More Dynamics Please
Addicted to Fun and Learning
And I guess that comparing the A130 and 530 would offer a pretty good clue as to how the A170 and 570 would compare.
I got the JBL A130 this week. Here are my JBL A130 measurements and crossover mod I did.
The crossover is as simple as it get, and after playing with crossover optimization the end result is a very simple mod adding one 3.3 ohm resistor in serial with the Woofer capacitor.The mod results with the simulation and actual measurements looking very promising.
Please find the attach pictures of the circuit the simulation and the actual measurements before and after the mod.
The measurements are done on tweeter axis 0.5m from the speaker. It looks like the distortion in the 0.5-2KHz also improved.
What does putting a crossover in would accomplish that EQ can't? Honest questionI did very short listening comparing one speaker with the mod and the other original , and the sound was smother to my ears. The tonality was closer to my JBL 306II after the mod.
I did some short listening with the A130 after the mod and compare them to other speakers that I have and they are really amazing.
They are much better than the Elac ub5 that I think are awful shouting speakers. They were better than the KEF Q150.
Amazingly they sound very similar to the Polk LSIM703 that I love.
What does putting a crossover in would accomplish that EQ can't? Honest question
I did very short listening comparing one speaker with the mod and the other original , and the sound was smother to my ears. The tonality was closer to my JBL 306II after the mod.
I did some short listening with the A130 after the mod and compare them to other speakers that I have and they are really amazing.
They are much better than the Elac ub5 that I think are awful shouting speakers. They were better than the KEF Q150.
Amazingly they sound very similar to the Polk LSIM703 that I love.
Do you have sources to the above claims? The one research thread here by user ctrl shows that an expensive/better crossover makes zero difference to a speakers' measurements. Subjectivism not withstanding.EQ cannot fix all issues that insufficient crossover design bring to the table like time align correction , avoiding cone breakup , and so.
EQ should be the last mod to the speakers after sufficient crossover design.
Do you have sources to the above claims? The one research thread here by user ctrl shows that an expensive/better crossover makes zero difference to a speakers' measurements. Subjectivism not withstanding.
Mate you gotta be a lot more convincing than that. You can't just say things sound "better" after modding without actually having the data to back it up. Need scientific data to back it up...All of those threads were basically about replacing a crossover's parts with more expensive, audiophool approved, "designer" versions and not about the actual design of the crossover filters...
Mate you gotta be a lot more convincing than that. You can't just say things sound "better" after modding without actually having the data to back it up. Need scientific data to back it up...
What does putting a crossover in would accomplish that EQ can't? Honest question
Out of curiosity I checked next in line JBL A170 which has extra driver and seems both A130 and A170 have same tweeter and 5.25 inch polycellulose woofer/s). Mesuring A170 would probably be difficult so in forum members experience...
1) can anyone tell what are the implecations of moving A130's 3.2Khz crossover point to A170's 1.8Khz and 2.8Khz) ?
2) Also can anyone guess dispersion and distortion wise what would be pros and cons of having 2 crossoverpoints amongst others issues if any.
Thanks and Regards
Thanks Jmudrick. I presume extra driver in A170 (Compared to A130) would further have reduced distortion at lower end ?
It is also interesting that the article in stereophile suggest some sort of port antiresonance which probably does not contribute to midrange like A130. I wonder if A130 can further improved by port adjustment/mods ?
Thanks Jmudrick. I presume extra driver in A170 (Compared to A130) would further have reduced distortion at lower end ?
It is also interesting that the article in stereophile suggest some sort of port antiresonance which probably does not contribute to midrange like A130. I wonder if A130 can further improved by port adjustment/mods ?
Think we can call me pessimistic about true acoustics for A170 but that's what i am after Amir used his wonder Klippel robot (thanks) to analyze Revel F35, what i mean is we tend to think about the positive logics as A130 must be improved as for A170 where one more cone transducer is added to relieve single cone for A130 so two must absolut be better than one, another thing that doesn't help is for A130 @ObjectAudio (thanks) report ab fabric the crossover is as simple as it get.Perhaps. With the A170 I still see that pesky behavior at 850hz in room but generally the ragged behaviors are easily corrected with a Harman curve EQ and it does play loud as I need.