Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 29

Thread: 4367 Cabinet

  1. #1
    Member sebackman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    583

    4367 Cabinet

    Dear all,

    I'm looking for the the cabinet data and port dimensions for the 4367. We have excellent data for the M2 and even CAD files out there, but I have not seen such data for the 4367.

    I'm planning to build a pair but flirting a bit with the old L300 design (slanting front and glass top), albeit 2 way.

    I will be using either 2430/D2, 2451SL or 2451Be. It will be fun to test them on the 4367 WG as I have not had that before. The M2 WG's I'm reasonable familiar with in different setups and do prefer the 4" driver on them.

    -And of course BSS DSP active, but that will be a later story

    Any input welcome.

    Kind regards
    //Rob
    The solution to the problem changes the problem.
    -And always remember that all of your equipment was made by the lowest bidder

  2. #2
    Senior Member Odd's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Oslo, Norway ------ Now Portugal
    Posts
    716
    Last edited by Odd; 05-11-2021 at 10:25 AM. Reason: More
    43XX (2235-2123-2450-2405-CC 3155)5235-4412-4406-4401-L250-18Ti-L40-S109 Aquarius lV-C38 (030) 305P MkII

  3. #3
    Senior Member jmpsmash's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Location
    Santa Clara, CA
    Posts
    224
    My mom has a pair in Hongkong. If no one else has gotten to it, I can ask her to measure the port dimensions. The white paper did say 4" and the drawing and text also shows dual flare. Seems like a regular port tube and not something fancy like the M2.

    Which woofer do you plan to use?

  4. #4
    Senior Member jmpsmash's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Location
    Santa Clara, CA
    Posts
    224
    Quote Originally Posted by jmpsmash View Post
    My mom has a pair in Hongkong. If no one else has gotten to it, I can ask her to measure the port dimensions. The white paper did say 4" and the drawing and text also shows dual flare. Seems like a regular port tube and not something fancy like the M2.

    Which woofer do you plan to use?
    Dual port with flares on both ends. The straight middle part of the port is 3". Total length including flare is 5". The outer diameter of the flare is 5"

    Parts express supplier uses the straight middle part as the size. The 4367 port would be called as a 3" port instead of 4" port.

  5. #5
    Member sebackman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    583
    Thank you for the info ODD and jmpsmash

    Great info.

    Can you please measure how long the non flared piece in the middle is. From the cut away it looks like the ports are made of 3 pieces, two flares and a straight piece in the middle.

    Can you also, at your convenience, please make external measurements on the cabinets and port positions so I can put dimensions on Odd's drawing.

    I have CAD data on the M2 ports and maybe these are the same (or similar)

    Kind regards and thank you
    //Rob
    The solution to the problem changes the problem.
    -And always remember that all of your equipment was made by the lowest bidder

  6. #6
    Administrator Mr. Widget's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    10,995
    Quote Originally Posted by sebackman View Post
    Can you please measure how long the non flared piece in the middle is. From the cut away it looks like the ports are made of 3 pieces, two flares and a straight piece in the middle.

    Can you also, at your convenience, please make external measurements on the cabinets and port positions so I can put dimensions on Odd's drawing.

    I have CAD data on the M2 ports and maybe these are the same (or similar)
    Has anyone heard port chuffing in a classic 43XX or a 44XX or in a DIY system not using undersized ports?

    I understand the purpose of flared ports, but other than improving the aesthetics of the port, and giving the manufacturer a clean finished solution that is easier to build in a manufacturing setting than cutting a tube squarely and cleanly finishing it as was required in those vintage systems, I am not convinced that we as DIYers need to follow their lead.

    I bring this up because it is difficult to model the port tuning when using flared ports. You can measure, trim, measure, and repeat until you hit the target frequency, but this seems like an unnecessary hassle if performance alone is the goal. On the other hand if the aesthetics of a flared port is appealing to you, then I guess you have your work cut out for you.


    Widget

  7. #7
    Senior Member jmpsmash's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Location
    Santa Clara, CA
    Posts
    224
    Quote Originally Posted by sebackman View Post
    Thank you for the info ODD and jmpsmash

    Great info.

    Can you please measure how long the non flared piece in the middle is. From the cut away it looks like the ports are made of 3 pieces, two flares and a straight piece in the middle.

    Can you also, at your convenience, please make external measurements on the cabinets and port positions so I can put dimensions on Odd's drawing.

    I have CAD data on the M2 ports and maybe these are the same (or similar)

    Kind regards and thank you
    //Rob
    Rob, you can find external dimension of the cabinet in the white paper linked to above. The white paper also describe in detail how thick the walls are (1 5/8" for the front baffle, 1" others) so it will be straight forward to deduce the gross volume.

    The port has a straight middle section, which is not the same as the M2 which has a concave middle section. I doubt the port will be identical as the box volume and the 15" woofers are different.

    The 4367 port seems to be something like this:

    https://www.parts-express.com/Precis...be-Kit-268-350

    The 4367 white paper also has the impedance plot, while in really poor resolution, the port tuning frequency looks to be around 32Hz.

    The measurement of the straight port tube I already described in my previous post. I will try to get you the other measurements.

  8. #8
    Senior Member jmpsmash's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Location
    Santa Clara, CA
    Posts
    224
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Widget View Post
    Has anyone heard port chuffing in a classic 43XX or a 44XX or in a DIY system not using undersized ports?

    I understand the purpose of flared ports, but other than improving the aesthetics of the port, and giving the manufacturer a clean finished solution that is easier to build in a manufacturing setting than cutting a tube squarely and cleanly finishing it as was required in those vintage systems, I am not convinced that we as DIYers need to follow their lead.

    I bring this up because it is difficult to model the port tuning when using flared ports. You can measure trim measure and repeat until you hit the target frequency, but this seems like an unnecessary hassle if performance alone is the goal. On the other hand if the aesthetics of a flared port is appealing to you, then I guess you have your work cut out for you.


    Widget
    If you get this particular brand, which is the brand sold in parts-express, they included a calculator:

    http://www.psp-inc.com/tools2.html

  9. #9
    Senior Member Anti K's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    Estonia
    Posts
    197
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Widget View Post
    I understand the purpose of flared ports, but other than improving the aesthetics of the port
    Wow, that's new info. If it works.
    For me as DIY it's even easyer use straight-edged tube, is even more aesthetic IMHO due to easyer sanding.

    And I see I'm not the only fool who wants pair a 4367 WaveGuide with large format CD.

  10. #10
    Senior Member Odd's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Oslo, Norway ------ Now Portugal
    Posts
    716
    4367 impedance plot

    Name:  JBL_4367_4.jpg
Views: 399
Size:  95.2 KB
    43XX (2235-2123-2450-2405-CC 3155)5235-4412-4406-4401-L250-18Ti-L40-S109 Aquarius lV-C38 (030) 305P MkII

  11. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    1,879
    Quote Originally Posted by Anti K View Post
    Wow, that's new info. If it works.
    For me as DIY it's even easyer use straight-edged tube, is even more aesthetic IMHO due to easyer sanding.

    And I see I'm not the only fool who wants pair a 4367 WaveGuide with large format CD.
    Guys run the large format drivers on pretty much any horn they'll fit on. Plenty of guys run them on the M2, I run them on the H4338 that was originally used with a 435AL, Giskard had 476Be on a 1400 Array horn I think at one point.

    I think the question I have is why JBL didn't - other than cost, of course. And I imagine they used that dual ring radiator on the 4367 since it's a 2-way, but the 4" stuff ain't bad 2-way with coated Ti phragms, I'm running 2-way during the summer on mine and it sounds fine, better than fine.

  12. #12
    Senior Member jmpsmash's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Location
    Santa Clara, CA
    Posts
    224
    Quote Originally Posted by JeffW View Post
    Guys run the large format drivers on pretty much any horn they'll fit on. Plenty of guys run them on the M2, I run them on the H4338 that was originally used with a 435AL, Giskard had 476Be on a 1400 Array horn I think at one point.

    I think the question I have is why JBL didn't - other than cost, of course. And I imagine they used that dual ring radiator on the 4367 since it's a 2-way, but the 4" stuff ain't bad 2-way with coated Ti phragms, I'm running 2-way during the summer on mine and it sounds fine, better than fine.
    looking at the FR from other guys here who tried the various 4" drivers on the M2 horn lens, the D2430K isn't that great compared to them, still have a huge drop going into HF that need to be compensated in crossover design. I went with the D2430K as it is the least hassle/cost to obtain.

  13. #13
    Administrator Robh3606's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Rocinante
    Posts
    8,704
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Widget View Post

    I bring this up because it is difficult to model the port tuning when using flared ports. You can measure, trim, measure, and repeat until you hit the target frequency, but this seems like an unnecessary hassle if performance alone is the goal. On the other hand if the aesthetics of a flared port is appealing to you, then I guess you have your work cut out for you.


    Widget
    Hello Widget

    What are you using to model?? I use Bass Box Pro, have been for years. I have been using the flared ports for several builds Arrays, B380, LFE subs and my passive monitors. They have all come in within +/-1 Hz of target.

    Rob
    "I could be arguing in my spare time"

  14. #14
    Senior Member RMC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    1,289
    I generally tend to agree with Widget (post # 6) but for different reasons, and it seems to me that sebackman is somewhat condemned to replicate JBL's flared ports in the present case, based on Odd's sketch in post # 2.

    I don't use flared ports, not because i don't believe in their benefit when properly designed, but simply because i have doubts about the science, if any, behind most flared tubes sold on the market for cheap. Their specs, other than dimensions, are rarely given, such as the Normalized Flare rate (NFR) value. Then its probably more a trial and error type of thing, or marketing.

    That software or calculators are available on the Web for flared vents doesn't change anything in my view. Who wrote these, what are their credentials, what is the science (often obscure at best) supporting this stuff? We simply don't know, it may be good, bad, so so, who knows... Too much is unexplained and unproven about those things.

    You think low-cost China, who manufactures most of the ports, flared or not, calculates all that stuff for proper, nevermind optimal, results??

    In sebackman's case, replicating the original vents would possibly guarantee properly ENGINEERED flared vents. The use of conventional ports might not be as effective in that context, cab depth could become an issue or the use of an elbow might lead to a space problem.

    The most advanced vent study and associated experiments that i know of is still the one from A. Salvatti, D. Button and A. Devantier, Maximizing Performance from Loudspeaker Ports, JAES, Jan/Feb, 2002, P.22. All together 62 pages long! Three seasoned Harman Engineers having quite a go at this, and leaving no stone unturned. I don't have time to retype what's on the pics so consider this as my retyping of that text.

    Although, i don't recommend getting the long article from the AES ($) since its pretty heavy material, written by Engineers mostly for Engineers. However the real flared port science is there, no doubt. File size is too large to post, plus the AES holds the copyright on it. Therefore will only post the summary (which is public domain) and limit my quote to two paragraphs. The phrase "The tapered port ..." explains why i think JBL chose this type of vent here. The longer "end correction" being the reason why tapered ports behave as if they were longer.

    Richard

    Name:  IMG_2442_LI (2).jpg
Views: 384
Size:  86.7 KBName:  IMG_2445_LI.jpg
Views: 379
Size:  74.7 KB

  15. #15
    Senior Member Anti K's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    Estonia
    Posts
    197
    In physics it's pretty simple. Differentiating time.

    When certain volume of air comes out from tube (at 1/2 sycle talking about speaker), then molecules of THAT amount of air have speed.
    We can lower the speed - if amout of air stays same - icreasing diameter of tube.
    (and it's quadric equatation!)

    near the edges of tube:
    - 'Neighrbouhood' molecules, outside of box, 'stand still'.
    - Exhausted air molecules have speed and they tear together the standing molecules (at the region of edges of tube). It causes friction. Friction generates sound...

    Its all about speed of molecules.

    Now, while flared end, the speed of air molecules at the end of tube decreases - while tube diameter increases. And friction should be lower.
    Simple as that.

    In practice I rebuilt Soviet driver own time as low as 15Hz FS, made them move lower than 20Hz with generator.
    (btw causes symhtoms as seasicness)
    Only thing I heard was tube turbulence. Flared or no-flared.

    What I have read - and it's understandable, there are different frictions between different materials (substances).
    And plastiv (PE, PVC etc) are not the best materials for speaker's invewrter tube.
    But metal is.
    So, going deep it's total madness...


    RMC
    could be right, if take some cheap plastic thing, we can only observe it aesthetically...
    Which is basically same MrWidged sayd.

    I see what works DIY, is bigger tube (less air speed) ... and bigger diameter makes tube same time longer.
    Here was a topic in this forum, person built next to Everests pair of 2x18'' (4 psc total) SUBs, and stated same - did long tubes because *I don't like the hum of short tubes*
    Or, take totally original flared parts (and we don't know the resources behind the research of these, M2 special shape for example)

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. 4367
    By Robh3606 in forum System Information
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 07-14-2020, 09:48 AM
  2. Jbl 4367 ? .....
    By joeinid in forum Lansing Product General Information
    Replies: 95
    Last Post: 06-08-2019, 10:47 PM
  3. JBL 4367 first listen
    By jpw in forum Lansing Product General Information
    Replies: 346
    Last Post: 02-25-2019, 05:01 AM
  4. JBL K2 S9900 vs JBL 4367
    By Fitero in forum Lansing Product General Information
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 06-30-2017, 08:08 PM
  5. 4367 vs 4430
    By 4344 in forum Lansing Product General Information
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 07-30-2016, 09:26 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
  •