glens

One last thing before I go to bed: have a look at http://www.cieri.net/Documenti/JBL/Technical Notes/JBL Technical Note - Vol.1, No.9.pdf Inquiring minds would like to know, does Klipsch make use of shorting rings in any way in their mud-magnet drivers?

One other thing I think has to be said. I'm just talking about this with you, not fighting over anything.

It's only the metal inside the coil that matters.

Isn't there usually more overhang (outerhang?) from a central alnico magnet to the inner diameter of the voice coil gap than with an outer mud magnet and its pole piece? Even if not, I surmise that a coil generating a magnetic field surround something metallic would influence magnetic energy within that "whatever" more if that thing were merely acting as a conductor of external magnetic energy as opposed to producing it (if that notion is sensibly expressed). And perhaps it's in that way the mud magnet assembly is more susceptible to flux variation? Though if I properly recall the content of the "JBL" pdf I linked earlier, the overall tone of it was that alnico assemblies are not inherently better in the final analysis.

I didn't review his post for this response, but what I recall is the expressed notion of "increasing airflow" in the port. And I take that as a misunderstanding of how ports work. Sure, you want air to be able to easily get in and out of the port, but it's the mass of the entrained air that matters most. Different port volume means different air mass, which means different frequency at which it resonates, and that's the major contribution it provides. Putting hole(s) in the side of the tube, in my view, would merely relegate it to a tube the length to the nearest hole to the outside. Now there may be some way in which the tube could thus act at multiple resonant frequencies, but I think it would not be as strongly a contributor as a single-purpose air mass would be.

The shorting rings aren't so much for flux modulation as for the changing inductance of the coil as more or less of it has metal inside as it moves in and out. There may be some flux modulation benefit as well but it's secondary. That's what I gleaned at any rate. The main difference is the alnico magnet typically occupies the position of the "pole piece" required by the mud magnet, which piece is typically larger in diameter, thus acts more as a core for the coil (also thus gleaned). I always liked the magnet structures of JBL alnico drivers and was saddened to see what I'd thought was a cheapening when they went to mud. Now I know "the rest of the story" as Paul Harvey would say. Drop back to the root at that cieri site and have a look around. They've got a slew of JBL tech. docs there. Some very interesting stuff!

It appears they're out away from their back wall a bit further than would be best for loading the drone. Play with placement.

Oh, yeah, poor recordings never sounded so bad. It's definitely a worthwhile tradeoff though!

Congratulations! Did you order "B stock" and if so have you been able to discover why that might be so?

They might not have historically been, but the Forte III are now classified as "Heritage." And he just offered an initial listening impression of his own in his own place. But maybe if you didn't see that you won't see this...

I didn't quite get that in my research this morning. The patent link inside your link doesn't work today but it can easily be found elsewhere. I perused it and didn't notice anything about "alnico conducting thus not benefiting from a shorting ring." The paper "Feyz" mentions is also not available any longer at the link in that thread, but can be found at http://www.diy-audio.narod.ru/litr/FaradayRingsVoiceCoilImpedance.pdf (it's quite an interesting read, but doesn't mention magnet material). Probably the most-pertinent-to-this-thread thing I found was http://www.cieri.net/Documenti/JBL/Documenti tecnici/JBL - The Great Alnico-Ferrite Debat.pdf In everything I looked at this morning, nothing lead me to believe that alnico magnet speakers wouldn't benefit from shorting rings too.

Like that stove. What you burn in it?

At least the original Discwasher back in the day had directional fibers that scooped into the grooves. Looks like RCA is marketing them now, but I think RCA ain't RCA anymore, either, so who can say... Many good old names (not restricted to audio) were sold to marketers who do business out of China.

Nah, you're late. The milestone was back at 5280.

Just looked, that 777 has A and B speaker selector so you can run both sizes of wire to the speakers and directly within mere moments between draw a comparison.

Potted and hanging, together.

8' between and assuming the amp is not too far off to one side, let us know if you note any difference whatsoever between 16 and 12 ga. wire.

https://www.amazon.com/Improved-Discwasher-RD-1006Z-Cleaning-replaces/dp/B07C1WGG7Y/ref=mp_s_a_1_5

High corner-loading works too.

Yeah, I wasn't too crazy about the idea of those pleated surrounds at the time, thinking they'd be stiffer than necessary. But in retrospect... I've got the same tweeters in mine as you have, so like I said, there's no telling what mine are like now.

No, you're thinking bookend!

Maybe, but "boxy" in a good and friendly way, if so. My affection for mine started out at a high level and grows each day.

Like Claude said, if you've got a "roomal" imbalance, and if there is one between the JBLs, you can correct both in one fell swoop!

Would be better to say "separates (can | possibly | sometimes) beat integrated." It really depends on all the specifics.

Might not hurt to rotate the woofers half a turn for the next 20 years' use.