The Vintage JBL West Coast Sound becomes the…

jaxvon

jaxvon

Audioholic Ninja
Swerd said:
Yes, they not only are classics, those old paper drivers in general are probably better than any 3-way you could buy today for $2,000 a pair. I decided that $130 for crossover parts was a lot less than new speakers. I'll pm a parts list to you. When you hear them again, with a proper crossover, you will be glad you did it. They still have many of the qualities that made the JBLs from the 70s so good.

As far as power goes, anyone who had JBL L-100s knows how sensitive they were. I ran mine for years with a 30 watt Marantz receiver. A few years ago I replaced that with a Denon HT receiver that delivers 75 watts/channel. With the new crossovers, I do have to turn them up louder, but it is easily handled by that receiver. I have also listened to them powered by a separate amp, a B&K ST-140 that produces 105 watts/channel. That is somewhat better, but not by a big margin. I am looking for a good used B&K or Hafler 2-channel amp that I could power the new JBLs with. My goal is at least ~120 watts/channel at a tightwad price of $1/watt.
I'm a fan of the B&K ST-202 Plus amp (200wpc), but I can't find one listed on eBay or AudiogoN at the moment. My dad has his driving some Vandersteen 2CE Signatures and it never runs out of juice. Of course, you could always jump on the A500 bandwagon :) $179 shipped...
 
Swerd

Swerd

Audioholic Warlord
jaxvon said:
I'm a fan of the B&K ST-202 Plus amp (200wpc), but I can't find one listed on eBay or AudiogoN at the moment. My dad has his driving some Vandersteen 2CE Signatures and it never runs out of juice. Of course, you could always jump on the A500 bandwagon :) $179 shipped...
Great minds think alike! How do you like the Vandersteens?

Used B&K amps are usually in good condition and work very well. I like the idea of a class A predriver followed by a class A/B mosfet output section. Since I last posted, I've lined up a used B&K EX4420, 200 wpc at the desired $1/watt price. This model is a younger cousin of the ST-202; B&K says it was made from 1993-98. B&K has a pdf file on it's web site that lists the specs on all its older models http://www.bkcomp.com/pdf/previous amp specs.pdf. The owner used it to drive some Martin Logan electrostats that were power hungry. It weighs 42 lbs!:eek:
 
jaxvon

jaxvon

Audioholic Ninja
Swerd said:
Great minds think alike! How do you like the Vandersteens?

Used B&K amps are usually in good condition and work very well. I like the idea of a class A predriver followed by a class A/B mosfet output section. Since I last posted, I've lined up a used B&K EX4420, 200 wpc at the desired $1/watt price. This model is a younger cousin of the ST-202; B&K says it was made from 1993-98. B&K has a pdf file on it's web site that lists the specs on all its older models http://www.bkcomp.com/pdf/previous amp specs.pdf. The owner used it to drive some Martin Logan electrostats that were power hungry. It weighs 42 lbs!:eek:
Sounds like a beast! I don't think the ST-202+ tips the scales at 42 lbs. In any case, I feel that the older B&K stuff (as in, not their current products) was higher quality, but I might just be crazy.

As for the Vandersteens, I think they sound great, and so does my dad. They sounded better than other speakers we listened to that cost $2800. They aren't much to look at, but they fit in with the decor and sound fantastic. Anything above quarter volume with them in the room is dB suicide. Yes I've done it, and it was a "front row" experience. I think that speaks volumes for both the ability of the speaker to maintain good sound at high levels and the B&K amplifier for being such a beast.
 
Swerd

Swerd

Audioholic Warlord
jaxvon said:
Sounds like a beast! I don't think the ST-202+ tips the scales at 42 lbs. In any case, I feel that the older B&K stuff (as in, not their current products) was higher quality, but I might just be crazy.
I first learned about B&K from a dealer about 5 or 6 years ago. He said they were as good as any thing made at much higher price, despite their lack of a big reputation. When it first appeared in the late 1980s, the B&K ST-140 amp benefitted from an outstanding review from Stereophile magazine. It was all the rage among audiophiles for a while. I think the ST-202+ was made around the same time.

The audiophile crowd has since moved on to other more fashionable and more expensive amps. But the B&K quality hasn't changed. This dealer told me how B&K is still owned by who ever started the company, is well managed, and has grown in size and revenue. Their bigger financial resources lets them buy much larger amounts of the expensive parts of amps, such as power supplies and machined aluminum heat sinks, and negotiate better prices because of the greater size of the purchase. So, according to this one admitedly biased dealer, B&K has maintained or improved quality over the years while avoiding the insanely high-priced range of audiophile components. And they are owned and operated in the USA, and their customer service is quite good. I emailed them about my used amp and they sent me a copy of it's original owner's manual.

I've now heard only 3 different B&K amps (an old 1988-93 vintage ST-140, my somewhat newer EX4420 (1993-98), and Dan's 5-channel Ref 7250 which was new a few years ago) so it would be difficult to comment directly about the quality of their older stuff vs. newer stuff. Because that dealer told me enough things about other audio products that have all turned out to be true, I'm inclined to believe him that most if not all of the B&K products are quite good.

jaxvon said:
As for the Vandersteens, I think they sound great, and so does my dad. They sounded better than other speakers we listened to that cost $2800. They aren't much to look at, but they fit in with the decor and sound fantastic. Anything above quarter volume with them in the room is dB suicide. Yes I've done it, and it was a "front row" experience. I think that speaks volumes for both the ability of the speaker to maintain good sound at high levels and the B&K amplifier for being such a beast.
That sounds like every Vandersteen fan I've ever met. After you've heard them, who cares what they look like. Believe it or not, there are some who don't care for their sound. It's difficult to explain in words to someone who has not heard them, but Vandersteens are the world champion at imgaing. No other speaker I've ever heard comes close to their ability to create a realistic 3D sound image of recorded music.
 
jaxvon

jaxvon

Audioholic Ninja
I can attest to B&K's customer service. A few years ago (like 7 or 8), the power switch on the front of my Dad's ST-202+ burned out. There was literally smoke coming out of the switch. He called up B&K to ask about a repair. Despite the fact that the amp was out of warranty for years, B&K offered to fix it for free, minus shipping. The amp was shipped off and back in about a week, totally fixed and ready to go. It has not failed since.
 
T

TDWesty

Audiophyte
jaxvon said:
I'm a fan of the B&K ST-202 Plus amp (200wpc), but I can't find one listed on eBay or AudiogoN at the moment. My dad has his driving some Vandersteen 2CE Signatures and it never runs out of juice. Of course, you could always jump on the A500 bandwagon :) $179 shipped...
Sorry for jumping in here, but what's an A500?
 
E

eno

Audiophyte
Eno

Not unlike my first set up: L100s with Marantz 2230 receiver and an AR turntable. The L100s and one the various Marantz receivers (from 15 to 75 wpc) were very popular in the 70s. All of them drove the L100s nicely - they were that efficient.

If you are interested, for as little as $98 in parts, you can build two of those new crossovers and smooth out most of the glare and brightness of the L100s. I can email you a parts list that I used. I started building them over the long weekend.
Could you forward parts list for Jbl 100 crossover, i ejoyed your article, on the l 100 i like your self have had these speakers since 71 bought in UK an now in WA, so i look forward to rebuilding my crossovers . Eno
 
Swerd

Swerd

Audioholic Warlord
Eno

Please send me a PM with your email address and I'll forward the parts list to you.
 
Swerd

Swerd

Audioholic Warlord
Parts List & Xover layout

Here are two slightly different parts lists. Only two items, capacitors C1021 (40 µF) and C2081 (30 µF), are different on these lists. They are highlighted in yellow. As of August 2006, their total prices differed by about $32 US. Parts List 1 uses less expensive bi-polar electrolytic capacitors, and Parts List 2 uses somewhat more expensive metallized polypropylene (MPP) capacitors. List 1 uses Bennic (Madisound) bipolar electrolytic caps for C1021 and C2081. List 2 uses Dayton (Parts Express) metallized polypropylene (MPP) caps for C1021 and C2081.

When I built mine, I splurged and used all MPP capacitors from List 2. Crossovers built with parts from either list should sound the same, so take your pick. Note that the large value MPP capacitors are larger in size than the electrolytic ones, and that is reflected in my crossover layout diagram.

Neither of these types of capacitors is as expensive as exotic or boutique capacitors. The house brands from Parts Express (Dayton) and Madisound (Bennic) are both very reasonably priced and very good performers.

It has now been nearly a year since building these new crossovers, and I am still quite happy with them. Now that most of the frequency range is smooth, the exaggerated bass response of the L-100 became a more prominent problem. The L-100 cabinet is about 1.6 ft³ and has a port vent. With the 123A 12" woofer, this causes a large peak, roughly 5 dB, in the 50-80 Hz range, that overemphasizes the bass. The best cabinet for these 12" woofers would be a 3.0-3.3 ft³ sealed box, which would require a completely new cabinet.

I found a much easier way to at least partially fix this problem. I sealed the port opening with a 3" Plumber’s Test Plug. I can find them at my local Home Depot or Loews’ in the plumbing pipe department for less that $4. I think the photo shows a smaller plug smaller than 3", but they are all similar. They consist of a rubber ring held between two metal plates, with a nut and bolt. Tightening the wingnut presses the two plates closer and expands the rubber ring. Plumbers use these to temporarily seal drain pipes so they can test for leaks.

To seal my L-100s, I filed down the smaller of the two plates until it would fit into the roughly 2⅞" diameter port. Then I turned the wingnut until it the rubber ring fit tight. I think it made a noticeable improvement, but I haven’t measured this to be sure.

If you have any gullible audiophile friends, try slightly turning the wingnut while playing some music and ask if they hear the difference. I find that about half agree with me and say it makes a big improvement!
 

Attachments

G

GRAYEO

Audiophyte
James B Got It Right

:eek:MAN WHY MESS WITH PERFECTION THE L SERIES ARE WICKED SPEAKERS,I HAVE A PAIR OF L150s AND L110s BOTH DRIVEN BY VALVE AMPLIFICATION AND TRUST ME THEY DON,T MAKE ANYTHING THAT COMES CLOSE
 
Swerd

Swerd

Audioholic Warlord
:eek:MAN WHY MESS WITH PERFECTION THE L SERIES ARE WICKED SPEAKERS,I HAVE A PAIR OF L150s AND L110s BOTH DRIVEN BY VALVE AMPLIFICATION AND TRUST ME THEY DON,T MAKE ANYTHING THAT COMES CLOSE
Despite my instinct to ignore a post such as the one above, I put too much work into this project to allow it to be the last post on this thread. In that spirit, I have several comments & observations:

  • Did you read the original posts? The frequency response curves of the original and modified speakers made it abundantly clear how much the sound changed with a properly designed crossover. If those graphs don't mean anything to you, I can understand that. But, personal preferences aside, why not avoid commenting on something you don't understand?

  • The L150 and L110 are different speakers than the L100. In fact, they have little in common.

  • No amplifier, valve or SS, will improve the flaws originally built into the L100s.

  • James B. Lansing died in the early 1950s, long before the L100s were designed. He had many admirable abilities, but designing from the grave was not among them.
 
Tomorrow

Tomorrow

Audioholic Ninja
Despite my instinct to ignore a post such as the one above, I put too much work into this project to allow it to be the last post on this thread. In that spirit, I have several comments & observations:

  • Did you read the original posts? The frequency response curves of the original and modified speakers made it abundantly clear how much the sound changed with a properly designed crossover. If those graphs don't mean anything to you, I can understand that. But, personal preferences aside, why not avoid commenting on something you don't understand?

  • The L150 and L110 are different speakers than the L100. In fact, they have little in common.

  • No amplifier, valve or SS, will improve the flaws originally built into the L100s.

  • James B. Lansing died in the early 1950s, long before the L100s were designed. He had many admirable abilities, but designing from the grave was not among them.
Well, at least he resurrected a wonderful old thread! :) Are you still playing those JBL's, Swerd?
 
Swerd

Swerd

Audioholic Warlord
Well, at least he resurrected a wonderful old thread! :) Are you still playing those JBL's, Swerd?
Yes, I still listen to them but less often than before. Since getting SongTowers, the old JBLs have been demoted to 2nd fiddle.
 
Tomorrow

Tomorrow

Audioholic Ninja
Yet another walk down memory lane. Geez, I have to reread this everytime someone resurrects it. And I still enjoy it!

Old brain. Short memory. :eek:
 
adwilk

adwilk

Audioholic Ninja
I hadnt seen this before...

This thread just destroyed a good chunk of my ego.
 
newsletter

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