Your Opinions L-150 AND L-100T

[Vitopanch]

Hail,
I am new to your group, a couple of weeks or so, and have been reading posts and really am enjoying this group.

That being said, I decided to ask for your opinions concerning my L-150's and my L-100T's. The bottom line is that I to my ears, the L-150's sound better, although I very much enjoy the music from the L-100t's as well. What I mean by better is that the L-150's low frequency sounds deeper, more growly, and the mid-frequencies seem closer to me and richer.

I have had plenty of folks listen to my A/B comparison's, non-audiophiles, and they just give me puzzled stares and have no opinion. The reason that I am asking is purely curiousity which is piqued by all of the posts on all of the forums that lead me to believe that I am rather alone in my opinion and will enjoy hearing your comments.

Background: I am original owner of L-150's and they are in perfect condition. I am the second owner of the L100T's and they are in perfect condition as well. All four Loudspeakers occupy the corners of a 15 x 15 room. Each pair is driven by a Phase Linear 700HF with a seperate Acurus RL11 preamplifier, each receiving it's input from a single un-noteworthy compact disc player and the comparison has been done at the same volume setting on the pre-amplifier, which is at full volume, however, safely under clipping level. These results occur while playing all types of music.

Many thanks in advance for your opinions.
Vito

[4313B]

Many thanks in advance for your opinions.I preferred the L150 to the L100T.

Try L100t3 networks in your L100T's and see if you like them better. Shouldn't take you more than a weekend to build them. The schematic is here - http://manuals.harman.com/JBL/HOM/Technical%20Sheet/L100t3%20ts.pdf

[hapy._.face]

...and who says we don't treat new members with respect? Huh!?

Nice, Giskard. :thmbsup:


Welcome to the forum, Vito' !!

[4313B]

...and who says we don't treat new members with respect? Huh!? :) It's totally dependent on the first impression they exude.

If they ride into town wearin' two guns hung low and tied down, well then they're just hankerin' for a gunfight so I reckon they'd best start draggin' iron.

[duaneage]

I'm ordering parts this week to do exactly that, change the L100T to a L100T3. I plan to make new crossover boards for A-B swapping and using slightly better parts than original for the caps. I should have it together next week and hopefully will be able to report on how it goes.

[mike]

I too prefer the L150. The L100t was probably a more accurate speaker but when the L150's are set up right that passive radiator gives them a warmth and fullness that is very unique and very pleasant. Not to mention that the L150 had much nicer cabinetry and classic JBL styling.

I find lately that I am starting to prefer the sound of the JBL's from the late 70's and early 80's over the newer more accurate speakers. Stuff like the L110, L96, L150 etc. seemed to really strike a good balance between accuracy and the lively forward "JBL sound". After listening to the 250Ti's for a while I sometimes find myself prefering the L96's.

Mike

[Regis]

It depends on which model L-150 you've got. I find the early L-150's lacking in midrange depth and detail and also, control of the bottom end. The L-150A utilized the same crossover as the L-112 and has a better sound to it. I've modified three stock L-150's to the "A" configuration, less the tweeter and there is a noticable difference when you swap out the crossover. Even better, put the 2214H from the L-100T into the L-150 and you will have a speaker that has some serious bass to it.

[Raffe]

I prefer the L150A compared to the L100T GI version because it sounds more "live" and has a really deep bas, the woodwork are better on the L100T GI. Compared to the 240Ti I prefer the L150A because of the midrange that I think is rather unpresent in the 240, but as usual the 250Ti are the best:applaud:

L96 sounds good but lacks low freqvency.. My opinion:blah:

[Vitopanch]

Many thanks for sharing your opinions.