Difference between JBL coated diaphragms
Hi
In some horn -drivers, coated diaphragms are used.
JBL 2450SL used in the DMS-1
Does the coated diaphragms extend as high in frequency
as the non-coated diaphragms ?
Why is the coated diaphragm used in the DMS-1 ?
and not in the PA drivers? What is the advantage
of coated diaphragms..
Would the coated diaphragms used in 2450SL fit
in the 2446, 2451, 2450 drivers? What would be
the main difference between this and the regular
diaphragm?
is this a diaphragm for JBL 2441/2445/2446/2450
http://www.centralfloridaspeaker.com/skit1.jpg
Dont look like the membrane in 2450, no "rib" structure..
In my K2, i think i have the 2450 diaphragm instead of the
coated version used in DMS-1 and s9500
http://pal.pp.se/~nord/K2/K2_04.jpg
Would it be very wrong to use this diaphragm instead
of the K2 original version diaphragm?
The originating owner put it there to gain some more
high frequency ower the coated diapgragm.
is the 475nd the same driver as the 2450 ? etc etc..
Re: Difference between JBL coated diaphragms
Quote:
Originally posted by Niklas Nord
Would it be very wrong to use this diaphragm instead
of the K2 original version diaphragm?
As far as I know, JBL has never officially endorsed swapping drivers, cone kits, diaphragms, network components, etc. in their production systems. Something tells me JBL wouldn't bother dusting a diaphragm for a specific application if that application didn't call for it. I think people keep forgetting that JBL has very specific intent for the various systems they design and manufacture.