Picked these up locally and talked the guy down from $150 to $100. Surprised why their resale value is pretty low? Only probelm they have is that the screens covering the 035tia's need to be replaced.
Picked these up locally and talked the guy down from $150 to $100. Surprised why their resale value is pretty low? Only probelm they have is that the screens covering the 035tia's need to be replaced.
Never heard 'em but that's a sweet deal, I wouldn't overthink the value they represent. The world is an odd place sometimes.Originally Posted by sperkerchef
Picked these up locally and talked the guy down from $150 to $100. Surprised why their resale value is pretty low? Only probelm they have is that the screens covering the 035tia's need to be replaced.
Yea I mean the msrp price was $549 a piece in 1989 which is like $967 in today's money. But your right, to me they're worth much more for $100 so I'm happy.
They represent an excellent value at over twice what you paid. They just don't carry the cachet of the more well-know JBLs that often don't sound as good. I consider them one of the sleepers of the brand. Not quite as good as the L96 but then few are.
". . . as you have no doubt noticed, no one told the 4345 that it can't work correctly so it does anyway."—Greg Timbers
They weren't made in mirror imaged pairs, or are those both "-R" models"? Considering that they are 99% 4410 Studio Monitors, and 4410's (-L and -R) pairs give excellent imaging, I am suprised.
I like the in line array of the drivers and they seem to image to me. This is also the case with my in line L100's compared to my offsets. The in line for one reason or another seem to image pretty well at least to my hear. Befroe I get attacked on that statement, I am aware that JBL really mastered imaging in the eraly 80's but for whatever reason the in line JBL's I have seem to image very well.
I have two 4410's and two 4412's.
With the 4410's it is quite easy to put them in a given acoustic enviornment and adjust their locations for good imaging. Regarding amplifier requirements, I have gotten good results in a small room using them with a 20 WPC Advent 300 receiver.
The 4412's require much more power, and are much more challenging to set up for good imaging. Once optimized, however, they can give a tighter and more focused image. That is, if the room is kind to them.
I would love to build a set using the 4410 vertical driver alignment and the 4412's 12" woofer. I can't imagine that design not providing outstanding performance.
Anyone care to opine on this?
It is a possibie future project, if I can work a deal with a local cabinet shop owner I know.
I have an old pair of L100t cabinets that I was going to drop in the 4412 componenets into. I have it all but just never got the time. I thought it could have been a killer set-up between the larger cabinet size and the inline drivers.Anyone care to opine on this?
Rob
"I could be arguing in my spare time"
It should work, despite the difference in diameters of the 128H-1 and the 2214H. I just tried a 128H in my empty L100T cabinet and it fits a little loose in the hole. Maybe loose enough that the gasket won't seal, but that's easy to solve. The bolt circle is the same, so It will bolt right in.I have an old pair of L100t cabinets that I was going to drop in the 4412 components into. I have it all but just never got the time. I thought it could have been a killer set-up between the larger cabinet size and the inline drivers.
Rob
Mike Scott in SJ, CA
Drive 'em to the Xmax!
I've got a spare pair of 128H-1's lying around if anyone needs them.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
