TS series new in japan

[herve M]

new in japan, TS series is beautiful !

http://www.harman-japan.co.jp/produc.../tsseries.html

[4313B]

Yeppers!

Thanks for the post Herve.

I'd really like to check this "no horns" series out.

Speaking of magnesium alloy diaphragms, JBL is also working on a version of the 476 that will use that material.

[herve M]

Yeppers!

Thanks for the post Herve.

I'd really like to check this "no horns" series out.

Speaking of magnesium alloy diaphragms, JBL is also working on a version of the 476 that will use that material.

Hi Robert, "476 magnesium" for the future K2 ? It's the secret ?

[4313B]

Yep, it's a secret

I can't remember how many years off it is, maybe two. :dont-know I think it takes something like six months just to tool up.

[Mr. Widget]

That is beautiful. I wonder if the Ashcraft design team did it?

Now that is funny. Ever since Harman started Revel, I have always considered them a rebranded JBL line. Now this JBL line looks like a Revel.


Widget

[4313B]

Now this JBL line looks like a Revel.

Maybe they figure JBL for Europe and Asia where they are appreciated most and Revel for everywhere else?

[Titanium Dome]

The similarities to the Revel Ultima2 Studio are interesting. Coincidence? who knows?

[Titanium Dome]

Just a reminder:

[Titanium Dome]

The drivers should be a nice upgrade, but the similar driver complement and arrangement are interesting. Of course, I'm a fool for inverted domes made of special metals, so the lust factor is high.

There might be a bit of healthy competition between the Revel and JBL folks. I'd love to do a shoot out with the Ultima2 Studio and the TS8000. Sweet.

As 4313B already wrote, Id like to get my ears next to these "no horns" beauties.

[grumpy]

I am surprised to see them put out in a market where they might be
likely to compete w/ Revel, but at roughly $9K/pr vs. Revel prices...
perhaps this is a way to cover price ranges, ala Sears old 'good, better, best'
marketing.

It would indeed be cool to be present for a side-by-side comparison.

[4313B]

There might be a bit of healthy competition between the Revel and JBL folks.

Jerry designs transducers for both, in fact, he didn't remember the 1500SUB label JBL put on his Revel 15 design. It was designed as a Revel Gem driver and then JBL found a few other uses for it. I think he still has a pair of Revel Gems that he uses with Greg's former M9500's.

[Valentin]

very very nice

thats what i wanted to see from JBL

[Zilch]

http://translate.google.com/translat...-8&sl=ja&tl=en

Tangerine tweeter?

See some of the Technics here:

http://audioheritage.org/vbulletin/s...ad.php?t=22240

[johnaec]

Boy, what a drag! 'Just got done with 10 minutes typing and poof! - all gone!!

Anyway, I was just commenting on the practicality of these smaller dual-woofer systems as compared to 14" - 15" LF systems. While total cone area might be roughly equal, and distortion, (within limits), even less with smaller cones, it seems like they can be problematic if you like listening at levels often discussed here at times, like 95dB - 105dB. Even though total cone area might be similar between two 8" and a single 15", I get the feeling the 15" will be capable of much greater Xmax, simply because you aren't trying to move such small cones linearly in the X.

I rather imagine that if you generally listen at levels lower than these, the dual small woofer systems are likely more accurate than the bigger systems - I know I've heard some where I've really been surprised by the quality of the LF! And browsing what's available from major manufacturers, these smaller dual-woofer systems certainly seem to have taken over. But what do people generally do that like the fidelity of the small woofer systems, but need to have augmentation to play at stuff like live levels from time to time? Can any of these small dual-woofer systems actually reach those levels with any sort of accuracy? Or is trying to blend a sub or two in your only real option?

Anyway, 'just curious. It'll be interesting to see how those drivers sound, if ever the chance presents itself...

John

[demon]

Anyway, I was just commenting on the practicality of these smaller dual-woofer systems as compared to 14" - 15" LF systems. While total cone area might be roughly equal, and distortion, (within limits), even less with smaller cones, it seems like they can be problematic if you like listening at levels often discussed here at times, like 95dB - 105dB.

my tip would be not the woofer size but the baffle-width.
(IMHO) the wider the baffle the better, and a large cone dont fit into a narrow front so you have that fixed. these dual-woofers always live in narrow baffles -and thats for optical not musical reasons.
see in-wall studio setups, theyre my benchmark. in-walls have the biggest baffles of them all!


cheers,
mikey