Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst ... 567
Results 91 to 104 of 104

Thread: 4365 has quality problems

  1. #91
    Senior Member martin_wu99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Xi'An,China
    Posts
    1,468
    Quote Originally Posted by baldrick View Post
    4365 MF/HF filter.

    i really canít understand that JBL did make a poor x-over design. Maybe they did not use absolute high END parts to svar Money. Are there LF filter on K2 or E2?
    Thank you,i am looking for 4365' crossover pixes these days, it is true that 4365' crossover is not as good as 4367,not to mention K2 or E2,why?
    46 lover

  2. #92
    Senior Member baldrick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Haugesund, Norway
    Posts
    808
    The picture I attached is 4365 crossover.

    Have no idea how itís compared to 4367. Itís very normal components, nothing fancy... but that is probably the case for most crossovers.

  3. #93
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    1,724
    Quote Originally Posted by martin_wu99 View Post
    it is true that 4365' crossover is not as good as 4367,not to mention K2 or E2,why?
    You are the one who keeps saying the 4365 crossover is not any good, yet have yet to articulate what the perceived problem with the crossover is.

    Point blank: What is the issue with the quality of the 4365 crossover? And I don't want a reply of "it's not good", give specific points relating to the issues with the crossover.

  4. #94
    Senior Member martin_wu99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Xi'An,China
    Posts
    1,468
    Quote Originally Posted by JeffW View Post
    You are the one who keeps saying the 4365 crossover is not any good, yet have yet to articulate what the perceived problem with the crossover is.

    Point blank: What is the issue with the quality of the 4365 crossover? And I don't want a reply of "it's not good", give specific points relating to the issues with the crossover.
    Some 4365 users complained that 4365's crossover is not as good as 4367's,i don't believe it,JBL should have same QC standard ,that is the whole thing.
    46 lover

  5. #95
    Senior Member baldrick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Haugesund, Norway
    Posts
    808
    Quote Originally Posted by bubbleboy76 View Post
    There are fine components in 4365-crossover, as far as I know.
    The problem, to me, is that the HF part has no lowpass-filter. This causes HF to play the same register as UHF all the way up to 20KHz. This causes comb-filtering. 476Mg HF-driver does not roll off on its own.
    There is no proper acoustic crossover between HF and UHF.
    This makes 4365 sound and measure too bright for my taste. Listen on high volume and ears get fatigue after a while.

    But if this particular discussion should continue, do it in a new thread.
    I'm no expert understanding passive XO, but doesn't it seem like DD66000 is designed the same way without no LP on MF driver?

    Name:  dd66000.png
Views: 450
Size:  89.8 KB

    I can't imagine that GT did create a bad designed crossover for these speakers.

  6. #96
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    1,724
    Quote Originally Posted by martin_wu99 View Post
    Some 4365 users complained that 4365's crossover is not as good as 4367's,i don't believe it,JBL should have same QC standard ,that is the whole thing.
    What exactly is the issue? Again, "not as good" is not a very detailed description. What's "not as good" about it?

  7. #97
    Senior Member Ian Mackenzie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    7,092
    My understanding is the uhf device has an acoustic crossover point of about 15 khertz.

    If your over 50 you will be lucky to hear that. The uhf driver is to please the Japanese market. That is why the horn is run all the way out.

    As for the comb filter effects it’s subjectively not an issue at these frequencies.

  8. #98
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by JeffW View Post
    What exactly is the issue? Again, "not as good" is not a very detailed description. What's "not as good" about it?


    I think the original crossover is good as it is. I have replaced some resistors and caps as you can see on the pics, and I feel that it maybe was a small upgrade. Just after the modification I was convinced it was a step forward, but after a while Iím not so shure. Maybe because Iím getting used to it ?

    ( I think that Valhalla internal and external speaker cables, was a bigger upgrade)
    Attached Images Attached Images    

  9. #99
    Senior Member martin_wu99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Xi'An,China
    Posts
    1,468
    Quote Originally Posted by smooth dancer View Post
    I think the original crossover is good as it is. I have replaced some resistors and caps as you can see on the pics, and I feel that it maybe was a small upgrade. Just after the modification I was convinced it was a step forward, but after a while Iím not so shure. Maybe because Iím getting used to it ?

    ( I think that Valhalla internal and external speaker cables, was a bigger upgrade)
    Looks good,many persons upgraded their crossover this way.
    46 lover

  10. #100
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Coast of Maine
    Posts
    537
    I have no complaints with my pair of 4365's......
    Careful man, there's a beverage here!

  11. #101
    Senior Member martin_wu99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Xi'An,China
    Posts
    1,468
    Quote Originally Posted by tom1040 View Post
    I have no complaints with my pair of 4365's......
    That's great,just enjoy it,if you replace its 045Ti with 045Be,it will be S9900
    46 lover

  12. #102
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Coast of Maine
    Posts
    537
    Quote Originally Posted by martin_wu99 View Post
    That's great,just enjoy it,if you replace its 045Ti with 045Be,it will be S9900

    I good with them as they are-thanks.
    Careful man, there's a beverage here!

  13. #103
    Senior Member Ian Mackenzie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    7,092
    Quote Originally Posted by bubbleboy76 View Post
    There are fine components in 4365-crossover, as far as I know.
    The problem, to me, is that the HF part has no lowpass-filter. This causes HF to play the same register as UHF all the way up to 20KHz. This causes comb-filtering. 476Mg HF-driver does not roll off on its own.
    There is no proper acoustic crossover between HF and UHF.
    This makes 4365 sound and measure too bright for my taste. Listen on high volume and ears get fatigue after a while.

    But if this particular discussion should continue, do it in a new thread.
    Can you elaborate on your listening environment and your listening position.
    I raise this as the acoustics can contribute to the perception of brightness.

    If in fact you feel the measured and subjective concerns correlate then consider some EQ. If you have a digital signal path this is not too difficult. This assumes modifications to the room acoustics or changing the loudspeakers position is not an option.

    No one loudspeaker is going to satisfy all tastes all the time. Try disconnecting the uhf device.

    Lastly itís possible that the loudspeakers are analytical to the point they are exhibiting the characteristics of other components in your system such as your power amplifiers. Cables can also have an impact on the voicing of a system overall.

    I bring these points up because sometimes there are one or more contributing factors.

  14. #104
    Senior Member Ian Mackenzie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    7,092
    I have listened to the 4365 although not for an extended period.

    On the crossover parts in a system at this level the parts are selected for the system as whole to function and perform to deliver the end result. In the diy space you have flexibility to change out parts for alternatives. The results maybe different but not necessarily better. Unfortunately more transparent parts show up more deficiencies in the signal path and recordings.

    If you were involved in the development of the loudspeaker and you were familiar with the acoustics and amplifiers and other components used and you continued to use the system under these conditions then itís unlikely you will have any concerns.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. My new jbl 4365
    By Mctwins in forum Lansing Product General Information
    Replies: 132
    Last Post: 02-08-2016, 06:09 AM
  2. Jbl 4365
    By saeman in forum Lansing Product General Information
    Replies: 240
    Last Post: 05-15-2014, 10:13 AM
  3. 4365
    By Techbot in forum System Information
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-25-2010, 01:58 PM
  4. JBLs: quality then vs. quality today?
    By Lee6 in forum Lansing Product General Information
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 06-21-2006, 11:13 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
  •