PDA

View Full Version : Praragon horn=2395 horn sans lens ?



Steve Gonzales
03-02-2005, 07:48 PM
I wonder if anyone knows if these two horns are of the same dimensions ? Also, is the Paragon crossed over at 500hz?

Alex Lancaster
03-02-2005, 11:05 PM
:) They are absolutely different, in all ways.

Steve Gonzales
03-02-2005, 11:13 PM
Do you think you could get the Paragon horn dimensions for me? Thank you :)

BTW: As I look at pictures, they look identical, both have about the same length, elliptical mouth and flat rectangular front flange. Have you seen both or are you giving it your best guess? Please excuse my pressing of the issue :)

Hofmannhp
03-03-2005, 02:24 AM
..... As I look at pictures, they look identical, both have about the same length, elliptical mouth and flat rectangular front flange. .....:)

I cannot imagine that they made a different cast for the 2343 (2395) horn.
Maybe we find out......

HP

Earl K
03-03-2005, 05:13 AM
- I have a pair of H5038 horns . I'm quite confident they are the same as the 2343 elliptical which combined with the slant-lens, forms the 2395 .

To be absolutely positive:
- Can anyone find a direct connection linking these words in JBL literature ; Paragon and H5038 ?



:cheers:

Steve :
I'll post dimensions once it's determined that the H5038 is a bonafide Paragon horn .

57BELAIRE
03-03-2005, 05:45 AM
Hi...according to publication CCS/75; " the HL9O incorporates a 36 in. slant plate lens backed by a 12 in. elllipictal exponential horn similar to that used in the JBL Paragon"

The H5038P is the elliptical horn used in the Paragon and appears to be "similar" to the horn mentioned above.

The N400 and later the LX5 both crossed over at 500 Hz.

Earl K
03-03-2005, 05:52 AM
The H5038P is the elliptical horn used in the Paragon and appears to be "similar" to the horn mentioned above.

- What is the printed word reference , linking the H5038P to the Paragon ?

- Is there one ?

- Sorry to be obtuse. I know they are all one & the same, but others seem to be a lot more sceptical . Hence the need for a paper trail .

57BELAIRE
03-03-2005, 06:31 AM
Hi...in Catalog PL-103 October ,69 the description of the Paragon's components list a pair of H5038P horns...is this what you mean? :blink:

Earl K
03-03-2005, 06:33 AM
Yup,,, that's the necessary proof . Thanks !

Now to wait for SteveG to wakeup .

:D

subwoof
03-03-2005, 06:39 AM
The horns are the same except for mounting issues - the 2343 had 1/4 countersunk mounting holes added for baffle mounting. No cut sheet was produced for it - you have to look at the older pro catalogs for a picture / description.

The 2395 horn had a series of 8-32 tapped holes on the perimiter to attach to the lens assembly.

I have had all 3 in the shop at one time or another but I don't remember the mounting arrangement for the 5038 - although I still have a pair of aluminum "bars" that were machined to mount on top + bottom of them.

sub

Earl K
03-03-2005, 06:52 AM
I have had all 3 in the shop at one time or another but I don't remember the mounting arrangement for the 5038 - although I still have a pair of aluminum "bars" that were machined to mount on top + bottom of them.

I thought those "machined aluminum bars" - were a "user mod" from either
Clair Bros. , Audio Analysts or Solotech for use in their boxes . ( Mine are from Solotech ) .

:)

Steve Gonzales
03-03-2005, 01:48 PM
I go through huge bouts of it, always have, always will :( . Anyways, thank you SO much, my "Super Sleuths" :applaud: . Every time I tinker with my 2395's, I look at that horn and say to myself " Damn if that doesn't look like a Paragon horn!", I searched everywhere I could find and came up with NADA. Very interesting. Now I'm wondering why the heck this 2395 lens won't play down to 500hz? I realize that those lens plates are engineered to pass/control certain wavelengths, but what a shame to have the rest of the thing have 300hz more potential in what I consider the most important part of the musical range. What is the general consensus about the Paragon's performance in the midrange?. Now don't think, that I think, that all of the sudden, I have a Paragon!. I just like to find out what I can do ,with what I have. I know that the Paragon fires it's midrange horn at that curved reflector. I just want to know how good the horn is?. I find it more than coincidence that both of my favorite JBL horns have elliptical mouths. Any thoughts?. Thank you all for your time and efforts, I can lay this one to rest, Regards, Steve Gonzales;)

Earl K
03-03-2005, 02:10 PM
Now I'm wondering why the heck this 2395 lens won't play down to 500hz?
- The mouth size is smallish and really only supports 700 to 800 hz. It's "M" factor was obviously chosen to boost upper frequencies - so that the slant plate would flatten them out .
- Another reason ( for a higher point ) has a lot to do with who was buying 2395 combos at the time - sound companies and discos ( ie, power handling ).
- Put a 2482 on that 2343 , cross it at 300 hz / pink noise it all and take a look at the screen .


I just want to know how good the horn is?.

- Since you have a pair, give them a listen without the slant plate using a 800 hz crossover point . Without that plate you'll need to pay more attention to time aligning . Without the plate - this horn sounds "high-velocity". It's not likely going to integrate very well with the rest of your stuff .
- You may just want to turn it sideways . :rotfl:

:cheers:

Steve Gonzales
03-03-2005, 02:21 PM
You're both knowledgeble and very witty, I understand and laugh at the same time :D . Is it just me , or are the phenolic diaphragmed drivers very good in the midrange?. I've got LE85's with them installed and I love them. I don't use them past, say, 5k. Thoughts?.

scott fitlin
03-03-2005, 02:36 PM
I`ve always found the phenolic diaphragms to be very good sounding in the mid band! Strong and clear. Makes sense as they were used for high intelligibility speech systems! The phenolic doesnt go up as high as aluminum, but if your cutting off at 5K and going into a tweeter, and you like how they sound, I say it works!

Earl K
03-03-2005, 02:40 PM
Is it just me , or are the phenolic diaphragmed drivers very good in the midrange?.

Somepeople swear by them ( Steve Schell ) being the most notable advocate around here.

I have some phenolics / JBL 2482 / RCA midrange 8 inchers & 3" diaphragmed compression drivers / RCF 1" compression drivers . Since my current efforts are directed towards making metal diaphragms integrate ( successfully I think ) - I'm afraid all attempts to incorporate phenolics in a straightup swap ) are bound to fall short without a major reworking of the smaller parts.

- In English now : :nanana: phenolics always sound way too "over-damped" for my liking.

- OTOH : IMHO ; JBL metal diaphragmed compression drivers sound waaaay too "under-damped" for typical home use - without a lot of help from passive circuits ( ie , resistive losses or aquaplas ) .

There you have it . 3 cents worth . :blink:

Steve Gonzales
03-04-2005, 05:00 AM
Thanks for the english translation for the technically impaired:p . Side by side critical listening A-B tests between my L220's with stock 2420/2312's installed and my L222's with LE85/H92's running phenolic's -all other things being equal- proves exactly what you said Earl. I have had to E.Q. the two pair so that a happy medium is reached. Sort of a blend/middle ground. I can make either pair sound great by itself and would be satisfied with either alone. B.T.W., My wife's family is from B.C., that is probably why I like you so much;) . Le Claire's. We all get into our tech stuff so much, that I just thought it would be nice to recognize you above all that. Thank you, Earl K.

Earl K
03-04-2005, 06:22 AM
:cheers: ( from the Great White North )