Page 4 of 7 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 100

Thread: 2450 Dia

  1. #46
    "new and improved" JBL Dog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    St. Louis, MO
    Posts
    2,048
    Quote Originally Posted by Zilch
    O.K., dibs on the doggie's dias....
    Zilch is the proud new owner of the dias. Here are those pics I was trying to post earlier:

    Thanks!
    Attached Images Attached Images     
    This message comes from JBL Dog

  2. #47
    Senior Member Ian Mackenzie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    7,100
    Hmm,

    Do you like them better than plain Ti?

    Ian

  3. #48
    Dang. Amateur speakerdave's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Northern California
    Posts
    3,573
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Mackenzie
    Do you like them better than plain Ti?
    Me? Dunno yet. I'm just trying to assemble the pieces for some M9500 wannabes.

    David

  4. #49
    RIP 2011 Zilch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Berkeley, CA
    Posts
    10,036
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Mackenzie
    Do you like them better than plain Ti?
    It's clear the prior owner of Doggie's diaphragms liked 475's better....

  5. #50
    Dang. Amateur speakerdave's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Northern California
    Posts
    3,573
    Quote Originally Posted by Zilch
    It's clear the prior owner of Doggie's diaphragms liked 475's better
    And what were the 475's like? I think they are the same.

    David

  6. #51
    Senior Member Guido's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    2,506
    Wouldn't one need a 8 Ohm (DCR ~4 Ohm) Dia to copy the M9500?

  7. #52
    Senior Member stevem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    New Jersey, USA
    Posts
    278
    What's the difference between the 2451SL diaphragm, and the 2450SL-A diaphragm? Is the former a 16 ohm, and the latter an 8 ohm?

  8. #53
    RIP 2011 Zilch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Berkeley, CA
    Posts
    10,036
    Quote Originally Posted by speakerdave
    And what were the 475's like? I think they are the same.
    I dunno. Maybe they just wanted 8 Ohms....

    In any case, here's the relevant section of the current parts list. Looks like "SL" in 8 Ohms is 2450, and 16 Ohms is 2451.

    475 would come from Consumer, presumably....
    Attached Images Attached Images  

  9. #54
    Senior Member stevem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    New Jersey, USA
    Posts
    278
    Note that the 2450SL diaphragm is smooth, not ribbed. As I understand it, the 2450SL-A (not listed) is ribbed.

  10. #55
    Dang. Amateur speakerdave's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Northern California
    Posts
    3,573
    Quote Originally Posted by Guido
    Wouldn't one need a 8 Ohm (DCR ~4 Ohm) Dia to copy the M9500?
    I don't know. I looked and didn't find where it said the voice coil in the treble driver of the M9500 was 8 ohms. I believe the input of the system is eight ohms, but there are two woofers and the system is bi-wireable. I realized early on that I probably was not going to be able to use the stock passive crossover because I don't really expect the stock horn to be available. So, if I use a passive crossover it will have to be a custom one anyway. But I plan to use active crossovers because Mr G.T. says that the 1400nd "does not like inductors." I think he means especially because most bass driver circuits are better without an inductor in there. I assume that the 1400nd doesn't like them especially because of the complex voice coil arrangement (there is a braking coil) in the 1400nd. Besides I want to use solid state for the bass and tubes for the treble. I chose 16 ohm coils because with a 16 ohm tap on the output transformer there is no power loss and in the days of tube amps treble drivers were usually 16 ohms nominally. Anyway, I don't expect it will really make any difference.

    David

  11. #56
    RIP 2011 Zilch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Berkeley, CA
    Posts
    10,036
    Without the engineering specs, it's difficult to know what's what.

    I'm recalling that my 275nd's are not only coated, but also the substrate titanium diaphragm is thinner than "standard."

    The coating is also substantially thicker than what I would call a "dusting." I posted a pic of them in the forum here:

    http://audioheritage.org/vbulletin/s...&postcount=675

  12. #57
    RIP 2011 Zilch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Berkeley, CA
    Posts
    10,036

    First try:

    1) Stock 2450H, top, ribbed. Performing per spec, apparently: http://audioheritage.org/vbulletin/s...08&postcount=9

    2) JBL Dog's D16R2450SL diaphragm installed, smooth, aquaplassed, bottom.

    Both on the same 2380A horn, no compensation or EQ, just 47uF in series for protection.

    Indeed, more natural sounding vocals, strings, horns, and pianos, 3-Way.

    Johnaec's coming by for a listen tomorrow, so second opinion pending.

    Sample of two, folks, so do not generalize from these preliminary results.

    [Looks like it'll "Push," (10 dB) tho.... ]
    Attached Images Attached Images   

  13. #58
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Richmond Hill, Ont.
    Posts
    4,672
    Zilch

    - Whatever happened to your fit-up of the D8R275nd diaphragms into the 2426 drivers ?

    - I seem to recall that particular experiment didn't turn out very well . Not as well as what you've just posted above.

    - Do you feel the problem was perhaps an install problem ? / or / Did you conclude they ( the old & new technology ) just weren't meant to work together ?

    - ( FWIW ; the 2410/le175 magnetic assembly has a flux level within the gap that is closer to the original 275nd spec. )
    - I've heard through the grapevine that "over-gaussing" a gap ( when driving a lighter weight diaphragm ) can lead to "non intuitive results in FR" . These results include a significant spike in the pistonic response area ( ie midrange ) vs the HF & UHF surround generated resonances . At least , so goes the rumour .


  14. #59
    RIP 2011 Zilch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Berkeley, CA
    Posts
    10,036
    Quote Originally Posted by Earl K
    Zilch

    - Whatever happened to your fit-up of the D8R275nd diaphragms into the 2426 drivers ?

    - ( FWIW ; the 2410/le175 magnetic assembly has a flux level within the gap that is closer to the original 275nd spec. )

    - I've heard through the grapevine that "over-gaussing" a gap ( when driving a lighter weight diaphragm ) can lead to "non intuitive results in FR" . These results include a significant spike in the pistonic response area ( ie midrange ) vs the HF & UHF surround generated resonances . At least , so goes the rumour .
    First try of 275nd in 2426H is here:

    http://audioheritage.org/vbulletin/s...t=9746&page=16

    [I'll try to post the Q&D index this weekend. ]

    They require different compensation and EQ than the stock 2426, from my results. Using AutoEQ, I played them on H3100 horns with similarly pleasing results, and plan to study them further. I'll likely end up tweaking some crossovers to use them, but in what system, I don't yet know.

    I'll mount them on some 2370A's here and post results for comparision to 2450, above. Actually, I have some 2427 throat adapters that'll mount to 2380A. Maybe that, instead, for a more direct comparison....

    [John's reclaiming his 2380A's here tomorrow, so I gotta do that today.]

    Re: LE175, they're so damn valuable with the wax seals intact, I'd have to buy some thrashed ones to try. Anybody have some for "Science?"

    [OR, a pair of nasty ol' 275nd motors? ]

    Edit: O.K., 275nd diaphragms in 2426H's on 2380A horn:

    1) 2426H, stock diaphragm

    2) 2426H, 275nd #1

    3) 2426H, 275nd #2

    4) Test setup, 2427 throat

    5) 2450 three-way in #56, above.
    Attached Images Attached Images      

  15. #60
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Richmond Hill, Ont.
    Posts
    4,672
    Hi Zilch

    - The fitup problem with the D8R275nd put into a 2426, was first mentioned in this single post . It shows a bit of a "sink-hole" at 5K .

    - My memory had that 5K dip in FR confused with the 7.5K peak that you got when you installed a D8R2421 diaphragm into a 2426 core, shown here in this post .


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. Network for 2450 and 2405
    By Harryup in forum Lansing Product Technical Help
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 12-23-2004, 05:53 AM
  2. 2450 SL diaphram
    By Maron Horonzakz in forum Lansing Product Technical Help
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 11-04-2003, 08:58 AM
  3. 22235a, 2226j, 2360, 2450, 077
    By Dieter in forum Lansing Product General Information
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 09-06-2003, 03:15 AM

Posting Permissions

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