JTR Speakers. They can't be this good!!!

croseiv

croseiv

Audioholic Samurai
Some things can be inferred just by looking at a product with out having ever heard one. For example, look at these two speakers and tell me which one you think would sound better...It's a no brainer for me.



 
J

jamie2112

Banned
UUUUUmmmmmmm the 1st one? I just don't know hhhuuuummmmmm ok I like the orange woofers best........:D The other Pair are just way to cool to sound better than the orange woofers.......LOL
 
Last edited:
R

Robof83

Audioholic
It may be, the JTR would be a superb candidate for a modified cabinet. :)

-Chris

Just wanted to update this thread based on this idea. On another forum, the designer of the JTR speakers suggest not modifying the cabinets for reasons I somewhat understand but not entirely.

Here is the link http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=16794106&posted=1#post16794106 His post is #172.

He says that Dynamat lacks the mass to work in the kinds of cabinets used by the JTRs. Couldn't you just thicken the layer of Dynamat to increase the mass? This I don't entirely understand. The rest of his post I don't really understand either. Perhaps someone more knowledgeable like Chris or someone else could explain this to me.
 
WmAx

WmAx

Audioholic Samurai
Just wanted to update this thread based on this idea. On another forum, the designer of the JTR speakers suggest not modifying the cabinets for reasons I somewhat understand but not entirely.

Here is the link http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=16794106&posted=1#post16794106 His post is #172.

He says that Dynamat lacks the mass to work in the kinds of cabinets used by the JTRs. Couldn't you just thicken the layer of Dynamat to increase the mass? This I don't entirely understand. The rest of his post I don't really understand either. Perhaps someone more knowledgeable like Chris or someone else could explain this to me.
I think you mis-understand my meaning of modifying cabinets. :) Dynamat is actually a critical part of it; but not by way of a single side application. I typically add a lossy visco-elastic layer like Dynamat, then adhere a second sub-structure cabinet directly to the Dynamat. Doing this creates a constrained layer system. This uses the two stiff layers to focus a shearing action into the damping core, effecting maximum conversion of mechanical to thermal energy. Simply applying Dynamat to the walls has some effect, but no where near enough to effect large differences that are desired. And you can add more, but a threshold point is quickly encountered where even if you add 5x as much, the effect will be minimal on it's own. You really have to effect another mechanism, such as the constrained layer system I described.

Here is the measured wall vibration of an Ascend CBM-170 vs. one I modifed: http://www.linaeum.com/productinfo/other/ascend_cbm170se_wmaxmod/wallvibration_oem_vs_mod.gif

The modified version added 1/4" visco-elastic damping(similar to Dynamat) plus 1/2" re-enforced concrete 2nd inner cabinet layer, then extensive steel bracing. This is MY idea of a modified cabinet. Here is a picture of inside the modified cabinet before I installed the new back wall: http://www.linaeum.com/productinfo/other/ascend_cbm170se_wmaxmod/9.jpg

You can also do a similar modification without cutting the cabinet open. You would have to install the visco-elastic layer through the cabinet openings, then use a 2 part idustrial floor epoxy ($40 1 gallon kit available at Lowe's) to make the required sub-structure. You should adhere some metal screen to the back of the Dynamat before pouring the expoxy to ensure an ideal adhesion to the Dynamat. Build up to about 3/8" minimum wall thickness. Place some additional oak braces inside before pouring the epoxy. For small 2 ways, 1 Gallon kit should be enough. For the Triple 8s, at least 3 Gallons would be needed.

-Chris
 
Last edited:
R

Robof83

Audioholic
Thanks for the response. Does less vibration always equate to better sound?
 
rmk

rmk

Audioholic Chief
Just wanted to update this thread based on this idea. On another forum, the designer of the JTR speakers suggest not modifying the cabinets for reasons I somewhat understand but not entirely.

He says that Dynamat lacks the mass to work in the kinds of cabinets used by the JTRs. Couldn't you just thicken the layer of Dynamat to increase the mass? This I don't entirely understand. The rest of his post I don't really understand either. Perhaps someone more knowledgeable like Chris or someone else could explain this to me.
I understand your confusion, Jeff was being incredibly vague in his response to ru-yap's question on AVS.:rolleyes:

I think you are the perfect candidate for a custom build by Audioholics resident wizard. You just don't see old world craftmanship like this from any of the so called professionals.
l
:p
 
J

just listening

Audioholic
I went thru and read all of the posts, then I checked into the reviewer. The fact is that this is not a professional review. Just an AVS poster with some writing skill.

Based upon the design (I like Mark Seaton's work) what we have is a speaker system designed to bowl one over with higher volume sound pressure. That's what big drivers do, blast the listener. The tradeoff comes in macro dynamic detail, speed, etc..

I hope that some professional reviews can take place on these speakers. In the meantime during my business travels up and down the west coast I hope to run into these speakers and get a listen for myself. Until then, I'll stay on the fence.
 
R

Robof83

Audioholic
I think you are the perfect candidate for a custom build by Audioholics resident wizard. You just don't see old world craftmanship like this from any of the so called professionals.

:p
Actually I don't own the JTR speakers. I am working with an infinity beta 20 set up at the moment.
 
rmk

rmk

Audioholic Chief
I went thru and read all of the posts, then I checked into the reviewer. The fact is that this is not a professional review. Just an AVS poster with some writing skill.

Based upon the design (I like Mark Seaton's work) what we have is a speaker system designed to bowl one over with higher volume sound pressure. That's what big drivers do, blast the listener. The tradeoff comes in macro dynamic detail, speed, etc..

I hope that some professional reviews can take place on these speakers. In the meantime during my business travels up and down the west coast I hope to run into these speakers and get a listen for myself. Until then, I'll stay on the fence.
If you are ever in the Sacramento area I would be happy to let you hear them. I am a skeptic myself and it was hearing them that moved me to purchase.:)
 
R

Robof83

Audioholic
These are definitely one of the speakers I plan on auditioning in a few years when I get out of college. I'm also really interested in hearing some of Jim Salk's speakers.
 
R

Robof83

Audioholic
Well I would go listen to them now, but I don't wanna get all exited over something I can't even come close to affording.
 
WmAx

WmAx

Audioholic Samurai
I think you are the perfect candidate for a custom build by Audioholics resident wizard. You just don't see old world craftmanship like this from any of the so called professionals.
That was not a custom build, I'm afraid. That is the interior shot of an Ascend Acoustics CBM-170 in the process of modification to remove all cabinet resonance(s). I think it hardly matters if I did not clean up some excess adhesive run-over. This cabinet is vastly superior to most; it will not produce any audible cabinet talk. It's also very tough to cut concrete slabs very neatly to fit inside the unit properly. The external cosmetics were not reduced, here is the replacement back on the modified unit(original back was cut off to access internals for mods):





It's a lot easier to get 'neat' interior appearance when using more standard wood materials(MDF outer shell, 1/2" viscoelastic layer, PB inner layer, oak bracing placed in high density spacing configuration), as shown here internally for my computer speaker cabinets(these are the mid/treble top modules; woofer modules not shown), before completion:


But what does it matter if the inside (that you never see) has some excess glue pools or some other similar thing present?

-Chris
 
Last edited:
J

jamie2112

Banned
I don't get the busting of chops on this thread. An objective post was put up and even with the credentials of this member he is getting crapped on.Why? Because he knows what he is talking about resonance wise? I am stumped here. These cabs may be the bees knees but looking at their specs and weight I find it really hard to believe that they are resonance free.
 
J

jamie2112

Banned
Thanks for the response. Does less vibration always equate to better sound?
IMO Yes always but I am a picky studio engineer.............:D
I would like to hear the JTR cabs very much but I am almost sure what they are going to sound like.Remember I have used EVERY Pro speaker cab made and then some.The look alone of the JTR's looks like a club speaker with the scratchy felt on them.In no way am I dissing anyones speakers but I will have to hear them myself. Anyone have any in the LA area?
 
WmAx

WmAx

Audioholic Samurai
Based upon the design (I like Mark Seaton's work) what we have is a speaker system designed to bowl one over with higher volume sound pressure. That's what big drivers do, blast the listener. The tradeoff comes in macro dynamic detail, speed, etc..
While what you say is 'common' as a matter of practical results with most such designs, it is not an inherent limitation. With the proper design/execution, the pro drivers can produce the same amount of resolution as the very best planar or electrostatic speaker systems.

-Chris
 
MidnightSensi

MidnightSensi

Audioholic Samurai
IMO Yes always but I am a picky studio engineer.............:D
I would like to hear the JTR cabs very much but I am almost sure what they are going to sound like.Remember I have used EVERY Pro speaker cab made and then some.The look alone of the JTR's looks like a club speaker with the scratchy felt on them.In no way am I dissing anyones speakers but I will have to hear them myself. Anyone have any in the LA area?
I wish clubs were still using direct radiating drivers, these bloody horns are gunna make me go deaf. Even my booth monitors on Fridays is horns (see signature). Nothing against horns, other than my hearing going down the drain.

I think the JTRs were built more intentionally for portable sound, not a club speaker, and weight is factorered into that. He has a nicely braced cabinet though. Remember some of the wood weight is lost from the three 12" holes cut in them.
 
R

Robof83

Audioholic
I don't get the busting of chops on this thread. An objective post was put up and even with the credentials of this member he is getting crapped on.Why? Because he knows what he is talking about resonance wise? I am stumped here. These cabs may be the bees knees but looking at their specs and weight I find it really hard to believe that they are resonance free.
I certainly wasn't trying to crap on him.(I apologize if it came across like that) I was simply trying to ask questions about things I legitimately don't understand.
 
newsletter

  • RBHsound.com
  • BlueJeansCable.com
  • SVS Sound Subwoofers
  • Experience the Martin Logan Montis
Top