Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 20

Thread: 4410 vs. 4313B

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    317

    4410 vs. 4313B

    It's been years since I have heard the 4410 and I was wondering if any of you guys can comment on how it compares to the 4313B or L96. From what I can recall it was a pretty transparent speaker but it lacked the the low end authority of the 4313B and L96. Also I seem to recall that it wasn't made quite as well or finished as nicely as the 4313B or L96.
    Mike

  2. #2
    Senior Member Audiobeer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    St. Peters, Mo just west of St. Louis.
    Posts
    2,410
    Your recollection is exactly how I feel about it! I'm a sucker for the 4313B's. I felt they were far superior to the 4310s! IMHO!

  3. #3
    Obsolete
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    NLA
    Posts
    14,548

    Re: 4410 vs. 4313B

    I'd said your recollection is pretty accurate Mike.

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    317
    Thanks for confirming my recollections. I've been looking for a nice pair of 4313B's or L96's or L110A's for a while. For some reason I just can NOT find a pair of any one of the above mentioned JBL's in good cosmetic condition. Every pair I come across is beat up.
    Mike

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    317
    I've got one more question. Have any of you guys ever listened to the LSR32? From what I've read on the net they are quite good.

    I basically gave up on JBL's newer products and then I bought a pair of HLS610's after reading Audio Magazine's lengthy write up on them. I am extremely impressed with the 610's.
    Mike

  6. #6
    Senior Seņor boputnam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    northern california
    Posts
    7,010
    Hey, Mike...

    Funny I missed this Thread, 'cause I was out in the shop/studio messing/listening to my 4313B's. Got a pair of reconed LE10H's from the one Giskard, and was (again...) marveling at the 4313B's. Truly phenomenal small format monitor. The tuning of the cabinet is magic for that LE10H.

    Luckily, mine are near pristing (Audiobeer remedied a banged-up corner), the transducers have all be renewed, and I have the original boxes. Lucky, for sure.

    Keep your eBay tuned and emailing you with alerts when a pair shows. And you might pm Audiobeer - last I remember he had something like three-pair he was refurbishing cabinets on - and he does great work.
    bo

    "Indeed, not!!"

  7. #7
    AudioGeek
    Guest

    Question

    Also I seem to recall that it wasn't made quite as well or finished as nicely as the 4313B or L96.
    How is it that the 44xx series aren't "made quite as well" or "finished as nicely" as 4313's or L96's?? I mean, how much better could the finish be on my 4412's than what they are? Walnut veneer is walnut veneer, isn't it?

    And what's not to like about their build quality, compared to other JBL's?

    I think sometimes you guys get overly nostalgic for the older models.(?)

  8. #8
    Administrator Robh3606's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Rocinante
    Posts
    8,843
    Hello Audiogeek

    I think the finish issue has more to do with what is currently available. The original 4400 series all had a walnut option. My L80T3 are 6 sided verniered cabinets from the 80's. They are some of the nicest cabinets I think JBL made. Their consumer and Pro lines have digressed from the use of real vernier. Where it was once common its now gone. I beleive now the 4400 are only offered with a vinyl clad.

    Rob
    Last edited by Robh3606; 01-05-2004 at 10:06 AM.

  9. #9
    Obsolete
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    NLA
    Posts
    14,548
    Originally posted by AudioGeek
    How is it that the 44xx series aren't "made quite as well" or "finished as nicely" as 4313's or L96's?? I mean, how much better could the finish be on my 4412's than what they are? Walnut veneer is walnut veneer, isn't it?

    And what's not to like about their build quality, compared to other JBL's?

    I think sometimes you guys get overly nostalgic for the older models.(?)
    I personally prefer the heavier duty LE10 transducers to the lighter duty 127 transducers. I also prefer the solid aluminum 033/044/066 tweeters to the flexible plastic 035 tweeters. Additionally, I'm not a huge fan of electrolytic capacitors in high performance passive networks.

  10. #10
    AudioGeek
    Guest
    Most of the older X-overs had 'lytics, didn't they? Maybe the 4313 & L96 didn't? If not, then that would be news to me.

    Ah yes...the infamous "plastic tweeter flex", for which the 44xx series and other JBL's have been so long reviled. I had nearly forgotten about that source of non-linearity...

    But it doesn't seem to be too intrusive, as long as the tweeters are properly screwed down to the baffle boards.

    Oops! Perhaps I've blasphemed in disagreeing with The Powerful and Almighty Giskard?! 1000 pardons for my heresy, O Great One!

    Rob, I didn't know if mike was referring to only the latest version of the 44xx's. It's too bad the wood veneer is no longer available, but then you don't have much to worry about maintenance-wise.

  11. #11
    Obsolete
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    NLA
    Posts
    14,548
    "Most of the older X-overs had 'lytics, didn't they? Maybe the 4313 & L96 didn't? If not, then that would be news to me."

    The L96, L112, and L150A used all metallized mylar capacitors as did the 4313/4313B. However, the 4313/4313B didn't employ the use of polypropylene bypass capacitors, first started with the introduction of the L110A. JBL has used electrolytics quite often over the years in the conjugate elements of their networks. The L96, L112, and L150A didn't use conjugate capacitors at all. The 4313 used mylar even in the conjugate circuit. The original L212 used all metalized mylars, even on the conjugates. I believe the final version employed some electrolytics. Electrolytics are less expensive.

    Some people have a serious problem with the use of electrolytic capacitors in high performance loudspeaker systems. I personally don't have a serious problem, rather it simply would never occur to me to actually use them.

    "Ah yes...the infamous "plastic tweeter flex", for which the 44xx series and other JBL's have been so long reviled. I had nearly forgotten about that source of non-linearity..."

    One of my issues with the plastic 035 series is the inevitable fatigue that occurs around the mounting holes. I've seen numerous 035's with broken or weakened mounting holes. Not an issue with people who bolt their systems together and never touch them again.

    I don't think anyone could argue much with the structural integrity of an 066 versus the structural integrity of an 035TiA. Some people really like high quality cast/machined components, others couldn't care less. JBL loves the 035 because it is cheap, reliable, and consistent. I pay the extra for the aluminum 044Ti or the 046Ti-1.

    "Oops! Perhaps I've blasphemed in disagreeing with The Powerful and Almighty Giskard?! 1000 pardons for my heresy, O Great One!"

    I don't know wtf that's supposed to mean so I can't really comment on it.

  12. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    317
    I wasn't trying to slam the 4410 or 4412 . They are nice speakers. No offense intended. However they really weren't made as well as the 4313 or the L110 etc. Giskard has already pointed out the electro-mechanical differences and I'll add that the finish on the 4400 series of monitors was more on par with the L100T, L80T, etc.; not bad but not as good as the earlier JBL's. I think they used a better grade of walnut veneer on the earlier speakers. The Ti series was more comparable to the 4313B or L110 in terms of build quality.
    Mike

  13. #13
    Senior Member Audiobeer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    St. Peters, Mo just west of St. Louis.
    Posts
    2,410
    L100T's wow.....in terms of veneer, that is the worst application I've ever seen. Those babies self destruct! I'd take a pair of those over the L-100s however sound wise!
    Last edited by Audiobeer; 01-05-2004 at 04:10 PM.

  14. #14
    Obsolete
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    NLA
    Posts
    14,548
    Originally posted by mike
    I wasn't trying to slam the 4410 or 4412. They are nice speakers. No offense intended. However they really weren't made as well as the 4313 or the L110 etc.
    Mike
    Understood.

    A 4410 built like a 4313 would never make the intended price point.
    A 4412 built like a 4411, 120Ti, or L112 would cost too much to remain at it's intended price point.
    It really boils down to simple economics.

  15. #15
    AudioGeek
    Guest
    Sorry, but I really didn't notice that the model's mentioned had much better of a cabinet finish than the other's. I suppose with some of the various drivers and components used, it's debatable as well.

    Certainly, I wouldn't say the 4313/4411 or the older Ti series rose to the level of (or surpasses) a Quad L-series, ProAc, Avalon, B&W, Thiel, or JM Labs, etc. - cabinet or parts-wise.

    Ok, this is all pretty subjective, but maybe I missed something?

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. 4313B Details
    By Guido in forum Lansing Product Technical Help
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 03-28-2018, 12:46 PM
  2. Center Channel 4425, 4412, 4410?
    By ooppalla in forum Lansing Product General Information
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 01-18-2005, 07:00 PM
  3. Proud of my 4313B / L96 clones
    By Guido in forum Lansing Product General Information
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 01-17-2005, 01:08 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •