Jordan JXR6HD in german DIY magazine Klang&Ton - Page 2 - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Loudspeakers > Full Range

Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.

Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 28th July 2006, 08:01 PM   #11
MarkMcK is offline MarkMcK  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Ohio
Dumbass wrote

Quote:
So what's your point?
There are many. One might be that an aspect of diy is doing things yourself instead of just copying or following another's path. Another might be in doing them better. Another might be that there is a limit to speculation and assumption.

For example, it might just be possible that the limited "depth" of image for the new Jordan is partly because of how it is used rather than a "limitation" of the transducer itself. Of course, even if it were, then it is possible to determine this with a high degree of certainty.

If you are going to buy high quality transducers, why stop there? Why not design loudspeakers that maximize transducer quality?

I hope others also have points. Although I also hope that we can avoid an infinite regress of points unless they apply to improved applications of the Jordan transducer. Time will tell.

Best to all out there,

Mark
  Reply With Quote
Old 29th July 2006, 12:07 PM   #12
Colin is offline Colin  United Kingdom
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: UK
Hi Mark

My comments on the JXR6 are restricted to one implementation so far and I haven't got round to optimising the cabinet edges yet (a felt baffle would help). I suspect if recessed correctly so the chassis is flush with the baffle, and used on a wider baffle, the image depth would improve to closer to the JX92.

Another point is that it might be psychological - the JX92 is reaching down to 35Hz and I hadn't heard this level of imaging below 100Hz before. I think that helps give the impression of depth because there are more cues to the acoustic venue. I'd have to try rolling off the bass to see.
  Reply With Quote
Old 29th July 2006, 12:22 PM   #13
diyAudio Member
 
Holger Barske's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Ruhrgebiet
Quote:
Originally posted by Colin
Looks interesting, though as my German is almost exactly 0, I'll have to guess some of the description. I wonder why they chose to crossover at such a high freq - power handling?

However the bass driver is a useful lead to what will integrate with the JXR6.
Hi guys,
I am one of the guys who did the Minium on Klang + Ton. The thing about the relatively high xover frequency is the narrow baffle, there is just too much loss to chose a lower frequency. Chosing a much wider baffle will allow a deeper xover frequency.
__________________
Best regards: Holger
www.holgerbarske.com - Deutschsprachiges Paradise-Support-Forum
  Reply With Quote
Old 29th July 2006, 07:30 PM   #14
soongsc is offline soongsc  Taiwan
diyAudio Member
 
soongsc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Taiwan
I think how loud you expect the speaker to play, how close you will be listening, and how close the speakers are placed against a back wall are important issues concerning bass reproduction. If someone can come up with a good ported (BR, BLH, MLTL, etc.) that works with the JXr6, then it would really be a good speaker stand alone. I have played with the earlier versions, and the image depth after adding a BSC is really good. The problem is it cannot play loud without running out of bass in this configuration. The high frequency and detail is second to none.

I have tried a design with a two way series XO using the old JX125, and the performance was also good. The project did not evolve further becasue the JX125 was out of production. However, with the design that was tested, the bass when very low and the organs reporduced very well to frequencies you "feel" when placed back close to a wall and port facing the wall. With a series XO, the transition was very good around the XO point (around 450Hz)with little coloration heard in many two way systems. Pianos sound like the same one from the higest notes to the lowest notes. Vocals sound well balanced. Component quality made significant differences.
__________________
Hear the real thing!
  Reply With Quote
Old 30th July 2006, 06:51 AM   #15
Dumbass is offline Dumbass  British Antarctic Territory
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: British Antarctic Territory
For the quality and price of a JXR6HD, you'd be short-changing the driver by using it alone.

We're talking an extremely wideband driver that can produce exceptional detail and dynamics within it's physical limitations. Would you use a Maserati to haul a trailer? Of course you wouldn't.

If you simply do the math concerning what it takes for a driver of that diameter to produce a given SPL at a given frequency, I wonder why you'd want to use it below 150Hz. There are any number of quality 10" to 12" bass drivers that could cover the lower frequencies.
  Reply With Quote
Old 30th July 2006, 12:27 PM   #16
Colin is offline Colin  United Kingdom
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: UK
Agree. For serious use, the JXR6 needs to be used above 150Hz. Think of using it like a good ribbon which extends to lower mid-frequencies.

It also lacks a conventional suspension so needs to be used in a sealed, acoustic suspension enclosure.
  Reply With Quote
Old 1st August 2006, 12:45 PM   #17
MarkMcK is offline MarkMcK  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Ohio
Hi threaders,

I agree with Colin that psychoacoustics is important in making listening judgements. Simpling reducing the amount of energy in the 60 to 120 Hz range will radically alter the sound of any loudspeaker. If you are used to hearing energy in the range on familiar music, losing it will change all aspects of the sound. It is very hard to hear through it to tell what is going on.

We are also closer to deciding on design variables. We do not, however, know what the x-max SPL limit is for the driver operating at 150 Hz. You can calculate this, but I would like to see that verified with a distortion test at this frequency.

If, as Mark Audio suggests, a sealed enclosure is used to set the driver's low frequency characteristics (say at 150 Hz), then we know that that will produce a second order high pass filter. If we want to protect the Jordan from signals below this frequency, then we will need to add a crossover. If you want a second order filter and integrate it with the enclosure enduced high pass filter, then the acoustic roll-off is now fourth order.

If this allows the Jordan to play loudly enough for the listener's preferences (and we have yet to determine this), then we have one interesting system possibility. There are plate amps available at relatively low cost that have built in adjustable fourth order low pass filters.

Still too many assumptions here. If there is low frequency reductions due to baffle, then these would have to be compensated for. If the Jordan's acoustic output (for a given distortion) is not compromised by a first order crossover, then we can use this extra 6 db per octave to compensate for baffle reductions. Again, I would like to have tests results for baffles and not rely on calculations alone.

Another assumption is the high frequency performance of the woofer. If the acoustic ouptut of the woofer is rising, then to achieve a complementary acoustic crossover, adjustments to the electrical feed will have to be made.

Keep in mind that many performance characteristics for the woofer are going to be dominated by the electrical crossover. Rise time requirements for example are going to be very low. There are a number of drivers in the 6.5 to 8-inch range that have flat responses for several octaves above 150 Hz. Often, when they do breakup and start peaking, they are highly directional. Thus downfiring the woofer will help to control the nasty cone vibration effects.

Just a couple of other things to consider. First, at 150 Hz, the low pass filter is going to be defining the acoustic center of the woofer. At 150 Hz, the acoustic center is going to be almost 2 feet behind the voice coil. Audibility of this offset is limited at low frequencies, but if you want to transiently align the drivers, then a digital delay (with all the limitations it will include) is the only practical way to go.

Biamping at this frequency also allows for easy application of motional feedback for the woofer. Because of the low audibility of acoustic center offsets at and below 150 Hz, and (or) because of using digital delays, then a satelite system with an fairly large amount of physical spacing of woofer and three-inch extended range transducer becomes a possibility.

Lastly, and particularly for Dumbass, it is important to consider design criteria. Since I wrote, we have found out that the 500 Hz crossover of the diy design was based upon some consideration of baffle size. Had little to do with the Jordan. Had more to do with the chosen box design. Although I do wonder why the baffle size only impacts the Jordan and not the bass drivers mounted in the same box. Oh well!

Best,

Mark
  Reply With Quote
Old 1st August 2006, 04:07 PM   #18
Colin is offline Colin  United Kingdom
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: UK
I'm pleased to see designs appearing for the JXR6, as it is a remarkable little driver. Even used on its own, in a small room and at reasonable volume levels, it serves well.

Regarding baffles, Ted always recommends as wide as possible. His own systems are wall mounted. This gives another interesting use for the JXR6 as it is small enough for several to be integrated into the room and practically disappear. With a suitably hidden bass system, you have access to another psychological trick, where a speaker system sound best when you can't see it.
  Reply With Quote
Old 4th August 2006, 03:50 PM   #19
MarkMcK is offline MarkMcK  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Ohio
Colin,

I agree . . . room integration for both sound and decoration are reasons to select a small extended range transducer (like the Jordan). The Jordan is an extended range design and not a full-range design. No three-inch transducer is a full-ranger. I know that people use three-inch transducers as if they were full-rangers, but they are losing too much important musical information by doing so.

I disagree, however, about the projects for the new Jordan being designs. I wish there were some designs. So far, however, that does not seem to be the case.

Mark
  Reply With Quote
Old 4th August 2006, 11:56 PM   #20
soongsc is offline soongsc  Taiwan
diyAudio Member
 
soongsc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Taiwan
Quote:
Originally posted by MarkMcK

I agree . . . room integration for both sound and decoration are reasons to select a small extended range transducer (like the Jordan). The Jordan is an extended range design and not a full-range design. No three-inch transducer is a full-ranger. I know that people use three-inch transducers as if they were full-rangers, but they are losing too much important musical information by doing so.

I disagree, however, about the projects for the new Jordan being designs. I wish there were some designs. So far, however, that does not seem to be the case.

Mark
Three inch driver work well enclosed in ported type enclosures placed back against the wall and listend at no further than 3M away from the speakers in a room around 4M x 5M. Larger and further away, they become thin.
__________________
Hear the real thing!
  Reply With Quote

Reply


Hide this!Advertise here!
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Klang+Ton Eos Plans? Anyone? ronning Multi-Way 0 27th December 2006 07:23 PM
article in german magazine cph2000 Multi-Way 11 27th November 2005 05:56 PM
Plans for Klang + Ton CT 202 Tuliman Multi-Way 0 29th July 2005 02:39 PM
Preamplifier from German magazine Klang&Ton supernet Solid State 10 7th November 2004 09:17 AM
No parameter in Klang and Ton tests capslock Multi-Way 7 18th September 2002 07:44 AM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 04:44 PM.


vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 1999-2014 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2