JBL Crossover Question:

[tarior]

My bad. It's the parts list for the Murphy crossover that is widely available. Troels has the schematics without the values.

 

[E-Stat]

In my opinion, I would leave the design alone and concentrate more on the adjustments of the driver levels, balancing them out as best as possible.

I respectfully disagree. The speaker's Achille's heel is the waaay too high xover from midrange to tweeter leaving wildly inconsistent directivity in a very sensitive area. The same can be said for the L110 along with others of that era.

The current LSR6332 using the same size drivers drops it a good octave to 2.2 k where a five incher is operating in an optimum region.

 

[WaynerN]

Well you can disagree all you want. There should be at least a few octaves between the 2 drivers and there should also be a
boxed in area for the midrange.....

 

[E-Stat]

Well you can disagree all you want. There should be at least a few octaves between the 2 drivers

The problem starts with the overly high xover from woofer to midrange. I'm with Floyd Toole and the rest of the modern world in acknowledging that reproducing a 2.7 inch wave with a 4 inch piston is going to result in notably pinched dispersion at the top end of its response. Only to transition to a dome tweeter sitting in the middle of its sweet spot. The result to me is an hourglass shaped fun house mirror response that I find distracting.

Are you familiar with the higher end Harman line Revel? That's what Floyd uses in his own system. The Salon 2 crosses its 4" midrange at 2.3 kHz.

As for me, I'm delighted that JBL fixed those overt deficiencies with all of its current products. Are you aware of the xover choice for your Studio 520Cs or Studio 530s?

and there should also be a boxed in area for the midrange

Would you care to explain what that means?