+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 16

Thread: Difference between JBL coated diaphragms

  1. #1
    Senior Member Niklas Nord's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    503

    Difference between JBL coated diaphragms

    Hi

    In some horn -drivers, coated diaphragms are used.

    JBL 2450SL used in the DMS-1

    Does the coated diaphragms extend as high in frequency
    as the non-coated diaphragms ?

    Why is the coated diaphragm used in the DMS-1 ?
    and not in the PA drivers? What is the advantage
    of coated diaphragms..

    Would the coated diaphragms used in 2450SL fit
    in the 2446, 2451, 2450 drivers? What would be
    the main difference between this and the regular
    diaphragm?


    is this a diaphragm for JBL 2441/2445/2446/2450



    Dont look like the membrane in 2450, no "rib" structure..

    In my K2, i think i have the 2450 diaphragm instead of the
    coated version used in DMS-1 and s9500



    Would it be very wrong to use this diaphragm instead
    of the K2 original version diaphragm?

    The originating owner put it there to gain some more
    high frequency ower the coated diapgragm.

    is the 475nd the same driver as the 2450 ? etc etc..
    Best Regards
    .Niklas Nord, Stockholm Sweden
    Proud owner of the Project K2 s9500 system

  2. #2
    Obsolete
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    NLA
    Posts
    14,357

    Re: Difference between JBL coated diaphragms

    Originally posted by Niklas Nord
    Would it be very wrong to use this diaphragm instead
    of the K2 original version diaphragm?
    As far as I know, JBL has never officially endorsed swapping drivers, cone kits, diaphragms, network components, etc. in their production systems. Something tells me JBL wouldn't bother dusting a diaphragm for a specific application if that application didn't call for it. I think people keep forgetting that JBL has very specific intent for the various systems they design and manufacture.

  3. #3
    Senior Member Niklas Nord's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    503
    Any thoughts about the high frequency
    cotated vs non coated
    Best Regards
    .Niklas Nord, Stockholm Sweden
    Proud owner of the Project K2 s9500 system

  4. #4
    Obsolete
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    NLA
    Posts
    14,357
    I'll have to go back over my notes. It's about time I finished my "diaphragm matrix" anyway. I've got to get several other people involved and that could take a little while. I could spew some preliminary stuff out but I want to avoid any potential misinformation.

  5. #5
    Senior Member Niklas Nord's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    503
    And regardning the 475nd used in the K2 s9500,
    dod you know if this is the same driver as the 2450 ? or
    is it the same as some other model..
    Best Regards
    .Niklas Nord, Stockholm Sweden
    Proud owner of the Project K2 s9500 system

  6. #6
    Obsolete
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    NLA
    Posts
    14,357
    It rings a bell but don't hold me to it just yet.

  7. #7
    Senior Member Niklas Nord's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    503
    Okay, thankt you, I´l whait for the answer
    I think this would be interesting for other readers,
    not just me.. Some info about various drivers..
    Best Regards
    .Niklas Nord, Stockholm Sweden
    Proud owner of the Project K2 s9500 system

  8. #8
    Obsolete
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    NLA
    Posts
    14,357
    Agreed.

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    missouri galaxy
    Posts
    1,307
    The 475nd is not the same as the 2450. But they are close. Both have the coherent phase plug design. But the magnet structure is placed on the inside on 475nd & 2450 magnet ring is placed on the out side . I dont know what the nd weight of 475 or 2450 is. Nore the flux density difference in gap of both drivers.

  10. #10
    Senior Member Niklas Nord's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    503
    Can we use the diaphragm for each one in the other?
    No acousticaly difference in the driver?
    Best Regards
    .Niklas Nord, Stockholm Sweden
    Proud owner of the Project K2 s9500 system

  11. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    missouri galaxy
    Posts
    1,307
    Acousticly different? I dont think so. But why JBL moved the magnet in that structure but kept the coherent phase plug & diapram position the same. might have been easier to mass produce. Some say they hear adifference between embossed diaphram & smooth diaphram or smooth diaphram with aquaplas coating. Ide like to see some distortion charts proving the findings. But I guess you cant put these kind of sonic findings on paper. And if JBL has they aint publishing them.

  12. #12
    Senior Member Niklas Nord's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    503
    Why dont they use coated diaphragms in all JBL drivers?
    Do they lack high frequency ?
    Best Regards
    .Niklas Nord, Stockholm Sweden
    Proud owner of the Project K2 s9500 system

  13. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    missouri galaxy
    Posts
    1,307
    Well JBL does like to slather that aquaplas on alot of their speakers. I suppose it does smooth out any frequency anomolies. I havent seen a side by side result of cones and diaphrams tested with & without coated speakers. I guess the next design breakthrough will be diaphrams and cones coated with HEMP.

  14. #14
    Senior Member Niklas Nord's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    503
    Giskard, dod you find something about this matter?
    Best Regards
    .Niklas Nord, Stockholm Sweden
    Proud owner of the Project K2 s9500 system

  15. #15
    Webmaster Don McRitchie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Winnipeg, Canada
    Posts
    2,040
    Here is all that I know on the matter. The coating material is aquaplas and it was originally intended to damp resonances in titanium diaphragms. Titanium has poorer internal damping than aluminum and it became more critical with that material when used for home speakers. The objective of the coating was to reduce distortion cuased by otherwise spurious resonances.

    According to JBL, the aquaplas coating has minimal effect on HF response. I think this is due in part to reliance on parasitic resonance in determining the limits of HF extension. Further, the horn compensation designed for individual speaker systems very likely takes into account any output effects of the higher mass.

    I found it interesting that during my first tour of JBL's Northridge plant in 2000, the line making 2445 diaphrams was using aquaplas coating. They seem to have subsequently dropped this for reasons that I am unaware. However, the new aluminum 2430 and berylium 2435 all receive aquaplas coatings when intended for home or monitor use.

    Regarding the 2450 and 475nd, both drivers were developed at the same time by Francher Murray. The 475Nd used an internal magnet so that home speakers using it would be shielded (the 1400Nd woofer also had an internal magnet and was thus shielded). This resulted in marginally higher manufacturing costs. Since shielding is generally not an issue in pro applications, the pro 2450 used the simpler and cheaper external magnet configuration.

    To address the original issue raised in this thread, I would not recommend replacing the 475Nd diaphragm with the 2450 diaphragm. The result will be higher distortion and a frequency response that is likely worse than what you are trying to fix.
    Regards

    Don McRitchie

+ 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 phenolic diaphragms
    By Tom Loizeaux in forum Lansing Product Technical Help
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 10-27-2009, 08:44 AM
  2. Non JBL compression driver diaphragms?
    By oldr&b in forum Lansing Product Technical Help
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-12-2004, 09:38 AM
  3. Difference between JBL Pro and Home audio
    By Guido in forum Lansing Product General Information
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 08-15-2003, 09:12 AM
  4. What is the difference: JBL XPL-200 / XPL-200A
    By pasadena in forum Lansing Product General Information
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 05-28-2003, 10:54 PM

Posting Permissions

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