Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 35

Thread: JBL old school sound comes back!

  1. #16
    Senior Member BMWCCA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    6,964
    So UHF and HF refer to the range not the drivers. That's reasonable, and handy, on a two-way system. I sort of expected that would be left to the room EQ in a studio setting but I guess it makes it seem more traditional for a JBL studio monitor.
    ". . . as you have no doubt noticed, no one told the 4345 that it can't work correctly so it does anyway."—Greg Timbers

  2. #17
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Location
    Kiev, Ukraine
    Posts
    2
    Little off topic but...
    Why there's 8 Ohms written on the back plate and in the specs there's 6 Ohms?
    (First picture in post #7)

  3. #18
    Senior Member Ian Mackenzie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    7,127
    Quote Originally Posted by BMWCCA View Post
    So UHF and HF refer to the range not the drivers. That's reasonable, and handy, on a two-way system. I sort of expected that would be left to the room EQ in a studio setting but I guess it makes it seem more traditional for a JBL studio monitor.
    You obviously have been spoon fed...LOL

    The market is the home consumer who wants a JBL monitor (M2 = Pro market)

    The controls are self explanatory, HF and UHF trim

    The manual is quite clear

    https://www.manualslib.com/manual/1168570/Jbl-4367.html

  4. #19
    Senior Member BMWCCA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    6,964
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Mackenzie View Post
    You obviously have been spoon fed...LOL
    Remember, my first 50+ years of listening to JBLs consisted my 030s in the main system—two drivers and one L-pad! My last 36 years have included the L112s in the bedroom—three drivers and two L-pads. My last almost-nine-years have been spent enjoying the 4345 clones—four drivers and three L-pads. One for each upper-range driver in all cases. I hadn't really considered any other way and figured the rest was left to the EQ!
    ". . . as you have no doubt noticed, no one told the 4345 that it can't work correctly so it does anyway."—Greg Timbers

  5. #20
    Senior Member SEAWOLF97's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    PDX, ®egon
    Posts
    9,098
    JBL old school sound comes back!

    I should hope that for the price of new speakers that they sound better than old school sound otherwise just buy some classic ones.
    “If you think that’s the dumbest thing you’ve ever heard,
    just wait a couple minutes!”

  6. #21
    Senior Member Ian Mackenzie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    7,127
    Well in adjusted pricing if a 4343 cost close to $5000 in 1977 then the 4367 in today's prices 40 years later is good value

  7. #22
    Senior Member Ian Mackenzie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    7,127
    Quote Originally Posted by BMWCCA View Post
    Remember, my first 50+ years of listening to JBLs consisted my 030s in the main system—two drivers and one L-pad! My last 36 years have included the L112s in the bedroom—three drivers and two L-pads. My last almost-nine-years have been spent enjoying the 4345 clones—four drivers and three L-pads. One for each upper-range driver in all cases. I hadn't really considered any other way and figured the rest was left to the EQ!

    Okay,

    Well they (GT) got smarter as time when on and figured out that the "Trim" arrangement is better for this type of system

    Besides l think almost everyone had been driven insane by trying to adjust the F'ing L pads.

  8. #23
    Senior Member BMWCCA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    6,964
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Mackenzie View Post
    Besides l think almost everyone had been driven insane by trying to adjust the F'ing L pads.
    Someone once advised me (may have been Ian) when setting up my new-to-me 4345s that using the L7 (which has no L-pads) as a reference point in that room and setting the L-pads on the 4345 with the L7 sound as a guide, might be a good starting point. So, now that I understand the purpose of the "frequency" trim pads on the modern systems is nothing more than tone-controls, it gives even more credibility to the use of an EQ in a room system—another big hot-button at the root of many audiophile arguments.

    If I felt like counting, I believe five of my dozen-or-so JBLs have one L-pad control per non-LF driver. Add one for the 250ti mess on the backside. The rest have none. Consumer versus pro monitor? Consumer versus wannabe "pro"-sumers? If the point is to adjust for room differences, what self-respecting audio engineer wouldn't do that from their desk rather than climbing up to the soffit-mounted boxes. Is all of it unnecessary and better left to permanent resistor values to achieve the ideal anechoic performance and letting the operator adjust for room variance at his control panel? What is the point of the L-pad then? And how can the pros here even attempt to explain the need to a spoon-fed amateur?

    I may have to change my title to Spoon-Fed Amateur, though I only changed the original "Bottom-Feeder" at the request of others here. I've been called worse—and by members of this forum!
    ". . . as you have no doubt noticed, no one told the 4345 that it can't work correctly so it does anyway."—Greg Timbers

  9. #24
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Location
    Kiev, Ukraine
    Posts
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by vitalii427 View Post
    Little off topic but...
    Why there's 8 Ohms written on the back plate and in the specs there's 6 Ohms?
    (First picture in post #7)
    Please forgive me my bad English but am I ignored?

    I've recently got 4367 and I'm impressed with the sound so much! I'm new to JBL. Previously had B&W 802 D2 & D3.
    My McIntosh MC601 has 8,4,2 ohms terminals. I've read on other thread that I should use 4 ohms terminal. And to my ears the sound is definitely better than 8 ohms.

  10. #25
    Senior Member Ed Zeppeli's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Nanaimo, BC
    Posts
    608
    Quote Originally Posted by vitalii427 View Post
    Please forgive me my bad English but am I ignored?

    I've recently got 4367 and I'm impressed with the sound so much! I'm new to JBL. Previously had B&W 802 D2 & D3.
    My McIntosh MC601 has 8,4,2 ohms terminals. I've read on other thread that I should use 4 ohms terminal. And to my ears the sound is definitely better than 8 ohms.

    Personally I'd just go with what sounds good in this case. You're in between two nominal impedance ratings for the amp; I doubt you'll damage it.

    For further information I'd be checking with McIntosh to see what they advise.

    Good luck and congrats on your speakers.
    DIY Array, 2242 sub, 4408, 4208, Control 8SR, E120 Guitar cab, Control 1, LSR305.

  11. #26
    Senior Member bldozier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    mount kisco
    Posts
    825
    I like old school an iam not that age, it's senseless to reinvent the wheel
    here, if you have no music to appreciate, maybe orchestra recordings, but thats
    as good as it's going to get.

  12. #27
    Senior Member martin_wu99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Xi'An,China
    Posts
    1,485
    Quote Originally Posted by SEAWOLF97 View Post
    JBL old school sound comes back!

    I should hope that for the price of new speakers that they sound better than old school sound otherwise just buy some classic ones.
    The 4367's price is very reasonable,and the tweeter is much better than those olds
    46 lover

  13. #28
    Senior Member martin_wu99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Xi'An,China
    Posts
    1,485
    Quote Originally Posted by vitalii427 View Post
    Please forgive me my bad English but am I ignored?

    I've recently got 4367 and I'm impressed with the sound so much! I'm new to JBL. Previously had B&W 802 D2 & D3.
    My McIntosh MC601 has 8,4,2 ohms terminals. I've read on other thread that I should use 4 ohms terminal. And to my ears the sound is definitely better than 8 ohms.
    IMO,MARK is much better than MCINTOSH to drive JBL,but still not good enough
    46 lover

  14. #29
    Senior Member martin_wu99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Xi'An,China
    Posts
    1,485
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Mackenzie View Post
    You obviously have been spoon fed...LOL

    The market is the home consumer who wants a JBL monitor (M2 = Pro market)

    The controls are self explanatory, HF and UHF trim

    The manual is quite clear

    https://www.manualslib.com/manual/1168570/Jbl-4367.html
    I don't think 4367 is home edition of M2, look at their horns,they are much more different
    46 lover

  15. #30
    Senior Member Ian Mackenzie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    7,127
    Quote Originally Posted by BMWCCA View Post
    Someone once advised me (may have been Ian) when setting up my new-to-me 4345s that using the L7 (which has no L-pads) as a reference point in that room and setting the L-pads on the 4345 with the L7 sound as a guide, might be a good starting point. So, now that I understand the purpose of the "frequency" trim pads on the modern systems is nothing more than tone-controls, it gives even more credibility to the use of an EQ in a room system—another big hot-button at the root of many audiophile arguments.

    If I felt like counting, I believe five of my dozen-or-so JBLs have one L-pad control per non-LF driver. Add one for the 250ti mess on the backside. The rest have none. Consumer versus pro monitor? Consumer versus wannabe "pro"-sumers? If the point is to adjust for room differences, what self-respecting audio engineer wouldn't do that from their desk rather than climbing up to the soffit-mounted boxes. Is all of it unnecessary and better left to permanent resistor values to achieve the ideal anechoic performance and letting the operator adjust for room variance at his control panel? What is the point of the L-pad then? And how can the pros here even attempt to explain the need to a spoon-fed amateur?

    I may have to change my title to Spoon-Fed Amateur, though I only changed the original "Bottom-Feeder" at the request of others here. I've been called worse—and by members of this forum!
    So did a stir you up?

    I hope not.

    Lets look at the facts.

    You are right all the old Pro monitor systems with multi drivers used L pads.

    The facilities and engineering of networks was a far cry back then from today.

    That is irrefutable.

    The vintage pro monitors had fully variable Lpads with "0" position somewhere and "Full" was around +4 all the way down to -10 or so.

    Its quite difficult to get both left and right speakers exactly the same without some sort of measurement of the levels.

    I did not refer to the L7 but its not a bad idea all the same.

    My more precise and simple diy technique was to use the ambiguous Tandy SLP meter, the one with a needle gauge. Just feed a steady state sine wave in the mid point of the range of each each of the upper drivers . Then measure it and then turn the Lpad down from full in 1 db increments.

    i.e.HF +4 is Full, "0" is flat on the 4345, so you set the sine wave at 5 hertz with the Lpad up full and the Tandy SLP Meter reads +4 or what ever reference you plant to use.

    Then turn the Lpad down until the needs reads 0 db (or 4 db less)

    Do that for all the other Lpads and you are in business.

    But like do it by ear and you will go crazy because small differences between there left and right channels will throw out the tonal balance and stereo image.

    The better domestic systems like the L250Ti and the statement systems had fixed position level adjustments for exact adjustment of a particular frequency range.

    And those fixed resister adjustments were awkward.

    The 4367 is much smarter.

    If you look at the actual adjustment its really narrow and the adjustment is exact.

    As a side point since the 60's the JBL marketing guy has played the virtues of the JBL pro monitor in the form of a domestic version aka the JBL 4311 and the Century.

    The 4367 is no different. It's for the home JBL nut case but he is not going to have a 1/3 octave pro equaliser in his lounge room.

    So G.T with his advanced facility at Harman arrived at more convenient and far more precise adjustment to cover most variations in rooms, placement and voicing with other equipment in the home.

    BTW I would not call a range of -1 top +1 db a tone control, its a fine adjustment of the frequency contour.

    Most tone controls are -10 to 10 db.

    If you refer to the manual its self explanatory.

    Things have gotten easier to adjust.

    But change in itself as a behaviour is not always easy.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. Any old school sound engineers here ? Show pics !
    By Chevelle in forum General Audio Discussion
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 05-18-2016, 02:15 PM
  2. Replies: 26
    Last Post: 02-24-2013, 08:10 AM
  3. I've gone back to Old School.
    By audiorep2 in forum Lansing Product General Information
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 03-29-2009, 12:02 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
  •