SpeakerFest! JBL/Phase Linear/HPM-100...

[thoots]

gyusher,

Hmmm, I can't complain about the bass from my L150A's. In comparison to stuff like the L100's and the Phase Linears, I can't find anything in the L150A bass that I don't prefer by the bushelful.

That said, I wasn't quite satisfied with the L150A bass when I first got the speakers. It was "deep," but it just never seemed to match up with the rest of the speaker's output quite right. I knew I could do it, and I hesitated for quite a while about it, but I eventually got in there and took out almost all of the weights off of the passive radiators.

The difference was just night and day -- I gave up a tiny bit of "lower bass" that the extra mass made possible, but I absolutely got the balance I wanted. I've run the L150A's through some of the Sheffield Lab stuff that the light and clean L100 bass always whipped through, and the L150A's whip right through it just as well, though with that lower "foundation" filling out the bass with plenty of power, keeping up right along with everything else.

Don't know if you ever played around with the mass on the passives -- they're just kind of like big stiff carboardish "washers" -- but going for "efficiency" rather than the "lowest bass" sure made a big difference in my enjoyment of the L150A's!

thoots

 

[gyusher]

Mass loading

gyusher,

Hmmm, I can't complain about the bass from my L150A's. In comparison to stuff like the L100's and the Phase Linears, I can't find anything in the L150A bass that I don't prefer by the bushelful.

That said, I wasn't quite satisfied with the L150A bass when I first got the speakers. It was "deep," but it just never seemed to match up with the rest of the speaker's output quite right. I knew I could do it, and I hesitated for quite a while about it, but I eventually got in there and took out almost all of the weights off of the passive radiators.

The difference was just night and day -- I gave up a tiny bit of "lower bass" that the extra mass made possible, but I absolutely got the balance I wanted. I've run the L150A's through some of the Sheffield Lab stuff that the light and clean L100 bass always whipped through, and the L150A's whip right through it just as well, though with that lower "foundation" filling out the bass with plenty of power, keeping up right along with everything else.

Don't know if you ever played around with the mass on the passives -- they're just kind of like big stiff carboardish "washers" -- but going for "efficiency" rather than the "lowest bass" sure made a big difference in my enjoyment of the L150A's!

thoots

Yes I did some mass loading of the PRs. . . They are great speakers, dont get me wrong I just prefer the L-112s more. Basically the same drivers without the PRs. . . Now I really prefer the L-112 to any L-100. . . In my mind there is no comparison. I have also owned the L-250 and the L-212s of all the JBLs I have owned I still prefer the L-250 for a big speaker and the L-112 for a bookshelf speaker, however given its size and weight it is a pretty big bookshelf.

I think my trouble was that I started with the L-112s and listened only to them for a long time (over a year) then World HiFi (Macon GA) where I bought them had a closeout on the L-150As, I bought them for 800 bucks new in the box. The first night I over extended a woofer on one of the 150s. . . fortunatly it "poped" back into place and I never had anymore trouble with it. I did learn not to spin up the volume on either of the JBL speakers. Take it up slow and they will play louder than I care to listen, even showing off... At that time I was using an Adcom GFA-1A for power on the L-150s and a SX-1250 on the L-112s.

 

[thoots]

The first night I over extended a woofer on one of the 150s. . . fortunatly it "poped" back into place and I never had anymore trouble with it.

Ouch! I also did an over-extender with a pair of 4311's. That was back in college, and I =was= pretty well cranking it at the time. I also "popped" it back into place, and all seemed well, though I seem to recall popping that thing out occasionally thereafter.

Man, not only does the woofer pop out, but your eyes sure bug out when it happens, too!

thoots

 

[gyusher]

over extending woofers

Ouch! I also did an over-extender with a pair of 4311's. That was back in college, and I =was= pretty well cranking it at the time. I also "popped" it back into place, and all seemed well, though I seem to recall popping that thing out occasionally thereafter.

Man, not only does the woofer pop out, but your eyes sure bug out when it happens, too!

thoots

It is an experience you truly remember. We were both fortunate. . . My friend did the same thing with his HPM-100s and was not so lucky. He did it with 20 watts too. . .

 

[mech986]

Hi Thoots,

Could you give us some details on the camera and lighting you're using for your photos? They're so clear and clean, I feel like I could reach out and caress the veneers on your JBL's...well maybe gaze at from afar

I'm looking for a good digital camera to use for posting and auctions so any help would be useful. Maybe even start another thread on camera selection.

Regards,

Bart

 

[thoots]

Bart,

Well, I'm not so sure you need a super-duper camera -- mainly, you just have to try to get some decent light, put your camera on a tripod, and never, ever use the flash!

I currently use a Canon Pro1, the 8-megapixel camera at the top of their "non-DSLR" PowerShot line. And, yes, I'm very happy with the picture quality I've been able to get out of it.

But, again, you can get great results with just about any of the current cameras on the market. "Lighting" has a ton to do with it -- and the most evil thing you can do is to use the flash to illuminate your equipment. Flash just blows everything out -- avoid it as much as possible!

In the shots I've posted here, along with pretty much all the shots I've ever taken of equipment, I've pretty much used the same technique:

1. Get as much "natural light" into the room as possible.

2. Augment that light with a bit of artificial light if that'll help. For instance, I brought along a little flexible-neck lamp when I visited Jay -- you can see it in the foreground of my "whole bunch of speakers" shot, above, in the foreground of the picture. I use one of those "Reveal" natural-light bulbs in it, and it sure helped to bring out the details of all the speaker drivers and such.

3. Put your camera on a tripod. Indoors, you're generally not getting enough light for a steady handheld shot, so get it on a tripod.

4. Use your camera's "two-second delay" feature. Most cameras have some kind of "delayed shutter" mode like this, which will let you hit the shutter button, then get your hand off of the camera before it actually takes the picture. That's how you get rock-steady pictures.

And that, folks, is all there really is to it! Beyond that, I guess I could mention that I take lots of shots, so I have literally hundreds to choose from, and I use my camera's "bracketing" feature to take multiple shots at slightly different exposure settings, so again I have even more different shots to choose from.

Hope this helps!

thoots

 

[gyusher]

big pics

I am curious how you post such big pictures?? I mean over the 800x600 limit and with file sizes up around 144k instead of 125. . .

Just curious? BTW I too love your pics and I agree never use a flash period if you are doing glamor shots. . .

Bart,

Well, I'm not so sure you need a super-duper camera -- mainly, you just have to try to get some decent light, put your camera on a tripod, and never, ever use the flash!

I currently use a Canon Pro1, the 8-megapixel camera at the top of their "non-DSLR" PowerShot line. And, yes, I'm very happy with the picture quality I've been able to get out of it.

But, again, you can get great results with just about any of the current cameras on the market. "Lighting" has a ton to do with it -- and the most evil thing you can do is to use the flash to illuminate your equipment. Flash just blows everything out -- avoid it as much as possible!

In the shots I've posted here, along with pretty much all the shots I've ever taken of equipment, I've pretty much used the same technique:

1. Get as much "natural light" into the room as possible.

2. Augment that light with a bit of artificial light if that'll help. For instance, I brought along a little flexible-neck lamp when I visited Jay -- you can see it in the foreground of my "whole bunch of speakers" shot, above, in the foreground of the picture. I use one of those "Reveal" natural-light bulbs in it, and it sure helped to bring out the details of all the speaker drivers and such.

3. Put your camera on a tripod. Indoors, you're generally not getting enough light for a steady handheld shot, so get it on a tripod.

4. Use your camera's "two-second delay" feature. Most cameras have some kind of "delayed shutter" mode like this, which will let you hit the shutter button, then get your hand off of the camera before it actually takes the picture. That's how you get rock-steady pictures.

And that, folks, is all there really is to it! Beyond that, I guess I could mention that I take lots of shots, so I have literally hundreds to choose from, and I use my camera's "bracketing" feature to take multiple shots at slightly different exposure settings, so again I have even more different shots to choose from.

Hope this helps!

thoots

 

[thoots]

I am curious how you post such big pictures?? I mean over the 800x600 limit and with file sizes up around 144k instead of 125. . .

Gosh, I just "host my own" pictures and then use the board's "image" tag to display them -- piece of cake. I sure don't need to be "uploading" them and filling up the forum's server space.

Quite strangely, the "Camera and Photography" forum doesn't seem to allow linking to your own pictures, only giving you the option to "attach" them. I got in the middle of replying to a message in there, until I pretty much exhausted all of the ideas I could come up with to link to a picture on my server.... I might have to chat with the moderator over there -- very strange, indeed!

thoots

 

[gyusher]

I see

Now I understand. . . I was really just curious as there are times especially if I have something for sale or even sometimes when I want to show something and it might be just a fraction larger than allowed. Especially nudies. . . Sometimes in order to show the detail you need it is damn hard to get the file size down below the 125 limit. I agree with the forum rules but like life sometimes there are exceptions.
Thanks for clearing it up for me. . .Now it makes sense to me.

Gosh, I just "host my own" pictures and then use the board's "image" tag to display them -- piece of cake. I sure don't need to be "uploading" them and filling up the forum's server space.

Quite strangely, the "Camera and Photography" forum doesn't seem to allow linking to your own pictures, only giving you the option to "attach" them. I got in the middle of replying to a message in there, until I pretty much exhausted all of the ideas I could come up with to link to a picture on my server.... I might have to chat with the moderator over there -- very strange, indeed!

thoots

 

[B3Nut]

Ron,



That's actually Jay's SX-535, powering the main comparison test we're doing in this picture. With efficient speakers like these, it was plenty of power, and it sounded just fine and dandy to me! :thmbsp:

thoots

An SX-535 in good running condition will surprise you...20wpc into 8 and 25wpc into 4, but the one my dad and I had years ago ran Maggie SMG's to decent listening levels. Not concert-hall volume, but still a good listening level. And the sweet top and liquid midrange these have are wonderful, no fatigue. IMHO with efficient speakers these low-power guys are the bee's knees...sweet as honey. :thmbsp: Loved that 535...

TP

 

[CharlieBee]

Flash is getting a bad name and deserves it when the flash is the dingy little thing on the typical point and shoot class cameras (many of which are not cheap at $500). If you had a Nikon D-70 or similar camera with a hot shoe on top to take real flash, great pictures can be taken. The flash should be aimed at 45 degrees and an index card or similair should be used again at 45 degrees to provide indirect (or bounce) flash. A low white ceiling can also be used.

Charlie

 

[bully]

Listening to the P-530 and with the music, the soundtrack of Charlie's Angels: Full Throttle, that has some very deep bass tracks the sound is as advertised. They are some excellent sounding speakers. They are being excited by the Yamaha M-80/Carver C-1 and a Technics' cdplayer.

 

[bully]

Sounding great this evening. Bass is solid and deep. Mids and highs are sublime. Excellent sounding speaker systems.

 

[bully]

I still think the P-530 are an excellent speaker system.

 

[bully]

What with the recent ADS/HPM comprasion I thought I'd bump this up.
I love my P-530.

 

[Retro Stereo]

An SX-535 in good running condition will surprise you...20wpc into 8 and 25wpc into 4, but the one my dad and I had years ago ran Maggie SMG's to decent listening levels. Not concert-hall volume, but still a good listening level. And the sweet top and liquid midrange these have are wonderful, no fatigue. IMHO with efficient speakers these low-power guys are the bee's knees...sweet as honey. :thmbsp: Loved that 535...

TP

Yeah, but I'll bet you didn't hook that little 535 up to those Infinity's in the background! LOL!


Retro

 

[Toka]

What are the specs of the L-150A's? I've found a copy of the manual online but it didn't list them...at least, not in the conventional way. I did see a little blurb in there about JBL not publishing that sort of thing, but still, I'm curious.

 

[mech986]

From the Lansing Heritage site, for all things JBL

Here's the link to the JBL L150 Millenium Brochure

http://www.lansingheritage.org/html/jbl/specs/home-speakers/1979-l150.htm

Second page to whet your appetite:

Bart

 

[Toka]

Thanks for that...I think that is what I found before, but unless I'm impossibly dense (not unlikely) I don't see the frequency response?

 

[mech986]

You're right, JBL doesn't list a frequency response within +/- x.x db. As they like to say, anyone can produce any number of responses depending on the conditions of the testing/measuring.

They did publish one frequency graph from this brochure which is specified in a particular environment. You can see this on the top left corner of the last page.