I know a guy who has a pair of Jordan Jx92s.
He has them in a 13 liter bass reflex. He complains that he lacks warmth in the midrange. He wonders if he can replace the driver with one from Alpair.
Unfortunately, I haven't heard the Jordan Jx92s, so I can't recommend any in particular. Maybe Maop can be in the right direction or not.
What do you think about this?
Anyone listened to the Jordan Jx92s?
He has them in a 13 liter bass reflex. He complains that he lacks warmth in the midrange. He wonders if he can replace the driver with one from Alpair.
Unfortunately, I haven't heard the Jordan Jx92s, so I can't recommend any in particular. Maybe Maop can be in the right direction or not.
What do you think about this?
Anyone listened to the Jordan Jx92s?
Try a baffle step compensation circuit to improve the midrange.
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/threads/jx92s-and-baffle-step-compensation.91385/
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/threads/jx92s-and-baffle-step-compensation.91385/
I only "listened" to mine, in an unfinished TL, very briefly both with and without crossing over to Aurum Cantus G2Si ribbon -- Jim Griffin's classic design. Sounded (to me) impressive but somewhat old-fashioned (sorry). Certainly not warm. Having just done the Alpair 5.2 TLonken, sure I would prefer it as being more lively and articulate, and deeper than expected at mid-50s hz, but extension-wise it is far from Jordan on both ends. If your friend could give up such wide and flat frequency response with largely flat phase, to trade for midrange warmth or palpability, yeah there are candidates. Just-discontinued Fostex FE108ez(Sigma); copies of classic Diatone P610 (I like Orgue alnico and Correct 5" version available in China); almost any vintage British alnico 4-8" including oval radio speakers; almost any modern paper cone whizzerless. None of the above comes close to covering fullrange though.
p.s. I believe the Jordan is a bit recessed 2-4khz so would move up the BSC/XO to compensate.
p.s. I believe the Jordan is a bit recessed 2-4khz so would move up the BSC/XO to compensate.
Last edited:
Most logic would be a Mark Audio Alpair 7MS, but i don't think that bass reflex will be tuned right for the driver when it was for the JX92, specs are different. The size may fit, but the port will have to be recalculated. A 5cm diameter vent of 12.5cm long is what it would need in that encolusre.
I replaced JX92s 3 times. Kept trying them, the rough upper mid/top makes them really hard for me tolisten to.
The MAs that are the same size are the A10s. Both A10.3 and A10p will fit 13 litres (near optimal for the A10.3).
dave
The MAs that are the same size are the A10s. Both A10.3 and A10p will fit 13 litres (near optimal for the A10.3).
dave
He want to use same box.
The hole diameter for driver is little more then 11cm.
It is in a box that is directed upwards with a spreading cone over it.
It spreads 360°
The hole diameter for driver is little more then 11cm.
It is in a box that is directed upwards with a spreading cone over it.
It spreads 360°
Omni eh? That would change response curve from cone area-weighted to radius linear-weighted, favoring HF. (At least when I tried it on Lowther PM6A after Harman Kardon Citation X 360.) It would also require much higher raw SPL spread 360 degrees, especially tough on the midrange output. Perhaps you can get more info from your friend how he dealt with these interesting design challenges ;-)
BTW the cutout diameter is 113mm not 110 commonly-seen.
I would suggest "stacking" the Jordan with a driver known for its warm midrange (any on my earlier list or an actual soft-cone midrange), played together. I have complementary pairings that really worker well as "bipole".
BTW the cutout diameter is 113mm not 110 commonly-seen.
I would suggest "stacking" the Jordan with a driver known for its warm midrange (any on my earlier list or an actual soft-cone midrange), played together. I have complementary pairings that really worker well as "bipole".
Last edited:
I have had the Jordans for many years, I agree with Jim Griffin, he really should try a BSC filter to adjust the response to his liking. Most full range drivers benefit from one. He can use his baffle dimensions to calc an appropriate filter. Or try a 1.5 mH inductor with a 5 or 6 ohm resistor in parallel as a start.
I have received some more information. The driver sits in a tube with an outer diameter of 15 cm.
He can make a little bigger hole if needed.
He is not the one who designed the speaker.
Omni yes.
I will perform the BSC filter.
He is in the process of changing drivers.
There is something special about the Omni. I have not tried omnidirectional radiation before. Maybe there are other requirements for the driver. It is indeed an unusual solution.
The baffle is minimal and slightly larger than the driver.
As I said, he wants more warmth in the midrange. Damping down the upper register should maybe work.
Last edited:
Possibly, although it depends on positioning and room acoustics. If it's just the JX92S facing vertically upward without any kind of deflector, then it's entirely at the mercy of the room, especially its reflectivity, along with its own & the listener's position in it. Assuming that it's not hard faces everywhere, that usually (not invariably) tends to result in an attenuated top end at the listening position relative to direct radiation. Baffle-step may exist, but again will depend on positon: if those tubes are well out from boundaries & on stands will make a dramatic difference to if they're sitting on the floor, rammed into corners. An RL shelving circuit or an RLC notch may help as has been noted -depending on circumstance. The advantage here of course is that it's entirely reversible. 😉
The "baffle" here is the deflector. Without deflector cone/ball/bulb-stem there would be no stereo imaging. The issue appears to be radius linear-weighted (reflection) vs cone area-weighted (direct). Perhaps some deflector curve exists (for a specific driver cone) to "shape" the frequency response for a target horizontal plane (seated or standing head-height). Daunting though 🙂
I also can't think of another 4" fullrange driver that can put out sufficient SPL that a deflected radius/thin slice delivered enough midrange many meters away.
I also can't think of another 4" fullrange driver that can put out sufficient SPL that a deflected radius/thin slice delivered enough midrange many meters away.
In fairness there can be (stereo imaging), especially with those intended to reflect off a front wall or into a corner. Whether it's 'accurate' is another question though. 😉 With omnidirectional types, you're really just trying to massively increase the ratio of reflected to direct radiation, to the point where there's so much it swamps out individual modes, or creates such a dense comb-filter that it's near-as indistinguishable. Rare for that to happen with absolute success on a consistent basis though, which is one of the reasons (along with a larger number of studio-engineers getting used to stereo mixing) they dwindled out of the mainstream from the early '70s.
A lack of subjective 'warmth' in the midrange to me would imply an excess of output over that BW rather than insufficent, so trying some form of EQ centred on, say, 1KHz - 3KHz & trying to pull it down a dB or two may be worth a shot. Probably better (certainly cheaper) than just trying to ram other drivers in at random in the hope you might eventually get something that suits -and that's ignoring box loading.
A lack of subjective 'warmth' in the midrange to me would imply an excess of output over that BW rather than insufficent, so trying some form of EQ centred on, say, 1KHz - 3KHz & trying to pull it down a dB or two may be worth a shot. Probably better (certainly cheaper) than just trying to ram other drivers in at random in the hope you might eventually get something that suits -and that's ignoring box loading.
He says no reflector.
Maybe 60 cm high stand on the floor.
Strange construction. I think they was made a long time ago.
Maybe 60 cm high stand on the floor.
Strange construction. I think they was made a long time ago.
The reflector is the cone above it. They really need to be tailored to a specific drive unit, so I'd be inclined to try an LCR centred on about 1.5KHz for a couple of dB of nominal padding of the midrange, or an LR to shelve down the top end. This is ultimately the problem with subjective basis though -nobody here really knows what 'warmth in the midrange' means. We can guess, and we may be right, but it's just a guess, since what we interpret that as meaning isn't necessarily what the owner does. 
My guess is he thinks the sound is sterile and that he might not prefer the sound of a metal cone. Just a guess.
Are there those who prefer a paper cone or a plastic one.
Are there those who prefer a paper cone or a plastic one.
Last edited by a moderator:
You can try to change damping. If the box is very well damped, maybe even stuffed then less damping brings more "warmth" and "liveliness".
You can try putting the box close to back wall if there is too much mids and not enough upper bass to bring the balance back without equalizing network or EQ.
I tried with fullrange drivers an amplifier with current drive:
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/...n-to-current-drive.389985/page-7#post-7227106
This helps everything in the sound: better transients and more highs and lows. Classy sound with much less distortion.
You can try putting the box close to back wall if there is too much mids and not enough upper bass to bring the balance back without equalizing network or EQ.
I tried with fullrange drivers an amplifier with current drive:
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/...n-to-current-drive.389985/page-7#post-7227106
This helps everything in the sound: better transients and more highs and lows. Classy sound with much less distortion.
