• The move to the new server is done. There are some software and database maintenance updates in process. This has us passing the hat around to help out. We appreciate any donations. Seriously, even a dollar helps. The payment page may be found here - https://www.audiokarma.org/support.html

Do JBL speakers live up to their hype?

You guys do realize that the LE14A (L220), LE14H (L220A), Le14H-1 (250ti et al), and LE14H-3 (1400 Array) are different drivers, right?

It's like saying you don't like Fords because they are all Edsels or don't like Chevy's because they are all Corvairs.

It's not the first time I've had to roll my eyes at a poster in this thread for dismissing the "LE14" out of hand since, well, all LE14s MUST be the same driver! :rolleyes:

I clearly specified LE14A in the quoted post and even mentioned the LE14H in another post about my L222s. At one point in the thread, I even acknowledged preferring other drivers to any of the LE14 variants.
 
You guys do realize that the LE14A (L220), LE14H (L220A), Le14H-1 (250ti et al), and LE14H-3 (1400 Array) are different drivers, right?

It's like saying you don't like Fords because they are all Edsels or don't like Chevy's because they are all Corvairs.

It's not the first time I've had to roll my eyes at a poster in this thread for dismissing the "LE14" out of hand since, well, all LE14s MUST be the same driver! :rolleyes:

"You guys do realize that the LE14A (L220), LE14H (L220A), Le14H-1 (250ti et al), and LE14H-3 (1400 Array) are different drivers, right?"

Yes we do Jeffery, but thanks for reminding us. :)


"It's like saying you don't like Fords because they are all Edsels or don't like Chevy's because they are all Corvairs."

Actually not a very good analogy, a better automotive analogy would be the small block Chevy V8 which was in production with, minor changes (bore diameter & stroke length etc) from 1955-2002. The basic block designs stayed very similar kind of like the LE14X series woofers.


"It's not the first time I've had to roll my eyes at a poster in this thread for dismissing the "LE14" out of hand since, well, all LE14s MUST be the same driver!"

Yes thats true, and likely won't be the last...:yes:
 
Since whenever I heard LE-14s, of whatever type, I was unimpressed I lacked the motivation to become expert on the driver's variations. That I'm not familiar with all the varients of the driver does not mean that those I think sounded bad didn't sound......well bad.

Nor does it logically follow that those variations I'm unfamiliar with would sound good to me. It's possible but not a certainty.
 
I clearly specified LE14A in the quoted post and even mentioned the LE14H in another post about my L222s. At one point in the thread, I even acknowledged preferring other drivers to any of the LE14 variants.

I apologize to you and hwirt, I merely inserted your quotes as a counter-point. I shouldn't have stated "you guys" to include you guys :D

And I own or have owned the LE14H, LE14H-1, and LE14H-3 but never a plain old Lansaloy surround LE14.
 
Since whenever I heard LE-14s, of whatever type, I was unimpressed I lacked the motivation to become expert on the driver's variations. That I'm not familiar with all the varients of the driver does not mean that those I think sounded bad didn't sound......well bad.

Hah! How true.

I wasn't a fan of the LE14 when it first came out. I'll admit to being a bit of a 15"-JBL snob (now an 18-inch-JBL snob; I've grown :D ), but they just weren't that impressive. Sort of like the D123 compared to the D130 and 130A early on. You got the impression that the D123 was a compromise designed to fit inside a 16"-stud-wall spacing. The LE14 was designed (and promoted) as offering a big-speaker sound in a 12"-woofer-size cabinet.

Which accounts for why I was so slow to embrace the L250/250ti later in life. And probably why I chose the 4345 over the 1400 Array when I had that choice to make. No regrets, but I do have new-found respect for the 14" JBLs of modern day design.
 
Also remember: "More data, less wank!"
I'll be doing a shoot out later this week L88's vs Nova 5b's. Virtually identical dimensions, weigh within a few pounds of each other, one is two-way the other is three way (with dual tweets) and both have 12" drivers. The first thing that will come out of the mouth of a "typical" JBL "guy" will be "yeah well that is not representative..." yada yada yada. Hey, if the L88 can't smack down the Nova to the same ratio as the difference in retail price and JBL hype, then it really does come down to a lot of hype. I'm expecting the L88's to win, by a landslide, based only on price, hype and legendary name. If they don't, no excuse on the planet can change my opinion on the subject.

For the record, neither has been modified or altered, they're close enough in age for this shootout, though the Nova's are older, and since the 123a is legendary (and so far I'd say rightfully so) on it's band width performance, the fact that one is a two-way and the other a three-way, should matter little.

Next shootout will be half a dozen speakers, should be entertaining.
 
I apologize to you and hwirt, I merely inserted your quotes as a counter-point. I shouldn't have stated "you guys" to include you guys :D

And I own or have owned the LE14H, LE14H-1, and LE14H-3 but never a plain old Lansaloy surround LE14.

No problem Jeffery, your commentary is appreciated. This is all about enjoying the hobby and exchanging ideas. And having a little fun..
 
I ran L220As and 250tis in the same room where I could A/B them at a flick of a switch. Nobody will convince me that the LE14H/PR15 in the L220A sounded just like the LE14H-1 in the 250ti. Or that both were bad or both were good. They were absolutely different.

I concede that it's entirely possible that somebody may dislike both speaker systems (I no longer listen to either), but unless they took the time to remove the drivers and build exactly the same box to A/B the different drivers, then it's possible they could be mistaking "systems" for "drivers".
 
Different crossover points (more than likely slopes, as well), different tunings, different position of the driver in the room. Yes, I'd expect them to sound different. :)
 
Different crossover points (more than likely slopes, as well), different tunings, different position of the driver in the room. Yes, I'd expect them to sound different. :)

I had all that stuff in my original reply, but pared it down.

Didn't want to dilute the point that all LE14/LE14X variants sucked :yes:
 
Also remember: "More data, less wank!"

The facts are that you went off on tangents in your replies, in regards to my post about having to pay a premium for a pair of highly regarded JBLs( that I'd like to own).
Referencing "bashing" of L100s, art movements Impressionism and Realism????":),
inexpensive JBLs( even though I don't need a lecture on how to buy a pair of speakers),
JBL bashing in general ,
demands of which speakers I own and what I paid for them is moot compared to the real life going $rates$ of a pair of highly sought after JBLs...
I just happen to think there's a couple pair of speakers that sound as good as a JBL and sells for half the costof a JBL, generally speaking.
 
Last edited:
Notwithstanding the JBL engineering involvement with the Pioneers, even JBL fans don't put the L100s up on a pedestal for much beyond their marketing success. We all know they were derived from a control monitor designed to mimic the ubiquitous Altec studio monitors of the day.

What JBL fans are you talking about? You can only go so far with marketing and then the product has to stand on its own.

And what is this "ubiquitous Altec studio monitor" you mention? If the 4310/4311 came in like a steamroller and displaced most of them, the Altec monitor must have had a serious deficiency just waiting to be exploited.
 
demands of which speakers I own and what I paid for them is moot compared to the real life going $rates$ of a pair of highly sought after JBLs...
I just happen to think there's a couple pair of speakers that sound as good as a JBL and sells for half the costof a JBL, generally speaking.
Thanks for that clear declarative sentence.


And what is this "ubiquitous Altec studio monitor" you mention? If the 4310/4311 came in like a steamroller and displaced most of them, the Altec monitor must have had a serious deficiency just waiting to be exploited.
Well, you could just Google it. But wait, let me do that for you: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Studio_monitor or here: http://www.audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?4408-JBL-Technical-Notes-Volume-1-Number-15&p=40110&viewfull=1#post40110
 
Last edited:
What JBL fans are you talking about? You can only go so far with marketing and then the product has to stand on its own.

And what is this "ubiquitous Altec studio monitor" you mention? If the 4310/4311 came in like a steamroller and displaced most of them, the Altec monitor must have had a serious deficiency just waiting to be exploited.

Ok, here's the history.

http://www.audioheritage.org/html/history/jbl-pro/1960s.htm

Nutshell, a great driver series, the Altec-Lansing 604 duplex speakers, were installed in fairly large cabinets and were used as monitors by industry professionals in music, studio, and film production. The fairly famous A7 was also developed by Altec-Lansing to provide similar sonic reproduction in theatres and performance venues of the 50's and 60's. These 604D series drivers and A7's are still highly prized speakers today, and many like/love they way they sound and work. So these are the speakers that literally everyone was using Circa early to mid 60's across the US. Were they with "serious deficiency"? Sure, but at the time, they were state of the art with respect to what was needed, generally smooth but limited output on the extremes of frequencies, high output sensitivity (especially with generally limited output tube amps of the day), and pretty consistent performance and sound characteristics (important for producers, engineers, and musicians using these tools). Was it high fi? Well, for some yes, but few knew, could buy, or even house such large and expensive speakers.

Ask around today though about the 604D and revised 604E duplexes and A7's and for such "deficient" speakers, they sure do get a high value and rating in today's markets, domestic and abroad.

Due to a critical mistake on Altec's part in making the cheaper 605 driver a priority for monitors, the industry didn't like them. Enter JBL and the first attempt making a large studio monitor based on the D50SMS7, essentially an S7 load (like a JBL Olympus with single woofer) in an industrial cabinet. What helped them was Capitol Records liking what they heard (a somewhat smoother frequency response) and they bought the successor 4320 speaker (consumer L200). The 4310/4311 was designed to specifically sound like the Altec-Lansing monitor that everyone was using but in a smaller package (could fit more into a soffit space for the new multitrack recording process. Here then could studio's now replace their much older Altec units with newer and in some cases, better sounding JBL monitors. Couple that with revised modern looks and it became the thing to do, especially with new bands in the 60's coming into the recording scene. The old Altec's still looked like that monitor in Les Paul's studio of the mid to late 50's (nothing wrong with that but upgrading and sales proved the modern looks were important).

So the 4310/4311 speakers did what they were designed to do - work and sound like an industry standard so people were familiar with them and could do what they had always done. And they sold a ton of them and the consumer L100 was a similar success. Later versions of Studio Monitors had much better, flatter, frequency responses as well as tuning into issues of directivity, power response, frequency extension, etc. (434x and 44xx series). That all came from very good engineering, testing, manufacturing, and yes, sales and marketing. JBL continues to do all of those things in the pro market, even today, with the LSR series of monitors, the Vertec and Architectural Series, as well as many other product lines to address all needs, niches, and budgets.

Do all the speaker sound "good or great"? Not always, but these are professional products to do professional (and semi-pro, amateur) work. Are they HiFi? Only people can judge that for themselves. But very few companies in the loudspeaker business have been around for as long, have a long history of engineering prowess and mostly manufacturing excellence as JBL. Sure there's lots of other smaller or limited line companies that make great loudspeakers. But JBL is one of the best out there, IMO.

I'll select out the relevant part of the link above for the next post.

Bart
 
From Lansing Heritage link above:

"JBL would get its foot in the door of the broadcast and studio segment of the professional market in the 1960's as well. As in the cinema market, they would be up against their greatest rival, Altec Lansing. Altec had a lock on the studio monitor business with their 604 Duplex and A7. Were it not for a misstep of Altec in 1962, JBL may never have gotten the opportunity to enter and eventually dominate this market. That misstep was Altec's introduction of the 605A Duplex. The 605 was introduced as the next generation Duplex and replaced the previous 604D. However, it's primary development objective was cost reduction as opposed to improved sonic performance. The magnetic motors of this driver were significantly reduced in size compared to the preceding 604D. It resulted in a 3db drop in sensitivity in addition to subtle changes in sonic character. Industry response was entirely negative. Sales of the 605A dropped significantly in comparison to the 604D. It resulted in such a backlash, that for the first time, major record companies began considering alternatives.

At the time, JBL had developed the D50SMS7 as their first dedicated studio monitor. It consisted of the S7 home component kit installed in an industrial cabinet. JBL was having a very difficult time breaking into the market with this system until the Altec 605A introduction. All at once, they found a receptive industry. In particular, Capitol Records had a relationship with JBL through Bill Thomas. Capitol had a facility in the vicinity of JBL's Casitas headquarters and Bill had become acquainted with their management. Bill convinced Capitol to try the D50 monitor once the 605A backlash had become evident. Capitol was very pleased with this system. They were impressed enough that they eventually standardized all of their studios on JBL monitors.

Eventually, Altec had to admit their error and reintroduce the 604 as the 604E Super Duplex. However, by then, the genie was out of the bottle. The close of the decade saw the development of two significant JBL monitors that expanded their customer base beyond Capitol Records. The first was the 4320, which was a refinement of the D50. It used a higher cross-over frequency for increased power handling and better integration between the horn and 15" bass driver. The result was a studio monitor that had flat axial response and flat power response - something that the 604/5 could not match. It resulted in widespread industry acceptance.

The second significant JBL monitor from the late 60's would become an industry legend. That was the 4310 bookshelf monitor. The 4310 had a unique design goal. That was, to mimic the sonic character of the industry standard 604 in a small package. Even though JBL was making inroads in the monitor business, they could not displace the 604's reputation as an industry standard. What is interesting, is that the 604 was anything but accurate. It had a pronounced midrange peak and a high frequency response that is noticeably rolled off. However, because it had become ubiquitous in studios throughout the 40's and 50's, it became a reference that all studio engineers knew how to work with. This was arguably more important than accuracy since it was a consistent basis of comparison.

Bob Fine, a prominent New York studio owner, set the original design objectives for the 4310. The need for a small package was the result of the introduction of eight track recorders. Bob's first approach to using this technology was to install a monitor for each individual track. It was not possible to mount eight 604's in a control room, and hence his request to JBL to develop a compact monitor. While this approach to monitoring would not last long, the small package 4310 that resulted from this demand soon found use in new studio applications.

The 60's saw the rise of small independent studios. The 4310 was perfect for their smaller control rooms. The 4310 was also small enough to be mounted directly on the console bridge for nearfield monitoring. This had the great benefit of minimizing the effects of room acoustics. The close proximity of the monitor meant that the engineer was exposed to a high proportion of direct sound from the monitor, and lower levels of sound reflected off of walls and ceilings. It is these reflections that can greatly degrade the sound of a loudspeaker.

There is an interesting anecdote on the development of the 4310 that speaks to the empirical nature of loudspeaker design during that era. Ed May was the JBL engineer responsible for the development of the 4310. He took an existing two-way design, the L88, and added the LE5 driver to increase the midrange output to match the 604's peaked response. Corporate pride precluded acquiring a 604 to make a direct comparison. However, so well known was the 604 "sound", that Ed May had no trouble replicating its sonic character through subjective listening tests."
 
One critical thing to remember is the loudspeaker and audio industry as a whole was rapidly expanding and learning new things all the time in the 50's and 60's. However, much of the knowledge of speaker building was mostly experimentation - the Thiele-Small papers were still a long ways away and designing and building drivers to exploit these TS parameters was not know at the time. So Altec and JBL were working with talented designers and production people to make the best they could with what they had (slide rules, analog computers, tube and early solid state amps and preamps, and their ears!
 
The Beatles at Capitol working with the Altec monitors (probably 604D/E).

3439044_618294.jpg
 
The Beatles at Capitol working with the Altec monitors (probably 604D/E).

3439044_618294.jpg


Nah. Every time I mention that they were an abortion, one of the guys on the JBL forum is adiment that the Beatles were mixed on 605s! :sigh:

(Doesn't it say 605 in the pic?)
 
Back
Top Bottom