JBL 100t vs. HPM 100

[needforspeed]

I believe I can make a credible argument that a simple RTA measurement will tell quite a bit, as well. Since it's in-room including reflections, carefully taken, it characterizes more what you're actually hearing as opposed to the performance under ideal conditions.

Here's the curves for HPM-60 from an earlier thread, the top one showing adjustability. This may indicate the kind of range the designer built into the product family. Looks like you have to crank both mid and tweet down to tame it. You can also see why HPM-60 might be preferred over HPM-100 by some listeners:

Excellent reply Zilch (As Always). When I first wired up my speakers, The highs were "Bright" I guess you could say, And the mids overrun by that crazy freq range of the Woofer. After Schooling myself on EQ hook-up/set-up, And after a week of tweaking, I found "Cutting" the upper range, And increasing the mid points, Really changed these speakers..For the Better. They are'nt really muted, Not the right term, Lets say all the drivers are working as a team now, None are "Ahead" of the others. Using these with just a Bass/Treble knob ain't gonna cut it. Even adding more power to them made me have to "Re-tune" them. They seem very sensitive to change. Room/Location, Even the Interconnects. Any of this make sense. Appreciate your thoughts.

 

[Zilch]

Any of this make sense. Appreciate your thoughts.

In the course of reading up a bit on these, I encountered several discussions of revoicing them here on AK and elsewhere, which are available for review. There are some fairly obvious entry points for approaching that, but I hesitate to suggest anything from my own experience with JBLs, as it may not translate.

To do that right, I'd be starting from scratch, essentially, with the drivers, box, and an active crossover, as if it were a new design. Perhaps some tweaks might improve them, but I'd have to work with them like you did to make that determination. On the other hand, these may be one of those "They are what they are, let them be..." situations where such effort is better expended on other projects and platforms, particularly if people like them as-is.

None of this is to suggest there's anything wrong with them, per. se.; I just believe it's worthwhile to determine and discuss what they actually are, as against what we think they are, or what we might want them to be, in which regard the frequency response curves alone provide a wealth of information for due consideration.... :thmbsp:

 

[Damage]

Quality vintage speakers are like quality vintage wine, and I like my Zepplin with HPM100!

You are doing yourself an injustice.

 

[Damage]

There are two things wrong here.

1) Cones suck as tweeters.
2) West coast sound design philosophy.

So if you honestly think that any design thought went into them being used off-axis, you'd be seriously mistaken. They were designed to be "loud n' proud!" To argue otherwise is pointless. Someone needs to dig up the old sales literature.

What I see is a more benign impedance plot than I would have expected and a freg response plot that off axis i'd like to see at about 15 degrees but as is has very forward upper mids and lower treble. After that, depending on what is being referenced, could easily be construed as rolled off highs. IF the speaker was 90db sensitivity speaker, it would have extension to close to 20khz with a very broad shelf from 2k to 13k. I'd expect a perception of remarkable detail on axis, probably "shouty" with more laid back response at15 -20 degrees off axis. I can also understand why some might like these better stacked. The FR lends itself well to the comb filtering effects that would be encountered by doing so.

 

[sleddogman]

BOOM, TIZZ!

Question: Would the "flat" settings for Presence (2) and Brilliance (7) shown for the 4310 be applicable to the 4311/L100 as well?

 

[Zilch]

There are two things wrong here.

Left and Right.... :

 

[Zilch]

BOOM, TIZZ!

Question: Would the "flat" settings for Presence (2) and Brilliance (7) shown for the 4310 be applicable to the 4311/L100 as well?

4310 has a different (real) crossover. L100/4311 "Laboratory Standard" is 5, 5 or middle on both controls, depending on the variant.

[It ain't flat, tho, as we know.... ]

 

[sleddogman]

<snip>
When I first wired up my speakers, The highs were "Bright" I guess you could say, And the mids overrun by that crazy freq range of the Woofer. After Schooling myself on EQ hook-up/set-up, And after a week of tweaking, I found "Cutting" the upper range, And increasing the mid points, Really changed these speakers..For the Better.

N-F-S: Where do you currently have the controls set on your HPM-100s, or did you leave them "flat" (at 0) on the cabinets and effect the aforementioned changes through an outboard EQ system?

Enquiring canine minds want to know...

 

[sleddogman]

4310 has a different (real) crossover. L100/4311 "Laboratory Standard" is 5, 5 or middle on both controls, depending on the variant.

[It ain't flat, tho, as we know.... ]

So, is that 5/5 as "flat" as they'll ever get through control adjustment, or is there something that gets them a bit closer to "the ideal"? Thanx Zilch!

 

[Zilch]

That's as flat as they get, in my experience, with the bass boom and the mid peak at basically the same level.

The 4310 adjustment response contours show what happens: The drivers' bandpasses overlap such that it's not possible to dial them flat in the sense of "linear."

In L100 (except for the first ones, drivers-in-line,) and 4311, there's only highpass on the mid and tweet, so everything runs full range above the respective crossover points. Woofer runs free in all of them.

Until someone posts the HPM-100 crossover schematic, it's hard to tell what's going on. I see four inductors, three capacitors (4.3, 3.0, and 0.15 uf) and one 10-Ohm resistor on the board in another thread.... :yes:

 

[Tripqzon]

HPM-100 Crossovers

SWN-117 - 1st generation

SWN-158 - 2nd generation

 

[needforspeed]

In the course of reading up a bit on these, I encountered several discussions of revoicing them here on AK and elsewhere, which are available for review. There are some fairly obvious entry points for approaching that, but I hesitate to suggest anything from my own experience with JBLs, as it may not translate.

To do that right, I'd be starting from scratch, essentially, with the drivers, box, and an active crossover, as if it were a new design. Perhaps some tweaks might improve them, but I'd have to work with them like you did to make that determination. On the other hand, these may be one of those "They are what they are, let them be..." situations where such effort is better expended on other projects and platforms, particularly if people like them as-is.

None of this is to suggest there's anything wrong with them, per. se.; I just believe it's worthwhile to determine and discuss what they actually are, as against what we think they are, or what we might want them to be, in which regard the frequency response curves alone provide a wealth of information for due consideration.... :thmbsp:

Agreed, I've read a few posts here on various changes done, From changing the tweeter all together (To an after market brand) Dayton, Even a JBL Ti. Didn't list the model number, To using an active crossover as you mentioned. I preferred doing something externally as they did not sound bad enough to tear them apart. I tried and tried to find the "Sweet Spot" I knew was there for my style of music, And listening area. It is my option, And just mine, The engineers knew what they were doing, But I think they crossed the line in this case searching for the ultimate in Clarity in the speakers. That upper spectrum "Ringing" Had to go (Unless your a classical music listener). I like Rock music, Played mid volume to loud, And it would drive you out of the room after an hour. Now my test Disc's are perfect (To Me), Without tearing apart the speaker. Even tilting them back helped. Spending some time with these, will pay off with a very "Powerful" sounding speaker, And would wipe out alot of complaints, Putting an EQ in the loop is a must, To "Tone" things down. The Mid/High L-pad, Isn't enough. Thanks again Zilch.

 

[dnewma04]

There are two things wrong here.

1) Cones suck as tweeters.
2) West coast sound design philosophy.

So if you honestly think that any design thought went into them being used off-axis, you'd be seriously mistaken. They were designed to be "loud n' proud!" To argue otherwise is pointless. Someone needs to dig up the old sales literature.

There are three things that are wrong with your comments.

1.) Some cone tweeters are very nice, the peerless cones used in old Mc gear that was just recently discontinued performed remarkably well with flat response out to near 20khz and not half bad off axis response if that is something you'd seek in a speaker. There aren't a lot of 'great' cone tweeters, but there are a few and they perform quite well as tweeters. Even some full range cone drivers do quite well as "tweeters"...Diatones, creative sound, tangband, lowther, fostex, triangle, bandor, hi-vi, jordan and audax all make or made speakers with cones that would extend to the real limits of human hearing.

2.) If the people want a west coast sound, you build a speaker with the west coast sound. Simply good business, to me.

3.) Not once did I indicate they were designed for off axis listening. But, in interpreting the plots provided, I commented that off axis performance actually looks decent. What I don't know is how well the off axis response compares when measured off axis to the left and right. As Ray indicated, because of the lack of symmety, the off-axis response may vary.

Of course they were made to be loud and proud and to sound "good" to the people buying them. Chances are, if they had a perfectly flat frequency response, the people that bought them would have looked for something else that had more "detail' and "presence".

 

[Damage]

touche!

 

[Damage]

Left and Right.... :

I've got one coming. We shall see if it arrives in one piece AND in working condition.

 

[needforspeed]

N-F-S: Where do you currently have the controls set on your HPM-100s, or did you leave them "flat" (at 0) on the cabinets and effect the aforementioned changes through an outboard EQ system?

Enquiring canine minds want to know...

Set flat, Outboard EQ. I'm gonna post the break down on the settings, But I'm sure there are variables, And listening preferences. The purpose was to "Turn Down" the treble in the upper spectrum, And bring forward, Slightly, The middle. Bass settings were slightly tweaked to the + side also. We are only talking small changes here, It turns out these are pretty sensitive to change, Turning the speaker slightly, Or tilting them back, As I did, Would through off all the settings, And change the whole dynamics of the speaker. Hell, One night I changed the interconnects from the Monster ones I had to some Canare DIY cables and my wife said they sounded different. I never told her I made any changes. Bottom line, You can't just wire them up, and start rock'n, They need to be "Tuned" to your liking.

 

[Zilch]

What is there about HPM-100 that would make them inherently more "sensitive" than others in this respect when it comes to optimizing their performance?

I think we've already discovered that in this thread.... :yes:

 

[needforspeed]

What is there about HPM-100 that would make them inherently more "sensitive" than others in this respect when it comes to optimizing their performance?

I think we've already discovered that in this thread.... :yes:

Agreed.

 

[Big Jim 007]

I stumbled upon this one from a link in another thread wherein Zilch recommended it....

Geez, I own a pair of L100A's and I without knowing what in the hell I was doing (other than listening) adjusted the presence down about 2db and about 1db on the brilliance....they sound very flat and natural...I have them raised about 8" off the ground and on some Auralex Gramma's which really tightens up the bass.

I love my JBL's and doubt that they will ever leave me, even if I get some mega bucko new tech speakers!!!

 

[dmusgrave]

Zilch you need to make a road trip to my place and bring some JBL's that sound better than my HPM-900's.

Sucks living in the middle of nowhere, I can't do any comparison listening