Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: same or different ?

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    New Orleans, Louisiana
    Posts
    523

    same or different ?

    Are the crossovers for 4301s and L19/L19a the same power handling and frequency xover? thanks

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    New Orleans, Louisiana
    Posts
    523
    Quote Originally Posted by midlife View Post
    Are the crossovers for 4301s and L19/L19a the same power handling and frequency xover? thanks
    Help! I looked it up on the matrix & searached the library and could only find the L19 & A specs

  3. #3
    Obsolete
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    NLA
    Posts
    14,548
    I posted them years ago. I don't have time to look them up again right now.

  4. #4
    Senior Member louped garouv's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    formerly "the city where imagination takes precedence over fact"
    Posts
    2,169
    Quote Originally Posted by midlife View Post
    Help! I looked it up on the matrix & searached the library and could only find the L19 & A specs

    discussion and links to 4301 network...
    http://www.audioheritage.org/vbullet...ad.php?t=15529



    and a more generalized 'google' search based on "4301 network" on www.audioheritage.org

    http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&a...es&safe=active


    good luck, and happy reading.

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    New Orleans, Louisiana
    Posts
    523
    Thanks! I have noticed according to the specs each of the three (L19, L19a, 4301) have different power handling capabilities. Is this due to the drivers or the xovers? I have a diy project that i would be using one of the above listed xovers and do not quite understand if its electronics or drivers that determine the power handling.

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    New Orleans, Louisiana
    Posts
    523
    Quote Originally Posted by midlife View Post
    Thanks! I have noticed according to the specs each of the three (L19, L19a, 4301) have different power handling capabilities. Is this due to the drivers or the xovers? I have a diy project that i would be using one of the above listed xovers and do not quite understand if its electronics or drivers that determine the power handling.
    One more question please ^^^

  7. #7
    Senior Member louped garouv's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    formerly "the city where imagination takes precedence over fact"
    Posts
    2,169
    patience is your friend....

    sometimes it takes folks (with the right skill set) awhile to get online


  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    New Orleans, Louisiana
    Posts
    523
    Quote Originally Posted by grumpy View Post
    4301 and 4301 were intended for professional use and rated in conservative
    terms at 15w continuous -sine wave-.

    L19 Tech Sheet shows 35w continuous -program-, which is intentionally a
    different measure ... inviting comparison of this consumer product with
    seemingly similarly rated competition.

    L19A Tech Sheet shows 100w, with no further information about what that
    spec might mean or how it was determined... perhaps indicating that it
    would be reasonable to use amplifiers capable of up to 100w output with
    this product, not that it could absorb this level of power long-term (a
    -guess- on my part).

    As confusing as that might be, the power handling -spec- definition is what
    changed..., not the ability of the constituent parts to handle more or less
    power.
    I want to use one of the three above xovers for a diy two way spkr project. I would like to have that xover which has the higher wattage capacity. Was the JBL specs a marketing issue or do the xovers actually have different watt capacities or is it the drivers of those models that determines the wattage rating?

  9. #9
    Senior Member grumpy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    5,494
    I concede defeat. Please delete the post containing my reply.

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    New Orleans, Louisiana
    Posts
    523
    Quote Originally Posted by grumpy View Post
    I concede defeat. Please delete the post containing my reply.
    Grumpy, don't be so grumpy, thought you might want to render just a little bit more info...at any rate I get your point

  11. #11
    Obsolete
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    NLA
    Posts
    14,548
    The power ratings of these particular loudspeakers are based on the drivers. The newer SFG ferrite woofers handled a bit more power due to the larger heat sink as well as improved adhesives.

    Upon inspection of the networks one can see that the conjugate resistor has a power rating of 10 W. The high pass 10285 L-Pad is the smallest version and has a nominal power rating of 15 W. It is available here from Parts Express - http://www.parts-express.com/pe/show...number=260-250

    I personally use the "better" JBL 58450 L-Pad available here http://www.parts-express.com/pe/show...number=260-255

    The 3101 used a slightly smaller 16.5 uF capacitor in the conjugate. This will affect the knee of the curve of the low pass filter. One would probably be hard pressed to hear the difference between it and the 18 uF. If I remember correctly this was simply because JBL moved from using the wax can 16.5 uF capacitor to an electrolytic 18 uF capacitor.
    Attached Images Attached Images     

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Posting Permissions

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