on a limb here with the 2235 to 2216nd modification in a pair of 4430s. All it takes is money -- ha ha.

Hmm, all it takes is money! :D

So, then what are the considerations and changes required for a swap? Cabinet Volume? Is the 4430 of similar Volume to the M2? Close? or not even close?

Port Tuning. here's where a physical change to the Speaker Ports no doubt means a change that would not be easy to return to if end results were not favorable.

A simple drop in fit without taking Tomahawk to Cabinet's Baffle? Again, a possible mod (butchering) in which there's no easy way returning back to stock once done. Surely would not entertain such and ruin the value of such a speaker, in which mine are in as mint and stock condition as you'd likely find.

And lastly, X-Over changes-mods. Not sure what that would encompass or if at all needed? An Inductor swap, or ?

I'm assuming no X-Over changes made for the Compression Driver-Horn, not much can be done there I'd guess with the stock X-Over and altering it's X-Over points.

If I could predict the swap would be nothing more than the cost of a pair of 2216Nd or Nd-1, I'd maybe take the leap of faith, and the expense of such a swap.

Same with perhaps the 2234 if there was an overall improvement in bass performance with a simple swap out of drivers.

I'd have maybe thought JBL themselves would've changed to the 2234 if they felt an improvement of performance to this particular speaker, and thus later came with a 4430A or B version?

Of course back then, there was no 2216Nd to be had.

[markd51]

Not at all. You can't just drop them in and expect them to work without verifying the cabinet tuning as well as possible changes to the crossover network. Even dropping in a 2234 which is a 2235 less the mass ring would probably require an attenuation change and possible adjustment to fb.


Rob:)

Sorry for my ignorance, what attenuation changes would you be speaking of, and what is adjustment to fb?

I know it's smart knowledge to consider that such butchery usually can produce unfavorable end results trying to out-engineer the masterful designers of JBL, but I know too that there have been some exceptions to the rule, and how many have improved a number of revered speakers by replacing X-Overs, etc.

One past example where I thought I'd try a swap was with an older pair of L-65 Jubals, of which I still own my original 4 from 1974.

Yep, was going through again the infamous surround rot, and needed them re-foamed or re-coned.

A friend I knew gave me a pair of I believe they were 2206 12"Drivers to try, and see how I liked them in a pair?

Well, bottom line was they would not physically fit-drop in, the magnet and basket design of the 2206 was too large, and the L-Shaped Port Tubes inside the Jubal's cabinets interfered, so I never did get to try them and gave them back. I was not about to monkey with the Port Tubes, and yank or move them.

I eventually had all 4 126A's re-coned ($600)

[Robh3606]

I know it's smart knowledge to consider that such butchery usually can produce unfavorable end results trying to out-engineer the masterful designers of JBL, but I know too that there have been some exceptions to the rule, and how many have improved a number of revered speakers by replacing X-Overs, etc.


In all of these systems the base sensitivity is determined by the woofer with the mid and HF drivers padded down to match it. If you drop in another woofer with a different sensitivity or a rising or depressed response at the crossover point you end up with a stepped response instead of a smooth transition. Adjusting fb or box resonance frequency is essentially what changes to the port tuning does. The 4430 has a very aggressive 34Hz tuning which may or may not work with a 2216nd. You really need to model it in a box program.

To verify that the transition will be correct you should measure both the woofer and HF horn separately in the box and run that in a crossover simulator. Measure the system as a whole and use that as a verification of the simulation. Then make any adjustments in the sim if required.


Replacing crossovers with what?? You just can't swap a crossover unless the voltage drives match. If you are talking CC networks with equivalent voltage drives same acoustic and electrical response.


Anyone can just drop different drivers/crossovers in and like what they hear which is fine. To do so where you actually verify that the response has not degraded from the original system response takes some work and tools.

Question is how many of these "exceptions" have done the work instead of just dropping in a driver/crossover and saying all is good.

It depends on what your goals are.

Rob :)

[markd51]

In all of these systems the base sensitivity is determined by the woofer with the mid and HF drivers padded down to match it. If you drop in another woofer with a different sensitivity or a rising or depressed response at the crossover point you end up with a stepped response instead of a smooth transition. Adjusting fb or box resonance frequency is essentially what changes to the port tuning does. The 4430 has a very aggressive 34Hz tuning which may or may not work with a 2216nd. You really need to model it in a box program.

To verify that the transition will be correct you should measure both the woofer and HF horn separately in the box and run that in a crossover simulator. Measure the system as a whole and use that as a verification of the simulation. Then make any adjustments in the sim if required.


Replacing crossovers with what?? You just can't swap a crossover unless the voltage drives match. If you are talking CC networks with equivalent voltage drives same acoustic and electrical response.


Anyone can just drop different drivers/crossovers in and like what they hear which is fine. To do so where you actually verify that the response has not degraded from the original system response takes some work and tools.

Question is how many of these "exceptions" have done the work instead of just dropping in a driver/crossover and saying all is good.

It depends on what your goals are.

Rob :)

Thank you Rob for some of these technical explanations. I understand most of what you say, meaning doing it right is not an easy task as some lay person might think. And of course I do not possess such technical and engineering knowledge-prowess to know what to do. I have about as much knowledge as Greg Timber's Baby Toe! LOL

The only way would be if somebody else took this unknown path of experimentation, and research, and knew exactly what needed to be done, or could be done to achieve the intended desirable-better end results lessening any of the shortcomings that have been mentioned and disliked by some.

Many years ago, I did buy a Sunfire True Subwoofer MK-IV on a whim. To more or less try complimenting the 4 JBL L-65 Jubals I was using at the time powered by my 2 McIntosh MC-2105 Amps.

And again when I upgraded the system to the 4430 Speakers, I then bought two brand new Bryston 7BSST2 Amps.
These Amps do drive the 4430 Speakers with aplomb, plenty of headroom considering these amps provide 676-674 watts into a 8ohm load on the bench from factory tested specs.

Bass is tight, clean, albeit maybe a slight bit lean, but certainly not muddy. Such might be possibly attested to a better damping factor of the Brystons versus the older MC-2105 Amps?

I have again used the Sunfire True Sub to compliment the 4430's seemingly losing some steam at the lower frequencies, and only barely power the sub. When in use, you cannot pinpoint the sub in the room, barely set at 0db, and that's how it seems most would tell you how to properly use whatever Subwoofer in a system, and not shaking pictures off the walls, which BTW that little True Sub MKIV is capable of doing.

A subwoofer of course would not address any lack of Mid-Bass Frequencies that the 4430 is supposedly said to lack.

Perhaps an external EQ of some sort might be a better, and easier way of addressing such?

How I'd like to upgrade to a slightly better pre-amp with somewhat better tone controls, something like the McIntosh C-48 or such? Something like this might help me squeeze some better performance out of the 4430 speakers?

Again, thank you for your response, and explanations sir!

[toddalin]

Many years ago, I did buy a Sunfire True Subwoofer MK-IV on a whim. To more or less try complimenting the 4 JBL L-65 Jubals I was using at the time powered by my 2 McIntosh MC-2105 Amps.

I have again used the Sunfire True Sub to compliment the 4430's seemingly losing some steam at the lower frequencies, and only barely power the sub. When in use, you cannot pinpoint the sub in the room, barely set at 0db, and that's how it seems most would tell you how to properly use whatever Subwoofer in a system, and not shaking pictures off the walls, which BTW that little True Sub MKIV is capable of doing.

A subwoofer of course would not address any lack of Mid-Bass Frequencies that the 4430 is supposedly said to lack.



How long have you had the Sunfire and how long do you expect it to last? It is a great piece of equipment and mine easily keeps up with my three L300s, four W10GTi/2425 surround speakers, and W15GTi driven by a Crown PSA-2XH bridged for mono at ~800 WRMS into the 12 ohm load.

After Sunfire, then later Rita's fixed mine, I got smart. These literally shake themselves to death. I took the amp out of the cabinet and made a separate ventilated cabinet for it. I put a block-off plate and terminal on the speaker. Not only does the amp not shake, it can run cooler and the speaker cabinet picks up some internal volume. I've not had problems since the relocation of the amp.

http://www.audioheritage.org/photopost/data//500/medium/Sunfire_003.JPG
http://www.audioheritage.org/photopost/data//500/medium/Sunfire_004.JPG

[toddalin]

Many years ago, I did buy a Sunfire True Subwoofer MK-IV on a whim. To more or less try complimenting the 4 JBL L-65 Jubals I was using at the time powered by my 2 McIntosh MC-2105 Amps.

I have again used the Sunfire True Sub to compliment the 4430's seemingly losing some steam at the lower frequencies, and only barely power the sub. When in use, you cannot pinpoint the sub in the room, barely set at 0db, and that's how it seems most would tell you how to properly use whatever Subwoofer in a system, and not shaking pictures off the walls, which BTW that little True Sub MKIV is capable of doing.

A subwoofer of course would not address any lack of Mid-Bass Frequencies that the 4430 is supposedly said to lack.



How long have you had the Sunfire and how long do you expect it to last? It is a great piece of equipment and mine easily keeps up with my three L300s, four W10GTi/2425 surround speakers, and W15GTi driven by a Crown PSA-2XH bridged for mono at ~800 WRMS into the 12 ohm load.

After Sunfire, then later Rita's fixed mine, I got smart. These literally shake themselves to death. I took the amp out of the cabinet and made a separate ventilated cabinet for it. I put a block-off plate and terminal on the speaker. Not only does the amp not shake, it can run cooler and the speaker cabinet picks up some internal volume. I've not had problems since the relocation of the amp. I actually keep the amp in my bedroom closet on the other side of the wall from the speaker.

http://www.audioheritage.org/photopost/data//500/medium/Sunfire_003.JPG
http://www.audioheritage.org/photopost/data//500/medium/Sunfire_004.JPG

[1audiohack]

It’s surprising how much that little mass ring does to the midrange on a 2235. In measurement it pulls right about 3dB out of the midband and tilts the bottom up about 2.7dB.

Having both 4430’s and 4435’s it is amazing how much different the character below the horn is between the 4430 and 4435.

They are good enough that it is damn difficult to make them better.

Barry.

[toddalin]

...And had I of known back in the day when I had the AlNiCo 2205s reconed as 2235s, I would have had them leave them out. A sub does a better job of the low bass and it was not worth the loss of the the mid-band and resultant tilt.

[1audiohack]

It’s funny but my favorite 2235 variant is a 2234 kit in an E basket and motor assembly. Good for another near 3dB upward tilt. A little EQ boost on the bottom and Bob’s my uncle.

My favorite old school 15 is still the 2220 and like you say, use a sub.

Barry.

[markd51]

Yeah, I went through a lot of Baloney with that Sunfire Sub, twice back at Sunfire, and I think once at Bob's and Ritas, only to get dicked around, and the repairs didn't last but a few months at most.

Auto turn on was my recurring problem. Last man I sent it to was a tech for them, forget his name offhand, McCarthy, or some such irish sounding name. He must've tossed in 40 new Caps, Resistors, etc, and it has been good ever since. Told me I'd never have a problem with it again.

But yeah, I know what you mean about not only vibrations, they'll shake themselves to death, but probably heat too.

Damn shame that I had a good buddy, Andy Homeyer who lived in NM, and was a master machinist. He'd make a blanking plate for the Sunfire Sub lickety split, in an hour, with all holes drilled, sent it out and have it black anodized as well. He died about 5-6 years ago, age 74, lived like a monk, wasn't much he couldn't make.

Andy made stuff commonly for the amateur astro community. Heck, I even seen once he made a mini Gattling Gun from scratch, used to sit in his machine shop, fired .22's. Was a work of art.

http://www.intint.com/andy/index.html

[toddalin]

Auto turn on was my recurring problem.

http://www.intint.com/andy/index.html

This was why I sent it in the second time. The first time the woofer had delaminated from the surround and the original owner had cut the ground lug off of the wall plug. Sunfire replaced both the woofer and the amp for their fixed price $150 fee (IIRC) including return shipping. They even sent me the box, no charge, to send it in.

Rita's fixed the turn on problem, and that's when I did the cabinet. At that time, I just sent in the amp to save shipping costs. I remember that they even sent an itemized parts list. I've not had a problem since.

[markd51]

This was why I sent it in the second time. The first time the woofer had delaminated from the surround and the original owner had cut the ground lug off of the wall plug. Sunfire replaced both the woofer and the amp for their fixed price $150 fee (IIRC) including return shipping. They even sent me the box, no charge, to send it in.

Rita's fixed the turn on problem, and that's when I did the cabinet. At that time, I just sent in the amp to save shipping costs. I remember that they even sent an itemized parts list. I've not had a problem since.

Sorry to veer off topic, but I really got tortured going through Sunfire for the repair.
First time, it lasted 6 months, the second time, I had to ship it back, they changed two Pots as well with apparently wrong values.

And those first three times going back to them, it was the entire Subwoofer, Sunfire would not let me just send them the Plate Amp.

With the screw up with the two Pots, Volume and Phase, they said they tested it, and it was blowing them out of the office, yet when I got it, and with the Volume Pot turned up all the way, it was barely playing! They confused the hell out of me with what was actually wrong, I think they were actually full of it to tell the truth.

Then it lasted about another year, and again, auto turn-on went to hell.

The last time I sent it in to the last tech (Bill Flannery), it was just the Plate Amp (was sure happy about that!), and I took close-up pics of the Boards before shipping. When I got it back, it was quite apparent how much parts he swapped for brand new. Not had a problem with it since, this guy did know his stuff!

BTW, the man who fixed my Plate Amp the right way the last time was Bill Flannery. He pulled out all stops and went to the nines, totally re-capped, something like 45 caps and such, I have the full list with the repair invoice, the repair and soldering was all first class

Here's the link to his business which you might wish to save in case you or others ever have a problem with your Sunfire Subs, or Sunfire Gear. Again, sorry for veering off topic folks.

http://www.flannerysvintageaudio.com/

[toddalin]

Here's the link to his business which you might wish to save in case you or others ever have a problem with your Sunfire Subs, or Sunfire Gear. Again, sorry for veering off topic folks.

http://www.flannerysvintageaudio.com/


Will definitely keep him in mind. Mine may go through auto turn on and shut down several times during the evening simply watching television. I figure that we don't listen loud enough for it to "retrigger" before it "times out" but have never noticed this when listening to music, albiet at a louder volume.

Back to "slam" I was listening to Talking Heads Burning Down the House, where the slam is very notable. Makes no difference if you like Talking Heads, or not, to appreciate the recording techniques, especially the drums.

The Ethyl Mermans really make the snare "kick" and it's just not there on the L300s. As I said, I think this is partly due to the fact that the 10" moves a lot of air, but now revise this theory to include a good transient response producing a "fast" speaker.

Certainly the Heil AMT is a "fast" speaker by its very design. (By "fast" I means has good transient response.) The 2251J is also very fast because it has big voice coils with a differential drive and a very light cone on a pleated surround. Even the 2241H would be considered as a fast woofer when compared to one with a foam surround and mass ring (e.g., 2245).

[markd51]

Will definitely keep him in mind. Mine may go through auto turn on and shut down several times during the evening simply watching television. I figure that we don't listen loud enough for it to "retrigger" before it "times out" but have never noticed this when listening to music, albiet at a louder volume.

Back to "slam" I was listening to Talking Heads Burning Down the House, where the slam is very notable. Makes no difference if you like Talking Heads, or not, to appreciate the recording techniques, especially the drums.

The Ethyl Mermans really make the snare "kick" and it's just not there on the L300s. As I said, I think this is partly due to the fact that the 10" moves a lot of air, but now revise this theory to include a good transient response producing a "fast" speaker.

Certainly the Heil AMT is a "fast" speaker by its very design. (By "fast" I means has good transient response.) The 2251J is also very fast because it has big voice coils with a differential drive and a very light cone on a pleated surround. Even the 2241H would be considered as a fast woofer when compared to one with a foam surround and mass ring (e.g., 2245).

Ethyl Merman's, not sure what these are? Are they the 4345, or clones of such? (Got about $17K you can loan me for a pair of 4345's? LOL)

And AMT's, that was a tough choice for me back in '74 at MusiCraft in Chicago, I almost bought two pair of AMT 1's, but chose 2 pair of JBL L-65 Jubals instead. Was running quad back then, first a Sansui QR-6500, then a Marantz 4400 which crapped out quickly in 6 month's time the CRT went out, then onto a pair of Mac 2015's with a Bose 4401 PreAmp.

Back to the 4430's, I've been pretty happy for what they are, and for what I paid, which was $1600 (plus some minor shipping costs from a member who helped me here) for an essentially mint pair, only needing the grill covers replaced with the right stuff, and Zilch (RIP) helped me there, bought 2 yards of material from him and did get around to re-covering the Grils, and they look quite formidable in all stock trim. They had nice looking Grey-Silver Cloth on board when I got them, but of course not correct.

I got those 4430's right here, a man, Tom Tatman from Catamount Studios in Cedar Falls Iowa advertised them here, and I quickly pounced on them. Said they had been never used in a Studio, were bought and used in some Company's Conference Room solely. The 2235H's were re-foamed by Orange County Speaker a month prior to buying them, Tom did provide the invoice, something like $235 for the re-foams I recall.

They made the 1100 mile trip to southern NM via R&L Carriers and arrived just fine.

In comparison to the Jubal, they had that very similar and familiar "JBL House Sound", so there wasn't much of a hearing transition for me to adjust to, to decide if I really liked them or not.

Back in '99, or might've been 2000, I almost bought 4 brand new 4430 from a Guitar Center, at the time they contacted JBL, and they said there was only 5 left at the time, something like only 3 lefts, and two rights in their wharehouse and that was it, no more.

List was $2100/ea, free shipping to store, and the salesman at GC quoted me actual sale price of $1600/ea. Yeah, I was going to buy 4, at $6400! Jeez! In retrospect, and now drving a pair with the Bryston 600 watt monoblocks, 2 are plenty as far as being sufficient to have the cops banging down your door in any normal home seting.

As for the last little bit of HF without a whizzer-tweeter (like the 077/2405) I'm not missing that much with the 4430.

But would like to one day entertain a nice solidly made pair of custom Speaker Stands. I think the 4430 could benefit by being raised up a bit. I think 8"-10" would be perhaps better.

These are some gorgeous stands, fell in love with their looks. I did contact Kenrick about these, and they said they were a custom one-off for a customer, and they don't make them. :-(

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QcKEpqvVDXM

[toddalin]

Ethyl Merman's, not sure what these are?

My own creation: 2241H woofers in ~6 cu ft, 2251J 10" (actually ~9.75"), and Heil AMT with crossovers I designed and implemented. The crossovers have been reworked countless times and will probably be revised again. If I find that I can make even a 1 dB difference at any point in the spectrum as noted on the RTA, and not just my ears, I will spend hours trying various combinations of frequency contouring to make that change. And, I continually go back and undo/redo changes to see if subsequent changes changed them too. Even the Heils received "acoustic lenses" to smooth their responses.

I call them the Ethyl Mermans because they do female voices so well, and can do it LOUD as was Ethyl's trademark. Of course, now they do everything well.

http://www.audioheritage.org/photopost/data//500/medium/DSC_000413.JPG

[toddalin]

I too was pretty happy with what I paid for my 4430s.

I got the pair, (one woofer was out but it was just a lead off on the crossover), a pair of 4330s, a pair of 4425s, and a Tascam 8 channel mixing board (just like the one we used back in the day) all for $1,100 and the gent helped me load them and came home with me to unload them (three trips). The woofers needed foams and eventually I sold the 4430s for $1,100 (after paying $100 for refoams when I got them).

The 4330s had original 2420s with tangential diaphragms and replaced my LE175s in the L200 cabinets. These were the first 2420s that I had considered to replace the LE175s owing to their similar tangential diaphrams, that I prefer. I later found an original tangential diaphragm on ebay that had been mismarked as a 2425 diaphragm, and this replaced the diamond aluminum 2420 diaphragm in my center channnel.

The three LE175s and their horns were traded straight across for the three 2405's, two of which have consecutive serial numbers. These replaced three 075s in the L200s/center, two of which were also sold. Everything else was sold off for profit.

http://www.audioheritage.org/photopost/data//500/medium/Revised_L200_vs_4430.jpg

[Ian Mackenzie]

Nice pic Todd,

Back to the first post questions .

Dual woofers will demonstrate more authority than the same single woofer
In the case of the 4350 the woofers bandwidth is also deliberately limited to the optimum range of the driver. The 12 inch light weight mid cone driver above 250 hertz further improves transient performance. It might pay to verify what woofers you have installed in the 4350's?

The single 2235H driver is used in the stock JBL 4430 15 inch two way bi radial monitor. However that design calls for operation of the woofer up to the 1000 hertz crossover point with the 12 db per per octave crossover slope. The 4430 trades authority and other subjective characteristics which might be important to the Hifi listener in exchange for a more compact system with improved coherence and flat power response using driver technology available at the time in the early 1980's. Such a trade off is acceptable in commercial markets. These bi radial monitors were a significant commercial success compared to the larger more expensive 4350. The 4435 is a more efficient, larger and more powerful design than the 4430 compact sibling with refinement in some subjective characteristics.

Unless you are highly skilled with suitable test equipment and have some good technical insights into these designs then attempting to modify the 4430 is not going to be easy. Getting it right is important if your interested in making comparisons otherwise its just different and not necessarily better. The end result may not justify the time, money and effort involved unless you are following a well trodden road of a proven design amendment. I recommend you audition the JBL 4367 consumer monitor AUD RRP $23000 which is one of JBLs better contemporary 15 inch two way designs. https://klappav.com.au/products/4367-floorstanding-speakers

Then judge for yourself what subjective qualities you prefer. My feeling is you might be wedded to the classic vintage JBL sound of your 4350's

My suggestion is that you hang for the return of your 4350's and spend the extra cash on your signal path. The US-AUD exchange rate is currently 0.66 making a pair of 2216nd or the 2216nd-1 drivers a reasonably expensive diy change out If you are interested I have pair of 2216nd's and one day we could catch up and try them following some measurement and proper adjustment of the 4430 network as required. You can also look at some improvements to the original 4350 spec. Drop me pm.

A lot of people I speak to prefer the older vintage JBL designs. Leave it to yourself to make your choices. Always trust your ears before accepting an opinion.

[markd51]

Yes, the 4367 is a beautiful looking speaker. A modern day rendition of the 4430 it perhaps could be said.

And price of admission in USA is $15,000 Yikes! A little bit too rich for my blood.

[Ian Mackenzie]

For some who own a collection of Jbl drivers past and present such as the 2216nd then they might play around with the idea just for grins. With a dsp based active crossover it might be possible to create your own incarnation of a Frankenstein 4430. There is nothing wrong with diy experimentation if you have the time, resources, skills and funding to pursue your own project and see it through.

For example the original stock compression driver and bi radial horn in the Jbl 4430 is also worthy of potential upgrade to match the performance of the Jbl 2216nd woofers. LHS member Guido has trialled a Tad compression driver with excellent results. But again this was an expensive project. Some will consider a 1.5 inch Jbl compression driver and a more modern Jbl progressive waveguide. The modified design then becomes a totally new loudspeaker design. One thing leads to another and you are on your own. Getting hold of these components can be a lengthy wait.

Why not clone a Jbl M2?. My preference is to follow as closely as possible an original Jbl design. Why? A lot more goes into a Jbl loudspeaker design than picking a couple of drivers and a horn. They are designed to deliver a set of performance criteria using considerable engineering capability and resources. Usually several prototypes are listened to and assessed. The design is empirically finalised by a Jbl panel of practitioners with decades experience. If you think you can cook up a loudspeaker that will match or exceed a Jbl designed system from a single attempt good luck with that 😉.

It requires a lot of patience, time, a bunch of reliable test equipment and a range of skills and knowledge. That adds up to a lot of hours in the man cave and a very understanding wife.

For example you might try new drivers or modified drivers using for example Beryllium diaphragms but be aware the results may not work out the way you expected. Some users have reported Truextent Beryllium diaphragms in some Jbl compression drivers do not subjectively extend the HF response sufficiently high enough despite measurements suggesting otherwise. They then have to look for a suitable uhf driver. EEK the cost without certainty of the outcome.

[jfine]

I've found it's usually the room, and placement, there's threads out there like the Sumiko speaker setup (http://db.audioasylum.com/cgi/m.mpl?forum=speakers&n=215930&highlight=Master+Set&r=), etc., It takes time. And patience for sure. I don't do the microphone measuring game, that didn't work as well for me.

I've had L150's, L300's, now S9900's, and even those can lack mid bass depending on where I place them. There's been folks complaining at shows about the S9900's being thin, or lacking mid bass. It's in the set up. The way I have them set up, in my room, they do not lack at all, punchy as hell if I need them to be.

Room treatments also help after set up is complete.

IME, YMMV, etc.,