You're braver than me.. 
I too have heard rumors that the 2402/2404/2405 frams will fit some older Fane bullet tweeters, but have not ever had a reason to find out. I had the use of a pair of Fanes and actually slightly preferred the 2402, but they had the stock Fane diaphragms so I wonder if these might be a bit of an upgrade?? IMO Any diaphragm that fits has got to be an improvement. Someone at Lansing Heritage probably has the definitive answer to this question, if not I know someone who might also know the answer..
I too have heard rumors that the 2402/2404/2405 frams will fit some older Fane bullet tweeters, but have not ever had a reason to find out. I had the use of a pair of Fanes and actually slightly preferred the 2402, but they had the stock Fane diaphragms so I wonder if these might be a bit of an upgrade?? IMO Any diaphragm that fits has got to be an improvement. Someone at Lansing Heritage probably has the definitive answer to this question, if not I know someone who might also know the answer..
Over no fram at all, for sure!
It will cost me $36 to find out. They might even take it back if it doesn't fit. Or I'll just flog it in the swap meet section. At least these are aluminum and not titanium.
Ending up with a choice of JBL 2397 or 2311 horns, and it seems that I might prefer the 2311 with 2308 lenses overall. Deja vu as this is the equivalent set up for the 2440 that I had on the 2420.. It works well in small rooms despite the objections to lenses that some people have. (The 2311/2308 combo wins on transient response as well as imaging - sometimes sounding a bit harsh which I associate with Ti diaphragms, 2397 is smoother, slightly more musical, less detailed, and more forgiving until congestion sets in, but lacks the incisiveness of the 2311 based set up..)
Now I am debating getting a pair of Radian 1245-16, I've found some at well below market, but still not cheap enough to cause me not to hesitate based on the comments about extension. I really need usefully flat response w/o eq to 8kHz where i cross to the 2402 on the top end..
Maybe I'll just stay with the D16R2445 that I have right now, now if I could get some aquaplas..
Also I own the 2311, the 2397 are loaners and not for sale - going price for these is about $700 a pair right now so the fact that I like the 2311 as much as I do might ultimately save me some money..
Now I am debating getting a pair of Radian 1245-16, I've found some at well below market, but still not cheap enough to cause me not to hesitate based on the comments about extension. I really need usefully flat response w/o eq to 8kHz where i cross to the 2402 on the top end..
Maybe I'll just stay with the D16R2445 that I have right now, now if I could get some aquaplas..
Also I own the 2311, the 2397 are loaners and not for sale - going price for these is about $700 a pair right now so the fact that I like the 2311 as much as I do might ultimately save me some money..
Watcha got? Mike, send me a PM - if not of direct interest to me - you never know -- I may have friends who would be interested. I'm always curious..
I'm hesitating on the Radian frams, OTOH they are well below normal market prices - even so they're not that cheap.. I'm concerned about ending up with yet something else that doesn't serve... The TruExtents are just too expensive to even think about.. ($599 each.. ouch..)
The real concern is twofold, 1) is that they will turn out to be a bit tame sounding, and 2) much worse is that they allegedly don't have the required HF extension for my 8kHz X-O point, and the last thing I want to do at this point is another very expensive passive X-O - this one is very good and works perfectly with what I've got. The titanium 'frams are a bit bright at times but otherwise are quite listenable and quick sounding - so complementing the rest of the system..
Glad the 2402 family of frams work in the Fane tweeters, I suspected they might be ok.
One other thing, at this point I think I prefer the 2311 it just images a LOT better in my room, and has cleaner, better delineated transients. It's brighter, but also more resolving than the 2397 which incidentally is still a great horn to use with this driver.
I'm hesitating on the Radian frams, OTOH they are well below normal market prices - even so they're not that cheap.. I'm concerned about ending up with yet something else that doesn't serve... The TruExtents are just too expensive to even think about.. ($599 each.. ouch..)
The real concern is twofold, 1) is that they will turn out to be a bit tame sounding, and 2) much worse is that they allegedly don't have the required HF extension for my 8kHz X-O point, and the last thing I want to do at this point is another very expensive passive X-O - this one is very good and works perfectly with what I've got. The titanium 'frams are a bit bright at times but otherwise are quite listenable and quick sounding - so complementing the rest of the system..
Glad the 2402 family of frams work in the Fane tweeters, I suspected they might be ok.
One other thing, at this point I think I prefer the 2311 it just images a LOT better in my room, and has cleaner, better delineated transients. It's brighter, but also more resolving than the 2397 which incidentally is still a great horn to use with this driver.
Last edited:
I use 2440 with 2441 dias at the moment on Edgar 340 hz horns . JBL driver replaced Tad4001 and I feel it's easier to work with JBL than TAD.It has full low midband you don't have to deal with HF harmonics of BE diaphragm. I'm a little surprised with your comments about about tractrix as radial/cd horns are much more colored than round tractix but I admit that with everything but classical those coloration add to lifelike/concert type of sound (PA sound??) I heard truExtent dias but it's hard to say anything specific as the implementation is more important than drivers used .I meant mentioned Cosmo horn and new field coil C.A.R speakers . I didn't care for either one. Without horn loading from 100-180Hz and up it's sort of waste of time..
Long dead thread, but I am now considering changing from D16R2441 diaphragms in my 2440 drivers to D16R2440 type. I am using 2311 horns with 2308 diffusers on the midrange. Concern is I have got to have reasonably flat response to 8kHz, the 2441 'phragms manage this without problem, the response is somewhat peakier than what I measured with the original 2420/2312 combo I originally had. (+/-5dB worst case vs better than +/-3dB) Range is 800 - 8kHz.
In the process of procuring some 2440 'phragms, hopefully this proves not to be a misstep. Will report back when I know more / have success finding them.
In the process of procuring some 2440 'phragms, hopefully this proves not to be a misstep. Will report back when I know more / have success finding them.
The more peaky response probably has more to do with the stubby 2311 compared to the much longer 2312 horn than the diaphragms.
Back in the late 1970s, when my hearing was still excellent, the production company I was partners with then used a lot of 2440s. As the diaphragms would crack around the surround, we started replacing them with the 2441 diaphragms. We were primarily using the 2350 90x40 radial horns, going two way crossing over at 500 or 800 Hz.
As I recall, the 2441 not only went higher, they sounded smoother than the 2440.
Later we went 3 way, crossing at 800 and 5kHz into 2420s on various horns, 2307 and 2312 among them.
Regarding the 2311 or the 2312, either will measure and sound smoother without the diffraction lens, though the dispersion will be ultra-narrow in the HF, and level will be several dB hotter.
Art
Back in the late 1970s, when my hearing was still excellent, the production company I was partners with then used a lot of 2440s. As the diaphragms would crack around the surround, we started replacing them with the 2441 diaphragms. We were primarily using the 2350 90x40 radial horns, going two way crossing over at 500 or 800 Hz.
As I recall, the 2441 not only went higher, they sounded smoother than the 2440.
Later we went 3 way, crossing at 800 and 5kHz into 2420s on various horns, 2307 and 2312 among them.
Regarding the 2311 or the 2312, either will measure and sound smoother without the diffraction lens, though the dispersion will be ultra-narrow in the HF, and level will be several dB hotter.
Art
Last edited:
I scored a pair of NOS 2440 diaphragms from a friend and should have them in a few days. The 2441 'phragm definitely has a more extended response, but based on the literature I have from JBL exhibits much larger variations in HF response than the 2440 'phragm under the same test conditions. (Tube based test set up IIRC)
I should be able to report back fairly soon on whether or not they address my specific issues.
I'm crossing at 8K so the additional response is not required.. (I think?)
Ultimately I may need to consider crossing lower in an eventual upgrade scenario.
Your observations on the 2311 and 2312 match mine, but the sound at the listening position without the lenses in place is pretty unpalatable. Small room, and directivity is needed.
I should be able to report back fairly soon on whether or not they address my specific issues.
I'm crossing at 8K so the additional response is not required.. (I think?)
Ultimately I may need to consider crossing lower in an eventual upgrade scenario.
Your observations on the 2311 and 2312 match mine, but the sound at the listening position without the lenses in place is pretty unpalatable. Small room, and directivity is needed.
Kevin,
I find it odd you would say "directivity is needed", while the diffraction lens greatly reduces directivity. Using the narrow exponential 2311 without the lens definitely requires level and EQ changes from "with".
Prior to the 12AM, Clair Brother's "Banana" floor monitors using the 2311/2440 or 2441(no diffraction lens) was the among the most popular stage monitor with professional big name touring artists world wide.
I used the 2307 (a bit shorter horn than the 2312) with 2420s in my floor wedges back in that era, after a short period of experimentation using the diffraction lenses they were abandoned, IIRC I was able to return them to the dealer for credit, just keeping a few on hand for artists that preferred a more "warm, fuzzy" sound.
Art
Last edited:
I understand the confusion, Based on limited experience I would not consider the 2311 or 2312 horn in any sense acceptable for use without the lens in a small room domestic environment. I've tried it and the best analogy I could provide would be two laser beams intersecting at the listening position. It's extremely unpleasant and very, very directional - no practical sweet spot anywhere within my space. Based on my measurements with the lens installed I have a pattern of approximately 40 degrees in the vertical plane and 60 degrees in the horizontal plane. When I refer to directivity I am thinking more in terms of direct radiator directivity, not lens vs no lens. My room is small about 14' wide x 19' long - , and the ceiling height is 6' 8" - the ceiling is vintage acoustical tile.
Interestingly enough the 2440 'phragms (they arrived this morning) are an improvement in some ways over the 2441 they replaced, and in about the way I expected/hoped for.
I'm thinking about other horn configurations for the 2440s in the future, and an XO respin at some point. (LR 2nd order design I did 7yrs ago)
Based on limited experience I would not consider the 2311 or 2312 horn in any sense acceptable for use without the lens in a small room domestic environment. I've tried it and the best analogy I could provide would be two laser beams intersecting at the listening position. It's extremely unpleasant and very, very directional - no practical sweet spot anywhere within my space. Based on my measurements with the lens installed I have a pattern of approximately 40 degrees in the vertical plane and 60 degrees in the horizontal plane. When I refer to directivity I am thinking more in terms of direct radiator directivity, not lens vs no lens. My room is small about 14' wide x 19' long - , and the ceiling height is 6' 8" - the ceiling is vintage acoustical tile.Interestingly enough the 2440 'phragms (they arrived this morning) are an improvement in some ways over the 2441 they replaced, and in about the way I expected/hoped for.
I'm thinking about other horn configurations for the 2440s in the future, and an XO respin at some point. (LR 2nd order design I did 7yrs ago)
I'm being lazy, but I really, really need to do some new room response measurements to determine what I need to do next..
The mids sound a little fuller, and the slightly etched/strident quality is now gone.
There are a lot of minor problems with this speaker system some of which can be fixed with effort, all of my own doing and resulting from lack of knowledge / experience at the time I designed them. Some are easy fixes like mounting the mid horns on an appropriately sized baffle, the current ones are too small. (coming very soon) One problem I cannot fix is the acoustic centers between the Iconic 165-8G and the 2440/2311/2308 is too great, and this I cannot fix. (I have not yet identified any audible or measurable issue at the listening position.)
I've included a picture of the room and system, it is as they say what it is. No real option for significant changes - it's the one room in the house that's mine.. Despite the obvious clutter and visible issues it's actually by far the best room I've ever had, and I have heard far worse elsewhere in recent times; somehow I got somewhat lucky, although I also put some thought into this mess I'll admit.
The sound is very immediate, and at the listening position cohesive and detailed. Imaging is very good. Bass extension is down into the low 30s, top is handled by early 075s with their original 1950s vintage 'phragms. Power available is 20Wpc and efficiency is around 100dB excluding room lift. It's quite dynamic and yes it can go very loud even in the bass.
The mids sound a little fuller, and the slightly etched/strident quality is now gone.
There are a lot of minor problems with this speaker system some of which can be fixed with effort, all of my own doing and resulting from lack of knowledge / experience at the time I designed them. Some are easy fixes like mounting the mid horns on an appropriately sized baffle, the current ones are too small. (coming very soon) One problem I cannot fix is the acoustic centers between the Iconic 165-8G and the 2440/2311/2308 is too great, and this I cannot fix. (I have not yet identified any audible or measurable issue at the listening position.)
I've included a picture of the room and system, it is as they say what it is. No real option for significant changes - it's the one room in the house that's mine..
Despite the obvious clutter and visible issues it's actually by far the best room I've ever had, and I have heard far worse elsewhere in recent times; somehow I got somewhat lucky, although I also put some thought into this mess I'll admit.The sound is very immediate, and at the listening position cohesive and detailed. Imaging is very good. Bass extension is down into the low 30s, top is handled by early 075s with their original 1950s vintage 'phragms. Power available is 20Wpc and efficiency is around 100dB excluding room lift. It's quite dynamic and yes it can go very loud even in the bass.
Attachments
This Thread ain't dead yet.
I've been a Radian/JBL 2440 fan since discovering Radian & Co.
EV Georgian's in the corner w/Radian Diaphragms,
JBL BB Tweets & Bob Crites "Eminence 15" woofer with Al Ks XO's.
After my EV Patricians (owned for decades) hit the road due to being as much fun as swimming in a mud puddle, I put Georgians to the test and have not looked back.
SF L3 front end, Aronov LS9100 P/P Amp's, etc., all contribute to the show.
Do I like Radian Diaphragms.. You bet!
I have JBL Diaphragms too and refuse to spend $'s for titanium or BE,
which I've listened to and they sound no better than Radians.
For normal listening, the only thing I like better is most ANY good Headphones. pc
I've been a Radian/JBL 2440 fan since discovering Radian & Co.
EV Georgian's in the corner w/Radian Diaphragms,
JBL BB Tweets & Bob Crites "Eminence 15" woofer with Al Ks XO's.
After my EV Patricians (owned for decades) hit the road due to being as much fun as swimming in a mud puddle, I put Georgians to the test and have not looked back.
SF L3 front end, Aronov LS9100 P/P Amp's, etc., all contribute to the show.
Do I like Radian Diaphragms.. You bet!
I have JBL Diaphragms too and refuse to spend $'s for titanium or BE,
which I've listened to and they sound no better than Radians.
For normal listening, the only thing I like better is most ANY good Headphones. pc
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.