PDA

View Full Version : L100...Severe make over: history, pics and test results.



Akira
11-11-2005, 08:59 AM
These original Century L100s were purchased in 1974, at a cost of $650. (CND) when I was but a mere teen. What I did not know that day as I joyfully unpacked my prize, was that these very speakers would literally change my life...spawning a 28 year odyssey of sound ending in 2002 with the sale of my last system. The console from my studio now wrapped in plastic, only an engineer's personal microphone collection remains. The digital basement has slain the once mighty analog facility. Who would have thought the meteor would land? It seems I must surrender to an undeniable fact. I am a dinosaur of sorts.......
Systems have come and gone. First the horns, then the compression systems, then the designer names, the technical ryders always demanding more. But through it all, JBL has always been there. The workhorse of the industry, not always seen, sometimes hidden underneath the glory of another grille's name. An old friend, the reliable soldier once flanked by an army of peers, the fierce sonic warrior...through it all, JBL has always been there.
Of my past JBL inventory only a pair of 4411s and the speaker that started it all, these original Century L100s remain.

Akira
11-11-2005, 09:00 AM
(2) Yorkville cubes, D120 with Atlas sound horns (1969) my first P.A.
(2) Decade 16
(2) L100
(2) 4411
(2) 4430
(4) 4663 3 way (2205/2470/2x2405)
(4) HF clusters (2470/2x2405)*
(2) 2395 slant plates (2482/EV tweets)
(8) dual 18s (2241)*
(8) dual 12s with 2 (2xE120/2445)*
(4) dual 15s (E140s)*
(4) single 12s with 1 bi-radial (E120/2420)* pictured below
(11) 4602 stage monitors
(2) 4604 stage monitors (clones)
(2) dual 12/'s with 1" stage monitors (2xE120/2420)*
(1) dual 15/2 drum fill (2225/2441)*

Akira
11-11-2005, 09:01 AM
OK...I know that no matter how much you modify an L100...it is still an L100.
A hippo in a dress is still a hippo, albeit a prettier one.
But, keep in mind the purpose of these mods which are 80% based in sentiment. These speakers are rarely used, but in a limited way are still useful. They will become a mobile system, mainly for outdoor activities. BTW, after accidentally stumbling on this site and seeing the remarkable work many of you have done, I got the inspiration to carry out this project. Almost all parts and peripherals are from left over existing inventory, so to a large extent that dictated what I would do. What I lacked, i just traded with friends.

Modification #1: road case mounting

In the mid 70s there was no second option for a portable studio monitor. As I was in the habit of dragging these babies to live gigs and location recordings they got hacked up, so eventually I mounted them into road cases. I think they look cool but, the wife says they are the ugliest speakers she has ever seen. (not allowed in the house) Well that is not its purpose anyway. While I still use them for the odd mobile recording, they are now retired to a life of summer barbecues, outdoor parties and just listening in my backyard. These speakers can go anywhere, are fast to setup as an integrated system and they are not delicate. While I hear no difference in sound, the extra stiffness provided by the road case 1/4" of mahogany can only help their particle board construction.

Akira
11-11-2005, 09:03 AM
A sealed female 280 input jack was added for speed, convenience and no polarity mix up. I always hated those little springy things anyway.

Akira
11-11-2005, 09:04 AM
This box is a little boomy around 60-80Hz. I thought i would try some extra dampening. When I opened up the box I was surprised to see that only 3 of 6 surfaces were insulated. Adding insulation on the exposed sides yielded very little change, but a slight change nonetheless which I convinced myself (or imagined) was a tiny improvement. So more is better right? I filled the box loosely packed...It sounded horrible! No life in the speaker. My guess is the low end bump was intentional to make up for a shortened bottom end. The tuning (2" unducted pipe) is different from other 4310/11/L100 series. This anomaly falls in the "just have to live with it" category.

Akira
11-11-2005, 09:06 AM
As you are aware, shortly after its introduction the LE20 was replaced with the LE25 which simply out preformed it. But, how good (bad) is the LE 20. The original 4310 monitor design goal was to mimic the dominant Altec 604, and to this extent the LE20 succeeds marvelously, due in no small part to it's near seamless interface with the LE5 midrange. This tweeter is in fact a very small speaker and sounds like an extension of the mid. The obvious downfall is a smoothly falling off response above 10K...again 604 attribute. I just EQ the top.

As I no longer have use for these drivers they are FREE TO A GOOD HOME.
I would rather see them put to good use than have them collect dust. So any forum member can contact me at: le20@soundchaser.ca I just ask that you full fill the following criteria: 1) have a project on the go or at least planed for the future. I want these drivers used and enjoyed. 2) prepay your shipping so it is not a problem for me. 3) after you receive these drivers and are satisfied they are in good working condition, make a very small contribution to this website. I will not guarantee these free drivers spec out but they sounded fine the last time I used them. They were re-magnetized 6 years ago, one was reconed and they have seen very limited use. As you can see from the pic, the badges have fallen off and the paint on one of them is starting to rust, but they can be cleaned up.

Akira
11-11-2005, 09:12 AM
New high end systems all boast specs well above 30K. I have not heard JBL's beryllium super tweeter...maybe it sounds amazing...any opinions? From what I gather the extended response adds to the performance of the entire box??? Not sure what that means... My favorite HF is the slot. It sounds like air and totally opens up the box. There is no sizzle, spit or sparkle that some people mistake for great top end. To me, the 2405 has the best reproduction of hi-hat, ride cymbal and acoustic guitar harmonics and does an excellent job of creating that breathy air on a vocal.
Luckily, the original L100 (early line array) is the only 4310xx version which can accept the 2405 slot. It's wide horizontal dispersion coupled with a narrow vertical dispersion make the slot an ideal candidate for a line array configuration. By tracking the serial numbers of the L100's I was able to find the exact cross over schematic and was pleasantly surprised to learn that this was the only model that did not use the 6db/octave 1st order slope @ 6K. This model uses a 2nd order 12db/octave bessel slope @ 7K5, which puts it in 'slot' territory. However, for this conversion I would have preferred a non additive Linkwitz Riley filter.
Problems:
The 2405 slot is 9db more efficient than the driver it replaced, which means while the L100 can accommodate it, there is no room left on the Lpad for level adjustment.
Even with a 12db slope @ 7K5 the slot can develop a rough metallic sound when driven really hard and the resulting interference can result in the cross over frequency having a beaming effect. I tried increasing the slope of the 2405's and was never quite happy with the result. As it turns out the LE 5-2 mid is the irratating factor not the slot as can be seen in the rising response of the test graph. Zero reference standard on the mid has always been too harsh, even when I was young and could take it.
Time to cheat:
Even though the speaker falls in between +/- 3db, I was not happy with the response graph so I tried a little cheating. I moved the mic around to a position where the graph looked the best and adjusted the crossover to where the picture looked the best: 4.5' away, mic aimed directly between mid and slot. Mid decreased to -9db, slot increased 1.5db to -7.5db. The response graph flattened out and looks pretty good averaging +/- 2db. (above 500Hz) When I played a program the result was immediately noticeable...much smoother and less irritating. By turning down the mid 3db and raising the slot 1.5db, the sound improved considerably. Obviously the LE5-2 is the offensive problem, not just in frequency response, but also in tonal signature. It should be noted that the upper mid region dominated by the LE5 is also one of the easiest regions to tailor where EQ can actually be effective.

Akira
11-11-2005, 09:16 AM
One of the first questions I asked when I found this site was, which 10" bass drivers would be appropriate for a high Q response mainly in the 25Hz to 50Hz range. Got some bad scolding but, I wanted dual 10's for many reasons. Mitigating factors aside, IMO they are quicker. (received some flames for that!) I wanted the ability to run stereo or mono sum. They must have a strong presence down to 20Hz. I did not want to hear them so much as feel them. They are compatible with a full range system and I could use existing inventory to power them. BTW, someone built a fabulous single 1500AL which almost changed my mind...beautiful job. While over all it may be superior to my sub, the dual 10's suit my application better.

So my speaker of choice is............OMG car speakers!!! OK, now you can throw flames!#%*&#!! :flamer:Made in China%*!!%#:flamer:

These are good speakers in spite of their off shore heritage. They are relatively inexpensive at around $200. USD The construction is excellent but, of course the only thing that matters is their performance. They peak at 26Hz with a combined sensitivity rating of 101db referenced at 2.83V both channels independently driven.
OK, what sucks? Well the only thing that really bothers me outside of sending my money off shore is the damn stupid painting on the cone. A ridiculous peak rating whose only purpose in life is to show off in your car!!%&*# These speakers will be played with covers on.
So the verdict is: Absolutely Perfect.
They are everything I was hoping for-- tight, quick and earth moving. Not a bass driver, lower than that, a true sub driver. The L100's can not keep up with this sub. Again, as can be seen from the RTA test result graph...absolute perfect response!

Akira
11-11-2005, 09:22 AM
The beauty of this system lies in it's packaging--self contained, pre wired, quick, mobile and rugged...touring company inspired. I decided that the system should be able to be split up. 3 piece, for a quick 5 minute setup using the L100's with main EQ/power rack. 5 piece, for heavy bass and pounding adding dual sub with Xover/power rack.
Main rack: Klarke Teknic 1/3 octave EQ Bryston 3B 100W/side @ 8 ohms
Sub rack: 24db/octave BSS crossover Bryston 4B 400W/side @ 4 ohms

Akira
11-11-2005, 09:26 AM
Tests were conducted out doors to create an anechoic environment. While results were fairly consistent above 600Hz, lower frequencies were a little misleading as we had to wait for the slight wind conditions to calm down--thus the peak values can be seen in the following graphs. A calibrated mic using a DBX digital cross over system's RTA was employed. Due to wind conditions this was a very unscientific testing but, it does give an idea of what is going on. I would have liked an RTA with half scale increments. In all cases the microphone was aimed approximately at the middle of the box between the woofer and mid range. Only on the very last graph was the microphone moved into a position where it looked the best in a picture. (4.5' aimed between mid and slot) All distances are approximate.

Akira
11-11-2005, 09:28 AM
notice the double hump in the high end which marks the upper limit of the mid and the lower end of the slot. keep in mind the Xover point is 7K5

Akira
11-11-2005, 09:30 AM
(first pic) top curve only set to: -1.5 @ 5K/ -3 @6K3/ -1.5 @8K
(second pic) right side, distance 10' EQ as above, mid -3, high -9

Akira
11-11-2005, 09:31 AM
1

Akira
11-11-2005, 09:35 AM
much better response with mic position changed to between mid and high. mid down/slot up slightly
note that wind turbulence gives a deceptive reading below 600Hz, mic was also mistakenly set to +24db, fast response.

Akira
11-11-2005, 09:38 AM
(sorry for the flash) EQ out. 24db/octave BSS crossover with Linkwitz Riley filter set @ 60Hz. PERFECT RESPONSE! note that the 4th bar from the left is the crossover point; thereafter the effect of the electronic slope can be seen.

Akira
11-11-2005, 09:41 AM
An L100 is still an L100--anomalies and all. The sub sounds better on some programs crossed over at the L100's lower limit. On other program material crossing above the 60-80Hz hump yields better results. The mid/high while no longer seamless, sounds a lot better with the 2405 overall. In the final configuration a small amount of EQ -1.5db @ 6K3 and -3db@80Hz yields a reasonably decent response. Back in the day, I used to run the L100's with the mid -3 and the top full out with tons of EQ. Now years later, I wonder how that was possible and why is the laboratory standard of zero db so far off. The only time I could ever set the mid to 0db was with the waffel cover on. I suppose they were meant to be played that way. They say the grill is acoustically transparent, but I have always felt there was a huge difference...more hi-fi as opposed to in your face. But, again that was years ago and I may have lost my point of reference. I was a little surprised that the LE5-2 was the source of many problems, and may try swapping an LE5-9 in place if the tuning will work, but then my 4411's probably won't like that...but I never play them anyway. Does this new L100 sound as good as the 4411? In a word--NO. But, it's more...shall we say, stimulating.
Despite using many "real" studio monitors, I am still enamored by their sound. With a reinforced top and bottom end they can certainly go louder. This system won't get a lot of play but, that's not the point. Spending little money and revamping unused inventory to have a little fun is I suppose, the real purpose. The benefit is they have a new life. I like the system better now and it has a new found functionality that makes them special...maybe they will last another 32 years.

Lancer
11-11-2005, 10:36 AM
Outstanding thread! :applaud:

Zilch
11-11-2005, 10:50 AM
Very nice. Thank you. :applaud:

sonofagun
11-11-2005, 08:12 PM
Outstanding thread! :applaud:

Agreed...now if I can figure any of it out!

How about I send this guy a foam front same as my Quadrex grilles to do testing on and report back?

Let me know Akira.

jpb_dk
11-11-2005, 11:46 PM
Mi M8,
Thanks for interesting reading ! Absolutely wonderfull to read something that have been carried out with passion :applaud: :applaud: :applaud:

Thanks
Jens

Earl K
11-12-2005, 04:33 AM
Hi Akira,

- Nice mods to those vintage L100s'. I love the road case approach ( definately indicates a long term commitment ) . Your lucky that your early generation L100s have the preferred inline arrangement . JBL retired that feature for a couple of decades . Did you end up modifying the networks, to pad down the 077 ?

- The subs are real nifty . Those components have serious K2 lineage written all over them ( with a double magnet too ! ) . A bit of black paint could fix the offending "logo" .

- Was I involved in this scolding fest that you referenced ? ( If so , I apologize )

:p

bigstereo
11-12-2005, 05:18 AM
Dude, that is F-n cool. :rockon2: :rockon2:

pelly3s
11-12-2005, 05:23 AM
Akira,

great story, and killer little system. I need that setup for my remote recordings i do

spkrman57
11-12-2005, 05:41 AM
I liked all the detail and thought you put into your project that you were also able to convey to us so we could understand it!

Ron

rockecat
11-12-2005, 07:58 AM
That was great,I don't understand all of the the tech stuff and I still enjoyed it.

Regis
11-12-2005, 09:28 PM
Akira,
Very unique set of L-100's to say the least! The 077 mod was, wow, different! The road cases actually looked pretty cool, considering. And the Century's rock on into an another century :D

Regis

edgewound
11-12-2005, 10:14 PM
You do nice work, Akira...nice.

johnaec
11-13-2005, 07:01 AM
So what do you have in the sub cabinet? JBL automotive, but what models? How do they sound?

John

Robh3606
11-13-2005, 07:32 AM
What a nice set-up!! I used to use my L100's for outside parties at my house. Your mods bullet proof them, bet they sound good!! I like that sub too.

Rob:applaud:

morbo!
11-13-2005, 01:11 PM
like your ampage too

Akira
11-13-2005, 01:24 PM
So what do you have in the sub cabinet? JBL automotive, but what models? How do they sound?

John

yeah car speakers. had my doubts but they are superb and well priced. imagine having way more power at 30Hz than your system has mid and highs. but, the drive rack has a lot to do with it. as my post said, "tight, quick and earth moving." this is a true sub not a bass speaker, meaning it has a high Q, one note punch (good for bottom 2 1/2 octaves) as opposed to the musical bass fidelity and range you would expect from an AL1500.

JBL power series (automotive) 1020D D stands for dual voice coil.
400 Watts RMS @ 4.5 ohms
comes with T/S parameters and box design info and suggestions

johnaec
11-13-2005, 02:09 PM
yeah car speakers.Sorry - I didn't realize you went over the subs in an earlier post.

I think some of those JBL automotive speakers are really something! I've got one of their differential-drive 10" W10GTI subs myself, (for car usage). But it's also amazing what it does with bass guitar use! I wouldn't hesitate for a minute using one of the differential-drive W10, 12, or 15GTI series for sub usage home/studio/SR.

John

boputnam
11-13-2005, 04:57 PM
I am still enamored by their sound. That is the greatest L100 lust I have ever known... :)

sonofagun
11-14-2005, 07:52 AM
Agreed...now if I can figure any of it out!

How about I send this guy a foam front same as my Quadrex grilles to do testing on and report back?

Let me know Akira.

HELLO...

??

BooBoo Magoo
11-14-2005, 09:05 AM
Very nice Akira! :)

Akira
11-14-2005, 10:59 AM
[/size]

HELLO...

??

i am responding publicly because the direct email didn't work. don't worry the problem is likely on my end.

thanks for the offer, but the grille would not fit and due to the mods it is something i would not pursue anyway.* i suppose a cover only with no wood frame might be able to be squeezed in there for a test, but the only thing to be gained is my personal opinion...and that would not neccessarily be right, just my opinion.
i suppose i touched on a personal spot with my views on the original grille.* yes i did feel there was a difference (i think the original literature said -1.5db, not sure) but, you have to remember i never really played them with the grilles on and when i did it was only to try them out....who knows what i heard, that was 32 years ago!
thanks once again for the offer, akira

Tom Loizeaux
11-15-2005, 05:57 AM
Thank you for such a satisfying post! Your explainations with photos were great. It's inspiring to see someone work at improving a classic product and succeeding!

Your eloquent first post, which expressed your feeling about being left behind, needs a response.
Tools do evolve, and style and tase do change, but seasoned audio folks who are willing to listen and maybe learn, will always bring experience with them that the younger, current wave of audioheads can't. Ultimately that experience and passion will show itself and will make a difference!

Tom

cleger
11-07-2006, 09:59 AM
Contemplating this same mod... I realise this thread has been dormant for about a year.

I don't understand from this post or from reading the entire thread how Akira handled the +9 dB relative efficiency of the 2405. I'm going to pick up a pair of 2405s and dust off the router, but can anyone clarify this for me?

I like my L100s, but the LE25 just isn't cutting it for me.

Thanks,

Chris Leger



Problems:
The 2405 slot is 9db more efficient than the driver it replaced, which means while the L100 can accommodate it, there is no room left on the Lpad for level adjustment.
Even with a 12db slope @ 7K5 the slot can develop a rough metallic sound when driven really hard and the resulting interference can result in the cross over frequency having a beaming effect. I tried increasing the slope of the 2405's and was never quite happy with the result. As it turns out the LE 5-2 mid is the irratating factor not the slot as can be seen in the rising response of the test graph. Zero reference standard on the mid has always been too harsh, even when I was young and could take it.
Time to cheat:
Even though the speaker falls in between +/- 3db, I was not happy with the response graph so I tried a little cheating. I moved the mic around to a position where the graph looked the best and adjusted the crossover to where the picture looked the best: 4.5' away, mic aimed directly between mid and slot. Mid decreased to -9db, slot increased 1.5db to -7.5db. The response graph flattened out and looks pretty good averaging +/- 2db. (above 500Hz) When I played a program the result was immediately noticeable...much smoother and less irritating. By turning down the mid 3db and raising the slot 1.5db, the sound improved considerably. Obviously the LE5-2 is the offensive problem, not just in frequency response, but also in tonal signature. It should be noted that the upper mid region dominated by the LE5 is also one of the easiest regions to tailor where EQ can actually be effective.

clmrt
11-07-2006, 11:59 AM
This sums it up, it seems, plus signal processing.

"Problems:
The 2405 slot is 9db more efficient than the driver it replaced, which means while the L100 can accommodate it, there is no room left on the Lpad for level adjustment.
Even with a 12db slope @ 7K5 the slot can develop a rough metallic sound when driven really hard and the resulting interference can result in the cross over frequency having a beaming effect. I tried increasing the slope of the 2405's and was never quite happy with the result. As it turns out the LE 5-2 mid is the irratating factor not the slot as can be seen in the rising response of the test graph. Zero reference standard on the mid has always been too harsh, even when I was young and could take it.
Time to cheat:
Even though the speaker falls in between +/- 3db, I was not happy with the response graph so I tried a little cheating. I moved the mic around to a position where the graph looked the best and adjusted the crossover to where the picture looked the best: 4.5' away, mic aimed directly between mid and slot. Mid decreased to -9db, slot increased 1.5db to -7.5db. The response graph flattened out and looks pretty good averaging +/- 2db. (above 500Hz) When I played a program the result was immediately noticeable...much smoother and less irritating. By turning down the mid 3db and raising the slot 1.5db, the sound improved considerably. Obviously the LE5-2 is the offensive problem, not just in frequency response, but also in tonal signature. It should be noted that the upper mid region dominated by the LE5 is also one of the easiest regions to tailor where EQ can actually be effective"

cleger
11-07-2006, 12:23 PM
This sums it up, it seems, plus signal processing.


Huh?

So he's doing it all with the l-pads and existing crossover?

clmrt
11-07-2006, 12:35 PM
The woofer operates full-range. The mid operates with a hi-pass only, and fuzzes up the lower treble.

In any case, the net result is that when adding the hot tweeter, you give some sparkle above the chaos, and tweaking the L-pads and using a bit of EQ, you can get a reasonable end result.

Apparently.

I love it. Awesome kit. A technical clusterphuck, I guess, but beautiful nonetheless.

Note the mid is almost completely shut down with the L-pad, -9.5. The woofer is screaming along full range, adding midrange output. The hot tweet will give the illusion of some kind of balance.

Zilch
11-07-2006, 12:46 PM
The L-pad will attenuate all the way to "off," so it's possible to achieve balance, though not in the optimum adjustment range. I'd just put an additional fixed L-pad in series with the 2405 to move it back into a reasonable range.

The thing with mic positioning seems to be smoke and mirrors; clearly Akira concludes that the LE5-2 needs "work," too, which is the basis of my conclusions in other threads: Leave L100s be what they are unless you've got the vertical-in-line version and just want to have fun messing with them.

Rereading this thread, I don't conclude the 2405 upgrade was all that successful an approach to "fixing" L100. 035tiA is a known means of improving the HF in all L100 versions without otherwise altering their fundamental character. I hope Akira will respond....

clmrt
11-07-2006, 12:54 PM
First class execution. I wonder if they'd still give me a headache.

Zilch
11-07-2006, 01:00 PM
First class execution. I wonder if they'd still give me a headache.2405 crossed at 6 kHz?

What's to wonder? :dont-know

clmrt
11-07-2006, 01:01 PM
:hmm:

cleger
11-07-2006, 02:00 PM
Thanks guys.

LRBacon
11-13-2006, 08:08 AM
New high end systems all boast specs well above 30K. I have not heard JBL's beryllium super tweeter...maybe it sounds amazing...any opinions? From what I gather the extended response adds to the performance of the entire box??? Not sure what that means... My favorite HF is the slot. It sounds like air and totally opens up the box. There is no sizzle, spit or sparkle that some people mistake for great top end. To me, the 2405 has the best reproduction of hi-hat, ride cymbal and acoustic guitar harmonics and does an excellent job of creating that breathy air on a vocal.
Luckily, the original L100 (early line array) is the only 4310xx version which can accept the 2405 slot. It's wide horizontal dispersion coupled with a narrow vertical dispersion make the slot an ideal candidate for a line array configuration. By tracking the serial numbers of the L100's I was able to find the exact cross over schematic and was pleasantly surprised to learn that this was the only model that did not use the 6db/octave 1st order slope @ 6K. This model uses a 2nd order 12db/octave bessel slope @ 7K5, which puts it in 'slot' territory. However, for this conversion I would have preferred a non additive Linkwitz Riley filter.
Problems:
The 2405 slot is 9db more efficient than the driver it replaced, which means while the L100 can accommodate it, there is no room left on the Lpad for level adjustment.
Even with a 12db slope @ 7K5 the slot can develop a rough metallic sound when driven really hard and the resulting interference can result in the cross over frequency having a beaming effect. I tried increasing the slope of the 2405's and was never quite happy with the result. As it turns out the LE 5-2 mid is the irratating factor not the slot as can be seen in the rising response of the test graph. Zero reference standard on the mid has always been too harsh, even when I was young and could take it.
Time to cheat:
Even though the speaker falls in between +/- 3db, I was not happy with the response graph so I tried a little cheating. I moved the mic around to a position where the graph looked the best and adjusted the crossover to where the picture looked the best: 4.5' away, mic aimed directly between mid and slot. Mid decreased to -9db, slot increased 1.5db to -7.5db. The response graph flattened out and looks pretty good averaging +/- 2db. (above 500Hz) When I played a program the result was immediately noticeable...much smoother and less irritating. By turning down the mid 3db and raising the slot 1.5db, the sound improved considerably. Obviously the LE5-2 is the offensive problem, not just in frequency response, but also in tonal signature. It should be noted that the upper mid region dominated by the LE5 is also one of the easiest regions to tailor where EQ can actually be effective.

You could replace the LE5-2 with an LE5-6, LE5-10, or LE5-12. The L100 Tech Sheet suggests the LE5-10 as a replacement for the LE5-2. It may smooth out the midrange a bit.


Larry

Zilch
11-13-2006, 09:42 AM
104H vs. LE5 FR curves here:

http://audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=5706

Akira
11-14-2006, 10:56 AM
The L-pad will attenuate all the way to "off," so it's possible to achieve balance, though not in the optimum adjustment range. I'd just put an additional fixed L-pad in series with the 2405 to move it back into a reasonable range.

The thing with mic positioning seems to be smoke and mirrors; clearly Akira concludes that the LE5-2 needs "work," too, which is the basis of my conclusions in other threads: Leave L100s be what they are unless you've got the vertical-in-line version and just want to have fun messing with them.

Rereading this thread, I don't conclude the 2405 upgrade was all that successful an approach to "fixing" L100. 035tiA is a known means of improving the HF in all L100 versions without otherwise altering their fundamental character. I hope Akira will respond....

Zilch...you are right again. This system sounds good because it is "over stimulated." Gut wrenching sub bass and an over active (but smooth) top end. Not a bad thing for a party speaker.
Just my preference but, I much prefer the 2405 to the 035tiA. The slot can work fine in this system (L100/ inline setup) but, the LE5-2 has got to go and a simple Lpad mod adjustment is needed. After all, my favorite JBL of all time uses exactly that configuration: 4315

p.s. a special thanks to Tom Loizeaux. I took your advice, that's why I have been away. I have since gotten into location 'concert recording' for video.

bigstereo
11-20-2006, 10:33 AM
So Zilch, are you saying that the 035tiA will drop right into the L100 with out any cutting? I was thinking about trying something like this. I think that I might have a weak LE20 anyhow. Unless it's the network causes the problem.

Zilch
11-20-2006, 12:22 PM
035tiA requires cutting. There's at least one thread here showing it.

Best answer seems to be recessing the face and overlapping rather than shaping the 035tiA bezel as Grumpy suggested in post #4 here:

http://audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=11756

Rob suggests a simple crossover mod, as well:

http://audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=74404#post74404

bigstereo
11-21-2006, 01:40 AM
035tiA requires cutting. There's at least one thread here showing it.

Best answer seems to be recessing the face and overlapping rather than shaping the 035tiA bezel as Grumpy suggested in post #4 here:



Rob suggests a simple crossover mod, as well:



Roger that, thanks.