It is reasonable to believe that most will not like the extra woodwork to make the driver look good/finished in a cabinet, me included. However, that extra woodwork would not deter me from buying an extraordinary driver, albeit this remains to be seen with this Jordan. It is also reasonable to believe, given the increased competition (Markaudio and Dayton, etc.) which was not present when the JX92s was first released, Ted Jordan would not create another obstacle for potential diyers, unless it yields much high higher performance.
Having said the above, and as much as I liked the original JX92s and think Ted Jordan is a talented designer and gentleman, I would opt for a similar performing driver without the hassle of doing extra woodwork.
Having said the above, and as much as I liked the original JX92s and think Ted Jordan is a talented designer and gentleman, I would opt for a similar performing driver without the hassle of doing extra woodwork.
The whole speaker is smaller in width/height and depth, which will make it easier to fit in triangular enclosures, narrow cabinets, etc.
The wider circular bezels of some of the drivers we commonly use have certainly precluded them being designed into some of our standard shaped designs, and have provided challenges to cabinet design.
dave
The wider circular bezels of some of the drivers we commonly use have certainly precluded them being designed into some of our standard shaped designs, and have provided challenges to cabinet design.
dave
ah yes, but with drivers that perform at this level, the sonic benefits far outweigh the extra design and fabrication "issues"
ah yes, but with drivers that perform at this level, the sonic benefits far outweigh the extra design and fabrication "issues"
Indeed. And making us think harder pushed the entire family forward.
dave
FWIW, I used to rarely fit grilles to my DIY speakers but the commercial actives I'm using at present have them. In addition to protection, not being able to see the drivers moving aids the impression that the speakers themselves are not projecting the music. For that reason alone, I'd add grilles in future.
... 84 db sensitivity?
Progress or just... a fools errand?
I know that the britts have a thing for speakers that require 1k watts to come alive, but come on? this is a step back.
Why?
I think MarkAudio have better alternatives here.
About the same as the A7. Althou closer in size to the A10.2 which is ~87.
dave
Call me old-fasioned, but I will need to hear this driver before complaining about it.
+1
dave
The new shape doesn't bother me other than requiring a bit of extra woodwork. I prefer my speakers behind grilles, especially the alloy cone variety; the shiny surface is too tempting to the "ooh what's that made of then?" brigade.
My complain on the new shape is just because to replace my damaged Jx92 drivers in my vtl cabinet i have to go again for the EAD drivers.
Northernsky
... 84 db sensitivity?
Progress or just... a fools errand?
I know that the britts have a thing for speakers that require 1k watts to come alive, but come on? this is a step back.
Why?
I think MarkAudio have better alternatives here.
/Jacozz
we havent even seen the updated plot of the Eikona let alone know how they sound...
Call me old-fasioned, but I will need to hear this driver before complaining about it.
+1
dave
OK, Mr Bond, you're old-school
add me to that list - I'd be happy to hear Ted's latest work ( my only experience with products bearing that label were very underwhelming - due to one pair being damaged, a second pair from the group buy of several years ago, and a pair in what I think was a compromised enclosure design)
If this new offering meets the high expectations, the issue of dealing with the frame shape could be considered as a test of DIYer's skill; if not, then even the simplicity of a round shape and the brand name won't assure market success.
... 84 db sensitivity?
Progress or just... a fools errand?
That's given on the preliminary spec and it looks like the new driver is rated at 8Ω. It will be interesting to see what the final spec looks like but good drive unit design is like any other field of engineering - a balance.
And it depends what you want to use it with - if the power handling is better, there isn't an issue. 100w will give a respectable 104dB output at 1 metre on peaks. The Jordans have never been candidates for sticking on the end of mini-power valve amps. They're modern drive units.
Most DIY'ers have access to CNC machines, so the odd shape isn't a big deal.
CNC = Carefully Navigated Chisel? I shall wait for some listening tests, and reflect that every design is a collection of compromises. If you agree with those compromises, you may like the design, if not, not.
Happy New Year, y'all
I have the "old" Jx92, and in my opinion, they need plenty of watts to come alive... and they are 87 db or so... but I like them for their ability to make decent bass in a pretty small box.
I guess we all have different sonic preferences. I prefer high efficiency drivers
But, of course, let's wait and see.
I guess we all have different sonic preferences. I prefer high efficiency drivers
But, of course, let's wait and see.
... and they are 87 db or so...
None of the units i've measured have been that high.
dave
Hello guys! What type enclouser do you think will be the best for this new driver?
Thanks!
Thinking of an 'in wall' ML-TQWT .. just an idea I've got for these
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.
- Home
- Loudspeakers
- Full Range
- New Jordan driver - preliminary details