JBL 4430 vs 43XX balance argument

I own a pair of JBL 4430's, theses were designed in the 80's. Using the newly developed Bi radial horn. The introduction was a departure from older design from the 60' to 70'. The architecture used new principals unheard of in that era. For instance, the low freq. driver is crossed over at the point where the off axis are equal (-6 db). This eliminated the abrupt transition between the two drivers. The nasal quality and harness were addressed and effectively eliminated. This was JBL first venture into high power two way design loudspeakers.
The topology coupled high sensitivity with very wide dynamic range unheard of for a 15 inch drive crossover at 1khz..

JBL earlier loudspeakers (43XX) used a round exponential horn with a plastic slant plate. In this application, it added a nasal quality and through sound as if propagated by a spotlight. In general this gave horns a bad rap in the eyes of the consumer. The rounds horns lope like crazy, I would not consider them unless I had a special application, like a restoration project. My 20 year old KEf were much smoother.

The JBL 4430 loudspeaker is not for everyone. They render music on the cold side of neutral and play with passion. They are not bright nor etched. But can handle several 100 watts all day/night at 92db efficiency.
Remember they were designed to be mounted in a wall. DON'T place them in the middle of the living room and in a environment that echo's. This speaker has very wide even dispersion for it's bandwidth. An
Acoustically dead environment is required to achieve balance in the frequency domain.

So far every person I introduced them to thought they produced a life like reproduction. I yet to hear any speaker under 1500(ebay) that can compare. If you have a chance check them out, you might be surprised.

If the the 2231 and Le15 were such great drivers would they be produces today? NO!!!!! Because the 2235 will go lower, play louder with less distortion. I had the two later there is no comparison.

The 4430 superceded the 43XX series because it was the next generation of studio monitor!!!!! Are they better than the 4355's ????

spencer
:D

" Are they better than the 4355's ????"

No, but IMNSHO, the 4435 sure is! :)



We've been over this several times before, often in detail, and the fact is some people prefer the older 43xx series and some prefer the 443x. There is a reason why I personally own 4430's and no longer own 4331's, 4333's, and 4343's, and it sure isn't because I hate blue baffles, on the contrary!

Maybe this would be a cool poll topic. If someone knows how to set up a poll...

That's true, but from the earlier post. I felt that both sides of the story should be told also there quite a few who were never involed in the orginal discussion.

Spencer

Well, a lot of good stuff has been lost over the past year or so, that's for sure. I really enjoyed the guy who used to work at JBL posting what cheap plastic crap the 4430/4435's were compared with the 43xx stuff. That was a hoot and a holler.

"The 4430 superceded the 43XX series because it was the next generation of studio monitor!!!!! Are they better than the 4355's ????"

I have a pair of "improved" 4355 clones that sound wonderful in my fairly dead room. Three of the four walls are floor to ceiling velour drapes. They can be opened at regular intervals to liven up the room when desired. If anyone has a pair of 4430/4435s near the San Francisco area it would be very interesting to compare them.

I think the fact that JBL sold the large 4430/4435s and the 4355s at the same time indicates that it is largely a preference thing.

As far as the discontinuing of the 4355 it was probably a simple business decision. I don't know what the retail price of the 4355 was at it's demise, but I bet it cost JBL more to produce a pair of them than the cost to produce a pair of 4435.

Giskard, do you still have the retail price lists for these speakers?

"I bet it cost JBL more to produce a pair of them than the cost to produce a pair of 4435."

Quite a bit more to be sure.

"Giskard, do you still have the retail price lists for these speakers?"

Yeah, according to the dealer price sheets the last time the 4355 and 4435 were on the same schedule was October 1982 through August 1983.

October 1982
4401 $177
4301 $228
4312 $405
4411 $534
4430 $1176
4435 $1605
4345 $2160
4355 $2802

September 1983
4401 $189
4301 $243
4312 $432
4411 $570
4430 $1260
4435 $1716
4345 $2310

Ive owned both of these systems and both are great. The 4350/55 uses 2 15" drivers flat out to about 250/315 Hz. the 4435 uses 2 15" drivers and rolls one off at 100HZ and cuts it down about 6 db. So the 4350/55 will have more maximum output. Also the 4350/55 uses the nice large midrange/2" drivers/tweeters. Does this make a diffrence? Yes it does wider dynamic range on the 4350/55. The 4350 can play about 4-6 db louder and need less power. There are problems in the 175-275 Hz range when you use 2 2235h drivers in series kind of a wooly type sound that can be a prob. in the wrong room. Also the mid/hifreq section can be a bit hard in a small room. Now the 4435 is a newer design and is more refined sound, this system is at home in the living room. 4435 will show you everything MAJOR diffrences in amplification/front end ect. The dual 15" will beat the @#$% out of the room. Ive drained many a large mono block on these and they beg for more. 4350 dosent need as much power.
The timealignment is audiable on the 4435. On good piano recordings the 4350 would sledhammer the sidewall, the 4435 the piano is does that and width of the housing and height and the piano is actually behind that wall. Ive had 10 different $$ Large amp connected to these and can tell you the sound of each.Ive noticed that the 4350/55 sounds best biamped with tube electronics for the mids/highs for the best resolution. The 4435 are so close they dont require biamp to perform good. Best bet. Get both systems:D

Yeah,


Its a nice topic to debate and I suppose it comes down to preferences and what you are used to and grow to like after a while.

The AES paper by John Eargle ,Davis Smith & D.B Keele Jr Titled " Improvements in Monitor Loudspeaker Systems" circ 1983 covered the whole issue of horns, advances in recording technology and consistently uniform coverage angles offered by newer horn designs.

I am not sure if this in the library but it would be great if someone who has a nice clean copy could scan it and send to Don.

Spencer raises some interesting points and I always felt the 4431/4432 where is bit closed in and odd sounding at times too.

However, the addition of the mid 10" in the 4343/B seems to defy this apparent subjective thinking. There is obviously more to it than meet the eye.

My theory (IMHO) is that running the LE85/2420 down to 800 Xover point with the longer exponential horn and then to the 2231 caused some obvious colouration, I am not sure why??

However the shorter 2307 in the 4343 crossing over at 1200hz is far less coloured . I accept the directivity isses of the exponential horn/lense but the whole package with the 10" cone mid covering 300 - 1200 hz seems to be a winner and would be hard to go back to the 15" after hearing it.

Pity JBL never marketed such a beast using the 2344, it works rather well. But then I could be biased as I am running this configuration at the moment!!

Ian

No debate from me which is better, for those who can not effort a 43xx system a 44xx horn can be as satisfying. Don't believe all the hype, (including mine), let your ears be the judge.

The 44xx horns are reasonably priced and affordable. It's hard to understand why a L65 can command 500 - 1000 on ebay. vs 4430 which would sell for a ~1000. There is no comparison between the two.

Spencer

Or a pair of L-100s for $1,000!!!!!


Obviously logic doesn't enter into the value placed on collectibles.

The 4435 I own are very good as well. The bass response is so accurate that you need a critical place in the listening room. They need a good power amp . I never compare with 43555. But I am sure that the response between 250 hz and 1000 hz is much interesting with the 124 JBL model 2202 !!!!
Am I wrong ?

Conclusion, I will never sell them. The 4435 are mounted with 2 2234 (not 2235) and a 2426h driver.

Regards, Stephane

Quote:

---

Originally posted by caladois
The 4435 I own are very good as well. The bass response is so accurate that you need a critical place in the listening room. They need a good power amp . I never compare with 43555. But I am sure that the response between 250 hz and 1000 hz is much interesting with the 124 JBL model 2202 !!!!
Am I wrong ?

Conclusion, I will never sell them. The 4435 are mounted with 2 2234 (not 2235) and a 2426h driver.

Regards, Stephane

---

Thediffrence is not as huge as you may think. The 2202 is a large jbl driver with about the same construction as a jbl woofer. Rather slowish. id like to see some 4-5" drivers for high powered midrange. And feel free to compare the 4435 to the 4355!