Moving things around ...

bully

member
Jeepers, moving a few things took a coupla hours.
Lotta poundage, though.
Moved the Sansui G-9700, moved a few other things, and came up with a pretty stout, very good sounding set, especially for vinyl.
I moved the Yamaha M-80 to a different rack, and have it controlled by the Kenwood Basic C-2. The Technics SL-1300, an Onkyo T-9, and a Technics cassette deck and cdplayer make up the electronics. The M-80 is driving the FrankenL100's.
People, I am telling you this sounds FUN! Just great with some eclectic jazz fusion tunes. The Basic C-2 has what can only be described as a superb phono section.
The 1300 will give over to the 1400 Mk2 (oh boy, it shipped out this afternoon from the Sea-Tac area!!) when it gets here.
For the SP-25, I'm thinking about using red oak for the plinth.
Having moved the SL-1300 a couple of times this evening, dang, that is one HEAVY turntable. Whatever I decide to do for the SP-25, it will have to have a base that goes at least 20 lbs.
Well, the last album just ended, and I'm regaled by the sound of a happy ol' boxie chewing a pig ear. Before to much time goes, I'll need to get a recording of Rox at 'work.' It is hard to describe the multitude of sounds: snortles, chomples, gruntles, slorps, harumps ... just amazing.

To make the moves, I also had to disconnect the big Sansui and move it over to where the Yamaha was sitting. Y'know, when y'all get to 200 wpc and bigger gear, these things are hefty!
Man, I got tired toting those things from over there to over yonder.
Can't believe it's so late. Still waiting for Roxie's bedding to dry.

pete
 
Point and click Pete - no excuses now with your new digi camera!

We want to see what you've told us about in copious narrative this last year or so!

Bring it on!
 
BullY "Lots of power" Pete,

Why don't you post your Q's about the camera at the New Technologies forum?

Chris
 
PIX YES

Bully l really enjoy your posts vintage audio equipment plus stories of Roxie.

I want pics of Roxie eating the pigs ear ( pigs ear being a favourite of my dogs).:) OK ok also the equipment.

If you ever have a storage problem you know l can help there to ;no vintage equipment too big or too small for the bigmacc. Storage free to all AK members.:D
 
Thanks, Mac, I appreciate the offer! ;)
That little digi camera turned out not to have flash, and wouldn't take pix inside. So I took it back.
Mebbe my brother has bought a new one, and would sell me his old Kodak 3600 (or 3700).
I've got some 35mm film somewhere here. I need to do a top-to-bottom fall housecleaning anyway so I should be able to find some stuff that I've squirreled away and can't find. Like a few weeks ago I was poking around in a closet and found an Onkyo M-5140 amp.
Have spent the last two or three hours downstairs listening to my newest assemblage of gear (described above). What a sweet sounding group. I have really become smitten with those JBL's (the FrankenL's). I can only imagine that Tom must be in sonic heaven when he fires up his fabulous line-up!
I do have several pair that are distinctly better than the L100's, but that does not take away from the sound and the emotion of the the FrankenL's. They just have that "it".

more later, fer sure
 
bullypete,

Hey, watch it there with your "distinctly better than the L100's" talk there! :boxing: Bear in mind that your "FrankenL's" have none of the original drivers in them. You've got those foam-surround woofers with current-generation JBL/Infinity midranges and HPM-100 tweeters in those, correct? The L100's have one of the most minimal crossover networks ever put into a pair of speakers, so precisely-engineered driver selection is more than crucial for that cabinet than with most any other you could stuff some drivers into. I'd hope you'd get a pair of actual L100's in there before you go saying something's "better" than they are... :saywhat:
 
Nope, I have 2213 woofers and LE25 tweets, and a better than original midrange. The sound is fine. Very much as I remember the L100's.

I'm not sure how to read your comment. I very much enjoy the JBL sound. And, that is exactly what I have said numerous times, here in this thread, and in many other threads.
As I have been led to understand, the 2213 is the pro model of the the D123? Mine have been professionally reconed, and an excellent job of reconing was performed.
I do see the little smiley-thing, so I'm thinkin' you're not po'd, and I wouldn't know why, if you were. I'm not the most socially-adept person in the room (& there's only the Rocks Ann and I).

In my listening comparisons, the HPM-900 is distinctly 'better' in all respects: fuller, deeper, & yes more dynamic bass, cleaner, clearer, and more detailed and 'airy' through the mids and up.
Until the other day, the FrankenL's were driven by the G-9700, 200 wpc at ridiculously low THD/IMD. Now, I've got the very much superior M-80/C-2 combo powering them. The HPM-900 have only had the Kenwood KR-9600.
uh, she's ready to go out.

pete
 
The Phase Linear's are up here, but I think, and that is the key here, I think, that they are distinctly a 'better' sounding speaker system. As I've said, I'm comparing with the FrankenL's, but I have had the wonderful opportunities over the years to spend many many most enjoyable hours listening to the L100's.
I also mentioned that those distinctions are really not the most important aspect I'm thinking about when listening to the FrankenL's. I'm thinking they sound darn good, and very good with an eclectic variety of music! They are a whole lotta good fun to just get down and play the music.
Heck, for that matter, so are the CF-150, but I can't really play them often, what with the neighbors. Dang.
Like, here's a suppose. Duane and Dickie tradin' licks and the boys are keepin' up and those two drummers and wailin' on the skins. Yeah, if I want to catch all the details, I'll listen to the HPM.
If I want to catch the feelin' of being at the Fillmore, the JBL.
Does that grok?
Right now, if I could only keep four pair of mine, the two JBL and the PL & the HPM are the keepers. Nothing derogatory said or intended.

pete
 
bullypete,

Well, you just can't go calling those things you have "L100's." Now, at least you have the proper LE25 tweeters. But, while the 2213 might be the professional version of the 123 woofer, you don't exactly have 2213's there, Pete. You might notice that the cones are not white in color, nor do they have the "accordian fold" surrounds. Nor do they have quite the shape of the 123/2213 cone, which is "shallower" than what you've got. Nor is the ribbing on the woofer quite the same, either.

To be specific, the L100A (what most of us know as the "L100," with the midrange offset to the right of the center line) used the 123A woofer, the "A" standing for "Alnico." An "H" after the model number refers to "ceramic" magnets, which JBL switched do during the late 1970's. I don't recall if what you have has the "A" or the "H" after the 2213 model number. But, what is abundantly clear is that those 2213 baskets were "reconed" with some recone kit other than the 2213. They absolutely most certainly look like the 122A woofer's cones and surrounds -- the woofers used in the L166 Horizons and the L65 Jubals.

The bottom line is that you've got woofers substantially different than the original 123A's that define the L100's sound. My impression is that the 122A cone is a heavier cone than that of the 123A, and my impression also is that the foam surround is a "stiffer" surround than the accordian-fold surround attached to the 123A cone. I might also add that I have held both the 123A and the 122A woofers in my hands at the same moment in time, and the 122A woofer was considerably heavier -- JBL used a bigger, heavier magnet to power that cone than it used in the 123A woofer to power the "white woofer." Bottom line, I'm not sure exactly what you've got there, but I'm pretty sure it couldn't have quite the same sound qualities that the original 123A woofer would have in an L100 cabinet.

Moving on to the midrange, on what basis can you report that what you have is "a better than original" driver there? Do you have frequency response graphs or some actual documentation of the two different drivers? Have you heard them both in an a/b comparison? Have you done such a comparison with them mounted in the cabinets you're now using? I sure don't comprehend that you could have any basis to consider them "better." All I can comprehend is that the JBL/Infinity stuff made today is of far lesser quality than the JBL vintage/professional drivers from the older generations. How much did you pay for those new mids? The version of the LE5's that are still available from JBL are $90 apiece. Sorry, but I find it hard to buy the assertion that these new drivers not designed for this particular speaker system to be "better" than the true originals.

At any rate, the L100's have different crossovers than most anything else you can find. Most speakers have crossovers that roll off the lower driver as they roll in the higher drivers. i.e., the woofer rolls off while the midrange rolls in, then same again between the midrange and the tweeter. But, as I understand it, the L100 crossover doesn't roll anything off at all -- it just rolls the higher driver in, and the lower drivers continue to produce sound as high as they can go. In the end, this just means that it is probably more critical in the case of the L100 than in other speakers to use the actual, original drivers, or else you'll wind up with "gosh knows what" with whatever mishmash you bolt into those cabinets.

Finally, consider how the L100 woofer is not controlled in any way whatsoever by the crossover -- it operates full-range, at full volume. Most crossovers actually cut the woofer output considerably, to help it match the output and power-handling capabilities of the higher-range drivers -- those usually not able to produce the same amount of volume nor handle the kind of power that a woofer can handle. That makes the original woofer just that much more important to have in the L100 cabinet. I tested this with my L100's and my L166's when I had the latter. It was amazing to see how the L100 woofer no longer sounded like the L100 woofer when I put it into the L166 cabinet -- most very obviously, you could hear the effect that the L166 crossover had on that woofer.

All I'm really getting at is that you've got something there, but it surely isn't an "L100" speaker as currently configured. And, you can remember what the L100 sounds like, but if you really want to say that x sounds better than y, then you really ought to listen to them in an a/b test, rather than rely on what you may have heard a decade ago or so.

To put it in perspective, think in "car terms." Say you bought a 1969 Ford Mustang, but one without an engine. So, you put a Pinto engine in it, and then you go saying that, while you like your Mustang, you can certify that the Camaro and the Dodge Challenger are much faster than those '69 Mustangs. Or, if that's not charitable enough, let's call it a "427 Mustang," but again it had no engine, and you wound up putting a 302 engine in it. And then you go saying that the "427 Mustang" can't come close to the speed you get in your 396 Camaro or your 383 Challenger. You really don't have a "427 Mustang" to make that comparison with! You just have a Mustang with a 427 badge on the side, with some other thing sitting in the engine compartment.

Anyway, same here with your FrankenL's. Please don't call 'em "L100's," unless you break down and put the actual, original 123A woofers and LE5-2 midranges into them. You might like the sound of your FrankenL's, but in a comparison with a "real" pair of L100's, I think you'd find some quite significant differences. I've gotta admit that it grates me the wrong way to hear you call something "better than the L100's" when you're actually talking about speakers that don't have the L100 woofers nor the L100 midranges in them....

And now, I'll step off my soapbox! :p:
 
CONFUSED

Toots and Bully l think l have a solution for the main point raised in this thread.

"Who's speakers are better;Toots (Mr Original) or Bully ( Mr. Frankenstein).) ;)

Of course someone might be thinking Mac that wasn't the point; heh l never let facts or truths interfere in my quest for vintage audio.:eek:

Like jay stated "how do we know the effect of the "non-stock"drivers" etc? Answer is we don't without impartial professional evaluation.:p:

Guys you know what the solution is; you got it ship all speakers concern to Bigmacc for a free evaluation; l beleve a 12 month test is called for ( cover all the seasons).

Always here for you. Bigmacc.:D
 
Well, gosh. Y'know, I've continued to call 'em the "FrankenL's" throughout. I KNOW they are not originals. I HAVE spent long hours listening to the originals, many years ago. I remember how I enjoyed them, and I remember how I felt they compared to what I had at the time (CS-99A's & CS-88A's).
I just checked JBL's own spec list, and the 2213 and the 123A have the same specs.
My 2213's are the alnico models.
The physics of the equations clearly favor the PL P-530 and the HPM-900. Each of those speaker systems come with a much larger cabinet, cabinet construction easily on a par with the JBL cabinet. The woofer driver in the HPM-900 is considerably larger and heavy than the 2213/123A. Etc.

The bottom line on my comments has been that the FrankenL's have a wonderful sound, deep full bass, the mids are smooth and clear, and the highs are sparkling and open. I have been enjoying them immensely.
but, of course, I stand by my comments.
 
Folks,

Just commenting on this, and I quote:

"I do have several pair that are distinctly better than the L100's"

Again, whatever the "FrankenL's" might be, the thing they most certainly are not would be "L100's." Gosh, if we're going to say that "x" is better than "y," let's not be this loose with what we're calling these things, eh?

And, gosh yes, bully, a 2213 and a 123A might well have the same specs, but you still don't seem to recognize that the "2213's" you have were reconed with a different cone and surround than the "2213" used -- my point would be that the different cone and the different surround makes them "different." Same with the "different" midrange -- if you've got a different woofer and a different midrange in the speakers, chances are just really, really, really good that the speaker will sound "different" than the originals. If you like the sound, well, great! But, if you say other speakers sound better, well, do you think maybe just for a second or two that the original cabinets with the original crossovers might perhaps sound better than drivers that weren't engineered to be in those cabinets with those crossovers might sound, and that might have something to do with your thoughts regarding what sounds better? At any rate, so long as you don't call the things "L100's," I've got no beef.

I guess all I can say is that I come from the camp that stands there horrified at the thought of taking some classic vintage speaker, and just tossing in whatever drivers you get your hands upon. I do not agree with any concept that we're going to cook up something that sounds as good or better than what the engineers who designed these speakers did just by tossing in whatever drivers might be handy. I just shake my head in sorrow to see classic speakers on eBay whose owners at some point decided to just replace woofers with some car-stereo "God Knows What" woofers or whatever, and then they just threw away the fine vintage drivers that simply needed an inexpensive surround refoam job.

In the end, my attitudes toward this kind of thing comes from actual experience. I have swapped woofers between a pair of L100's and L166's, and I can report that I didn't like the results in either one nearly as well as the sound those speakers produced with the woofers that were designed for them. I have also replaced the LE5-12 midranges of my L150A's with the 104H-3 midranges from my old 4312A monitors. Gosh, I really liked those newer 104H-3 midranges -- they gave those 4312A's a wonderful, "exciting" midrange sound. So, I stuck 'em into my L150A's, and I was just very happy with that sound. I even went ahead and sold the 4312A's, sporting the LE5-12 mids out of the L150A's. But eventually.... It took about a month, but I came to realize that something wasn't quite right. I was hearing a "stridency" in some voices -- notably higher-pitched female voices. It wasn't something that you would hear in most music, but when you heard it, you heard it. So, I finally wound up purchasing a new pair of the original LE5-12 midranges directly from JBL/Harman, and I really came to respect the engineering that goes into speaker design -- the cabinet, the drivers, the crossovers, and the crossover configuration. Here we had two midrange drivers that were EXTREMELY close in "relation" to each other -- the 104H-3's being the "new improved" replacement for the LE5 series -- but something obviously wsn't right. I don't know if it was something in the crossover that didn't fit well with the 104H-3's in there, or perhaps it was just that they didn't match well with the other drivers in the system. Most certainly, looking around all the JBL catalogs, you don't see any situations where JBL combined the woofers and the tweeters from the L150A's with that 104H midrange.

At any rate, that's where I'm coming from. Sticking different drivers than "the originals" into a cabinet makes the speakers sound substantially different than how "the originals" sound. I would hope we could avoid making generalizations about a particular speaker if we're actually discussing a speaker that has been modified with something other than the original driver complement.

OK? Once again, off the soapbox for now!
 
In bully's defense he didn't butcher those cabinets he bought em' empty and has tried to put the original stuff back in. I beleive he has a lost pair of the great white woofers out there somewhere even that he bought in Europe in his quest to restore them.

I understand thoots since I to get on the defensive about my CV's.

But I believe the way all bullys post read to me was these sound better than that to HIM. I don't think he is meaning this is better than that but that to his ears with his setups this or that sounds better to him and him alone.

I mean cuz if both you are really saying whats better than what period and not what sounds better to each of you as the listener then you are both wrong.

My CV's are better than both of those puny bookshelves you are arguing over ;) :D ;) :D ;) :D
 
My version of this is as follows:

Both speakers might sound different, to say one sounds better than the other is a personal opinion. Some people like sub/sat systems, some like horns, some like electrostats, some like Cerwin Vegas, some like JBL, some like Paradigms, speakers are a very personal thing what one likes the other doesn't.

I also think bullypete's FrankenJBL's should pretty good; he put in some mighy fine drivers in those enclosures, and also should sound SIMILAR to a pair of JBL's - all the drivers in the speaker cabinet are JBL, and because if that should have more or less the same timbre.

The important thing is pete's having fun with his system, which is the whole point of this hobby. They may not be L100's but I bet they are mighty fine speakers.

Chris
 
I was thinking of that great scene in The Life of Brian ... :D
The FrankenL's do sound good. Got the SL-1400 Mk2 with that MC Ortogon MC10 cart in the system now. WAAHHH-HOOOO, that is some sweet sweet sounding LP system.
Yeah, it's prolly time to hit up the USPS again about how're they doin' tracking that package.
Or, somebody should send me some insurance money!
 
Back
Top Bottom