When my ears were young and not buzzy speakers were crappy. Now my ears are crappy and my speakers are great (X- statiks). Thanks for the videos and my speakers GR research.
I bought a pair of the upgraded version 4312 JBLs brand new in 1984 that were a huge difference from the JBL L40s I had.. used them with my Nikko 100 Watt receiver and was able to crank up the NOISE without blowing up woofers and tweeter's like the little ones did. But that's what they were made for I guess. Playing LOUD! I traded them in for DJ equipment in the late 80s & always regreted it until I knew what good speakers were all about. Nice watching this video now and knowing I made the right decision years ago. Thanks Danny! 👍✌️
Today is a disaster because of existing measuring equipment reveals it, but in 1978 compare to other speakers they sounded great, the good news is with this great job Danny did they can sound much better ;)
This has to be the WORST speaker I have ever seen you review. I can't imagine why anyone would invest $730.00 dollars to try to save this old piece of junk plus all their own labor especially seeing the speaker cost about 1/3rd of that new back in the day I would recommend anyone who has a pair of these turn them into planters for the yard and invest in one of Denny's kits and end up with a speaker of real quality from the get go. (Those bass drivers are unsalvageable as well as the rest of the speaker. Nostalgia just isn't worth that much. It's like trying to restore an old Yugo! Who would do that!)
I remember all vintage speakers very well. They sounded killer when I was in my teens! Not so much when your older. Great job! Kudos on you schooling OCD Mikey on the Magnapan! 😊
Bruce Swedien (knew him personally) also used the 4.5 inch CTS driver in a 6x6x5 inch cube referred to as Auratones and of course, rebalancing occurred in the mastering stage.
@@77WOR I personally think a lot of guys (including myself) liked these bitd was because we had carpet on the walls and where listening to pb from tape, but whatever. 🤷🏻♂️
I'm no engineer but I get what is being said here. I could hear on my L100 centuries that that mid was playing too high. I found them way better with vinyl and tape with the midrange control on my Yamaha Cr2020 reciever set at minus one ore even two. The L112 is a far better version of the L100. I run a set of these with an Accuphase E305L. Better bass and more clean extended highs and slightly less forward mids. I am a vintage Jbl fan but confess to seeing the beauty in Ev of the same era. Their 29mm tweeter was a killer and probably played low enough to go wirh woofer and mid bass units used in several speakers of this time. I run stage system 200s in my theatre system as front lefts and right with an entertainer speaker as a centre ....loud efficient and clean without the harshness.
@@phatjbl Absolutely correct. The JBL 110 and 112 that replaced the 4311 and the domestic version: the L100, were far more accurate speakers with real crossovers that filtered correctly instead of single capacitors on the tweets and mid.
But still… back in the day I used these speakers as monitors for recording and mixing music professionally and guess what… I loved them! Of course they weren’t perfect, but they gave me mixes that translated very well to other systems and radio/tv. I had a hard time finding replacements when the time came… And I have to say that I enjoyed working with them. If I’d still have a pair I would certainly try your upgrade kit for sure…
Sure. These were a good representation of the generally bad speaker designs of that time period. That is why the Yamaha book shelf monitors were popular in the 80s and 90s. The yamaha sounded like boom box speakers, so a good idea of your mix on pretty bad playback systems.
@@morlidor Absolutely not. I don't know if you watched the video. These are very very poorly "designed" speakers, with junk thrown into a cheap box. Sound really good? Depends if you want to hear what is on the recording. Elac B5's sound good and fun, but they do not remotely let you hear what is in the recording. No transparent window into the recording. Not even close.
That`s right. You can`t just change these speakers into some bland sounding modern speaker. It doesn`t work that way, all the character will be gone. They are great the way they are.
@@brugj03 Character? I guess inaccurate and mostly terrible sound is a character. No words like transparency, imaging, frequency extension would apply. These are probably a 50/50 split between box sound a speaker cone sound.
Jbl wants you to hear the truth "loud" like at a concert hall or stadium. One of the leaders in concert venue. At the music event is the music sound out of phase yes, maybe but no one cares its live music. JBL brought the concert sound home. But I agree what GR Research explains is correct.
popular usually doesn't correlate to quality with the general public. look at all these klipsch amazon customers. smartest move for klipsch was selling on amazon👍
Like Pioneers HPM 100 which fans love for some reason. I had a pair... twice. I really tried to give them a chance but the abrasiveness and listening fatigue became intolerable.
Well, you just scientifically proved that a huge number of audio enthusiasts are deaf😂! L100 is a derivation of the 4310/11, and are simply the most ever sold in JBL’s History! Well done!😂😂😂😂😂😂 Now go back to listen to “audiophiles” speakers and leave us alone with ours “junk but loud”. The lesser the demand the lower the price! 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
When I worked at Motown Hitsville Studios (Los Angeles) in the late 70's early 80's, these speakers were used all the time. They would sit up on a shelf on top of the consoles as near field monitors. I can't begin to list the albums mixed on these speakers, I constantly found the mid range drivers connected out of phase on some and not on others. Whether they came like that from the factory I had no idea but I had to go through and get them all to match. They were horrible but recording engineer theory was if you could get mix to sound good on them, they'll sound good on the radio.
This explains perfectly why a good portion of the music I liked from the 70's and 80's sounds so incredibly bad on a very revealing system. Thank you for verifying my suspicions of JBL my whole life. No matter which one I listened to, there was always an alternative I would have chose instead. There was just a tonality to them unpleasing to my ear. To me the Infinity's of that time had a much better sound. It could very well be that the Infinity's measured even worse. I don't know, but to me that was the sound I've been after my whole life.
Wow... This one is interesting to me, because I heard a pair of these in a dedicated space with an old Marantz receiver. They had stands that raised them up about 8" and tilted them back a bit. The damn things sounded excellent!
I bought a pair of HPM60s new in 1976. Blew the woofers at a frat party in 1980. Replaced the woofers with some from Frasier in Dallas. Been using them continuously for almost 50 years! Now using them in my garage to rock the neighborhood. Looking forward to the HPM60 video.
They sold a lot of those made to be loud L100s not much to them. So they could make good ones like the L110s, much better sounding speaker. I still have them tried them bouth out side by side. Could tell right away how much better the L110s were. They have a much better and advanced for then crossover. If you can ever try a pair I would say they are close to the KLH 5s.
@@ChicagoRob2 Look what they did to that poor guy's martini! I "married" a pair of L88's. And I was a Cerwin Vega rep back then. So ya, I knew them! Gene Czerwinski gave us a plant tour. Because dome drivers were very popular then, he glued half a basketball onto a woofer cone to have a dome woofer as a joke!
Dan thinks he is the savior to the loudspeaker world , these speakers came out in 1973, professional studio Monitors , they are enjoyable ( re cap them to save the tweeters) and a great piece of audio history. I bring mine of now and then . Most of the older jbl’s are very well made and enjoyable to listen to.
It would be easier to replace the tweeter with a good modern soft dome in low Fs. The change is quite drastic, previously the 5-6k region had almost 100dB and now there is a dip there to approximately 86dB. Someone will say that changing the tweeter will mean a different speaker. But with such different frequency response it is also a completely different speaker. Objectively better, of course. Anyway imagine how many recordings of that time was screwed up by such "studio monitors"...
I think is one of your best videos and upgrades this one and the HPM100, you said a great true about in the late 70's there were not measuring equipment like TEF to help designers in making the ideal crossovers and that's why this vintage speakers can be improve vastly with your work, anyone owning a JBL 4311 would be glad to pay those 730 dollars in order to make their 4311 to sing much better, I was waiting at the end that you say that after the new crossover you like a lot this speaker, maybe some day another guy bring you the L-112 which is a bit better than the 4311, thanks for this job
My understanding is these JBLs were monitors intended to be mounted above a mixing console. That is why the tweeter/midrange below woofer. Back in the day there were listeners that loved them and those who hated them. Old saying .... "JBL" means "Junk, But Loud"
There are a couple versions of the 4311, though I'm not entirely sure what the differences are between them aside from maybe a difference in the mid woofer.
"Near field" monitors even. He should look at the L100 which is JBL most popular speaker. It was a hi-fi version of the 4311. I just acquired a set of 4311b which have a slightly higher crossover point on the mids and highs. Also slightly better midrange and tweeter design. Also the edges wont matter as you are sitting directly in front of them. You are correct in that the drivers are not just "haphazardly placed upon the baffle" as suggested in the clip. Its as though GR Research is going off measurements and not research afterall. Those measurements are nothing averyone knows monitors are supposed to sound like crap. However I happen to love the sound of mine.
@@MurderousMindstate Danny has already worked on the HPM100 and has a video about them but you didn't even bother to look before commenting. "Monitors should sound bad" that's a load of copium if I've ever read it. Monitors should be accurate to the source, even if a little dry/sterile.
The more I hear from this guy the less I believe. I've been in this hobby since the mid 70s. I used to hit the recording studios in LA frequently. Most of them had 4311s. Some, like A&M, had Altec 604 coaxial studio monitors. Some had Urei time aligned studio monitors based on the 604 but with their own crossovers, etc. Companies have been making loudspeakers for over a century and to this guy, everything that he didn't have a hand in is crap. I get it that you want to sell crossovers and your own brand of speakers and kits, but to say that somebody just threw a bunch of drivers into a box to create an industry standard studio monitor is truly arrogant. I worked at Altec Lansing in the 70s. I saw the level of quality that went into their products. I worked the heavy speaker line, amplifiers and crossovers, and customer service repairs. I know how the voice coils were wound. We made an excellent product. Our main competitor at the time was JBL. We shared a founder and design philosophy. I knew people who worked there too. Their quality was top notch as well. So as far as I'm concerned, you have lost all credibility.
Hey everybody. These speakers were highly praised in the 70s, when hi-fi was in its prime. The recording experts agreed as well. Now ask yourself, was 70s monster hi-fi more enjoyable than todays digital hi-fi? You bet it is and still today. My stock 4311s sound phenomenal and have detail and realism. I would never modernize them because they already sound best to me.
I wonder what he thinks of the more expensive JBL studio series vs. these. I think these were the mass market crap that JBL produced vs. the much better larger 43xx models and such...
Can 35yo crossover components cause ringing buzzing at certain frequencies? Or the old wood? I lined the insides with mat, nothing changed. It’s around 120 180 and 340 hz when doing a sweep. Rare Radian Engineering cabinets. Single point source with diaphragm mounted on the back of the woofer. I have 3x 10” and 2x 8” used in 5.1 setup.
Overall I’ve enjoyed these since new. It’s not often, but the buzzing will occur if certain frequencies hang out for a bit. My dad has the original smaller 8” that were used on top of recording consoles for nearfield. Our 8” have been refoamed. Never on the 10” but no visible issues. 3 of them are great as my L R C.
Well to put things in perspective when I was in college in the early 80s, I had a two-way design from them and everyone loved them. We enjoyed the aesthetics and their ability to play rock music times change, but in the moment it was pretty darn enjoyable.
Companies like Bose and Klipsch survived. Appearance, marketing and gimmicks is what allows these companies to survive. Convincing people they are high fidelity and accurate even when they are not.
@@jim9930What are some 5inch mid-range speakers designed in the 60's that smoke these? You said by "any standard" so let's look at equivalent drivers of that era. If they were never a good driver please list a few other drivers of that era that are vastly superior.
When I was young (talking 70's here) all the guys that were several years older all had those giant Pioneer receivers (or maybe Marantz if they were really cool) plus those JBL L100's Wasn't until I got to college and heard a guys rig who had modded Dynaco tube amps, the Chartwell version of the BBC monitor w/ a Linn LP12 deck. Changed my life. I realized how things were supposed to sound.
The discovery of British designed loudspeakers, many of BBC design, were a revelation for many of us used to JBL, Altec and Pioneer. The refinement and subtlety are on another level.
I know we are talking speakers here, but I would like to add my opinion on the European recordings of the 70's and 80's. I would say on balance the sound recorded from that time period out of Europe was much better than most of the US engineered music. I liked the Music from here But Europe had a definite advantage when it came to recording sound. IMO that would avail them to being ahead of the curve on speaker design.
Speakers that messure bad can never sound good, but messuring good dont allways sound good eigther. That's where the components in the speaker comes in. Danny is telling us this evevery time.
This is pretty funny.I bought a pair of Century L100 years ago and thought that they were the worst speakers I have ever heard.The tweeters sounded like an arc welder.Beyond me how people could listen to them for more than about ten minutes!Let alone pay $1000 or more for them.
I'm surprised you didn't address that the woofer is physically 180 out per JBL plus, the response below 100Hz down to 60. We know that speaker pretty much stops reproducing below 45Hz. Now, recording engineers as myself used these pretty much exclusively from 71 (4310) through mid to latter 80s. The primise was- "you can hear the songs as the recording engineer balanced them"
More hit records were mixed on the JBL 4311 series monitors than just about any other speaker in history. They were, (And STILL are) held in esteem by many, many audio pro's and your review of them as a "Disaster" is so, so wrong. Are they the best speaker ever made, No, BUT they are a very good speaker and still being used in the studio world wide.
They are what they are. The response was a mess and a mess in every direction. The cabinets were lightly made and unbraced. They buzzed like crazy. The had bad surface reflections and edge diffraction. They didn't even have a real crossover in them. Sorry, I will just have to stick with being honest.
@@morlidor I'm sure some sound really good. I have a pair of hpm 60 I was going to restore but I have so many better speakers that I have built myself that I would want to replace all the drivers and redesign the crossover and all it really would be is a box to me and at that I would have to find woofers that would work with the internal volume.
@@morlidor I have put a lot of money into my reference pair and they are multi layer MDF covered with.75 solid oak. It's not even a comparison. They look like furniture
@@morlidor I don't disagree. However, when you're feeding the woofer mid- to high-frequency tones, you're not doing it any favors. Use a filter/coil to limit the frequencies the woofer has to try and handle. Very little loss and the woofer doesn't have to try and reproduce frequencies that it can't.
This speakers were designed to be driven with an amplifier with very high damping factor. Additionally, they should be operated above a certain volume.... The high weight of the membrane shifts partial resonances downwards and creates a more linear transition to the midrange. Not sure what amp you used nor the output level you used to measure... both is key to this speakers. Measuring them with low output levels and relatively low damping factor amp might be very ugly. Even if they are rated with 60 Watts ? I recommend a decent professional 500W amp to drive. They are brilliant midfield studio monitors.. thats it. Use appropriate cables ;-))) This is not HiFi nor NS-10 is. They were a tool in its own right 45 years ago.
Changing amps of any kind will not fix the amplitude problems. It won't fix the phase cancellation problems. The won't get the cheesy parts out of the signal path. It won't fix the cabinet resonances...... There is nothing brilliant about them. They were a mess.
you should have let the mid go until 4000K - the tweeter going down to 1200K cant give good full bodied mids like electric guitars in 70's rock or saxophones.
No, the acoustic centers are way to far apart for them to cross that high. That is only a 3.3" wavelength. So any slight movement left or right would easily cause them to be out of phase and cancel each other out.
Please respect an all time classic. Those speakers sound great for what they are. It`s called character they are MEANT to be that way. Do you really think a firm like JBL doesn`t know how to build a speaker.
That was really common with older speakers, it's also common with really cheap speakers, this model was no different, just a single cap and pot each on the mid and tweeter.
@@hoth2112 coils is not very expensive And makes huge difference ☺️ Don't build it at all if it's going to sound horrible . These drivers have potential with 12inc woofer
I can respect the measurements and all the science. But the end of the day doesn’t mean it sounds better. I just picked up a pair of 4312s to replace SVS ultra bookshelves . I doubt these JBL’s measure anywhere close to the svs’s , but they sound a hell of a lot better
I love these videos. I remembered drooling over these as a kid. Over the years I almost pulled the trigger several times but they always got away. It seems like I dodged a bullet. Im still interested in some Kenrick Sound modified JBL's but until then im good.
Speakerlab, a DIY speaker kit store up in the Seattle area, had showrooms that you could go and demo their products in. This was around the late '70's. They had a set of JBL century 100 that they kept so folks could A/B their competitive product in the same price range. Speakerlab use air core inductors early on, the drivers were placed on the front baffle in line, the midrange crossed over at 500 Hz and had a rubber surround inside a dedicated dampened enclosure. The 12" woofer 3 way kits they had were the model 3, which used an Audax 1" soft dome linen tweeter, or you could opt for the model 4 with the upgraded Klipsch style Electro Voice T-35 compression tweeter. Both these would trounce the JBL, no contest.
@@jim9930 I always carried a few extra voice coil replacement domes for the Audax tweeters. You could order linen, poly, or titanium coated domes in 4 or 8 ohm. I used them in car stereo back in the 80's as well. Good sounding, but fragile buggers! Oh, by the way car stereos back then were a time arrival nightmare. We mounted drivers were they would fit.
@@jim9930 The model S19 speakers I had used a 4 inch ferrofluid cooled sealed midrange drivers by Polydax made in France. Very nice sound and transitioned well to the planar tweeters made by Foster in England.
a friend got new 4310s in the 70s and try as we may, we couldn't get them to sound good fin multiple positions, on the floor, on chairs against the wall and away about 3', sealed port, open port, no grills,etc. they would only sound acceptable EXACTLY on axis aimed straight ahead, and also at low levels for background or late night listening. he quickly sold them for the accommodation price he paid (he engineered for KPPC-prog rock-before it became KROQ in LA, actually located in Pasadena CA). he then went to work for Infinity Systems and the sound was WAY better from a variety of their speakers which he got to bring home. the L100 in general, which the 4310 and 4311 series were related to, were boomy, hard in the mids, and harsh in the highs. the new version, evenwith the new drivers and integral stands, are still too prominent in the bass which obscures their actual lows and overshadows any improvements in drivers. current pricing actually rivals original pricing adjusted for inflation. the fans of the old and new versions are certainly welcome to their choices but the new JBL Synthesis series are exquisite if chokingly priced in the five figure range.
People used a thing called an Equalizer back in the day. I use one now with my Yamaha NS-1000m.... stock xover w/ new caps....sounds delightful. I have excellent hearing.
loved this one. I used to be in a band that used a recording studio, where these were the main monitors, but they were wedged into the corners on shelves. We used to get some real weird sounding mixes from that studio.
I always watch right to the end! Another great upgrade and very interesting to see the filler driver applied like that! And what a huge bass driver, I would've expected to keep ringing more than it did. I was just thinking of pouring epoxy into the front to level out the front, that would alter the vintage speaker, but it might deal with the diffraction a little better.
Danny.... Love this video on a studio classic..... but why oh why does your 3rd plot line need to be Yellow? It's so hard to see yellow on white, and I'm watching on a calibrated monitor. (maybe I need some Clarity caps in my 4k monitor??)
you probably know this one but back in the 70s and 80s did they even have the equipment to measure and design crossovers like they do today? cost cutting aside the major brands seem to be making a lot better balanced crossovers than they once did. some may add a deeper sound like a drop at 2khz but it's intentional not accidental.
The early B&W 801 measured +/- 2 dB across the range, with later versions +/- 1.75 dB, or better. They used computer modeling and anechoic chambers and could design and manufacture very accurate speakers more than 40 years ago. Crossovers were complex 4th order, unlike JBL’s $1 crossover.
Wow - throwing drivers in a box - pretty much sums it up! The front baffle is crying out for a couple of ribs/braces - the 3 holes with the narrow webs between them - probably are letting the panel flex a lot. Is the midrange driver a sealed back? You don't mention a separate enclosure, so it seems that it is?
This is the first time I looked at the "fixed" curve and thought, this effort wasn't worth it. These things need to be in a garage playing filler music while you change the oil in grandma's olds.
You made the best of an impossible task. On the horizontal off-access, if I recall correctly, it's not possible to have the tweeters on the outside for both channels because JBL did not mirror the driver arrangement for left/right speakers in the 4310/4311 series. The 4311B and Pioneer HPM-100 were my two favorite speakers when I was a kid back in the mid-80's. I was ASTONISHED by what you were able to do for the HPM-100. Not surprised that the 4311 was a bigger challenge, but congrats on the results. I'm almost tempted to pick up a pair to give your upgrade a try. :)
Still have my L110s from 1977 still sound good. The old and newer reviews of them are good for the most part. They were overlooked a lot back then because of the popularity of the L100S. More of a better design that the engineers wanted. But money and sales had priority. 😎
At 0:45 yep, that's what I was thinkin. Otherwise, JBL makes some great stuff, newer stuff that is. I mean their Studio 590's for example, on sale at $400..... Go try to beat it from any brand out there at that price point! I have 4 of them, and right out of the box they measure so good, I don't even bother to EQ them. They are ugly, but they sound like they measure, just very good. These dinosaurs you were trying to bring back to life, well, ya can't shine poop, it only smears, right? In something like this ya just have to replace drivers, no amount of EQ crossover work is gonna fix this kind of broken. I understand the orientation is by label, but I'd listen to upside down if it were me. Anyway, I love this stuff, the show and tell, the real science behind the sound. Cheers 🍻
I understand the bashing of these old JBL monitor speakers. That makes me want to hear your opinion on the 120Ti, 240Ti and 250Ti. As these models gets a lot of love.
I added a 10" powered subwoofer to my Marantz / JBL set up and my 4311Bs sound better than ever. I may try your kit if the big improvement the sub gave me ever wears off.
And these coloured things were designed by Bart Locanthi, the same guy who designed the dreadful Pioneer HPM series and who gets revered as a great designer for some strange reason. Our man from GR-Research makes Bart L. look like a rank amateur.
Thats very true, maybe one of the worst for imaging and not the best blending of frequencies, but they sure do make some good looking drivers and speakers though! These look especially good with the orange grilles and those white aquaplas woofers, they grab your attention everytime.
Ya why would anyone what a stupid old control monitor, anyway just because some are selling for over $4000 😳 doesn't mean anything. And All the people in recording studios , that used them. like those people know about about sound 😳 man I don't think he has ever heard a pair in good working order. This video is the most blasphemous thing I've ever heard ! 😡🤬🤬 Long live the JBL control monitor ✌️
Those JBL models were popular in the 70s and copied by Rogers Sound Lab. Then most THX theaters used JBL speakers and sounded harsh and horrible - but Lucas can market any crap.
I believe that any JBL speaker that has four numbers like this was a pro level speaker, probably for studio application. Also, not intended for pleasurable listening, but rather, for hearing that things were out of place among the instruments and voices. That being said, the problems you found are certainly PROBLEMS!
Another big problem with this speaker: the Qts of the woofer is close to 0.5, so it really wants to be in a sealed box. In JBL’s reflex box, it has a nasty peak around 55-60 Hz, below which it drops off rapidly. In partial defense of JBL, it was designed before Thiele and Small’s seminal work.
I have been watching your videos. Well done!! You share allot of info., I am sure that everyone out here appreciates it. It seems like these companies make their products but do not test them to see the performance. Maybe they don't care?? We the average consumer have to rely. On them to makes a good product for us. Maybe the people that design this stuff lacks the knowledge. that you have?? Or once again the don't care just want the money?? Nice video.
I'm curious what it would cost to send some older Beethoven Grands (2005 era) from Washington to Texas.....probably a lot! LOL Dang, I love what you do man, I really do! Keep them a coming! ⚽Also, do you have an EPL team?
Not too surprising Danny! One only needs to look inside these so called vintage speakers and think , really ! Most were also made of chip board, not a great product to use in speaker cabinets. Would I spend an additional $730us to upgrade them, No! better off spending that on better model.
Way back in the dark ages, I had a pair of these. Wanted them so bad I could taste it. Really liked them at the time. Drove them with a Marantz 2250. They were so much better than what I had previously. Was the first real speaker I had that made a real attempt as bass. Ironic Harman International a few years ago released an updated version of this (L-100) with a retail price of 4K. Have not heard them so can't comment on their sound but the claim is they measure much better than the older L-100 (and 4311). Not sure if its due to their price or SQ but they have not been selling like hot cakes the way the originals did. Going from memory all the big JBLs had a box that would resonate like crazy, even the big L-300s but folks still loved them.
Well old boy.... your fancy measurements and technical gobbldygook are all and fine.... but the simple FACT of the matter is that the 4311B was a great speaker. It sounded fantastic and was an industry standard for a very long time. The 4411 that replaced the 4311 was indeed a much better device and we had them in my home studio in the early 1980s. The 4411 solved many of the issues that you raise, however, it doesn't discount the fact that JBL sold HEAPS of these 4311s over the years and continue to do so with the 4312 line........ Measurements are all and fine, however, there is always the element of "secret sauce" that comes in to play, and the 4311 had the sauce in abundance. Just not your flavour.😁
The university radio station had these JBL‘s in the production recording studio, this was in the early 80s. I never liked them. My home rig was a pair of ADS 200’S with two 8” subs crossed over at 150 hz. Sounded much better than the JBL’s . This was with a harman/Kardon 330 receiver for the ADS and a Dynaco st 80 for the bass . Total broke ass College kid solution, crossover was all 6 db passive in-line set up. 😅
A part of me wishes I was back in college in my dorm room listening to my two JBL’s in 1981. Sure they didn’t measure well but I enjoyed the music so so much more lol so I’d rather be 21 in that dorm room well that doesn’t make sense.
