Hmmm... yes, but it is used here to mean almost the final as in almost the last word.Originally Posted by tom1356
Irregardless (that's a joke!) some would call the Paragon near the bottom of the pile of speakers sonically. Perhaps some would consider it the second from the very bottom.
Widget
I never claimed you said anything. You just feel a need to repeat things you have no actual experiance in.
I know you will go on and on with this but Like you said, There is "Way too much energy spent on this silliness". I think I can find something more intresting to do so you can Carry on if you feel inclined to do so.
Maron
First of all MY HAT is tipped to YOU!!
You made two Paragons and it only took two month each I would say that was very quick congratulations, I am only dreaming now. I checked eBay to see if I could get a copy of Audiofan magazine but all there was is Feb 1965 and March 1965, is there any way you know how to get a copy? I will just keep looking for now.
Ed
FEROCE,,,, No I dont have a copy now,, The Photos were Poloroid,, I have copies somewhere,,, But since the move to North East Tundra of Mo. I hav,nt unpacked all the box,s,,,I was going to make another variation of the Paragon addressing the problems of the origional,, Now that we have better drivers and woofers,, A wider bandwidth unit could be designed going only two way,, TAD Be drivers and better low frequency woofers,,, Redesigning The horn for a lower cut off,,,The unit would be even wider but the same height,,, But alas I,m not kicking up as much dust as i did back then,, 4 way bypass has slowed me down.
[quote=Mr. Widget;243912]You think?
From my experience the "most critical listeners" won't even tollerate the phase shifts introduced by an equalizer.
I do agree that there is something quite special about an all horn loaded system. I have heard a few that were reasonably accurate and those have been quite something to behold. It's the sort of thing that gets people like Dick Burwen and Roberto in Italy to build massive custom rooms with inclusive horns
Jeez, I wouldn't know a "phase shift" if I heard one.
I'm talking about musicians hearing their tracks played back on the Paragon...sort of like those 4350 control room playbacks that "sealed
the deal" back in the day.
.
I bet if you were shown the difference you'd hear it...Jeez, I wouldn't know a "phase shift" if I heard one.
I'm talking about musicians hearing their tracks played back on the Paragon...sort of like those 4350 control room playbacks that "sealed the deal" back in the day.
As for musicians... I find it surprising how many excellent musicians can be quite satisfied with nothing more than a boom box.
I take it from your posts you find the Paragon musically satisfying. While I have only auditioned them a couple of times and have never lived with one for an extended period, I am quite certain that their glorious sonic performance is not the reason they command such a high price on the used market.
Widget
Maybe that is the problem Widget, you have never lived with it. I lived with the Paragon from 1978-1991/92.
At first I was very disappointed with the sound. After talking to a friend of mine, who had the Paragon some years, adjusted the knobs on the crossovers, bought other electronics, things got much better. I must admit that is was not until 1982 that the Paragon really started to "sing". I then had a HK record player with a "Rabco" arm, a really expensive pic-up (at the time), I think it was a "Audio Technica" "Signet", a DB preamp and two large KenWood L-09 Mono Amps. This combination sounded very good.
This was at the start of the cable area, but I am sure that some better cables would have improved the sound a little bit.
Yeah, eventually my senses would get numb and I'd appreciate it.
I am not dumping on the Paragon. It just doesn't offer what I want. The Paragon that I have listened to the most is at an older friend's home. He bought his new in '58 or '59. He has been listening to it ever since. In the early '80s he replaced the LE15As and the crossovers with new ones... as the sound was no longer quite right and it didn't occur to him to have the woofers reconed and he didn't realize the drivers were under warranty. He also updated his McIntosh gear to new pieces in the '90s.
I've listened to this system fairly extensively and I understand why it still puts a smile on his face. I think it is neat too, but it really shows us how far audio engineering has come since then.
Widget
Greetings, All,
I have only heard a JBL Paragon once in my life, and that was in a very busy, and super noisy stereo store in San Diego, many years ago. So, in truth, I've not really "heard" them in a fair environment.
One thing that has always struck me about that system, however, is that they seemed to be "digital ready" far in advance of the actual digital age. Am I right about that? I look forward to hearing what you all think. Thanks, and God Bless!
Every Good Wish,
Doc
The only thing that can never be taken away from you, is your honor. Cherish it, in yourself, and in others.
Hi Doc.
Most JBL speakers was well prepared for the "digital age", as there was not so much difference in the sound in the studio compared to today's digital recordings.
The "attack" of the sound in a studio, using good equipment in "the old days" is very much like what you get on a cd today playing at home today. First when the record or cassette, witch we listened to in our homes at that time, the sound was poorer. This was especially noticed in the low and high frequency.
As ones said: "low notes require a much wider record groove, and a lot of wide record groves will decrease the playing time on each side of the record". This is taken from the JBL record "Sessions".
To get very high frequencies on a record at that time, recording speed of 30" pr second, and Dolby A, witch was the ultimate at that time. Also taken from the same record. (Sessions)
What ever this means, a full horn system delivers sound in a way other speakers will not accomplish. No boxiness, very dynamic. And when there are used high efficiency speakers with a proper amp you can get very high undistorted sound pressure levels. (There is no comparison to a smallish 8 inch box.)
The soundreflector of the Paragon lets go a lot of sound to the side walls of the room left and right. The rest is reflected ahead and performes a smallish soundstage. (The tweeters are not well integrated.) With this sound distribution the whole room is subjectively filled with sound. You can stay where ever you want. When you look at the picture of the XXL you see that it is placed to the right of the stage. But when you sit in the left of the audience you do not have the feeling of being too far to the left. It is a very unusual effect. I have tried it even at home with two boxes turned to a cardboard reflector in a 26 feet wide room - it worked fine.
Just my 2cts.
____________
Peter
NO, Not ready then or now!!!
The Paragon sound is dated...Only the 375 driver reflects off the curved panel,,Tweeters placed in the back of bass horn are useless,,and limited in bandwidth,,Xovers are dated and harsh, Digital ready??? no, about as bad as the original Hartsfield,,(two way)and just as phazy
My uncle had a Paragon he bought from a friend around 1974 for a song. He had no idea of its stature or heritage. I listened to a lot of rock through that speaker and it sure could get loud. I particularly liked the clarity of the midrange horns.
Just for fun, he let my band use his Paragon as a front-of-house PA speaker at a small theater outside St. Louis. We split the sections -- one on each side -- and pointed the 375s at the crowd, as much as that was possible with half the reflector backing in the way. Although it wasn't perfect, it didn't sound half bad!
I lived in St Louis back then,,What theater??
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
