+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 23

Thread: Looking for recommendations: 12" woofer for L65

  1. #1
    Senior Member porschedpm's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Reno/SF Bay Area
    Posts
    483

    Looking for recommendations: 12" woofer for L65

    I purchased a pair of L65 Jubals several months ago. These were in mint condition except that the foam surrounds on the 126 woofers had disintegrated. I sold off the 126's and installed a pair of 2213H woofers in their place. I was pretty happy with the resulting sound of these modified Jubals until I discovered this forum. Now, after reading the many posts regarding the variety of 12" LF speakers available, and how each have their own distinct sonic personalities, I'm wondering if I made the a wise decision by going with the 2213H's. I'd like to ask for opinions of the 2213H and recommendations on what would be a better pair of woofers to install in the Jubals to improve their perfomance. Thanks for your help.

    Ed S.

    PS. Just as an aside to add to the collective database of knowledge out there, I tried swapping out the LE5-5 midranges with a pair of the LE5-2 Alnicos, under the assumption that the Alnicos would be a better midrange. I was wrong. The resulting midrange sounded muffled, almost as if someone had turned the volume down on just the midrange by a couple of notches (guessing 3 to 6db). I listened to it that way for several days but couldn't get used to it so I changed back LE5-5's. I don't know if there's a logical explanation for this but I'd be interested to hear if others have had this same experience.

  2. #2
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    8
    I happen to think the "white woofers", from the 4311/4312/L100 is the best 12" woofer JBL made (at least from the vintage years) Problem is....the "bookshelf" cabinets they were installed into did'nt do them justice.
    That is the whole problem with that series, ...a compromise in cabinet size. That speaker being driven full range in the 4311/L100, is another story altogether. Don't let infamous L100 sound qualitys sway you from what is an outstanding 12" driver.
    All this of course IMHO.
    L100 D123-
    43xx 2213- ....if I remember correctly.

    Regards, Russ

  3. #3
    Administrator Robh3606's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Destiny
    Posts
    7,515
    The problem with the 2213/123 is indeed the cabinet size. You can get 122A which can get you a good solid peak free low end in a little more than 2 cu ft. Can't do that with a 2213. Get yourself a copy of WINISD and run the woofers to see what you get.

    http://www.linearteam.dk/default.aspx?pageid=winisd

    Rob

  4. #4
    Senior Member GordonW's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Marietta/Moultrie GA USA
    Posts
    1,454
    If you can't find 122As or 126As to go back in there, a pair of 128H or 128H-1 will work pretty well. Very similar upper end response to the 122/126... the 128 is a tiny bit more efficient, but it's not anything that can't be compensated for, by the mid/tweeter level controls.

    As for the LE5-2 midrange "muffled" effect... sounds to me, that maybe those alnico LE5s, had weak magnets. Alnico drivers can suffer from demagnetization, if they've had any trauma (being dropped, rapid heating/cooling, being blown and reconed)... this will manifest itself, in a loss of efficiency and upper end response.

    Regards,
    Gordon.
    This Is Gordon's Page: www.geocities.com/gordonwaters

  5. #5
    Dang. Amateur speakerdave's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Northern California
    Posts
    3,048
    porschedpm: " I'd be interested to hear if others have had this same experience."

    I changed out my LE5-5's for LE5-2's because I wanted the low loss magnet structures next to my TV. I thought the famous Alnico sound quality would be a bonus, but I really didn't hear much difference, if any. I didn't A-B them at all, so I can't say definitively. I did not hear the dullness you say you're getting either.

    For the woofer I would try some 2214's (that may be the same as the 128) since they were used in the 4425 and 1) in that speaker the woofer is also crossed out at 1000 Hz, and 2) the cabinet is almost exactly the same size (although different porting may be required).

    I think the white lansaplas woofer (2213) might have its advantages (better in the upper region) but in the L65 cabinet you will be looking for the lows compared to the stock woofers.

    This speaker uses a twelve-inch woofer to its upper limit, uses the LE5 to it's upper limit and uses the 077 past its lower limit. The speaker has a punchy, forward, driving sound, with that wonderful bite the 077 provides, and so it is good for a certain kind of listening. It is almost the epitome of the West Coast sound apellation of the 70's. A great party speaker. But for critical listening of classical, vocal, or acoustic jazz its shortcoming are too obvious.

    Mine are sitting here idle, and I am listening to some LSR32's give the most exquisitely neutral and spacious rendition of Angst der Hellen und Friede der Seelen: A Collection of Sixteen Motets on Psalm 116 by Praetorius, Schutz, and others. This afternoon it was Art Blakey and last night it was Clarence Gatemouth Brown.

    The L65--the Jubal--has been looked at in some detail on this forum with the idea of what can be done to improve it. I think it is fair to say that the verdict is that the speaker is closely engineered to its design goals and trying to improve it is like attempting to improve the floor plan of a small house--it's probably already optiimum within its limitations.

    The best thing is to use it the way it is and move on when you need to. You might realize some improvements by reworking the crossovers to dampen down the mid and tweeter and to bypass the caps, but I cannot make specific recommendations on this.

    Good luck.

    David
    Last edited by speakerdave; 05-02-2004 at 11:41 PM.

  6. #6
    Obsolete
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    NLA
    Posts
    14,425

    Re: Looking for recommendations: 12" woofer for L65

    I'd be inclined to use something that would have at least a snowball's chance in hell of keeping up with the 077/2405 so I would probably go for a 2202 or 2204. I'd be inclined to see if the 376/2441 diameter would fit in the enclosure and if so then I'd bolt an HL93/2311 in the LE5 hole. Use a 4355 filter. That way you end up with a tiny 2 cubic foot system that would kill a lesser man. Cross these over to the subs of your choice. Something like four 1500 SUB's ported should do the deed.


  7. #7
    Moderator / Treasurer/Marketplace Czar boputnam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    northern california
    Posts
    6,906

    Re: Re: Looking for recommendations: 12" woofer for L65

    Originally posted by Giskard
    ...Something like four 1500 SUB's ported should do the deed.
    :shock:
    bo

    "Indeed, not!!"

  8. #8
    Obsolete
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    NLA
    Posts
    14,425
    What? Talk to me Bo...

  9. #9
    Moderator / Treasurer/Marketplace Czar boputnam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    northern california
    Posts
    6,906

    Re: Looking for recommendations: 12" woofer for L65

    Originally posted by porschedpm
    ...recommendations on what would be a ... (proper) ... pair of woofers to install in the Jubals
    The 126...

    I'd not continue the path you're on, just because it started with a mistake.

    First, the 126A is a positive polarity transducer - you swapped-in the 2213H, which is a negative transducer. Unless you cross-wired it (i.e., BLK to Red LF post) you've encountered some quite unintended consequences, I'd think. Frankly, I don't know where you are at (sonically...), right now.

    Where it me, I'd use the Search button and research the issue of transducer polarity (if for nothing else than to amaze your friends... ), and then eBay for some 126's, get 'em re-surround, hook 'em up right, and enjoy some masterful JBL engineering. That is, unless you've got an anechoic chamber at home, and sufficient test gear to "upgrade" what JBL left for you...
    bo

    "Indeed, not!!"

  10. #10
    Moderator / Treasurer/Marketplace Czar boputnam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    northern california
    Posts
    6,906
    Originally posted by Giskard
    What? Talk to me Bo...
    Only that I want some... And all this before breakfast!
    bo

    "Indeed, not!!"

  11. #11
    Obsolete
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    NLA
    Posts
    14,425
    Just between you and me Bo - The L65 was never "masterful" and not from lack of trying. It's probably best thought of as a fun little system that was meant to be enjoyed by those who liked it.

    Anyway, I agree with you from the standpoint that JBL loudspeaker systems are designed and implemented as a whole. I'm not sure I understand why someone would bag and tag a pair of 126's in an otherwise "mint" pair of loudspeakers just because they had foam rot. Anyway, when JBL changed out the 126A in the original L65 with the 122A in the L65A they also made some network changes. When they moved to the 129H in the L65B the network was changed again. In other words, much of this stuff isn't real arbitrary or whimsical. I have little doubt JBL would have stuffed a 123 or 2212 or 2213 in the L65 if any of them would have worked "right".

    Incidentally, JBL had the S21 system available which was the Loudspeaker Component Series version of the L65 using the 4-inch voice coiled 124/2203. Again, the network was designed specifically for the 124/2203, LE5/2105, and 077/2405 although JBL did conceed that some people might prefer the LE14 to the 124/2203 in that system so it was actually specified as an option.

  12. #12
    Moderator / Treasurer/Marketplace Czar boputnam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    northern california
    Posts
    6,906
    Interesting post, Giskard, and I agree.

    I sense that the "foam rot swap" was done innocently, as they often are, and the swappee was thought comparable to the swapped...

    ...much of this stuff isn't real arbitrary or whimsical. I have little doubt JBL would have stuffed a 123 or 2212 or 2213 in the L65 if any of them would have worked "right".
    is exactly the point, isn't it. JBL designed so many transducers because they had/have quite specific applications - I suppose, "specific" here could be replaced with "limited"... Thus the advent of Theile-Small parameter modelling.

    I wasn't aware of that S21 system (thanks for that! ) but did myself a DIY cabinet with a LE14A that was a pretty good (but not optimum) mating with the N65, LE5 and 077.
    bo

    "Indeed, not!!"

  13. #13
    Obsolete
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    NLA
    Posts
    14,425
    "is exactly the point, isn't it. JBL designed so many transducers because they had/have quite specific applications - I suppose, "specific" here could be replaced with "limited"... Thus the advent of Theile-Small parameter modelling."

    You've probably still got a copy of my rant about that. I've ranted about it in one form or another since the very first version of this forum.

    "I wasn't aware of that S21 system (thanks for that! ) but did myself a DIY cabinet with a LE14A that was a pretty good (but not optimum) mating with the N65, LE5 and 077."

    There are pictures of your system with the 075 on this forum somewhere. Which version of the N65 are you running? I've posted the LX30 schematic several times although which version(s) of the forum I posted it on escapes me at this point. You might want to look at that schematic if only for the fun of it. See how it differs from the three different N65 variants.

  14. #14
    Moderator / Treasurer/Marketplace Czar boputnam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    northern california
    Posts
    6,906
    Originally posted by Giskard
    [BThere are pictures of your system with the 075 on this forum somewhere. Which version of the N65 are you running? I've posted the LX30 schematic several times although which version(s) of the forum I posted it on escapes me at this point. You might want to look at that schematic if only for the fun of it. See how it differs from the three different N65 variants. [/B]
    Yea, the original DIY design was for the 2405's/077's, but the lad opted for the 075's - he thought they looked "cooler" than the 2405's. Certainly can't argue with the visual impact of those 075's. Someday, when he get's older, nostalgic and starts lusting after L100's he'll wish he opted for the 2405's...

    And, it's the N65 - first iteration. I've not compared it to the LX30 for some time, but will again, now...
    Last edited by boputnam; 05-03-2004 at 09:55 AM.
    bo

    "Indeed, not!!"

  15. #15
    Moderator / Treasurer/Marketplace Czar boputnam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    northern california
    Posts
    6,906

    LX30

    They've added that 20uF cap / 7.5 ohm R combo across the 124 - there's nothing like that in the N65 variants. 'splain...?? Is that a choke of some kind?
    Last edited by boputnam; 05-03-2004 at 10:04 AM.
    bo

    "Indeed, not!!"

+ Reply to Thread

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. JBL 12" Woofer
    By speakerdave in forum Lansing Product General Information
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 01-18-2007, 02:58 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