Triumph said:
thank you for this contribution. you dont contribute very often but when you do it is fantastic.
A JX92+EB Cantare system would run me about Euro 200 each for drivers alone. I guess I better start saving. I intend to save for about 1 year for this (1000 Euros is about my monthly income and I am well paid in India) so if I save 100 Euro per month it will work. I have to account for import duties as well.
I can see from the picture you are using the JX92+EB Cantare for your center channel. Are you using the same speaker for all 5 channels?
Did your friends prefer the BSC or no BSC (with tweeter)? Since my system will be wall mounted I think I cna get by without the BSC. Also since my rear speakers will have a volume near 5 Liters the BSC will only be 1mh with 4.7ohms.
I am leaning towards minimal BSC (see above) plus tweeter. the reason being that I find winding air core inductors upto 1mh with 14SWG wire diffcult but above 1mh is really tough.
Again I really thank you for this contribution.
Al, no hard feelings but I can and will wait for quite some time to decide between the FR125 (or any later version), JX92S and/or Fostex FX120 (esp if they can improve the Xmax).
The so called BSC is not just for baffle compensation. The driver it self has different radiation strengths and patterns that vary with frequency. What the compensation does is that it compensates for the effects if dispersion pattern and its effect on FR of the driver. Not all drivers need this. But for those that do, you can refer to this post for some ideas.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=60748
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=60748
Navin,
You can save a lot of money on the rearspeakers if you look for a cheaper alternative. They are less important.
I suggest one from the Tang Band series for example the W4-455S with an Fs from 65 Hz . You can build it in a closed box form about 8 liter. It only cost 25 euro!!!! Or the W4-657SC with an Fs from 46 Hz but needs a larger box. But there is a lot more in that quality and price range.
The front speakers are the most important, don’t save on them.
Now something honest. I have been in India myself I know a bit how much people earn over there, you must have a very good job. But I do not know what kind of amplifier you have. The suggestion I made for upgrading with a supertweeter is high end stuff, I am talking Linn and Pathos here. I really don’t want you to spend your money on something that does not make a difference because there is a weak link in the chain.
So, my suggestion. Focus on the front speakers they are the most important. The JX92s is a very good full range to work with, but there is more. For the same price you can build very good two way systems even with a better sound only no point source effect. It is just a matter of choice what kind of sound you prefer. The second most important is the center. Less important are the rear.
The beauty of what I suggested is that you can start quick and can upgrade later. Even when you buy a high end amplifier over a few years it will give you satisfaction if you upgrade then.
It is always better to have the same sound on all the 5 speakers but that is a concession to the cost. Even with a large budget I will not save on the two frontspeakers. My experience is that with a BSC you can flavour the sound a little so that all the speakers are a bit from the same sound. If you use the W4-657SC it has also a aluminium cone so it probably will sound a bit more like the Jordan than a paper cone.
You only can tell if you need a BSC if you have build the cabinet and listened for a few days, even with a wall mounted speaker.
It is always important to listen first and then decide.
Good luck.
You can save a lot of money on the rearspeakers if you look for a cheaper alternative. They are less important.
I suggest one from the Tang Band series for example the W4-455S with an Fs from 65 Hz . You can build it in a closed box form about 8 liter. It only cost 25 euro!!!! Or the W4-657SC with an Fs from 46 Hz but needs a larger box. But there is a lot more in that quality and price range.
The front speakers are the most important, don’t save on them.
Now something honest. I have been in India myself I know a bit how much people earn over there, you must have a very good job. But I do not know what kind of amplifier you have. The suggestion I made for upgrading with a supertweeter is high end stuff, I am talking Linn and Pathos here. I really don’t want you to spend your money on something that does not make a difference because there is a weak link in the chain.
So, my suggestion. Focus on the front speakers they are the most important. The JX92s is a very good full range to work with, but there is more. For the same price you can build very good two way systems even with a better sound only no point source effect. It is just a matter of choice what kind of sound you prefer. The second most important is the center. Less important are the rear.
The beauty of what I suggested is that you can start quick and can upgrade later. Even when you buy a high end amplifier over a few years it will give you satisfaction if you upgrade then.
It is always better to have the same sound on all the 5 speakers but that is a concession to the cost. Even with a large budget I will not save on the two frontspeakers. My experience is that with a BSC you can flavour the sound a little so that all the speakers are a bit from the same sound. If you use the W4-657SC it has also a aluminium cone so it probably will sound a bit more like the Jordan than a paper cone.
You only can tell if you need a BSC if you have build the cabinet and listened for a few days, even with a wall mounted speaker.
It is always important to listen first and then decide.
Good luck.
Triumph said:
Thanks you Triumph. I am glad you have visited India. Hope your visit here was a good one.
My HT/AV amplifer is a Marantz SR 7000. It has 5.1 and though it is complex to use the amplifer part is quite good and beefy and can drive most of the speakers i have heard so far. My subwoofer is from Audio Concepts (DV12 x 4) driven by a Carver M1.0t.
Presently my HT speakers are Vifa 6" 2 way in the front and JBL Pro III (simialr to Control 1) for the rear. But this is only a stand in. just like my 29" sony CRT TV. I had always planned to replace the speakers and the CRT TV with a 40"+ Plasma or LCD.
Every speaker I have heard i have found something lacking. the immediate coherrence of my guitar amp is just not there. even some TV speakers if played within their limits sound quite good and i thought that might be becuase they are full range.
My audio system (which is a different system) consists of a Marantz KI CD player, a home made pre amp using relay switching and OP275, home made power amp using Hitachi MOSFET (metal boxes) for the midbass (Scan Speak 8546), a EL84 Push Pull Parallel tube amp for the tweeter (Scan Speak 9900).
navin said:
I have met a merchant from India here, a very good person with a good sense of humor.
I think you are experienceing what most liver performers will experience when they start listening to audio systems. I must say that it is very difficult to do it on a multi-way system. That is why I had stuck with full range drivers. But I am also trying to do a two way system, lots of figuring out to do.
I certainly would like to visit India some day. I just came back from the Angkor Ruins in Cambodia, and I enjoyed it very much. There are just so many wonders in the world.
soongsc, triumph, if you are ever in Mumbai (bombay) please give me a shout and let me know when you are coming.
i suspect that high value inductances in the XO (above 1mh) rob the music of it's dynamics. I dont have any evidence for this but this is just a suspicion.
another explanation could be that we are just so used to one kind of sound that any other even if it more accurate does not sound right to us.
whatever the reason i am hoping to catch the magic of my 15W Marshall / Celetion tube guitar amp (6550) with this speaker.
i suspect that high value inductances in the XO (above 1mh) rob the music of it's dynamics. I dont have any evidence for this but this is just a suspicion.
another explanation could be that we are just so used to one kind of sound that any other even if it more accurate does not sound right to us.
whatever the reason i am hoping to catch the magic of my 15W Marshall / Celetion tube guitar amp (6550) with this speaker.
navin said:
Inductances in the XO normally is in the low frequency path, I changed from a 16# (I think) solid wire inductor to a 14# foil inductor, the base dynamics was a day and night's difference. Crossover was about 450Hz. The base dynamics was so good that I though is was not necessary to go to a larger base for the room size I was designing for.
Probably the best way to find out is to just record your playing on a CD and the replay on your audio system and see how it sounds. Either have someone else play and you record, or have someone else record and compare.
FWIW, I've used conventional two way (Scanspeak) and wide bandwidth two way (all Jordan drivers, crossing at 500Hz). I would find it very hard to switch back after the JX92. It's not just the point source imaging (though that is wonderful) but also the coherence of the fullrange approach I'm enjoying. The sound is seamless from bass to treble.
Out of interest, I recently went to a demo of a £22,000 Linn surround system (it's a new floorstanding system, all active) to catch up with what good, commercial hifi is doing. Very good if you want huge volume and like hearing lots of finger nails on guitar strings. But it was a relief to get back to a single driver per speaker! (Usual proviso regarding room, volume levels etc - though I wasn't convinced the Linn sounded more dynamic, particularly.)
Colin
Out of interest, I recently went to a demo of a £22,000 Linn surround system (it's a new floorstanding system, all active) to catch up with what good, commercial hifi is doing. Very good if you want huge volume and like hearing lots of finger nails on guitar strings. But it was a relief to get back to a single driver per speaker! (Usual proviso regarding room, volume levels etc - though I wasn't convinced the Linn sounded more dynamic, particularly.)
Colin
soongsc said:
where did you get a foil inductor. the only ones i have used are air core 14 SWG (about 12 AWG) solid wires ones. how much do foil inductors cost?
Colin said:
Colin I had the same expereince. I heard at length The Joesph Audio Pearl and after that a Manger 103 (Vifa 8" + manger) and the Manger sounded nicer to me. After the Manger I wanted to hear a Lowther single driver speaker but we did not get the time. Next time maybe.
I wish I could put my finger on the why this sounds better than that but I cant. I hope I am unbiased. Since neither system was mine and both owned by equally close friends (albeit really rich friends) I think i was.
I suppose the 2 way Jordan system you heard was the JX53 with the JX 125. If so how do you compare this system with the JX92.
I hope to allow my JX92 to breath a bit by programming the HT/AV receiver to small for all 5 channels and using my subs for everything below 100hz. BTW is there anyway one can change this frequency (100hz). My Marantz SR7000 seems to have only one choice of XO freq for the .1 channel. I wish it could have been switchable 60/80/100/120 or maybe small (100Hz), medium (60hz) and large (fullrange).
>I suppose the 2 way Jordan system you heard was the JX53 with the JX 125. If so how do you compare this system with the JX92.
Yes, it's my own system which I've been running for several years, until I built GM's 48 MLTL design a few months ago.
The JX125 operates into a 33 litre sealed enclosure. This system sounds more civilised with slightly more HF but doesn't achieve the holographic imaging of the JX92S. The 48" MLTL gives the 92 more reach into the bass, around 35Hz. What I wasn't expecting is that the MLTL sounds less resonant on certain male vocals than the sealed enclosure. Proves GM's design is right on the button.
Both systems sound good and there's no discontinuity in the sound with the 53/125, nor any of the horribly etched HF of most tweeters I've heard.
The 92 is definitely the exuberant youth of the two ... very engaging.
Colin
Yes, it's my own system which I've been running for several years, until I built GM's 48 MLTL design a few months ago.
The JX125 operates into a 33 litre sealed enclosure. This system sounds more civilised with slightly more HF but doesn't achieve the holographic imaging of the JX92S. The 48" MLTL gives the 92 more reach into the bass, around 35Hz. What I wasn't expecting is that the MLTL sounds less resonant on certain male vocals than the sealed enclosure. Proves GM's design is right on the button.
Both systems sound good and there's no discontinuity in the sound with the 53/125, nor any of the horribly etched HF of most tweeters I've heard.
The 92 is definitely the exuberant youth of the two ... very engaging.
Colin
navin said:
You can order foil inductors from Alpha Core direct. They also have a page that shows international distributors.
http://www.alphacore.com
Full ranges do sound more coherent. But also important is the cone material which the Jordans really excel with such thin and well controlled cone. Additionally, due to the material, the cone itself does not absorb any energy from the moving coil, technically making them more revealing.
I also listened to a pair of Manger 103 once, and specifically listened to piano from their own demo CD (good recording BTW). My general feeling was they were okay, but it did not trike me as dynamic. Lots of the details were not there, the piano just didn't sound right, I felt the JX53 + JX125 was much better even though the system I have is much cheaper. There are still a few places which I'm also trying to refine with that combination. For an even more dynamic system, I would go for the JX150 and JX53 array, but that would be a few projects down the road.
soongsc said:
I am to believe that the surround material in teh Jordans also play a role in controlling the resonances that usually happen in metal coned drviers.
BTW how does the JX92 compare with the JX53/125 combo. In any case I hear the JX125 and 150 are not being made anymore.
I agree teh Manger 103 is not dynamic but atleast it was something I could listen to for hours. I found the Pearls to be too revelaing so much so that the music was lost.
navin said:
It's really a whole combination which includes the surrounding material, cone shape, cone thickness, etc.
I have only tried the JX92 a little bit, no listening tests yet. This is work after the JX53/JX125 project. My guess is that if the low frequency music you listen to is organ type music etc. where the low frequency is very periodic, then the JX92 will be good with designs such as the MLTL, If you listen to music with low frequency content generated from punching type transients such as drums, then you need a larger cone area.
You are right that the JX150 and 125 are temorarily discontinued as explained at the Joran site. I work with them with hope that they will be back and improved. The design concept is a sound one but the production requires dskills and equipment diferent from normal drivers which makes them difficult to find a manufacturer.
soongsc,
I wish I could control the XO freq. of my HT/AVR. If you know how i can change it (open it up and change some resistor or cap or both) let me know. It is a Marantz SR7000.
The present XO freq. is 100Hz. I would have prefered 80Hz or lower as the JX92 will not be stressed even if it is run down to 60Hz.
FleXoNotch looks interesting. Thanks. I still have not looked at it in detail as I am trying to get by with as few compoents as possible.
I wish I could control the XO freq. of my HT/AVR. If you know how i can change it (open it up and change some resistor or cap or both) let me know. It is a Marantz SR7000.
The present XO freq. is 100Hz. I would have prefered 80Hz or lower as the JX92 will not be stressed even if it is run down to 60Hz.
FleXoNotch looks interesting. Thanks. I still have not looked at it in detail as I am trying to get by with as few compoents as possible.
>I am to believe that the surround material in teh Jordans also play a role in controlling the resonances that usually happen in metal coned drviers.
BTW how does the JX92 compare with the JX53/125 combo
Hi Navin
See my ramblings above re the last question. Both sound very electrostatic in nature.
Ted Jordan wrote several articles for the UK publication Wireless World, back in the 1970s, which covered the design of wide bandwidth metal cone speakers. Still applies today and it is interesing to see how few manufacturers are following his line of development, going for rigid cones and then having to sot out the resonance problems.
BTW how does the JX92 compare with the JX53/125 combo
Hi Navin
See my ramblings above re the last question. Both sound very electrostatic in nature.
Ted Jordan wrote several articles for the UK publication Wireless World, back in the 1970s, which covered the design of wide bandwidth metal cone speakers. Still applies today and it is interesing to see how few manufacturers are following his line of development, going for rigid cones and then having to sot out the resonance problems.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.