Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
Vintage 15" JBL comparisons w/soundclips
- Thread starter johnk_10
- Start date
It's hard for me to tell the versions apart in the pictures. Possibly there could also be more variations, e.g. cloth with three small rolls, cloth with two small rolls, and cloth with two larger rolls. (In addition most Hi-Fi-type drivers (2231, 2234, 2235 etc) of course used a single roll foam surround).
Here's a good pic of what I call "triple-roll" (I don't know the official terminology, if any), since it to my eyes appears to be three peaks in the cloth cross section between the cone edge and the frame rim (most easily seen about 3 o'clock):
I could be wrong, but the drivers in the nice Sunn cab look more like the E140-style (large) dual roll to me, whereas the K140 you show in the opening post looks more like the above. If you find some time to inspect the drivers more closely, possibly even shooting a couple of closeups, it'd be highly appreciated!
Now when you got me all excited about K140:s, I'm going to pay uttermost attention to even the smallest details.
Interesting! That looks close to the one John has and to the pic I posted above AFAICT.
As a contrast, here's the (large) "dual-roll" E140 Google just found for me (guess where -- drumroll -- John's site!):
Ok, I've checked this with an expert, and here's the scope:
The first production years they used the triple pleated accordion style cloth surround in the K:s. However, in 1973 they gradually moved a number of drivers to the type we find in the E:s, the reason being "improved reliability in high power applications". Hence John's nice reference unit is an early sample of the K:s.
Around the same time, they also raised fs for a number of drivers for the same reason. E.g. early 2205:s had fs = 25 Hz but later ones 30 Hz, early 2202:s had 40 Hz, but later 50 Hz. I have no info on the K140:s, but perhaps they were originally as low as 25 Hz, like the 2205:s? It's interesting to note that this trend continued. The successors had even higher fs (2225: 40 Hz, E140: 32 Hz). They traded low end for mid band SPL...
The first production years they used the triple pleated accordion style cloth surround in the K:s. However, in 1973 they gradually moved a number of drivers to the type we find in the E:s, the reason being "improved reliability in high power applications". Hence John's nice reference unit is an early sample of the K:s.
Around the same time, they also raised fs for a number of drivers for the same reason. E.g. early 2205:s had fs = 25 Hz but later ones 30 Hz, early 2202:s had 40 Hz, but later 50 Hz. I have no info on the K140:s, but perhaps they were originally as low as 25 Hz, like the 2205:s? It's interesting to note that this trend continued. The successors had even higher fs (2225: 40 Hz, E140: 32 Hz). They traded low end for mid band SPL...
- Feb 16, 2008
- 21,240
- 23,638
- Disclosures
- John K Custom Basses
i have one in a sonic cab and it rocks the house down. lip is so big i had to remove the cloth and go with a metal cover....i have had it since early 80's a lower end of my GK 800 RB rig. still sounds great especially with my new svt7 so it may come out of retirement..after a good clean up. with that lip.... Wonder if it would fit in one of my 15s cabs with a blown cts.. right now i have a JBL 2225 in it
If I remember correctly my old black tuck and roll Kustom 2-15 cabinet had JBLs in it. Don't recall the speaker model number but it kicked major butt. That cabinet used to fit in the trunk of my dad's '68 Impala with room left to spare. Ah...the good ole' days.
You guys don't know how badly I want a 215 with two D140's in it. I loved my E140 TL606 cab but from John's samples, I think I'd prefer the D140 by a slim margin. The K is sweet, but not the tone I'm looking for in my head. I like mids. 
Yup...back when bass cabs were bass cabs, cars were real cars and could haul them, men were men, and sheep were scared...
- Feb 16, 2008
- 21,240
- 23,638
- Disclosures
- John K Custom Basses
You guys don't know how badly I want a 215 with two D140's in it. I loved my E140 TL606 cab but from John's samples, I think I'd prefer the D140 by a slim margin. The K is sweet, but not the tone I'm looking for in my head. I like mids.
IME, the D's and K's sound nearly identical but the K's have the advantage of handling more power.
Here is one for you. When I first started gigging I was playing keys. I believe I could fit a Fender Rhodes AND a Peavey 215 cab in the trunk of my grandparents' 1965 (I think... the big square one) Buick Electra 225. Hilarious when you think about it.
The K sounded a wee bit darker to my ear the other day I thought... oh well! I'll trust your ears and experience on your amp!
- Feb 16, 2008
- 21,240
- 23,638
- Disclosures
- John K Custom Basses
The "F" series were modifications to the venerable all purpose D series driver to help them hold up better to the stresses and varied environmental conditions imposed upon the drivers when manufacturers (mainly Fender) started putting them in guitar amps.
The JBL employee who developed these "F" modifications was a gentleman named Harvey Gerst; perhaps with your JBL background you know him Doc.
The first 15" one was the D130F, the next 15" one was designed for bass instruments and added a stiffer ribbed cone and other fortifying changes, designated D140F.
Wow, do you know your stuff, congrats Ed.
Here's whats fascinating to me. Ampeg offered a D130F as a factory upgrade from their normal Jensen and later CTS 15" Speaker in the B-15N. As far as I know, they never moved to the D140's that were JBL's bass musical instrument speakers. I suppose it's possible that by the time D140's were readily available, Ampeg had moved to the Theil Box design with the new "helmet head logo. With that redesign of the speaker enclosure, Ampeg started using Altec 421 A's and then Altec 421 8H's for their factory upgrade. This would have been in early 1967 if I remember correctly. Any thoughts?
Ric
There's some great milage in this thread, thanks for posting those clips! I just got a Mesa D-180 that would be great with that tone and it just so happens I've got a pair of E-140 in pro built PA cabs, from the 70's or early 80's I guess.
BUT they sound nothing like your clips when I have tried bass through them, when used with subs they are great, but by themselves, no bass at all.
I measured them up to compare with [Invalid or Expired Link Removed] you posted, I picked number 6 for E140 general bass
They are a bit over 4cuft, no surprise there. But compared with the recommended JBL stock cab they have a bottom shelf port 30.7 sq" instead of 25.1 and it's 7", not 6.5" long. The port is taller for most of its length until it meets the rat fur, about 2mm proud. I measured carpet surface to top to get the height.
They are fully lined with dacron. JBL say the cab needs extra volume when using dacron instead of fibreglass. All the chat on the thread seems the volume isn't too critical and they are about 4.4 cuft anyway, less bracing and dacron can't be far shy of 4 cuft
The only other thing about them is they are taller and shallower, 13" instead of 16.7" in the standard cab.
Can anyone shed some light on why they have no bass, I mean NO BASS? Flap like flags in the wind with almost no volume on an open E bass.
BUT they sound nothing like your clips when I have tried bass through them, when used with subs they are great, but by themselves, no bass at all.
I measured them up to compare with [Invalid or Expired Link Removed] you posted, I picked number 6 for E140 general bass
They are a bit over 4cuft, no surprise there. But compared with the recommended JBL stock cab they have a bottom shelf port 30.7 sq" instead of 25.1 and it's 7", not 6.5" long. The port is taller for most of its length until it meets the rat fur, about 2mm proud. I measured carpet surface to top to get the height.
They are fully lined with dacron. JBL say the cab needs extra volume when using dacron instead of fibreglass. All the chat on the thread seems the volume isn't too critical and they are about 4.4 cuft anyway, less bracing and dacron can't be far shy of 4 cuft
The only other thing about them is they are taller and shallower, 13" instead of 16.7" in the standard cab.
Can anyone shed some light on why they have no bass, I mean NO BASS? Flap like flags in the wind with almost no volume on an open E bass.
- Feb 16, 2008
- 21,240
- 23,638
- Disclosures
- John K Custom Basses
that sounds very strange to me, since i've never had a JBL 15" that didn't didn't sound great on a low E, and that's including the higher voiced 130 series.
I have been monkeying around with WinIsd. Interestingly WinISD does not agree with the JBL design. Not very close at all, predicting duct length 0.194m = 7.6" vs JBL design of 6.5" for two 4" round ducts in 4 ft3 for a 40Hz tuning.
Changing the tuning freq (btw, not sure what that is exactly) changes the predicted port length markedly, but doesn't change the response very much.
Looking at my shelf port, it's a little over in area and length. The tuning frequency would be between 38 and 39 hzHz if the volume is 112 litres (4cuft). Raising the volume lowers the tuning frequency, and response suffers a bit between 40 and 80 hz. This won't be rocket science to guys used to designing cabs huh!
I wonder if my stuffing has less volume soaking efffect than JBL predicts for dacron. It could be something else, I'm not a stuffing expert. The internal volume is 4.5 ft3 less the driver incursion, port shelf, and a little bit of bracing.
Either way I mess about with sizes the predicted response graph hardly moves. They all tail off from 40 hz, quite flat up to 80 hz around 5-6-7 dB down, then smooth rise reaching near 0dB at 450 hz.
If I work on the thickness of the port shelf before it hits the carpet nothing much changes.
Is there a tipping point to the response where you get farting trying to play E (with limited EQ available) ? It's a real joke at the moment. I'm wondering if piling in say half a ft3 of solid stuffing could make a significant difference.
Changing the tuning freq (btw, not sure what that is exactly) changes the predicted port length markedly, but doesn't change the response very much.
Looking at my shelf port, it's a little over in area and length. The tuning frequency would be between 38 and 39 hzHz if the volume is 112 litres (4cuft). Raising the volume lowers the tuning frequency, and response suffers a bit between 40 and 80 hz. This won't be rocket science to guys used to designing cabs huh!
I wonder if my stuffing has less volume soaking efffect than JBL predicts for dacron. It could be something else, I'm not a stuffing expert. The internal volume is 4.5 ft3 less the driver incursion, port shelf, and a little bit of bracing.
Either way I mess about with sizes the predicted response graph hardly moves. They all tail off from 40 hz, quite flat up to 80 hz around 5-6-7 dB down, then smooth rise reaching near 0dB at 450 hz.
If I work on the thickness of the port shelf before it hits the carpet nothing much changes.
Is there a tipping point to the response where you get farting trying to play E (with limited EQ available) ? It's a real joke at the moment. I'm wondering if piling in say half a ft3 of solid stuffing could make a significant difference.
