Jordan jx92s fullrange drivers vs other fullrange drivers?

[zman01]

Andy,

We are OT - it's dangerous to extol too much about MA paper on Jordan thread.

Also from your post gathered that you have 2 pairs of MA CHP-70 (gen 1, right?). As I said in another post today, EL-70 has an edge on both top and LF and will go a bit louder with less excursion, but that doesn't make the CHP-70.1 bad. Quite similar sonic signature, the EL-70 more dynamic, the CHP-70 gen 1 is more laid back and delicate.

[murphythecat8]

did anyone compared the jordan, any jordan, with a supravox FR?

[R-Carpenter]

Originally Posted by chrisb

Since this thread is about the Jordan drivers, it's probably germane to mention that far fewer (if any to date?) have heard the latest gen of Jordans than the full array discussed above, and moreover to compare any of them .

I actually worked on a few line arrays based on 92. Using a 3 way array myself now.

[chrisb]

Originally Posted by R-Carpenter

I actually worked on a few line arrays based on 92. Using a 3 way array myself now.

Roman, is it?

My assertion was not that no member posting her heard the "new 92" (apparently you have?) but that few have heard all the drivers mentioned earlier, much less had opportunity to compare any combinations - so that any postulations on differences would be purely that

If that's not the case as of this writing, I stand corrected


and as Zia noted, it's poor form at least to get too sidetracked riding our own favorite hobby horses

[Colin]

AFAIK only Ted and colleagues working on it have heard the latest Jordan driver. I believe it uses the same cone as before but everything else is new.

[andyjevans]

Hi Chris,

I take your point about hobby horses. On the other hand, this thread did start by saying

"I was wondering how the jordan fullrange drivers stack up next to the mark audios and fostex and tang band drivers? I was wondering about reviews and testing?"

Requests for comparisons are inevitable. As audio builders were are time and time again in the position where we have a limited sum of money and we want to spend it on the best available option. We haven't heard (or measured) the choices we want to make and are relying on the experience of those who have. Fortunately on this forum we have some great guys - including yourself - who can help with this.

Hobby horses are difficult, though. Over time a lot of us can become polarised in one kind of solution, one kind of product, and see that as a solution. It just happens. It would be good to think that we all have the goal of remaining open minded so we can carry on moving onwards and upwards.

Best

Andy

[R-Carpenter]

Originally Posted by chrisb

Roman, is it?

My assertion was not that no member posting her heard the "new 92" (apparently you have?) but that few have heard all the drivers mentioned earlier, much less had opportunity to compare any combinations - so that any postulations on differences would be purely that

If that's not the case as of this writing, I stand corrected


and as Zia noted, it's poor form at least to get too sidetracked riding our own favorite hobby horses

It is and I agree with you on the subject of sidetracking.
Nobody in US has the NEW 92 that was mentioned in another thread. I think that the driver is in development stage at this point.
As far as original question goes, it's hard to compare 92 to other drivers because they are all different animals, respond differently to the loading. Motors offer different advantages and disadvantages. Some people will like MA and other will prefer 92 or Fostex. So, IMO it would all come down to particular design, driver implementation and designer behind it.
I can certainly set up a controlled test next NY DIY if anyone is serious about it.

[Bill poster]

The bottom line is we can't compare the current driver yet, but it will sound different without the dust cap.

[chrisb]

Originally Posted by R-Carpenter

It is and I agree with you on the subject of sidetracking.
Nobody in US has the NEW 92 that was mentioned in another thread. I think that the driver is in development stage at this point.
As far as original question goes, it's hard to compare 92 to other drivers because they are all different animals, respond differently to the loading. Motors offer different advantages and disadvantages. Some people will like MA and other will prefer 92 or Fostex. So, IMO it would all come down to particular design, driver implementation and designer behind it.
I can certainly set up a controlled test next NY DIY if anyone is serious about it.

I'll take this reference as the "old / original" JX9S, which at the risk of pulling off a scab, was a driver that in its last couple of years of production with that moniker was subject to some suspect QC - that's something I definitely heard for myself - of two pairs that I've heard, one definitely had some damage, and one was from the group buy of a few years ago - so the question should include the qualification "which 92?"

To a lesser extent, the same could be said about the evolution of Mark's Alpairs and CH series - i.e. "which exact generation?" .

And certainly the point is valid about driver comparisons being predicated on each being installed in an appropriate (and potentially different) enclosure load - but that of course is never guaranteed. As anyone exposed to or having worked in the retail audio trade is aware - never underestimate the potential for listening comparisons to be distorted by either unwitting mistake or intentional manipulation.

Originally Posted by Bill poster

The bottom line is we can't compare the current driver yet, but it will sound different without the dust cap.

From what can be deduced (read wild a$$ guessing based on the one photo) from the current Jordan website, there appears to be rather more to the redesign than just the open pole piece - perhaps there have been further technical data or listening tests released?

[Bill poster]

Yes it looks all new
I like the look of the driver altho the roll looks a bit awkward, it sticks out too much imo. Hope the pole piece stays how it is, reminds me of something off a Confederate bike.