| xcortes |
I'm building a Jordan JX92S based home theater system.
The main speakers will be the Jordan design Transmission lines. The surround will be based on Dr Griffin's minimonitors (the earlier ones withouth the tweeter).
I have not, however, settled on a center channel design. The only requirement I have is that I don´t want it to be deeper than the mains (and the plasma tv) so 15 cm is the max depth. This shouldn't be a problem with the Jordans. It should also fit below the tv so approx 75/80cm height is the max.
I can use as many as three drivers and they can be individually amplified as I'm building a multichannel amp.
The options are:
1. A single JX92S.
2. A single JX92S and a G2Si ribbon tweeter. Probably crossed over at 3k (based on Dr Griffin's new minimonitor design) with line level xo's. This would provide me with better horizontal dispersion.
3. Two JX92S drivers and a GS2i (also crossing at 3K -line level- and triamping). This idea attracts me because I think I could use the additional SPL (since the amplifiers will be somewhere around 30 watts per channel). I've read that the usual way of placing this kind of center channels (horizontally) is not good for dispersion but I could set the "array" vertically.
I will appreciate any ideas,
xavier |
|
|
| EC8010 |
| It's just as well your display is a plasma. Ribbon tweeters have an awful lot of leakage flux and would cause huge purity errors on a CRT. |
|
|
| Jim Griffin |
Xavier,
You asked about the following for a center channel application:
1. "A single JX92S."
Very good choice for a center and could be used vertically or horizontally for a lower profile.
2. "A single JX92S and a G2Si ribbon tweeter. Probably crossed over at 3k (based on Dr Griffin's new minimonitor design) with line level xo's. This would provide me with better horizontal dispersion."
I have done this before with good results. If you use the enclosure in the horizontal position, just clock the ribbon tweeter 90 degrees so that the ribbon is vertical.
If you are using a home theater subwoofer, I would use the new JX92S/ribbon minimonitor design for the left and right speakers and then use the JX92S alone in the surrounds as you suggested in your post. Just set-up the HT so that all minimonitors are 'small' and thus route all low bass to the sub. You'll not get serious bass from the Jordan TL configuration any way for a HT configuration.
3. "Two JX92S drivers and a GS2i (also crossing at 3K -line level- and triamping). This idea attracts me because I think I could use the additional SPL (since the amplifiers will be somewhere around 30 watts per channel). I've read that the usual way of placing this kind of center channels (horizontally) is not good for dispersion but I could set the "array" vertically."
A MTM configuration like you suggest is not recommended with this choice of drivers. With a MTM you would need to crossover lower in frequency--say 2000 Hz which is much too low for the G2si.
Finally, the Aurum Cantus G2si (and all their other ribbons) are well shielded so that operation near a CRT or plasma TV is not an issue as suggested by EC8010.
Jim |
|
|
| Colin |
FWIW, I recently experimented with GM's MLTL as speakers for a projector/home cinema arrangement, either side of the screen and toed in the recommended amount (ie crossing well in front of the listening position). I didn't feel any need for a centre channel as the dialogue etc imaged very well. However, I appreciate HT set up is rather different from music-only.
Colin |
|
|
| soongsc |
| quote: | Originally posted by Colin
FWIW, I recently experimented with GM's MLTL as speakers for a projector/home cinema arrangement, either side of the screen and toed in the recommended amount (ie crossing well in front of the listening position). I didn't feel any need for a centre channel as the dialogue etc imaged very well. However, I appreciate HT set up is rather different from music-only.
Colin |
HT setups are just because the decoding of proccessed sound requires a center channel. |
|
|
| navin |
| quote: | Originally posted by Colin
FWIW, I recently experimented with GM's MLTL as speakers for a projector/home cinema arrangement, either side of the screen and toed in the recommended amount (ie crossing well in front of the listening position). I didn't feel any need for a centre channel as the dialogue etc imaged very well. However, I appreciate HT set up is rather different from music-only.Colin |
I assume you did not feel the need for the ribbon either. what about using MLTL for left and right and a really small sealed box for the rears. how small a box can the JX92 live with. 4-5L? |
|
|
| Colin |
Hi Navin
It was a very brief experiment - I happened to have my hands on a data projector for a talk I was giving and couldn't resist trying it out ... I'm not really a fan of HT surround.
I run the JX92s without any ribbon HF - running in GM's taller MLTL, they sound fine and I wouldn't want to risk upsetting the holographic imaging. But I do use them with the recommended toe-in.
According to the Jordan site, the smallest enclosure suitable for the driver is 3L.
Colin |
|
|
| morbo |
You definately don't need (or want) a center channel - so long as all your listeners are centered between the L & R speakers. For me, that is almost never the case, I don't usually watch movies by myself. I built a center channel using one CSS WR125 (which is probably similar in output capablity to the JX92), and find that it is sounds great! Dialogue in particular is crystal clear, even when soft or whispered, I don't know if this is because there's no crossover, but it is certainly the best dialogue reproduction I've heard.
I cross over at 100hz and have no problems with reaching volumes at which my sub starts bottoming, so long as I cross them center over at 100hz in my receiver. Then again my room is fairly small, in a large room I would probably want to cross it over higher. As for the HF dispersion, I wouldnt worry about it too much, unless the money for the ribbon+xo is burning a hole in your pocket. |
|
|
| navin |
| quote: | Originally posted by morbo
You definately don't need (or want) a center channel - so long as all your listeners are centered between the L & R speakers....
I cross over at 100hz and have no problems with reaching volumes at which my sub starts bottoming, ...As for the HF dispersion, I wouldnt worry about it too much, unless the money for the ribbon+xo is burning a hole in your pocket. |
1. if you dont use center then what does one do with the center channel output from the decoder. do you direct it to other channels if so how?
2. 2 reasonsI dont like the ribbon. (a) you need an XO - I would not mind a simple 6db XO and let the fullrange run wide open but anything more it a headache to design right (b) cost
only i wonder if the JX92 HF dispersion will suit HT.
3. Given the price of the FR125 would you say that one could use the FR125 in a 1.5 way v/s a JX92 as a fullrange. It would cost the same. |
|
|
| morbo |
navin - in answer to your questions
1. the surround decoder sends the center channel info to the L & R speakers creating a 'phantom' center. The sound is centered between them, just like in a stereo recording when a singer is dead center in the soundstage. Only works when sitting near the sweet spot though, otherwise the image pulls to one side or other
3. I'm sure you could do a 1.5way. Personally, I don't find the need, output is fine, and in my experience there is little need for BSC as the WR in a ported box has a bit of an upwards tilt in the midbass-bass area (model it to see what I mean) and if mounted flush with the TV screen its effective baffle becomes very large anyway. |
|
|
| Triumph |
Xavier
This week I listened to the Bower & Wilkins demo DVD “A Sound Experience”. Which you can get free if you listen to the new 800 series from B&W at your local dealer.
The DVD opens with a live concert from Peter Gabriel in Milano. On my Jordan JX92s center I can clearly hear the difference between the two microphones he use, one bad headset and one slightly better handheld microphone (they are probably from good quality but there is too much atmospheric interference). But his voice is coming right out of my center, it is like Peter’s throat is my Jordan. It’s like I am sitting in Milano myself!
Another piece on the same DVD is a song from Sarah K. Two Spanish guitars and female vocals. Strange mixed, the guitars are coming from the centerspeaker, the voice is coming from the front speakers.
On my Jordan you can exactly locate the guitars, in the middle of the center. The sound is crystal-clear with a nice deep bass. The vocals tough are coming from the middle but are not exact to locate, it’s an area from 30cm were Sarah K throat is somewhere. Sounds more diffuse comparing with the guitars.
My frontspeakers are much better than my center Jordan. As front I use the Italian Diapason which is a two way system, a wideband driver with a tweeter connected without any crossover and with the conemiddle only 10cm from each other. So from listening distance it is almost a point source. But the Jordan has something unique to offer as a center. It is a fullrange driver, it is a point source and can imitate the human voice and the reception of a microphone like no other system can.
The point source effect is what I like about using a full range driver like the JX92s as a center. But honestly the sound of the JX92s has also some bad sides.
-the high isn’t of the best quality
-the low isn’t of the best quality
-there is a lack of dynamics (it just isn’t fast enough).
So therefore here my comment on the suggested designs using the JX92s:
1 using a single Jordan, its ok. But then you have live with the limitations of the Jordan, which are the quality of the high and low region.
2 using the Jordan as a two way system with GS2i and a xo at 3K. I think this will make a fine monitor but even as a monitor it will not be my choice. Cutting of the high end from the Jordan seems a good idea but then I would use a wide band driver instead. This can deliver a much better quality of bass with more dynamics in the middle. As a center it is almost like a normal two-way system without using the advantages of a single full range driver as a point source.
3 using two Jordans and a GS2i in a ‘D Appolito configuration. Seems also a good idea. But a d’Appolito imitates a point source, a full range driver is a point source.
A d’Appolito always sounds a bit more diffuse. And I listened to many d’Appolito centers. My experience a d’Appolito vertical gives a better sound (less diffuse) than a d’Appolito horizontal but the source is further from your screen, and most of the times it does not fit in the interior design and in our image how a center must look like.
My recommendation
Use the full range of the JX92s. Place it as close as possible underneath your screen. Use a BSC to flavor the sound to your taste. And put a cherry on top with a tweeter, only to give something extra on the high end.
Please consider the design I described on this forum at http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread/t-58565.html
I use a mini magnetostat, the Italian EB Cantare Super Slim supertweeter, which can deliver a fast high from 7k to 40k with a total flat curve. It is so small that it is possible to place it only 7cm from the conemiddle off the Jordan. The supertweeter is connected only with a 3,3µF cap. So no cutting off sound from the Jordan.
What you get is almost the full advantage of the full range driver, it gets a little more diffuse but it almost stays a point source. You can not compare it with a standard ‘d Appolito!
It is very important to place the tweeter as close as possible. I glued it on the edge of the Jordan. The tweeter is only 9mm thick and 33mm round. Only then no fase problems occur.
What I promise you is that you’ll be surprised about the realistic sound. Not only for voice but also for solo instruments like sax and guitar. It stays less suitable for piano because of the quality of the bass. Do not be afraid it will give you too much high or that it will be too sharp. Especially for S, F and T sounds it will not be more than without the supertweeter. Sharp S sounds are mostly because of bad recordings.
Adding a supertweeter will give you a much better quality of high, better understanding of vocals and even a more dynamic mid and bass.
The BSC I used is on the forum also but is now improved with help from my friend and forummember Soonqsc. You have to design one yourself for your own taste also depending on the type of housing. I also experimented with different caps for the tweeter but the 3,3 did it for me. It kicks in at about 14K so it will join the Jordan with the last half octave. It goes to 40K but that is total overshoot because there is no signal above 22K on DTS audio.
Do not understand me wrong I do not think a ‘d Appolito is a bad design. It is excellent if you need more volume because of your room size or if you like a better quality of sound because you like instruments like piano or alt sax.
I am just very enthusiast about this new possibility, so far I know this has never been done before with a JX92s. So consider it also because of the simplicity to build and cost.
But please do not cut off the Jordan it is a wonderful full range, what a waste!
I think I have got the most of the Jordan, it won’t go better. For me this is it! This is perfection. |
|
|
| navin |
triumph,
the biggest problem for us outside the EU is that the Italian EB Cantare Super Slim supertweeter is not available in he US or Singapore etc...
do you know if it is? I intend to use the JX92 with EB Cantare for my 5.1 system. |
|
|
| navin |
for $150 per speaker the choices are:
JX92 ($140) no tweeter
FR125 ($75) with the EB Cantare ($60)
WR125 ($50) mated to GS2Si ($90)
i'd prefer to use as few XO components as possible and preferably run the fullrange direct with no XO. this eliminate the WR125.
mating the EB Cantare to the JX92 will run up cost to $200 per side. For this one could mate the FR125 with the GS2Si? |
|
|
| Colin |
Suggest you try the JX92 on its own first and avoid all the x/over mucking about.
I run a pair of MLTLs using this driver and feel no need for an additional tweeter. In fact, I'd be loath to add one for fear of messing up the imaging. In comparison with a JX53/JX125 system, the 53's superior treble response shows up as a bit more air and a slightly more relaxed sound to the HF, but it is slight. (Proviso - at least it is with my hearing, which tails off above 15k, penalties of being over 40, etc)
If the 92 is facing direct towards you, you may need to roll off the HF slightly, as they are designed to be used off-axis. The easiest way to do this, of course, is turn them off-axis by having them face up or down.
BTW, back in the early 70s Ted Jordan designed a centre speaker system using two drivers and two reflectors which would be ideal for HT and requires only two audio channels. It was intended to achieve the sort of 'fixed' imaging that his linear array went on to achieve. Not much use if you are running a full 5-way set up, though.
Colin |
|
|
| navin |
colin, thanks i suffer from the same hearing deficiancies being on the same side of 40 as you are :-)
the JX53/125 combo or Fostex FF85k/Seas CA21REX combos were my initial choice but
a) the JX125 is not being produced anymore
b) I heard the 103 and found the sound a bit papery and feared the 85 would be similar.
c) my wife nixed the idea of floor standing boxes esp. 5 of them.
Since I have time before i need to buy my drivers I am waiting for a verdict on this forum between the FR125 and JX92. The FR125 is about 50% of the cost of the JX92 and if it turns out to be just as good.....
I remember the 50mm module the Ted Jordan was using (2 per channel). It was not very sensitive though. |
|
|
| Colin |
The FR125 seems to be getting some good reports but I doubt they'll be interchangeable with the JX92. The sensitivity seems to be somewhat less and the HF doesn't have the lift required for the 92's extreme toe-in. However it might be what's needed for centre channel use.
The JX53/125 is about 2-3dB less sensitive than the 92, so I used the amp's balance control to level them up and tested them on a mono signal. (How to spot someone who builds loudspeakers - he's made a mono CD of all his favourite tracks.)
Colin |
|
|
| soongsc |
I would take caution in taking any manufacture publihsed data for granted unless you have a second independantly tested results such that conditions can be duplicated. If you have comparible data from independent tests, then you can assume the data is at least close to what you expect.
Listening preference is personal, so you really need to know what kind of music other people base there comments on. |
|
|
| Triumph |
There are so much wonderful things to choose from.
-the FR is an upgraded WR, you have to use the WR with a tweeter. For the FR they claimed it is not necessary.
-compared with the JX92s the FR goes to 65Hz the Jordan to 45Hz
I still would recommend the Jordan you have more bass. But the price of the FR is very attractive.
Wait and save some until you can afford the Jordans you have more bas and…..
I think a supertweeter is a wonderful asset to a fullrange driver. It gives sparkle and dynamics. So later on you can upgrade with a supertweeter. You will have fun for many years.
Ordering in outside Europe can be a problem try: http://www.lautsprechershop.de/hifi/index.htm I hope they deliver world wide.
I promise you will have the same experience I am having this week. Finally I have a DVD with an excellent quality (Peter Gabriel is highly recommended by others but I think there is too much disturbance from his microphone). I listened to a jazzy DVD from a female vocal singer “Trijntje Oosterhuis, a thousand days” it has a DTS 5.1 track and is recorded in a smaller setting.
What I am now experiencing is the feeling that the microphone is straight plugged in to my Jordan. The membrane of the Jordan is almost her vocal chord. I have never experienced this before and I have listened to many centerspeakers.
This effect is totally because it is a point source, and second because of the quality of the speaker.
Unfortunate it is impossible to listen to my configuration trough the internet. But others have. And I let them listen with or without supertweeter and BSC because I have made two switches in the circuit. Everyone agrees the tweeter adds sparkle and dynamics in it. The credit is not mine, the design is from a German magazine. I only did it with a JX92s.
About the high frequencies are out of range for the (damage) human ear. The strange thing is that even people who can not hear above 5k can clearly notice when you shut off a tweeter in loudspeaker even with a XO from 10K. A supertweeter adds, fore everyone! Its adds quality of sound.
So the choice is yours. I only can share my experience and I have never done this on the internet and I probably never will, I dislike a bit PC use. But this is one worth it to share.
Regards |
|
|
| RAW |
As for the data taken on the FR125S.
Not a manufactures data at all far from it.
Testes were take by Dan Wiggins of Adire on a standard IEC baffle.
AS well these were not proto types they were some picked out of the batch before the shipment was sent via water and these came by AIR.
So I hope this helps out with a little unrest about the data that is provided.
I would be the same way if I did not know first hand for sure the data is correct.
Al
 |
|
|
| soongsc |
| quote: | Originally posted by RAW
As for the data taken on the FR125S.
Not a manufactures data at all far from it.
Testes were take by Dan Wiggins of Adire on a standard IEC baffle.
AS well these were not proto types they were some picked out of the batch before the shipment was sent via water and these came by AIR.
So I hope this helps out with a little unrest about the data that is provided.
I would be the same way if I did not know first hand for sure the data is correct.
Al
|
Where can the data be found? |
|
|
| navin |
| quote: | Originally posted by Triumph
I still would recommend the Jordan you have more bass.
I think a supertweeter is a wonderful asset to a fullrange driver.....And I let them listen with or without supertweeter and BSC because I have made two switches in the circuit. Everyone agrees the tweeter adds sparkle and dynamics in it. The credit is not mine, the design is from a German magazine. I only did it with a JX92s.... [/B] |
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). |
|
|
| soongsc |
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/show...&threadid=60748 |
|
|
| Triumph |
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. |
|
|
| navin |
| quote: | Originally posted by Triumph
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!!!!
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 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.
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. |
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). |
|
|
| soongsc |
| quote: | Originally posted by navin
Thanks you Triumph. I am glad you have visited India. Hope your visit here was a good one.
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.
|
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.:confused:
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. |
|
|
| navin |
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. |
|
|
| soongsc |
| quote: | Originally posted by navin
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. |
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. |
|
|
| Colin |
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 |
|
|
| navin |
| quote: | Originally posted by soongsc
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.sounds... |
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?
| quote: | Originally posted by Colin
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.....
Out of interest, I recently went to a demo of a £22,000 Linn surround system ...But it was a relief to get back to a single driver per speaker! ...
Colin |
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). |
|
|
| Colin |
>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 |
|
|
| soongsc |
| quote: | Originally posted by navin
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 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). |
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. |
|
|
| navin |
| quote: | Originally posted by soongsc
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. |
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. |
|
|
| soongsc |
| quote: | Originally posted by navin
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. |
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. |
|
|
| navin |
| quote: | Originally posted by soongsc
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 intend to use mmy JX92 for
a) background music when we have company
b) Home theater with 12" DV12 subwoofers
c) Listening to DVD concerts
d) comparing fullrange sound to my 2 way (ScanSpeak). |
|
|
| soongsc |
| quote: | Originally posted by navin
I intend to use mmy JX92 for
a) background music when we have company
b) Home theater with 12" DV12 subwoofers
c) Listening to DVD concerts
d) comparing fullrange sound to my 2 way (ScanSpeak). |
It should work pretty good. Bring the subwooferes in below 100Hz probably would be best. Get the JX92 as low as you can first, that will give you more flexibility during tuning. I have released the FleXoNotch to support tuning of full range drivers. Feel free to use it. |
|
|
| navin |
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. |
|
|
| Colin |
>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. |
|
|
| richie00boy |
| quote: | Originally posted by navin
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. |
Just forget the sub pre out on the main amp and build an active filter to go in front of your sub power amp. Feed it from the left and right pre-outs or speaker outs on the main amp. |
|
|
| soongsc |
| quote: | Originally posted by navin
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. |
There are so many different models out there that I get confused. :confused: But normally if the low pass is done digitally, it is normally changeable in the DVD or AVR through the setup screens. Otherwise, it takes some time to go in and trace the circuit, which is easier if there is a maintenance manual. Normally changes in the circuit would just involve some resistor or capacitor changes.
| quote: | Originally posted by Colin
>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. |
Didn't know I missed the such juicy articles, looks like a trip through the library archives would be interesting.:) |
|
|
| soongsc |
| quote: | Originally posted by richie00boy
Just forget the sub pre out on the main amp and build an active filter to go in front of your sub power amp. Feed it from the left and right pre-outs or speaker outs on the main amp. |
Can you actually do this with the SR7000? I remember a few years back when we were using a Maranz ?9000? something, we just hooked up external amps, I wasn't aware you could loop them back in. |
|
|
| richie00boy |
| I'm assuming the sub has a separate power amp and the signal from the home cinema amp is line level. Therefore there is no need to loop anything back in. |
|
|
| Colin |
>Didn't know I missed the such juicy articles, looks like a trip through the library archives would be interesting.
The articles featured in Wireless World November 1970 to January 1971. There was also an article about the development of the original 50mm module in Hi-Fi News April 1979. |
|
|
| navin |
| quote: | Originally posted by Colin
>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. |
I remember these. but those were the days I was experimenting with multi way systems as I SPLs was my goal. Also India was a realy closed economy at that time so anything imported was difficult to come by. Philips used to make some nice drivers (12", 8", 5", a 2"dome and 2 1" domes) that i used in the 70s.
| quote: | Originally posted by richie00boy
Just forget the sub pre out on the main amp and build an active filter to go in front of your sub power amp. Feed it from the left and right pre-outs or speaker outs on the main amp. |
can do that but that signal wont be the 0.1 information it would be the L & R information. On some DVDs the inforamtion in the L & R is not the same as the 0.1 channel right? |
|
|
| soongsc |
| quote: | Originally posted by Colin
>Didn't know I missed the such juicy articles, looks like a trip through the library archives would be interesting.
The articles featured in Wireless World November 1970 to January 1971. There was also an article about the development of the original 50mm module in Hi-Fi News April 1979. |
Thanks! It's nice to know people that read so much back then. |
|
|
| richie00boy |
| quote: | Originally posted by navin
can do that but that signal wont be the 0.1 information it would be the L & R information. On some DVDs the inforamtion in the L & R is not the same as the 0.1 channel right? |
The LFE/0.1 channel is a totally separate channel but, if you set the decoder to 'no sub' then it will route the LFE/0.1 channel info to the front left and right. IMO if you set it up like this it's best for movies and music as you can then set your sub/main crossover to be perfectly seamless as it sends the midbass of the LFE to the main speakers if your crossover is set well for large main speakers, so if your sub is close to you it's less noticeable on big LFE moments. Assuming of course your front left and right speakers are set to 'large'. |
|
|
| navin |
You were right. From the Manual I unserstand that If I set my front speakers to Large and no Sub then it will route the LFE signal to the front speakers.
So what you are saying is that I should set my speakers to Large and No Sub and then take the output of the RCA for the front and use a Cossover for the sub. But how do I protect the JX92 from over excursion. what i really need to dois set roll off teh JX92 from the really low stuff (below 60Hz). right? the JX92 will still be fed from the HT/AV amp (Marantz SR7000). |
|
|
| richie00boy |
| Yes you have that all right now. You may not really find an excursion problem with the JX92 because they roll off high enough naturally, give it a try and see what you think :) |
|
|
|
