Doesn't say "0", Thom.
It DOES spec a max filesize for different file types, tho....
Doesn't say "0", Thom.
It DOES spec a max filesize for different file types, tho....
I beg your pardon but it gives me a message saying the max size for my type of file(my file is jpg but it doesn't say that) is 1024 by 0 and my file is too large. Originaly my pictires were about 4 meg but I used photo shop to cut them down to about 250K same message. I notice there is a chart with many file types listed and a width and height for ea. except that there is no number in the height box for any of the file types. I wonder if that could be the problem. I would find it highly likely but I wouldn't actually bet money on it. My computer is the pits right now also. I klicked something on a JBL websight and my desk top is swarming with ikons for jbl files and as fast as you get rid of them or try to stack them up in one folder you get copy 1 and 2 and 5 it's nuts.
Kindly tone down the snark. There is no restriction on the height of a jpg image; that is why it is indicated with a "-" and not a number. There is a filesize restriction so as not to create undue bandwidth and storage issues. Even at that, it is currently set to over 500kb per jpg which is more than enough for images up to 1024 pixels wide. As you can see from the photo below, the attachements feature is working as it should. This is a 1024 X 1536 image that has a file size of 283kb.Originally Posted by Thom
Apparently the one dimension can't be more than 1024 regardles of file size but the message it gives you doesn't exactly tell you that. Now that it said I uploaded 5 files I wonder where I uploaded them to. Now as if I didn't have enough to do I have to go look up snark.
No, it says the width can't be more than 1024 pixels. The height can be anything, as evidenced by the 1536 pixel height of the image above. After you upload the images, you have to go back to the original post that the images are attached to and save it, otherwise the upload will not be complete.
Don
picture Does that magnet pot look like it was in a pile to become a 375 befor someone grabbed it or what? This last picthre is a d130, anLE15 and whatever I have here. The le15 is a little taller thal the 130 as the mag is a little larger the le15 fits right under the other one.
Well, I can see your pics now, Thom....
Good SHOW!
[I can't ID the driver, tho. Never seen one like it....]
They stuffed insid the pot. wonder what that did?
Hi Thom, group,
We have a genuine mystery here, a real "whodunit."
Truth being stranger than fiction, a friend told me a few days ago that he had acquired a rare, likely prototype JBL 15" woofer. It had been disassembled by the prior owner, but all the pieces were there. When he mentioned that it appeared to use a 375 pot for the motor, I told him about Thom's recent thread here.
He has temporarily assembled the driver, though the dust cap has not been reattached yet. He plans to restore it to function as all parts are in decent enough shape.
He dropped it off with me the other day so that I could photograph it for this thread. Unfortunately I cannot load pictures at the moment as I am using a borrowed computer. This one is virtually identical to Thom's though; same cone, including three glued concentric stiffeners on the back. Same treatment of the edge of the cone, though a little sloppier on this one. The pointed dust cap is also the same, as are all the motor parts. The only difference is that "model 520" is crudely stencilled on the side of the pot in white paint.
Now we know that Ampex used a lot of JBL equipment in their systems all through the 1950s. In fact, their needs exceeded JBL's capacity to supply, so they built their own factory in North Hollywood and paid JBL a royalty on a per unit basis. Ampex built both woofers and 375 compression drivers at this facility, so they would have had the driver parts on hand to construct this hybrid.
The Cinaudagraph woofers of the late 1930s and 1940s used a pointed paper dust cap. Rudy Bozak was their chief engineer, and he continued to use them after he founded his own company in the late 1940s.
My hunch is that these rare examples were either prototypes or a short production run of an attempt at an improved woofer for the Ampex bass systems. With the combination of fresh thinking and borrowed good ideas, my guess is that a single individual was likely responsible for them; I just wish I knew who he was!
My friend says that he has seen two or three other examples of these woofers over the years, though the cones were different and they may have been reconed. Since Thom saw eight of them at the Alhambra, this argues in favor of them being a production item, at least for a short time.
There are a couple of people I can think of who might be able to help solve the mystery, so I will try to contact them.
Not all of them had 4 drilled and tapped holes on the bach of the pot otherwise they were the same.
I spoke with a fellow today who related the recollections of a friend of his about these woofers. Apparently his friend took apart Ampex speaker systems years ago in two large 70mm movie theatres in San Francisco. There were reportedly a large quantity, something like 20 of these 375 pot woofers instaled in those houses in the big Ampex horn bins. So it does appear that they were manufactured in some quantity, as the various accounts tally to at least 30 of them so far. I am attempting to reach the fellow who removed them from the theatres, and will report in when I do.
Hi
You said someting about San Francisco theatres. Quote:
" Apparently his friend took apart Ampex speaker systems years ago in two large 70mm movie"
Can you ask him if it was any of these please.
" The Coronet, the Alexandria, and the Taravel"
Thanks
It probably means nothing, but in the Alhambra they were infininte baffle. They mounted behind the screen and the back of them was in a large room. The room wall was the baffle. I didn't see this personally, but the guy I got them from was knowledgable enough to be acurate. I thought they should have been in C55 horn enclosures but maybe ampex didn't use those.
I spoke today with the gentleman who removed the big Ampex systems from the theatres in San Francisco years ago. His name is Paul Mundt. He said that the woofers were installed in large bass horns with mouths 7' by 7'. In addition to the four 15" 375 pot woofers, each horn used a 10" mid bass driver and had an unusual phasing plug structure in the throat of the horn. A friend of his will be scanning and emailing to me some original Ampex literature on this horn, which was part of the Todd-AO system. I will post the images here when I receive them. I'm beginning to suspect that these 375 pot woofers may have been a special model produced by Ampex for Todd-AO.
Paul also mentioned that these systems used special high frequency horns consisting of what appeared to be modified Altec 1503 multicellulars. Each horn used two 288 drivers on a Y throat, oriented vertically instead of the usual horizontal arrangement. There was some sort of perforated metal screening installed in the horn throat as well.
Convergence, the two theatres were the Alexandria and the Cononet. I looked them up on the Cinema Treasures site and read that Mike Todd had personally supervised the installation of his system at the Alexandria in preparation for the debut of Oklahoma in September, 1956.
Interesting, This system had 375's with that wavy lens that is about four feet wide. Still could have been purpose built for the structure I suppose. I didn't see them but I think he would know the diffefence and the lens sure says JBL, maybe.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote