Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 24 of 24

Thread: Ashly XR1001 vs JBL M552

  1. #16
    Senior Member Jakob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    290
    I would like to begin and thank all of You for taking time and helping me with this, so: thanks a million!

    Earl and Widget: Very good points! I remember looking at those measurements and how many of the drivers weren't up to specs. I will let a friend of mine who is a certified JBL repairguy have a look at them. Before this, I used the ME150's together with my 2450's and 2405 in a passive setup, and the ME150 doesn't sound as good in the new setup. That is why I still think the M552 is the source of evil . To be more precise it was like someone pulled down a curtain in front of the speakers. The dynamics, realism and timbre disappeared.


    Rob: I think You gave a good advice: to look into a 9800 network and try to remake it into a 2-way. But it isn't easy and I haven't got a clue where to begin . My friend the repairguy can fix any driver but isn't a crossover constructor. I guess I have some studying to do!

    I'm beginning to understand how lucky I was when I used the N333 network with drivers and horns it were not designed for and got very good results (well I thought they sonded nice, they probably measured like a bose from hell ). Had a thought that this would be even easier but I guess I've learned that there is a lot more to building speakers than throw together some drivers and connect them to a network. Greg Timbers and all the other constructers at JBL have my deepest respect. At least, THEY know what they are doing

    Would using the NS3100 be a complete disaster? I guess the 2435 is far from the 2426 specswise. Guido gave me the advice to use the NS3100 for the LF and build something like the 4430 for the HF. A bit puzzled about that since they cross their drivers at different frequencies, 750 vs 1000Hz. If You read this Guido, would You mind explaining a bit more?



    Thanks all!

  2. #17
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Richmond Hill, Ont.
    Posts
    4,681
    Hi Jakob,

    (i) I'm glad you didn't interpret all my words as a scolding for buying used 2435s .

    (ii) Also, from my perspective, you've now turned the conversation back to ;
    " How to successfully implement the ME150H within a tuned box ? "

    - You apparently believe the problem is just the M552 ( giving dull , lifeless performance vs your passive setup ). I believe the problem can also be blamed as much on certain enclosure sizes ( & the tunings ) .
    -What's the current box tuning ( & size ) that you are using ?

    - I'd suggest that you look to the box sizes used in the 4344mkII or the S3100 for some inspiration .
    - If need be, get in touch with current owners of these 2 systems to get some accurate inside dimensions ( to approximate how many litres the woofer prefers to "see" so that it'll recreate decent bass ) .

    - Didn't you comment sometime within the last few months that you thought a tube amp on this woofer really helped it come alive ? ( or was that someone else ? )
    - No matter , that approach makes some sense, since in my experience this woofer is electrically, very "tight".
    - In other words it needs a special system alignment to help it "get the bass out " . That overt tightness can be "loosened up" either electrically ( such as with an amp with low damping characteristics / or / mechanically through either the use of oversize boxes or even ( heaven forbid ) a passive radiator .
    - The addition of a second ME150H tuned ( a la the Everest II & 4435 ) as a helper woofer ( I have to imagine ) will have its advocates .




    ps ; I still recommend that you get a better crossover than the M552 for the bass frequencies in your two way setup .

  3. #18
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Richmond Hill, Ont.
    Posts
    4,681
    Hi Jakob

    Quote Originally Posted by Jakob
    Guido gave me the advice to use the NS3100 for the LF and build something like the 4430 for the HF. A bit puzzled about that since they cross their drivers at different frequencies, 750 vs 1000Hz. If You read this Guido, would You mind explaining a bit more?
    - I have to imagine that Guido was speaking "figuratively" .
    - ie; Meaning ? Have yourself designed, a hipass section that's inspired by some of the ideas found within the 4430 network .
    - I wouldn't just duplicate the N3134 , part for part, value for value and marry it to the N3100 ) lowpass section and expect that to work .

    Quote Originally Posted by Jakob
    Would using the NS3100 be a complete disaster?
    - Seems to me that it would be a waste of money to build it , especially if you can't measure it's performance .

    Quote Originally Posted by Jakob
    I guess the 2435 is far from the 2426 specswise.
    - All the response plots I've seen say it's different enough ( I don't actually own any 2435s ) .
    - The H3100 is different enough from the H9800 that it'll require different HF compensation, as well as different notch filters to smooth things out .

    - I suspect that an effective custom HiPass network will need to borrow a bunch of design ideas from all of the following networks ;
    N3134 ( 4430 ) , N3100mkII ( but not the original N3100 ), N9800, and maybe the N66000 .

    - I've done just ( as an "on-the-benchmockup" ) with a single 2431H mated to a bunch of different horn flares ( unfortunately, not one of the horns used resemble the H9800 / so my notch filters aren't very relevant or useful to others ) .


  4. #19
    Senior Member Jakob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    290
    So, I guess my best (easiest) option is to get sure my 2435's are up to specs and use them with a good active crossover with G.T keyfilter and maybe modify the keyfilters to acompany the H9800 better.

    Sorry Earl, I put you on the wrong track: I'm very pleased with the ME150's performance. I have used them in different setups but always in the same 3 cubic feet boxes. Have heard of people saying they lack low end, but I'm a bass junkie and I don't miss a thing.

    Thanks: Jakob

  5. #20
    Senior Member pos's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Paris, France
    Posts
    2,546
    Hi Jakob

    How is your project going on?
    Did you refurbished your 2435s?

  6. #21
    Senior Member frank23's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    357
    I started playing with my 2435's some weeks / months ago trying out different setups just for trying out.

    Btw., I have read the whole quick & dirty 4430 thread and all about the 2435 etc.

    But yesterday evening I found out that the 2435 / pt-h1010 combination seems to sound better on the m552 2380 eq setting than on the 2360 eq setting. Pity me as I have just dismantled my top source living room active setup so I can now only try this in the garage.

    I have made a setup using the 2235 in the 4507 cabinet with the 2435 / pt-h1010 on top and having the m552 in the 2380 eq setting. It seems to sound ok. But you have to adjust the levels and crossover frequency to the dB.

    But as I have posted elsewhere I find the JBL are very sensitive to source and cables so a lot of the system not sounding nice could have to do with previous components in your chain. I think the m552 in itself is no bad device as it still allows me to clearly hear the difference between two sets of top interconnects and is no big negative factor by itself.

    Frank

    ps. I know the specs in the manual about the different curves, but does someone know where to find the 2360 and 2380 eq curves of the m552 or m553 in a graph?

  7. #22
    RIP 2011 Zilch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Berkeley, CA
    Posts
    10,036
    Quote Originally Posted by frank23 View Post
    ps. I know the specs in the manual about the different curves, but does someone know where to find the 2360 and 2380 eq curves of the m552 or m553 in a graph?
    Only place I ever saw them was in measured voltage drives from FFBREQ vs. CCBREQ cards for 5235 crossovers. I may have measured them on M552/3 and posted those results here when I was trying them out, some thread, somewhere in this forum.

    Regarding the Timbers "Key" filter, I did tweak it for H9800 and posted results with both the real thing and Widget's clone. Leads to that information may be found in John W's H9800 build thread, and more recently, one where I compared measurement results on various PT waveguides to find the optimum for PT-H95HF....

    http://www.audioheritage.org/vbullet...ad.php?t=14933

    http://www.audioheritage.org/vbullet...ad.php?t=24291

    http://www.audioheritage.org/vbullet...68&#post135168

    http://www.audioheritage.org/vbullet...99&#post134899

    BAH, found them all!

    Never got my 1.2 kHz CCBREQ cards built, tho....

  8. #23
    Senior Member frank23's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    357
    thanks, there is allways more info to find about the Q&D 4430 and the 2435 on this forum

    out of curiosity, what does FFBREQ and CCBREQ stand for?

  9. #24
    RIP 2011 Zilch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Berkeley, CA
    Posts
    10,036
    Quote Originally Posted by frank23 View Post
    out of curiosity, what does FFBREQ and CCBREQ stand for?
    80 Series is "Flat Front BiRadial," and 60 Series, "Constant Coverage BiRadial."

    "EQ" is, uhmm, EQ....

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. L100 and 43XX Monitor Legacy
    By Don McRitchie in forum Lansing Product General Information
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 05-22-2012, 08:09 AM

Posting Permissions

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