Newbie - 4312 Sweet Spot question.

[lutesk]

Hi all. I'm thinking about getting some 4312's, and have read they have a very small sweet spot. Any truth to this? I'm wanting some vintage JBL's real bad, but want to get the right ones. Thanks, great site here.

[boputnam]

:bs: Where the hell'd you read that?

I've had 4312's L/R for decades and never experienced that. The HF has excellent dispersion characteristics. You should have no issues... :no:

[lutesk]

:bs: Where the hell'd you read that?

I've had 4312's L/R for decades and never experienced that. The HF has excellent dispersion characteristics. You should have no issues... :no:

Thanks; much appreciated. I guess you have to take what you read on the internet at times with a grain of salt.

[boputnam]

Yea, well regrettably these days, that includes US, too!! :blink:

Do a SEARCH here for any variety of "4312" boolean strings and you'll find years of thoughtful contributions of, and lovefests for, the 4312's. They were the entry point of many to the 43xx series Studio Monitors, weaning most of us forever of the consumer lineage. But that comment alone will certainly evoke spirited discourse!

:duel:

[Mr. Widget]

Hi all. I'm thinking about getting some 4312's, and have read they have a very small sweet spot. Any truth to this? I'm wanting some vintage JBL's real bad, but want to get the right ones.

If contemporary audiophile imaging is important to you you may want to look elsewhere... I don't mean from the 4312, but rather the entire collection of vintage JBLs... they do not image like the better contemporary systems that you will experience at a high end audio store.

Classic JBLs have lots of appeal, but "imaging" is an area where they don't compete with many of the newer crop of contemporary designs. From reading people's posts here for a number of years, I have come to the conclusion that we have many different ideas as to what "imaging" is and in the audio community at large there are all kinds of theories as to what makes a system "image" well.... we see mirror imaging, we see wide dispersion, we see time alignment, we see minimum diffraction, we see narrow baffles, we see...

I have heard great imaging from a variety of designs and have my own theories as to what works and what doesn't, but the fact of the matter is these older JBLs while great fun to listen to, will not cast a holographic image like a Thiel, Vandersteen, Revel, Wilson.......

So if you want real kick in the butt dynamic fun speakers try the 4312s or one of JBL's other vintage offerings, but if "imaging" is of paramount concern, you really need to audition them first to see if their "image" is the type of sound you are looking for.

Widget

[Robh3606]

Which 4312 are you looking at the 4312 with the Le-25 tweeter or the 4312A which have the Titanium 035ti? The original I could understand that description. The paper Le-25 rolled of very quiclky above 15K and have a narrower patern than the 035Ti. The cabinets were not mirror imaged and had the driver in a tight cluster designed for near -midfield listening. The 4312A has a much better top end in all respects. The shrinking HF dispersion cone on the original 4312 does indeed limit your sweep spot. The titanium drivers is leaps and bounds better.

http://www.lansingheritage.org/html/jbl/specs/pro-speakers/1983-4312.htm


http://www.lansingheritage.org/html/jbl/specs/pro-speakers/1986-4312a.htm


Rob:)

[boputnam]

...will not cast a holographic image like a Thiel, Vandersteen, Revel, Wilson....... or BOSE... :rotfl:

[Mr. Widget]

or BOSE... :rotfl:

Ok Tin Ear....:applaud:

Widget

[lutesk]

So if you want real kick in the butt dynamic fun speakers try the 4312s or one of JBL's other vintage offerings,
Widget

Yep, that's what I'm looking for. Thanks all. I'll let you know how it goes.

[boputnam]

Ok Tin Ear....:applaud: Dammit, Widget!! I can still get TOTALLY mono-holographic! :moon:

[edgewound]

If contemporary audiophile imaging is important to you you may want to look elsewhere... I don't mean from the 4312, but rather the entire collection of vintage JBLs... they do not image like the better contemporary systems that you will experience at a high end audio store.

Classic JBLs have lots of appeal, but "imaging" is an area where they don't compete with many of the newer crop of contemporary designs. From reading people's posts here for a number of years, I have come to the conclusion that we have many different ideas as to what "imaging" is and in the audio community at large there are all kinds of theories as to what makes a system "image" well.... we see mirror imaging, we see wide dispersion, we see time alignment, we see minimum diffraction, we see narrow baffles, we see...

I have heard great imaging from a variety of designs and have my own theories as to what works and what doesn't, but the fact of the matter is these older JBLs while great fun to listen to, will not cast a holographic image like a Thiel, Vandersteen, Revel, Wilson.......

So if you want real kick in the butt dynamic fun speakers try the 4312s or one of JBL's other vintage offerings, but if "imaging" is of paramount concern, you really need to audition them first to see if their "image" is the type of sound you are looking for.

Widget

Widget....

I love your perspective on the audio world. It's very open-minded and realistic when looking at the industry as a whole. Everyones ears are different, as are our listening experiences that we relate to speaker systems' ability to produce and reproduce sound. I love how the D/K/E120's make my guitar amp sound...I also love the huge sound of 4331/ L300 filling the room bigger than life. Where I'm going here is...there are so manys to appreciate JBL products....and not everyone will agree on every aspect...but we gots to "keep it real"...I hate that cliche`, but I guess it works in this context.

Thanks,

Edgewound

[Tom Loizeaux]

I have a pair of 4312As that I really like. I did, however, add a touch of subwoofer to them. If you like deep low end, you might want to listen to the 4412, which has a foam surround on the woofer cone, and a slightly more sophisticatd crossover. I haven't A/Bd them, so I'm only responding to what I suspect is true. The 4312As, however, ARE quite nice!

Tom

[lutesk]

Well, I'm getting the 12's, not the 12A's. I guess if they don't cut it for me, I'll turn around and try to sell them. Thanks for bumming me out guys. :(


Just kidding. :)

[Mr. Widget]

Let us know what you think... and if you like those you'll eventually need to step up to the big boys.:D

As far as I'm concerned, if it doesn't have a 4" voice coil it ain't a JBL.:no:

Widget

[Lancer]

Let us know what you think... and if you like those you'll eventually need to step up to the big boys.:D

As far as I'm concerned, if it doesn't have a 4" voice coil it ain't a JBL.:no:

Widget:rotfl:

Goof! :p

[Miss Orchid]

if it doesn't have a 4" voice coil

Boys... http://www.austinserver.com/phpBB2/images/smiles/icon_rolleyes.gif (javascript:emoticon(':roll:'))

[Don Mascali]

Let us know what you think... and if you like those you'll eventually need to step up to the big boys.:D

As far as I'm concerned, if it doesn't have a 4" voice coil it ain't a JBL.:no:

Widget

:applaud: I agree, too much is just right!