JBL 4430's - Do they lack mid-bass???

[kelossus]

Bought a pair of 4430's awhile back but they ended up in storage so I never really got to play them. With my 4350's getting the cabinets redone the 4430's are now front and centre in my room.

My first impression is that the speakers really lack authoritative bass. The bass is there but does not have the impact I imagine it would/should. Doing some research it was recommended that I bypass the rotary the switch. Upon doing this and upgrading some of the internal wire to a larger gauge I was excited to hear any improvement. The bass is more present now but still not what I expected. Especially in the mid-bass area, they just don't have the slam I was hoping to hear.

Maybe I am spoilt by the 4350's or maybe something is wrong? I don't expect them to be like the 4350's but I was hoping to be somewhat impressed.

Any input as to what may have gone amiss? Or maybe confirmation that 4430's being a two-way somehow robs the 2235 of delivering that slam I am used to.

I have plenty of quality power on hand so I can dismiss that as a culprit.

[macaroonie]

In my experience the 2235 has issues where it tries to play in the midrange. The 30 gram mass ring compromises the ability of that come assembly to move quickly and cleanly.
Excellent as a Sub and probably running out of steam at 3-400Hz. In the big 4 way systems the woof hands over at 290 or thereabouts that's where the snap or slam comes from. It's just that the 2235 can't move
, quickly enough to deliver the goods.
Others have found the 2216Nd to be an excellent solution to this problem.
The selector switch can cause problems in 4430.

[Titanium Dome]

I had a beautiful pair of 4430s that never fully satisfied me. I added a B380 sub, which helped the bottom end, but did little to help the floundering 2235s in the mid bass. It was hard for me to sell them because they were so pretty, but I didn't buy 'em to look at, so when I downsized my JBL hoard, they were easy to let go.

[markd51]

In my experience the 2235 has issues where it tries to play in the midrange. The 30 gram mass ring compromises the ability of that come assembly to move quickly and cleanly.
Excellent as a Sub and probably running out of steam at 3-400Hz. In the big 4 way systems the woof hands over at 290 or thereabouts that's where the snap or slam comes from. It's just that the 2235 can't move
, quickly enough to deliver the goods.
Others have found the 2216Nd to be an excellent solution to this problem.
The selector switch can cause problems in 4430.

Are you saying there are some who have swapped the 2235H for 2216Nd in the 4430?

Are these then just a simple swap that pop in, and how did these speakers then perform?

Investigating this particular speaker, it appears the 2216Nd is not by no means an inexpensive speaker.
Looks like it is used in many of the newer top tier JBL Monitors being sold.

[Robh3606]

Are these then just a simple swap that pop in, and how did these speakers then perform?

Not at all. You can't just drop them in and expect them to work without verifying the cabinet tuning as well as possible changes to the crossover network. Even dropping in a 2234 which is a 2235 less the mass ring would probably require an attenuation change and possible adjustment to fb.


Rob

[johnlcnm]

Are you saying there are some who have swapped the 2235H for 2216Nd in the 4430?

Are these then just a simple swap that pop in, and how did these speakers then perform?

Investigating this particular speaker, it appears the 2216Nd is not by no means an inexpensive speaker.
Looks like it is used in many of the newer top tier JBL Monitors being sold.

I have a pair 4333Bs that have been heavily reworked. New JBL diaphragms in the 2405s. New Radians in the 2420s. New charge coupled Nelson Pass crossover for the L300s. 2216nds replaced the 2235Hs. No mods to the crossover which was designed for the 2235. Boxes are close to the M2s in volume and tuning. The 2216nds have about 1/3 the inductance of the 2235s. That translates into much better damping at the upper range of the driver, and it is audible. IMO, the 2216nd blows away the 2235 in both the lower midrange and bass. IMO, the 2216nd is a perfect match for a horn midrange compared to the 2235. The thing that I really notice about these speakers is, the sound escapes the boxes and sounds like one driver. I am sure the Pass crossover is in part responsible for the effect. IMO. If you have the bucks give it a try. I think the 4430s would also benefit with the woofer mod. Time for someone to go out on a limb here with the 2235 to 2216nd modification in a pair of 4430s. All it takes is money -- ha ha.

[toddalin]

I had the 4430s and preferred the sound of my modified L200/300s, though the 4430s way out-imaged the L200/300s, so I passed them on. I don't care for the "edge" of the titanium diaphragms, though I do use 2425s in my four surround speakers. Neighter the 4430 nor the L300 really has "slam" but I get that from the Ethyl Mermans that use a 2241H, 2251J, and Heil AMT.

The reason I think is..., while a horn can be every bit as loud/louder than the 10", the sound of the horn is very directional such that little air is really being moved through the room. OTOH, the 10" moves a lot of air such that it can "pressurize" the room and this is what you feel and perceive as "slam."

[markd51]

I have a pair 4333Bs that have been heavily reworked. New JBL diaphragms in the 2405s. New Radians in the 2420s. New charge coupled Nelson Pass crossover for the L300s. 2216nds replaced the 2235Hs. No mods to the crossover which was designed for the 2235. Boxes are close to the M2s in volume and tuning. The 2216nds have about 1/3 the inductance of the 2235s. That translates into much better damping at the upper range of the driver, and it is audible. IMO, the 2216nd blows away the 2235 in both the lower midrange and bass. IMO, the 2216nd is a perfect match for a horn midrange compared to the 2235. The thing that I really notice about these speakers is, the sound escapes the boxes and sounds like one driver. I am sure the Pass crossover is in part responsible for the effect. IMO. If you have the bucks give it a try. I think the 4430s would also benefit with the woofer mod. Time for someone to go out on a limb here with the 2235 to 2216nd modification in a pair of 4430s. All it takes is money -- ha ha.

Hmm, all it takes is money!

So, then what are the considerations and changes required for a swap? Cabinet Volume? Is the 4430 of similar Volume to the M2? Close? or not even close?

Port Tuning. here's where a physical change to the Speaker Ports no doubt means a change that would not be easy to return to if end results were not favorable.

A simple drop in fit without taking Tomahawk to Cabinet's Baffle? Again, a possible mod (butchering) in which there's no easy way returning back to stock once done. Surely would not entertain such and ruin the value of such a speaker, in which mine are in as mint and stock condition as you'd likely find.

And lastly, X-Over changes-mods. Not sure what that would encompass or if at all needed? An Inductor swap, or ?

I'm assuming no X-Over changes made for the Compression Driver-Horn, not much can be done there I'd guess with the stock X-Over and altering it's X-Over points.

If I could predict the swap would be nothing more than the cost of a pair of 2216Nd or Nd-1, I'd maybe take the leap of faith, and the expense of such a swap.

Same with perhaps the 2234 if there was an overall improvement in bass performance with a simple swap out of drivers.

I'd have maybe thought JBL themselves would've changed to the 2234 if they felt an improvement of performance to this particular speaker, and thus later came with a 4430A or B version?

Of course back then, there was no 2216Nd to be had.

[markd51]

Not at all. You can't just drop them in and expect them to work without verifying the cabinet tuning as well as possible changes to the crossover network. Even dropping in a 2234 which is a 2235 less the mass ring would probably require an attenuation change and possible adjustment to fb.


Rob

Sorry for my ignorance, what attenuation changes would you be speaking of, and what is adjustment to fb?

I know it's smart knowledge to consider that such butchery usually can produce unfavorable end results trying to out-engineer the masterful designers of JBL, but I know too that there have been some exceptions to the rule, and how many have improved a number of revered speakers by replacing X-Overs, etc.

One past example where I thought I'd try a swap was with an older pair of L-65 Jubals, of which I still own my original 4 from 1974.

Yep, was going through again the infamous surround rot, and needed them re-foamed or re-coned.

A friend I knew gave me a pair of I believe they were 2206 12"Drivers to try, and see how I liked them in a pair?

Well, bottom line was they would not physically fit-drop in, the magnet and basket design of the 2206 was too large, and the L-Shaped Port Tubes inside the Jubal's cabinets interfered, so I never did get to try them and gave them back. I was not about to monkey with the Port Tubes, and yank or move them.

I eventually had all 4 126A's re-coned ($600)

[Robh3606]

I know it's smart knowledge to consider that such butchery usually can produce unfavorable end results trying to out-engineer the masterful designers of JBL, but I know too that there have been some exceptions to the rule, and how many have improved a number of revered speakers by replacing X-Overs, etc.

In all of these systems the base sensitivity is determined by the woofer with the mid and HF drivers padded down to match it. If you drop in another woofer with a different sensitivity or a rising or depressed response at the crossover point you end up with a stepped response instead of a smooth transition. Adjusting fb or box resonance frequency is essentially what changes to the port tuning does. The 4430 has a very aggressive 34Hz tuning which may or may not work with a 2216nd. You really need to model it in a box program.

To verify that the transition will be correct you should measure both the woofer and HF horn separately in the box and run that in a crossover simulator. Measure the system as a whole and use that as a verification of the simulation. Then make any adjustments in the sim if required.


Replacing crossovers with what?? You just can't swap a crossover unless the voltage drives match. If you are talking CC networks with equivalent voltage drives same acoustic and electrical response.


Anyone can just drop different drivers/crossovers in and like what they hear which is fine. To do so where you actually verify that the response has not degraded from the original system response takes some work and tools.

Question is how many of these "exceptions" have done the work instead of just dropping in a driver/crossover and saying all is good.

It depends on what your goals are.

Rob

[markd51]

In all of these systems the base sensitivity is determined by the woofer with the mid and HF drivers padded down to match it. If you drop in another woofer with a different sensitivity or a rising or depressed response at the crossover point you end up with a stepped response instead of a smooth transition. Adjusting fb or box resonance frequency is essentially what changes to the port tuning does. The 4430 has a very aggressive 34Hz tuning which may or may not work with a 2216nd. You really need to model it in a box program.

To verify that the transition will be correct you should measure both the woofer and HF horn separately in the box and run that in a crossover simulator. Measure the system as a whole and use that as a verification of the simulation. Then make any adjustments in the sim if required.


Replacing crossovers with what?? You just can't swap a crossover unless the voltage drives match. If you are talking CC networks with equivalent voltage drives same acoustic and electrical response.


Anyone can just drop different drivers/crossovers in and like what they hear which is fine. To do so where you actually verify that the response has not degraded from the original system response takes some work and tools.

Question is how many of these "exceptions" have done the work instead of just dropping in a driver/crossover and saying all is good.

It depends on what your goals are.

Rob

Thank you Rob for some of these technical explanations. I understand most of what you say, meaning doing it right is not an easy task as some lay person might think. And of course I do not possess such technical and engineering knowledge-prowess to know what to do. I have about as much knowledge as Greg Timber's Baby Toe! LOL

The only way would be if somebody else took this unknown path of experimentation, and research, and knew exactly what needed to be done, or could be done to achieve the intended desirable-better end results lessening any of the shortcomings that have been mentioned and disliked by some.

Many years ago, I did buy a Sunfire True Subwoofer MK-IV on a whim. To more or less try complimenting the 4 JBL L-65 Jubals I was using at the time powered by my 2 McIntosh MC-2105 Amps.

And again when I upgraded the system to the 4430 Speakers, I then bought two brand new Bryston 7BSST2 Amps.
These Amps do drive the 4430 Speakers with aplomb, plenty of headroom considering these amps provide 676-674 watts into a 8ohm load on the bench from factory tested specs.

Bass is tight, clean, albeit maybe a slight bit lean, but certainly not muddy. Such might be possibly attested to a better damping factor of the Brystons versus the older MC-2105 Amps?

I have again used the Sunfire True Sub to compliment the 4430's seemingly losing some steam at the lower frequencies, and only barely power the sub. When in use, you cannot pinpoint the sub in the room, barely set at 0db, and that's how it seems most would tell you how to properly use whatever Subwoofer in a system, and not shaking pictures off the walls, which BTW that little True Sub MKIV is capable of doing.

A subwoofer of course would not address any lack of Mid-Bass Frequencies that the 4430 is supposedly said to lack.

Perhaps an external EQ of some sort might be a better, and easier way of addressing such?

How I'd like to upgrade to a slightly better pre-amp with somewhat better tone controls, something like the McIntosh C-48 or such? Something like this might help me squeeze some better performance out of the 4430 speakers?

Again, thank you for your response, and explanations sir!

[toddalin]

Many years ago, I did buy a Sunfire True Subwoofer MK-IV on a whim. To more or less try complimenting the 4 JBL L-65 Jubals I was using at the time powered by my 2 McIntosh MC-2105 Amps.

I have again used the Sunfire True Sub to compliment the 4430's seemingly losing some steam at the lower frequencies, and only barely power the sub. When in use, you cannot pinpoint the sub in the room, barely set at 0db, and that's how it seems most would tell you how to properly use whatever Subwoofer in a system, and not shaking pictures off the walls, which BTW that little True Sub MKIV is capable of doing.

A subwoofer of course would not address any lack of Mid-Bass Frequencies that the 4430 is supposedly said to lack.

How long have you had the Sunfire and how long do you expect it to last? It is a great piece of equipment and mine easily keeps up with my three L300s, four W10GTi/2425 surround speakers, and W15GTi driven by a Crown PSA-2XH bridged for mono at ~800 WRMS into the 12 ohm load.

After Sunfire, then later Rita's fixed mine, I got smart. These literally shake themselves to death. I took the amp out of the cabinet and made a separate ventilated cabinet for it. I put a block-off plate and terminal on the speaker. Not only does the amp not shake, it can run cooler and the speaker cabinet picks up some internal volume. I've not had problems since the relocation of the amp.

[toddalin]

Many years ago, I did buy a Sunfire True Subwoofer MK-IV on a whim. To more or less try complimenting the 4 JBL L-65 Jubals I was using at the time powered by my 2 McIntosh MC-2105 Amps.

I have again used the Sunfire True Sub to compliment the 4430's seemingly losing some steam at the lower frequencies, and only barely power the sub. When in use, you cannot pinpoint the sub in the room, barely set at 0db, and that's how it seems most would tell you how to properly use whatever Subwoofer in a system, and not shaking pictures off the walls, which BTW that little True Sub MKIV is capable of doing.

A subwoofer of course would not address any lack of Mid-Bass Frequencies that the 4430 is supposedly said to lack.

How long have you had the Sunfire and how long do you expect it to last? It is a great piece of equipment and mine easily keeps up with my three L300s, four W10GTi/2425 surround speakers, and W15GTi driven by a Crown PSA-2XH bridged for mono at ~800 WRMS into the 12 ohm load.

After Sunfire, then later Rita's fixed mine, I got smart. These literally shake themselves to death. I took the amp out of the cabinet and made a separate ventilated cabinet for it. I put a block-off plate and terminal on the speaker. Not only does the amp not shake, it can run cooler and the speaker cabinet picks up some internal volume. I've not had problems since the relocation of the amp. I actually keep the amp in my bedroom closet on the other side of the wall from the speaker.

[1audiohack]

It’s surprising how much that little mass ring does to the midrange on a 2235. In measurement it pulls right about 3dB out of the midband and tilts the bottom up about 2.7dB.

Having both 4430’s and 4435’s it is amazing how much different the character below the horn is between the 4430 and 4435.

They are good enough that it is damn difficult to make them better.

Barry.

[toddalin]

...And had I of known back in the day when I had the AlNiCo 2205s reconed as 2235s, I would have had them leave them out. A sub does a better job of the low bass and it was not worth the loss of the the mid-band and resultant tilt.