The Alpair7.3 is a very nice driver which I've heard in a range of enclosure styles ( my current 5.1 HT rig uses a trio in the front row) - even adjusting for frame dimensions, how much of a "drop-in" replacement they'd be for your design(s) is uncertain; at the very least the enclosures might require some retuning if vented.
The Alpair10.2 is an outstanding driver as well, but larger frame size might not fit your designs?
The full CH series utilize the same frame size - 124mm diameter / 6mm thick bezel . AFAIK the Alpair 7.3 is still shipped with extra bezel ring separate - without it, mounting requirements are 130mm x 8.5mm, with 135mm x 9.9mm. Then there's the magnet option - which can add 15mm to internal depth for folks crazy enough to want to nest bracing members to magnet structure, or otherwise encroach close to driver.
Yes, the CHR70 is a very good driver, the 7.3 is simply better in all performance aspects.
I think the new Jordan driver will fit into the rebate of the old driver - in other words the flattened off bits are narrower than the diameter of the JX92. But you would need to add filler pieces or felt to conceal the gaps.
I preferred the old round design but maybe Ted wanted to make them look distinct from all the JX92 knock-offs.
I preferred the old round design but maybe Ted wanted to make them look distinct from all the JX92 knock-offs.
Hi,
when I read the information on Jordan site about the new driver I asked by email if the hole size was the same than previous drivers for replacement.
Ted Jordan replied that he intended to produce a first batch of drivers with the old hole size and subsequently a new hole, but it seems the idea is gone.
Renato
when I read the information on Jordan site about the new driver I asked by email if the hole size was the same than previous drivers for replacement.
Ted Jordan replied that he intended to produce a first batch of drivers with the old hole size and subsequently a new hole, but it seems the idea is gone.
Renato
Well, considering the history, "knock-offs" might not quite be the whole story, but we should let that go.
Since it's still his name on the products, Ted is free to negotiate / terminate partnerships and production / distribution arrangements as well as redesign his drivers however he likes. These are certainly a departure in many respects from the pre "shake-up" JX92s and time will tell how far they've advanced.
I strongly suspect that the new basket shape is driven by what Lowther already had tooling for.
dave
variations on 4 corner pin cushion stamped and cast metal frames have been around for along time on all sides of the waters, so not really just a "British thing"
In terms of Mark Audiom the Alpair 10.2 has about the samecone size, but the bezel is larger.
In terms of usable in the same reflex volumes, A7.3, CHR/CHP would be close (as per normal, vent details would need changing). The A7.3 with optional bezel ring would be the closest physically -- fits just within the extents of the JX92. Details of the rebate are somewhat different.
IMO switching to A7.3 would not be a sonic hardship it is a much more refined driver smaller cone might still give the edge to JX92 in bass extension. CHR is closer to JX92 sonically.
dave
Attachments
Well the easiest way would be use a manufacturer's engineering department DXF to create a CNC pattern, or perhaps there's an app for your smart phone now that can do it for you
Years ago I had our resident CNC wizard write a program for the pin cushion Fostex pattern - after mastering the first size ( FE127) , the procedure was simple to scale to larger models.
Manhandling a delicate metal cone driver to create patterns the old fashioned way can be nerve wracking.
Agree with Planet10 I'd say the decision was to save costs on re-tooling rather than any structural gain, I haven't seen any problems with the existing JX chassis and dare say it could cope with even more weight but hey ho.
Bill Poster I'd overlooked EAD which is bad as I've had drivers from them before and they've always been helpful. I will contact them again.
Bill Poster I'd overlooked EAD which is bad as I've had drivers from them before and they've always been helpful. I will contact them again.
I have no recollection of the Lowther basket shape. I heard them some time in the '80s in a number of different cabs and all I can say is that their sound put me off whizzer cones for life.
Tannoy has been using that shape since 1979 and it is a pain in the neck to route rebates for them.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.