Giskard, I like what sounds the best.
Giskard, I like what sounds the best.
Just run an impedance curve on the 128H and compare it to the LE10H. Get the impedance of the 128H similar to the LE10H using the conjugate or else change the value of the series inductor.Originally Posted by briang
Also note that the 4313B used the edgewound copper ribbon wire LE5-odd midrange while the L96, L112, and L150A used the round copper wire LE5-even. Since this is DIY, try whatever you have and see how it works for you. In this specific instance I think you might find that it doesn't much matter.
To you. And that's not a problem. I just don't want people going away from the forum thinking the L36 is "better" than the L50. Mark thought the L50 sounded better and that's why he designed it the way he did.Originally Posted by Nightbrace
Glad I'm not the only one who needs a class in Crossover Design 101. It just makes me wonder what JBL was thinking, especially with the L50.
So you think the L50 sounds better? They are 2 completey different speakers sonically.
Yes, I preferred the smoother L50. I've always preferred the smoother JBL systems. A buddy of mine referred to them as "boring" - L50, L110, L212 - they were all boring to him. We both agreed though that the 4313 was killer. Whatever...
At least we can both agree that they are completely different speakers sonically, most would not think so given the fact that the drivers are virtually identical.
The only thing I can think of as to why JBL messed so much with the crossovers, is that I recognize a slight resonance around 240 Hz with the L36, was this a reason why they changed the crossover?
So its more of a preference you are saying, but aren't we all after accurate sound reproduction that is as true to the music as possible? To me the L36 is more "true" compared to the L50, but thats just my 2 cents, and I agree that we should not try to mislead people. The XPL160's I heard were even more true the mid-range flat out blew away everything I have ever heard. I am thinking of buying a set of L100T's, do you think I'll like these speakers at least as much as the L36's?
Has anyone tried the N36 crossovers in the L50?
What are your thoughts about the L166, L200 or L65?
This may be too obvious, but I’ll ask anyway. Have you tried turning up the mid and/or tweeter levels on the L112s?
yep, but all it does is change the volume, it does nothing to change the crossover points. But to do a proper comparison they should both be at 0. I actually prefer my L36's at about +1-+2.
The N50 is doing a bit more than that. Compared to the N36, the LFRolls off a lot lower than the N36. The midrange gets a real bandpass instead of a simple highpass and there is a RC trap on the output of the filter to further roll off the driver. The midrange xover also has attenuation fixed in addition to the lpad control. This is a really thought out bandpass and very specialized to the LE-odd midrange charactoristics.Originally Posted by briang
The 128H has a large voice coil and a steep rise in impedance above 2000Hz. taming that rising peak with a RC network will yield better results from the midrange since it won't interact as much. Predictable driver impedance that is flat and stable is easier to design for than drivers with swooping impedance curves.
Looking at the N36 vs. the N50, I see what you mean about the bandpass on the midrange for the N50.Originally Posted by duaneage
However, I've only got the L96 and L112s...so I'm still ignorant on the changes needed to the LE10H-1 vs 128H woofer conjugate to the midrange's high pass filter. Can you help?
It seems it's time for me to pick up some books on passive loudspeaker crossover design, theory and application.
Paying debt to Karma...
I was asking WHY JBL decided to change the crossover so radically from the L36 to the L50. The only thing I can find wrong with the L36, besides its poor response under 40 Hz, is its resonance at around 240 Hz, not a reason to completely change the values for the mid and tweeter is it? Last I checked they have nothing to do with frequencies this low. They are 2 compeltely different animals and have virtually the same cabinet size porting and drivers.Originally Posted by duaneage
Does the vertical alignment really call for this much change?
And anyways my question was if anyone ever tried using N36 networks in a L50, thats all. But thanks for the education.
To get back on Topic, finally, What are we talking about here? I forget, oh yeah L96/112 crossovers.
I think Giskard already summed up what to do with the L96 crossover, USE THE 3113B, the link is posted here. All is said is that you have to tweak it a bit for the L112 to suit your tastes. Or you could just leave it alone, as is stated here, there will not be MUCH of an improvement vs. the N112 crossovers.
Shame on me for hijacking. Bad, bad Brian!Originally Posted by Nightbrace
Paying debt to Karma...
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)