Hello, I’m wanting to build a reference pair of speakers and want to start out with the best drivers I can get my hands on/afford. I was going all JBL and as of right now have many JBL drivers to choose from, but thinking of using the 1500AL, 435Be, and 045Be. These drivers are used in the k2-S9800. So my thought was maybe to clone that. I did some reading and it seems that while some preferred the s9800 to the S9900, most preferred the s9900. The two speakers using the same woofers (pretty much, the 1500AL in the 9800 had small changes made for the 9900 and it is the 1500AL-1. With the changes being minor I do see most saying they prefer original, it being slightly better), and same 045Be tweeter. One big difference between the two is the 435Be 3” beryllium in the 9800 and the 476Mg 4” magnesium.
So it has to come down to driver size or how they used them in the crossover/speaker. I say that because the general thought is beryllium is a better material and the JBL 4” beryllium is the dream driver that is lusted after. So it shouldn’t be the material that makes people like the 9900 more. Only other option would be a better crossover in the 9900 or they ran the 3” in the 9800 into frequencies that were bordering its comfortable range. I don’t know.
So I inquired about the 4” magnesium through reconing speakers and a pair of those drivers would be just shy of $3k delivered to me, and that’s no horn! Uummmm no. That’s insane. So that’s out, then I was thinking what if I went with a non JBL driver. But maybe I should just play with the 3” beryllium (and H9800 horn) that I have now.
So I wanted to see what thoughts are, do you think it’s possible to cross a 3” beryllium driver to a 15” woofer and have it sound as good as a 4” driver of lesser material quality? Is there 4” that anyone recommends that isn’t stupid priced (like $1000 a pair or under, drivers only)? Or should I play with the 3” because it’s likely I can get it to sound as good?
Dan
So it has to come down to driver size or how they used them in the crossover/speaker. I say that because the general thought is beryllium is a better material and the JBL 4” beryllium is the dream driver that is lusted after. So it shouldn’t be the material that makes people like the 9900 more. Only other option would be a better crossover in the 9900 or they ran the 3” in the 9800 into frequencies that were bordering its comfortable range. I don’t know.
So I inquired about the 4” magnesium through reconing speakers and a pair of those drivers would be just shy of $3k delivered to me, and that’s no horn! Uummmm no. That’s insane. So that’s out, then I was thinking what if I went with a non JBL driver. But maybe I should just play with the 3” beryllium (and H9800 horn) that I have now.
So I wanted to see what thoughts are, do you think it’s possible to cross a 3” beryllium driver to a 15” woofer and have it sound as good as a 4” driver of lesser material quality? Is there 4” that anyone recommends that isn’t stupid priced (like $1000 a pair or under, drivers only)? Or should I play with the 3” because it’s likely I can get it to sound as good?
Dan
18sound do Be: https://www.eighteensound.it/en/products/hf-driver/1-5/8/ND4015BE
you could also consider drivers like the AXI2050 or a coaxial compresion driver that are also large format and free of breakup behaviour. Be drivers are just very expensive though $1000 a pair would seem cheaper than normal.
you could also consider drivers like the AXI2050 or a coaxial compresion driver that are also large format and free of breakup behaviour. Be drivers are just very expensive though $1000 a pair would seem cheaper than normal.
I can pretty much confidently say you won't get any 4" beryllium driver for under $2.000 to $3.000 per pair, and I've never seen one on the second hand market, but maybe past 2 years have changed that, haven't checked.
Most stories about people with experience in the field, have been that 4" always outperformed 3". Why that is, seems up for debate, but it ranges from descriptions that the 4" sounds more "real", even after equalizing both to same levels, to the 4" having less distortion, which can also be seen in JBL papers from a while back.
Whats left out of those comparisons are the newer AXI as well as the BMS stuff, let's call them the newer drivers.
I agree with Kipman, those might be cheaper yet similar in performance as the conventional beryllium drivers. I do love the berylliums, but never heard the BMS or the AXI. Personally, i like the extended low range of the 4" compared to the 3", the beryllium for it's low distortion extension(depending on matching horn to utilize properly) and the AXI and BMS can do both.
I have a few JBL 2450's, so I'll just stick with the old tech, but that's oke;-)
Most stories about people with experience in the field, have been that 4" always outperformed 3". Why that is, seems up for debate, but it ranges from descriptions that the 4" sounds more "real", even after equalizing both to same levels, to the 4" having less distortion, which can also be seen in JBL papers from a while back.
Whats left out of those comparisons are the newer AXI as well as the BMS stuff, let's call them the newer drivers.
I agree with Kipman, those might be cheaper yet similar in performance as the conventional beryllium drivers. I do love the berylliums, but never heard the BMS or the AXI. Personally, i like the extended low range of the 4" compared to the 3", the beryllium for it's low distortion extension(depending on matching horn to utilize properly) and the AXI and BMS can do both.
I have a few JBL 2450's, so I'll just stick with the old tech, but that's oke;-)
I think i can advice well.
I was in your shoes, got great advice from @pos and built a diy 3 way with JBL 2435HPL (Be) with M2 waveguide and Acoustic Elegance TD15M mid and various bass woofers (probably settling for 2216ND).
I also somehow ended up with a pair of Classic Audio T1.4 which has a 4" be by way of the JBL 2450 modified into field coil.
It's crossover is very different and after trying it with a Trinnov Magnitude for crossover and FIR processing for minimal phase it wasn't ideal so i left it as that.
Both speakers are in 2 different spaces so I never compared side by side.
My suggestion? The 4" does sound better but the increase in cost can cover everything else when used with the 3". Go for the 3", the 112db sensitive compression drivers with 3" beryllium is already so detailed that your upstream noise can be so bad its unlistenable and therefore more money need to be spent there. I had to go for an all balanced pre/power in order to not hear system hiss at listening position. The 4" will be better and end game end game but costs alot of money to get there.
I was in your shoes, got great advice from @pos and built a diy 3 way with JBL 2435HPL (Be) with M2 waveguide and Acoustic Elegance TD15M mid and various bass woofers (probably settling for 2216ND).
I also somehow ended up with a pair of Classic Audio T1.4 which has a 4" be by way of the JBL 2450 modified into field coil.
It's crossover is very different and after trying it with a Trinnov Magnitude for crossover and FIR processing for minimal phase it wasn't ideal so i left it as that.
Both speakers are in 2 different spaces so I never compared side by side.
My suggestion? The 4" does sound better but the increase in cost can cover everything else when used with the 3". Go for the 3", the 112db sensitive compression drivers with 3" beryllium is already so detailed that your upstream noise can be so bad its unlistenable and therefore more money need to be spent there. I had to go for an all balanced pre/power in order to not hear system hiss at listening position. The 4" will be better and end game end game but costs alot of money to get there.
I guess I wasn’t being very clear, I’m not looking for 4” berylliums, I know that they’d be way too expensive. I’ve seen what used JBL 476Be’s sell for. They want nearly 3k for their magnesium so I can only imagine the beryllium.
So what I was asking was for a comparison between the 3” berylliums I have (435Be) and a 4” non beryllium, be it aluminum, titanium, etc.
That’s actually exactly what I was considering mterbekke, either the 2450s or the 2452. Of course open to other brands offerings as well.
Is it possible to get as good of sound from a smaller driver made of a material known to make better sound vs a larger driver made of a material of lesser quality? 3” beryllium vs 4”???
Thank you, very good info. That first setup sounds pretty nice. May I ask what contenders the 2216nd had before you picked it? Seems a lot of people like that woofer. I’ve been on the look out for a pair for my JBL L300s. Curious about possibly trying the 1500AL in the L300.
As for you suggestion, I can just use the 3” Be that I have, but I don’t want to miss out if the 4” Al/Ti would be better which is why I set a budget of around $1000, it seems I could get into a pair of 2450s or 2452s for around $1000 minus the horns. I have many, many, too many drivers I could sell off to fund this as well. I have a few JBL 2426s I don’t see myself using anytime soon, a couple NIB 2242Hs, couple 2245s. I could easily sell enough to buy $3,000-$4,000/pr 4” Be drivers, but with 6 month infant twins my wife would probably kill me before I had a chance to hear them. Which is why I’m asking 3” be vs 4” ??
As for the setup I was hoping to keep it 3 way. Top handled by 045Be, then the 435Be or whatever 4”, bottom end handled by 1500AL. I do have 6 251J 10” midbass drivers, they’re a special version of the 2251J and were only used in the SK2-3300 speaker. Much much better than the original 2251J. So I could go 4 way which would likely help out the 435Be.
I plan to go all balanced, I have 2 Yamaha PC-9501n and 2 Yamaha PC-6501n which should offer plenty of power to each driver. Very nice sounding amplifiers. I was planning on going with the minidsp 2x4 HD, but just found out they don’t make a balanced version anymore. That’s a bummer. So have to figure out something for the balanced dsp as this will be fully active.
This will be for 2 channel music and then a matching center (I have 3 of every driver) will be added for movies. For sub duty I don’t know yet, I have a pair of Dayton Ultimax 18s, the pair of 2242Hs, and I have 8 JBL sub1500 drivers that were used in a revel sub, fairly unknown driver that was a buyout at PE sometime back. But for now want to concentrate on what exactly these mains and center will consist of.
Dan
Last edited:
I have systems that use the 435Be and 045Be combination and the 476Mg solo. Build with what you have, if you do it right it will be just fine.
Rob 🙂
Rob 🙂
I replaced a pair of Truextent Be JBL 2441s with the CELESTION Axi-periodic and would never go back.
I was well acquainted with all of the Ti horror stories and had heard q B&C far cheaper driver and it did sound pretty bad in the top octaves but the Celestion folks know about good sound.
I would think if you got a pair they would last you the rest of your life. That is my plan. i continue to be amazed at their naturalness and neutrality.
i have no experience with recent JBL drivers.
Used in Klipsch K403 with Xilica Solara for EQ.
I was well acquainted with all of the Ti horror stories and had heard q B&C far cheaper driver and it did sound pretty bad in the top octaves but the Celestion folks know about good sound.
I would think if you got a pair they would last you the rest of your life. That is my plan. i continue to be amazed at their naturalness and neutrality.
i have no experience with recent JBL drivers.
Used in Klipsch K403 with Xilica Solara for EQ.
I agree with the previous comments.
A 3" versus a 4" with lesser diaphragm is a tough comparison. The 4" aren't free from resonances so despite equalizing, they will still sound different and even if you would like one over the other, one could attribute that easily on personal preference.
What do you have? A great 3" beryllium. I would stick with that, and put more effort in finding out if you can/need to match that to a horn that makes it possible to cross lower and/or get rid of the tweeter. I don't think you need a tweeter, is a source of problems adding one(crossing at what F to actually keep a realistic advantage in off axis frequency response etc). Then again, you might need it because your horn might beam between 10 to 20 KHz.
All a matter of implementation is what I'm saying.
Either way, that's an awesome kit you have there and many months of serious tweaking worth to really find the sweet spots.
You'll be fine with the 3" ;-)
A 3" versus a 4" with lesser diaphragm is a tough comparison. The 4" aren't free from resonances so despite equalizing, they will still sound different and even if you would like one over the other, one could attribute that easily on personal preference.
What do you have? A great 3" beryllium. I would stick with that, and put more effort in finding out if you can/need to match that to a horn that makes it possible to cross lower and/or get rid of the tweeter. I don't think you need a tweeter, is a source of problems adding one(crossing at what F to actually keep a realistic advantage in off axis frequency response etc). Then again, you might need it because your horn might beam between 10 to 20 KHz.
All a matter of implementation is what I'm saying.
Either way, that's an awesome kit you have there and many months of serious tweaking worth to really find the sweet spots.
You'll be fine with the 3" ;-)
I would stick with the 3" Be you have. The description sounds like it should perform very well: http://www.audioheritage.org/html/projectmay/technology/435be.htm compared to a 4" diaphragm you will have a bit less LF output capability. In the EVEREST the crossover is 800Hz: https://www.jblsynthesis.com/on/dem...s/JBL 1500 Array_JBL Anniversary Brochure.pdf I would avoid most 4" Ti dome diaphragm drivers they are not the most pleasant to listen to.
No brainer, 3" Be. Again, there isn't a need for super tweeter especially with DSP.
I do not think these are high end enough. Suggest to start with the Sublime K231 crossover which is balanced. All Minidsp I tried had a major detriment to the sound when used with the 2435Be.
Acoustic Elegance SBP15 - very detailed, fantastic but lacked the thump you can feel in your body punch
JBL 2226 - Too low fidelity to keep up with the 2345Be & TD15M-Apollo
Line array of six SB15PFC30-8 5.25" midwoofers in a MLTL (by way of Curt Campbell's Uluwatu speaker design) Great punch but lack fidelity
These 2216ND just arrived so i havent had them in boxes to test yet but should be the most satisfying since we are merely 'cloning' the JBL M2 cabinet and outcome
There is always the option of a using a hybrid passive/active approach for the crossover to improve system SNR. The JBL M2 uses this approach. MINIDSP flex gets decent SNR: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/minidsp-flex-review-audio-dsp.30804/
Last edited:
oh wow, it’s great to see someone that has both and can comment on them. May I ask, is it that they’re just so close that I might as well keep what I’ve got, or do you prefer the beryllium? What are your thoughts on others here telling me to omit the 045Be?
Yeah I figured I would stay away from titanium, go with aluminum if I were to step to a 4”. I did quite a bit of reading in the celestions and those are intriguing. I think I may pick up a pair regardless just to play with. If anything I could build a second pair and run them with the 18” 2242, but man you need a huge horn to use them to their potential lol.
I’ll have to look into that. I’d really like to stick with the H9800 horn as it’s known as a top quality horn and it was made to go with these 3” berylliums. I’ll have to see if there is any known beaming. If anything I could run them without the 045s and see how it sounds. It would be two less channels of amplification and DSP which would be nice. Im glad to see so many coming in and telling me to stick with the 3” beryllium, gives me a bit more faith in the driver.
I see that they cross the 435Be at 800hz in the 9800 and then let the 045Be take over at 10 kHz. Maybe that’s why people weren’t as big of fans???? I’m the SK2-3300 which these are from and are timbre matched to the 9900s, crossed the 435 a little higher at 850 and ran them all the way up to 20 kHz and then let the 045 handle 20 kHz and up, all 4th order slopes. I wonder if they used 4th order in the s9800, I’m sure they did.
I took a look at that sublime product you suggested. Looks like it’s a pretty nice, high quality unit. I’m a bit confused, does it actually let you run a 3 way, or just a 2 way and a sub? I see you have to specify what frequencies you want when you order, so I guess that means no playing around with frequencies? I don’t think I could get the combo I’d be looking for. If I went with the three way I’d run the sub from 0-850hz, mid 850-20 kHz, tweeter up from there, but if I eliminate the tweeter, are those last two even an option? Any time delay? They seem like premium quality, but lacking in bells and whistles. But I guess I’m comparing an active crossover vs DSP.
That’s great you tried all of those combinations, I’ve always wanted to try out that design by Curt. I was going to build the similar towers he designed using the Aura NS6 drivers for my little brother (forgot what that one was called) then he came out with the Uluwatu, which is the same basically, but has much better everything.
I’ll have to do a bit of reading on that, that’s all new to me. Off the top of your head should it offer better sound quality than the 2X4HD? Aren’t there also some pro options out there as far as digital crossovers or DSPs?
Dan
It'll do the frequencies you want. You can use one Sublime K231 for 2 way or 3 way, you will need two for 4-5 way. The frequencies are fixed on cards hence i like to call them a poor man's accuphase active crossover. Cards are cheap, just buy many around the xo ranges.
Again, consider the passive xo to extend the 2435Be, its surprisingly clean despite this kind of eq.
Its pure analog, no delay but very transparent and dynamic and hifi standards. I prefer this over the Trinnov FIR DSP and the Trinnov compared to the MiniDSP made it sound very compressed and lacked detail.
It's great, I just wish it was more transparent to match the 3" Be.
The 435Be’s are great drivers but they do roll off above 10K or so. I like passive set-ups and with the woofer setting the system sensitivity that roll off can be an issue. Attached is a measured pair of each you can see what the differences in roll off are between them.
The larger 4” have a longer phase plug in comparison and have less roll off. As far as Ti drivers the aquaplas coated JBL’s 4” sound quite good.
The 045Be is one hell of a tweeter although the sensitivity is a bit low. I would certainly have a listen mine are crossed at 6-7k so I can clearly hear them.
Running active make sure you have protection caps in line with both the 435Be and the 045Be. Expensive whoops if you DC them. A real issue with active is noise and not using the 045Be and adding EQ is going to drive up the noise level.
You would be better off using part the existing passive network if you can and potentially bi-amping. That puts a protection caps in place and the built in attenuation lowers the noise floor.
Rob 🙂
Attachments
Much of my source material (uncompressed CD track rips; no SACDs or vinyl), are 60s pop, r&b and soundtracks, which were often victims of excessively applied compression. And some tracks during multi-vocal passages and when orchestrations get busy sound “congested”; possibly due to poor miking/baffling (??). So, while not outright crappy (??), much of my music was certainly less than pristinely recorded and/or mastered, even though almost all were issued by major labels.
Therefore, how enjoyable or "listenable" would beryllium drivers, especially like https://josephcrowe.com/blogs/news/...river-test-review?_pos=3&_sid=e989429b4&_ss=r make much of my recordings?
Ditto this beryllium https://www.usspeaker.com/radian 745neoBepb-1.htm , though which doubtless Pierre had perfectly EQed? See posts #15,266, 15,276. https://www.diyaudio.com/community/threads/beyond-the-ariel.100392/page-764
Might you instead recommend the "neutral" sounding Yamahas JA6681B aluminum, with beryllium support "fingers"
Or the perhaps more likely the "warm" sounding B&C DMC50 paper cone?
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/threads/critical-midhorn-build.172704/page-5
https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/horns-and-2in-drivers/post?postid=1779050#1779050
And @ 17:29 to 25:01here?