Quote Originally Posted by 4313B View Post
At the time I attributed it to the cone assembly. Out of the LE10H, 128H, LE14H, 2235H and 2245H only the 2235H used a mass ring instead of aquaplas. If I remember correctly, of the LE14H, 2235H and 2245H, only their cone assemblies (including three different geometries) and frames varied, the voice coils and magnetic return assembly were equivalent. There was a time when I cared enough to remember and could have answered definitively.

I believe the same held true with the LE10H and 128H, only the cone assemblies and frames varied. I do know that JBL added or subtracted a few coil turns from both the LE10H and 128H at some point to achieve whatever changes they were looking for.

In any case, transducers such as the 1501Fe, 1501AL, and 2216Nd really are "light years better". And that doesn't have to be a problem.

Thanks for that run down - over various threads scattered about you've commented on the commonality of some of the 4" and 3" VC woofers. Is the 2108 also an LE10 magnet and coil? Or maybe the 2121 coil? My guess has always been 'yes it is'..

Personally, I don't see the LE14A and those other drivers as using 40+ year old technology because it was 25 years ahead of its time when it came out - IMHO nothing made by other makers at the time can match what JBL was doing in the early 60s. It looks like they're keeping that tradition of being ahead of the curve with these new drivers, both in performance and expense. Eventually it'll all trickle down to 'the rest of us'.. haha.