JBL S99 Lancer modification

Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.

I just bought a pair of these, and noticed today- if I skip the throat adaptor, a Fountek Neo X 3.0 true ribbon tweeter fits snugly between the bolts which connect the horn to the adaptor, and the head of the bolts clamp the faceplate of the Fountek securely to the horn flange.
I'm crossing active, 3500hz 4 slope, and am not sure if this is hard on the ribbon or not.
It sounds wonderful, better by a little than the Fane, Selenium, or Peerless I already have. If it doesn't kill the ribbons, pushing the air mass in the horns, I see no reason to spend large on expensive drivers for these.
Despite their 5db lower efficiency than the 12" full ranger, the boost from the horn has me cutting the power to the tweeters to less than half that to the full rangers.
Anyone but me think it's probably safe, given the low power going to the tweeters, typically about a half watt or less?
 

Attachments

  • IMG_20190618_185819.jpg
    IMG_20190618_185819.jpg
    726.7 KB · Views: 121
  • IMG_20190618_185655.jpg
    IMG_20190618_185655.jpg
    914.8 KB · Views: 116
I just bought a pair of these, and noticed today- if I skip the throat adaptor, a Fountek Neo X 3.0 true ribbon tweeter fits snugly between the bolts which connect the horn to the adaptor, and the head of the bolts clamp the faceplate of the Fountek securely to the horn flange.
I'm crossing active, 3500hz 4 slope, and am not sure if this is hard on the ribbon or not.
It sounds wonderful, better by a little than the Fane, Selenium, or Peerless I already have. If it doesn't kill the ribbons, pushing the air mass in the horns, I see no reason to spend large on expensive drivers for these.
Despite their 5db lower efficiency than the 12" full ranger, the boost from the horn has me cutting the power to the tweeters to less than half that to the full rangers.
Anyone but me think it's probably safe, given the low power going to the tweeters, typically about a half watt or less?

wow gorgrous, just gorgrous. how they they sound? any more pictures?
 
I just bought a pair of these, and noticed today- if I skip the throat adaptor, a Fountek Neo X 3.0 true ribbon tweeter fits snugly between the bolts which connect the horn to the adaptor, and the head of the bolts clamp the faceplate of the Fountek securely to the horn flange.
I'm crossing active, 3500hz 4 slope, and am not sure if this is hard on the ribbon or not.
It sounds wonderful, better by a little than the Fane, Selenium, or Peerless I already have. If it doesn't kill the ribbons, pushing the air mass in the horns, I see no reason to spend large on expensive drivers for these.
Despite their 5db lower efficiency than the 12" full ranger, the boost from the horn has me cutting the power to the tweeters to less than half that to the full rangers.
Anyone but me think it's probably safe, given the low power going to the tweeters, typically about a half watt or less?
come on baby talk to me :)
 
come on baby talk to me :)

Sorry, still deciding between cedar wings, cedar wings with more Bubinga veneer on the sides, or Acacia side panels.
Maybe some pics later this week.
Meanwhile, I've done the full ranger first order bandpassed, at 125 hertz, and 1500 hertz, splitting the midrange to a Neo 10 planar at about 4000 hertz, to tame a dipole peak. Now a Peerless compression driver handles things above 7000 hertz.
Works very well, and I can't hear the crossover points, something I've only achieved twice before, and never with first order filtering.
Bass is being experimented with, using a stack of 4 fifteen inch open frame woofers, and a big plate amp.
Any compression driver I've tried sounds better in this horn, than in my 12" Dayton waveguides, RCF horns, or 511B horns, but I can't credit the wood for that, since I don't have a metal 1505B for comparison.
It's a fun project so far.
 
Sorry, still deciding between cedar wings, cedar wings with more Bubinga veneer on the sides, or Acacia side panels.
Maybe some pics later this week.
Meanwhile, I've done the full ranger first order bandpassed, at 125 hertz, and 1500 hertz, splitting the midrange to a Neo 10 planar at about 4000 hertz, to tame a dipole peak. Now a Peerless compression driver handles things above 7000 hertz.
Works very well, and I can't hear the crossover points, something I've only achieved twice before, and never with first order filtering.
Bass is being experimented with, using a stack of 4 fifteen inch open frame woofers, and a big plate amp.
Any compression driver I've tried sounds better in this horn, than in my 12" Dayton waveguides, RCF horns, or 511B horns, but I can't credit the wood for that, since I don't have a metal 1505B for comparison.
It's a fun project so far.

I am trying to decide between this horn and this one: TRACTRIX-600 - Horns by Auto-Tech

what would you suggest now that you have 1st hand experience with one of them?
 
I am trying to decide between this horn and this one: TRACTRIX-600 - Horns by Auto-Tech

what would you suggest now that you have 1st hand experience with one of them?

I have to admit, I chose these based on the fact they are beautiful furniture for my living room.
Having said that, they do provide what I was looking for- controlled wide ant tall dispersion, with angling limiting sidewall reflections.
I haven't heard the Tratrix horn your link shows, but it appears well designed.
I'm hopeful these will be my last speakers.
The treble is smooth and lush, the midrange sings, with the planar blending seamlessly with the 12" full ranger's output, taking over well before cone breakup, Doppler distortion mostly eliminated by large midrange surface area, and putting bass duty upon 4 15" woofers.
If both were equal in price and performance, I'd choose mine, for the looks.
 
Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.