S-1 sub question

[rrbadeau]

As I look at the bottom of the JBL S-1 subwoofer, I see left/right in/out connectors for the speaker wiring.

Am I correct in assuming that the signal comes in from the amp/receiver and is filtered for low bandwidth at the S-1 and continues to the other speakers? If this is correct, where would one put a mono/sub only amp? Is the S-1 not set up for such?

FWIW, I have a pair of 4312s with a Pioneer unit. Any info is greatly appreciated! TIA

[MikeBrewster77]

If I understand this model correctly (and if I don't, someone more knowledgeable than myself will surely correct me) this is a passive sub that high passes at 125Hz. So, your understanding is correct that you would run speaker wire off of your amp to the input on the sub, and then connect your "satellites" (the 4312's, if I understand your setup) from the output connections of the sub using speaker wire also.

I don't know what the slope on the passive crossover in the sub is, but the easy explanation is the sub would handle pretty much everything below 125Hz, and then your satellites would handle everything above that.

As to running it mono only, it could be done, but not with your current setup off of one receiver. This sub is passive (i.e., it has no internal amplifier) so it can't accommodate a line-level input. If your receiver has A-B speaker outputs, you could run it off of the second set, but you might run into load issues and it would sound like crap without a crossover in the mix.

The long and the short of it is that the 4312 is rated down to 45Hz, and the S1 is rated down to 40Hz; I'm not sure you're gaining much by putting the S1 into the equation unless you're trying to achieve bass replacement vs. extension. Even with that, while you might get slightly cleaner bass from the 4312, you're not getting the benefit of freeing up headroom in your amp since the whole setup is passive. Then there's the whole matching thing, and I don't know how they would mate up in terms of sound, or even if the bass from the S1 would actually be better or worse than that from the 4312. So I guess the question is, what are you trying to achieve?

Hope that helps. That sub has a bit of history to it, so bear that in mind as well.

[rrbadeau]

So I guess the question is, what are you trying to achieve?

Hope that helps. That sub has a bit of history to it, so bear that in mind as well.

First off, thanks, Mike!

I was thinking that the S-1 would contribute deeper bass overall as an additional and single standalone speaker. Given your data that the 4312s overlap in the lower end, there may indeed be very little to gain by adding the S-1 to this mix. I would add a mono-amp to power the S-1, but if I understood your summary correctly, (the low end) would likely sound muddier, or at least less distinct/natural, than using the 4312s by themselves.

Did I get that right?

I'm also interested in the "history" surrounding the S-1 as well. TIA

[MikeBrewster77]

I was thinking that the S-1 would contribute deeper bass overall as an additional and single standalone speaker. Given your data that the 4312s overlap in the lower end, there may indeed be very little to gain by adding the S-1 to this mix. I would add a mono-amp to power the S-1, but if I understood your summary correctly, (the low end) would likely sound muddier, or at least less distinct/natural, than using the 4312s by themselves.

Did I get that right?

I'm also interested in the "history" surrounding the S-1 as well. TIA

Yes. Simply adding the S1 to the system without any type of bass management (i.e., crossover) would sound like caca.

Of course, it couldn't hurt to experiment with hooking it up the way it's meant to be run though (i.e., amp's speaker level output -> sub -> sub out to 4312s). Why not give it a shot? You might like it. You might not. You might not notice much of a difference at all.

As to history, the S1 in some ways was an evolution from the Aquarius line, which you can read about here: http://www.audioheritage.org/html/pr...l/aquarius.htm