The sunn Forum

Sunn Musical Equipment => Q & A => Topic started by: Spectrum II on February 23, 2007, 10:20:23 am

Title: JBL D130f vs. D140f
Post by: Spectrum II on February 23, 2007, 10:20:23 am
This topic has been covered before, but let's open it up again. Tell me what you know about the characteristics of these speakers in bass applications, guitar applications, etc. I want this to be the definitive JBL Sunn thread.

Share your knowledge!
Title: Re: JBL D130f vs. D140f
Post by: Isaac on February 23, 2007, 02:55:31 pm
The D130 was designed as a guitar driver. The cone is smooth, lighter than that of the D140, and it has a higher resonance frequency (Fs). It also has a higher sensitivity, and a slightly extended high frequency response.

The D140 was designed as a bass driver. It has the concentric rings around the cone, which stiffen it, make it heavier, and supposedly help control breakup, so that the polar response (dispersion) is better in its upper range. It has a lower Fs, giving it a more extended low frequency response, and lower sensitivity overall, due mainly to the heavier cone.

IIRC, the D130 has an aluminum voice coil, the D140 copper. The frames and magnet structures are exactly the same, so they can be reconed from one to the other.
Title: Re: JBL D130f vs. D140f
Post by: EdBass on February 23, 2007, 04:01:55 pm
Well done Isaac, Add a short paragraph about the LE 100S driver and add that the D15S was a rebadged D130, and I think you may have completely covered the "definitive JBL Sunn thread" with a single post!
Title: Re: JBL D130f vs. D140f
Post by: JoeArthur on February 23, 2007, 06:07:33 pm
Well done Isaac, Add a short paragraph about the LE 100S driver and add that the D15S was a rebadged D130, and I think you may have completely covered the "definitive JBL Sunn thread" with a single post!

Oh come on - we know the LE-100S, which was the horn used in the 100s cab has absolutely nothing to do with D130 and D140 which the original poster posted about!!

Ok... I have to agree about the D15S.
Title: Re: JBL D130f vs. D140f
Post by: po-mo preschool on February 23, 2007, 06:56:05 pm
Anybody have numbers for the sensitivity ratings? Just curious.
Title: Re: JBL D130f vs. D140f
Post by: EdBass on February 23, 2007, 11:26:48 pm
I want this to be the definitive JBL Sunn thread.

To be "definitive", you would have to to include the only JBL/Sunn compression driver; wouldn't you?

If not, mea culpa for contaminating the essence of this thread.
Title: Re: JBL D130f vs. D140f
Post by: JoeArthur on February 24, 2007, 08:38:03 am
I want this to be the definitive JBL Sunn thread.

To be "definitive", you would have to to include the only JBL/Sunn compression driver; wouldn't you?

If not, mea culpa for contaminating the essence of this thread.

I guess you would!!

Do you happen to know how the horn was mounted in the 100s cab? Like was the top section blocked off and isolated (probably wouldn't need to be) or did the inside baffles still exist in the top section?  Never had one apart, but they were great for clean guitar sounds.
Title: Re: JBL D130f vs. D140f
Post by: Isaac on February 24, 2007, 09:34:39 am
I have a Sunn PA, complete with cabinets. Not the Beach Boys Coliseum PA, a smaller one. The cabinets are 24" wide, 30" or 36" high (I'm at work, and can't go measure them). They contain one D130 and a right-angle horn with the LE-100S driver, only one of which works. There is no separate enclosure. As you said, Joe, there's no need, as the LE-100S/horm assembly is completely enclosed. No inside baffles.

I'm not sure about the sensitivity ratings for the D series, but the K series is said to be almost identical. Sensitivity for the K130 is 103dB/1w/1m, swept from 500-2500Hz. For the K140, it's 98dB.

The thing to remember about sensitivity ratings is that there is no standard for measurement. JBL is usually pretty conservative with their ratings, so much so that they felt it necessary to explain their methods and why their ratings might be lower than those of other companies. Some companies measure at 1000Hz only. Others might run a full frequency test, then publish the highest number achieved. In that way, a driver might have a 100dB rating, but if that is achieved only in the breakup region at 4KHz, that doesn't make it a very useful rating for a bass driver!
Title: Re: JBL D130f vs. D140f
Post by: po-mo preschool on February 24, 2007, 11:36:21 am
Yeah, I guess numbers are never the magic bullets marketers want them to be. Thanks for the info, Isaac!
Title: Re: JBL D130f vs. D140f
Post by: Isaac on February 24, 2007, 03:00:53 pm
You're welcome. I'm always glad to help when I can.
Title: Re: JBL D130f vs. D140f
Post by: Spectrum II on February 24, 2007, 05:13:05 pm
Is it possible to run a D130 instead of the F series with this set-up?
Title: Re: JBL D130f vs. D140f
Post by: Isaac on February 24, 2007, 06:05:55 pm
With what setup?

Your question makes no sense to me as stated.
Title: Re: JBL D130f vs. D140f
Post by: Spectrum II on February 24, 2007, 07:11:41 pm
It's a Sunn head that, I guess, is basically a 2000s. It has 4 KT88's,  1 12AX7, 2 GZ34, & a 6N8A in an 18" chasis labeled "Spectrum II" that'll be running into the Sunn 115BH that I inquired about in a previous thread.
Title: Re: JBL D130f vs. D140f
Post by: JoeArthur on February 25, 2007, 08:46:02 am

It's possible to use a D130 with a 115BH.

But are you trying to do?

I guess I would personally be hesitant to put 120 watts into a single D130 if I was going to be using it for bass as I would be concerned about it flapping or blowing up on the low E string. Maybe EdBass will chime in here - I know some people that have used the D130 series for bass, but it was in a fully enclosed cab where the trapped air would help limit the cone movement.

But for guitar use I'd probably go for it, not turning up the volume of the amp to max.
Title: Re: JBL D130f vs. D140f
Post by: Spectrum II on February 25, 2007, 08:56:16 am
Thanks, Joe!

Basically, I'm just trying to get an idea of what speaker would sound best in there. I know that everyone has different taste, but I'm just trying to get what is generally considered the best sounding speaker for a cabinet like that.
Title: Re: JBL D130f vs. D140f
Post by: EdBass on February 25, 2007, 10:42:19 am
I guess I would personally be hesitant to put 120 watts into a single D130 if I was going to be using it for bass as I would be concerned about it flapping or blowing up on the low E string.
I agree that's probably too much grunt for any single D series. Those old JBL's are pretty tough but you can't get factory recone kits anymore. It would probably but OK in a studio situation at low (clean signal) levels, but I think you would regret hitting it hard with four saturated KT88's.
In Spectum II's scenario I would lean towards an EV, maybe a ceramic SRO or an EVM series. Don't buy either until you measure for fit though!
But for guitar use I'd probably go for it, not turning up the volume of the amp to max.
A few years ago I was at a boutique amp show, and one of the people there had an immaculate, totally refurbished, César Diaz modified '64 Blackface Vibroverb with a pristine D130F in it. Of course it was only 40-50 watts, but when he got those 6L6's cooking it was a jaw dropping experience. To this day I think it might be the best sounding guitar tone I've ever heard.
Until then I scoffed at JBL's, or for that matter any 15" driver as a guitar speaker (too slow, no sparkle, no chime, too dark, etc.), but that old 'verb was an epiphany...
Title: Re: JBL D130f vs. D140f
Post by: JoeArthur on February 25, 2007, 11:57:57 am
Until then I scoffed at JBL's, or for that matter any 15" driver as a guitar speaker (too slow, no sparkle, no chime, too dark, etc.), but that old 'verb was an epiphany...

I love 15" speakers for guitar.

I guess on the low end, there would be CTS 15". They don't have as much high end as other 15"s, and their efficiency is on the low side. I was trying out a head a couple of weeks ago through 2-12" and then plugged it into a 2-15" CTS cab without changing the settings, and the volume drop really amazed me.

EVM 15"s are pretty good. I have a couple of Force 15s in a cab and they have quite good high end.

The really amazing 15" speaker for high end sparkle and clarity is the Blue Marvel Peavey uses in the 1-15" version of the Delta blues. I can't find any specs for it, but it must have a high end around 6.5-7Kz at least. It can get brighter than a lot of 12" speakers.

Another alternative to a D130 would be it's close relative - the Altec Lansing 418-B. Like the D130, it has a cast frame, massive magnet structure, aluminum dome cap. The primary difference is a 3" voice coil compared to the 4" of the JBL.

Ok, back to JBL - a little history tidbit for those that might not know.

The "D" series were designed by Harvey Gerst while he worked at JBL. He left JBL to become one of the founding members of Acoustic Control Corporation, where he designed the 260 amplifier.

Of course Harvey wanted to use the JBL speakers he designed for the two cabs that the 260 could be ordered with - the easily recognized 2x15" with horn, and the 4-12".

JBL refused to sell speakers to Acoustic Control Corporation - having something to do with the fact that Harvey worked there. Not quite sure of the specifics of JBL's refusal to do business.

So that's why Acoustic Control Corporation wound up using Altec-Lansing speakers instead.

Harvey is still active in the music scene - this link will get you too a mini-bio:

http://www.itrstudio.com/staff.html

Title: Re: JBL D130f vs. D140f
Post by: Spectrum II on February 25, 2007, 12:13:41 pm
Speaking of Altec, Ed you mentioned that you've used the 421(?) with good results in Sunn cabs?

I've read a bit of Harvey's writing on the 130's on the Heritage website. I love the fact that he's still actively discussing & answering questions about his work at JBL. There's a lot of knowledge in the correspondence on that site.

As far as my curiousities with the d140f goes, there's a 2x15 Fender cab loade with d140f's in the space that I share with a few other bands that's sitting idle that I should plug into to get a grasp on how the speaker in general sounds. I remember plugging into it before, though, I worrying about blowing something because it seemed to be rattling quite a bit.
Title: Re: JBL D130f vs. D140f
Post by: EdBass on February 25, 2007, 09:40:55 pm
I have a pair of 421A's loaded in a 2000S cab, they sound great, probably the smoothest responding ceramic speakers I have. I would be a little less hesitant than with a D series to run one by itself unsealed behind a 4 X KT88 Sunn amp, but there a likely better choices for the application that you have described. I think the Altecs are rated at 100 watts, and I don't know what the actual rating is for a D JBL, probably 75-100 watts or so.
Again, any of the afore mentioned drivers should work fine at lower levels, but if you want to really get into your amp, you should probably get something a little burlier than the old JBL/Altecs.
I mentioned the EV's, I use EVM 15L's and SRO's, fine sounding speakers and they will take a "lickin' and keep on tickin'" (how old am I?). The E140 JBL will take your amp in stride also, but I personally like the sound of the EV's over the ceramic JBL's but that's just my opinion, it's a solid driver. I can't find much wrong with the cast frame Eminence 15" drivers either, in fact I was very impressed with the Neodymium model and it only weighs 6 or 7 lbs.
 
Title: Re: JBL D130f vs. D140f
Post by: Spectrum II on February 25, 2007, 10:29:25 pm
"Old" maybe :-D, but the guy to come to when it comes to advice. Thank you so much for your help. I'll let you all know what happens. I'm getting the cab on Wednesday & then I'll go from there.
Title: Re: JBL D130f vs. D140f
Post by: Isaac on February 26, 2007, 11:09:13 am
Speaking of Altec, Ed you mentioned that you've used the 421(?) with good results in Sunn cabs?

I've read a bit of Harvey's writing on the 130's on the Heritage website. I love the fact that he's still actively discussing & answering questions about his work at JBL. There's a lot of knowledge in the correspondence on that site.

As far as my curiousities with the d140f goes, there's a 2x15 Fender cab loade with d140f's in the space that I share with a few other bands that's sitting idle that I should plug into to get a grasp on how the speaker in general sounds. I remember plugging into it before, though, I worrying about blowing something because it seemed to be rattling quite a bit.
Hell, yes you should plug into it!

Keep in mind, though, that D140s are not the same as D130s, and sealed cabinets are not the same as ported ones. So listening to a pair of D140s in a sealed Fender cabinet isn't going to tell you how a D130 will sound in a ported Sunn, especially an odd design like the 115BH. You should do it anyway!
Title: Re: JBL D130f vs. D140f
Post by: Spectrum II on February 26, 2007, 12:03:04 pm
The guy who owns the cab had no idea what kind of speakers he had in it. He's lucky I'm a nice guy!
Title: Re: JBL D130f vs. D140f
Post by: Soundmasterg on February 27, 2007, 06:05:05 pm
One thing that should be mentioned, especially if someone is thinking of buying old JBL D series speakers off ebay, is that there is the JBL D130, and the JBL D130F, and they are different than each other, with the D130F being stronger and higher rated for power. Harvey Gerst goes into this on one of those sites he posted on, but the D130F was based on the D130 and basically made stronger. THe D130 was used a lot for hi-fi and movie theater speakers and things like that back in the 40's. The D140F was intended for bass and was based off the D130F. There is no JBL D140 either....only the D140F.
Title: Re: JBL D130f vs. D140f
Post by: po-mo preschool on February 27, 2007, 09:37:29 pm
Just came across this tonight:

http://www.webervst.com/spkrcalc/jbldek.htm (http://www.webervst.com/spkrcalc/jbldek.htm)
Title: Re: JBL D130f vs. D140f
Post by: Isaac on February 28, 2007, 08:43:41 am
Seems to me that I read recently that Gerst said that the D130F was exactly the same as the D130, and that the higher power rating was due to an evaluation of the type of signal that would be fed into it from a guitar amp as opposed to a full-range hi-fi.
Title: Re: JBL D130f vs. D140f
Post by: Isaac on February 28, 2007, 08:45:23 am
Just came across this tonight:

http://www.webervst.com/spkrcalc/jbldek.htm (http://www.webervst.com/spkrcalc/jbldek.htm)
Or, you could go to the source: http://www.jblproservice.com/pdf/Thiele%20Small%20Parameters/Theile%20Parameters.pdf
Title: Re: JBL D130f vs. D140f
Post by: JoeArthur on February 28, 2007, 08:51:07 am
Seems to me that I read recently that Gerst said that the D130F was exactly the same as the D130, and that the higher power rating was due to an evaluation of the type of signal that would be fed into it from a guitar amp as opposed to a full-range hi-fi.

I seem to remember him saying that the D130F had more space around the voice coil to prevent the coil from deforming when the idiots at Fender insisted on crunching the frame to the baffle using air powered sockets. I think he also says they should be mounted only using 4 bolts instead of all 8 to also avoid deforming the voice coil.
Title: Re: JBL D130f vs. D140f
Post by: Isaac on February 28, 2007, 08:57:15 am
Yes, I just found that.

Quote
The D130 and the D130F were essentially the SAME speaker. Exactly the
same voice coil, cone, spider assembly, magnet, basket. The only things I
did to the F are listed in a previous post, along with my reasons for
doing them.

I revised the guitar ratings since those D130 ratings were for INTEGRATED
music, like a symphony or a full band playing from the radio, tape or a
record. The rating for a single live instrument like a guitar is much
different, since there is nothing below 80 Hz or above 5 or 6 KHz coming
out of a guitar (at least back then). A D130F (or a D130) could easily
live with a higher power rating and we/JBL/I adjusted the rating
accordingly. The new rating would also apply to a JBL D130 if used for
that purpose.

If you had called JBL back then, you would have been transfered to me and
that is what I would have told you. Since I was in charge of that
division, I was responsable for creating those ratings and that was
our/my official position on the subject. As far as power handling, there
was no difference - the rating was changed to more accurately reflect
what the D130 or D130F could handle if used with a guitar as the source.

The changes he mentions were the increased voice coil gap, which gave a little leeway for overzealous mounting, and putting "goop" on the surround to protect it from the sun. That's it. Increasing the voice coil gap decreased the magnetic flux, which in turn would slightly reduce the sensitivity. Not by much, though. Mr Gerst estimates the D130 at 12,000 gaus, the D130F at 11,700.
Title: Re: JBL D130f vs. D140f
Post by: Soundmasterg on February 28, 2007, 03:21:59 pm
Thanks for the more detailed correction Isaac. I remembered there were differences between the D130 and the D130F but couldn't remember the exact differences.
Title: Re: JBL D130f vs. D140f
Post by: EdBass on February 28, 2007, 08:43:18 pm
Excellent information thread, guys!
Sonically, I personally can't tell a D130 from a D130F, I pretty much thought the difference was the designation "F(ender)", akin to Sunn's "D15S" designation.

But... All of this is relevent only if you can find a 30+ year old AlNiCo JBL with an actual factory cone assembly, and without a used up suspension.
Title: Re: JBL D130f vs. D140f
Post by: Funkengrooven on March 11, 2007, 04:09:35 pm
Just came across this tonight:

http://www.webervst.com/spkrcalc/jbldek.htm (http://www.webervst.com/spkrcalc/jbldek.htm)

I was waiting for someone to mention Ted Weber....
Awesome cat.. He does stuff with speakers that will make you pee your pants...
for instance.

I am running 3 JBL K-140's with Ted's D-130 voice coils and his D-140 Cones..
absolutely the best sound I ever heard...the fourth speaker in the group is a factory K-140


My big Bass rig is an SWR Mo-Bass...900 watts of brutal power (the small rig is a Sunn Concert Bass) and I routinely drive the hell outa the JBL's with no complaining at all.

I love JBL's ...and Ted makes them sing!
Funkengrooven!!
Title: Re: JBL D130f vs. D140f
Post by: Soundmasterg on March 12, 2007, 11:18:33 am
WHen did you have Ted recone those? Last I heard he wasn't doing the D140's because he wasn't able to find a good sounding cone. I know he does D130's no problem though.
Title: Re: JBL D130f vs. D140f
Post by: basiklybass on March 20, 2007, 07:49:36 pm
I have a 115BH and a JBL D130F. It does not fit in the cabinet. The frame rim is too deep and does not fit under the upper edge of the cabinet. I have the Utah with the 3" VC and very deep basket in it now. It sounds nice in my basement. Haven't had a chance to play it live yet. I agree, the horn couples nicely in any size room.

I have had D140F's for many years. The first ones all had smooth cones, like the 130's but slightly heavier. 5 grams comes to mind. The re-cone kits all had the ringed cone. The original edge suspension was all paper. Most every one I have seen in the last ...many years...have fabric. They are still the best speaker for a Sunn amp.

I just re-built a 200S. Had one in 1969....this one is a 67. Seems that a few months after all the new part, it is starting to sound real sweet.
Title: Re: JBL D130f vs. D140f
Post by: mratcliffe on January 04, 2008, 11:39:10 am
I was searching for info in the this subject and came across this thread. Joe A. and Issac pretty much nailed it. Here is a little more history tidbit from Harvey Gerst from different threads I came across:

All you ever wanted to know about "F" Series JBL
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Here is some stuff I dug up off an old USENET archive. It was written by Harvey Gerst, the person who apparently designed the Musical Instrument series speakers at JBL.
It is a long, but interesting tale:

9/20/97 alt.guitar.amps

…let me take you back to the late 50s, early 60s. JBL was a small company with their main offices above a candy store, and the manufacturing scattered in a number of buildings up and down the street, near Glendale, on Fletcher Drive.

They made the following speakers;
the D130 a full range 15",
the D131 a full range 12",
the 130A a 15" woofer,
the 130B (same as the 130A, but 16 ohms),
and the 150 - a 15" woofer with a heavier cone.

The D stood for a metal dome and the A and B were for woofers of different impedances. I don't remember if we made a 131A. We also made a D123 (full range pancake 12" speaker) and the D208 and D216 (both 8" speakers but with 8 and 16 ohm voice coils).

Fender was buying D130s for use in their Dual Showman systems, but they were experiencing problems in surrounds drying out from outdoor use, and burnouts from improper mounting techniques. I wrote a memo to the president of JBL, outlining a plan to let me design a series of speakers made specifically for musical use and he agreed. My plan called for modifications to the D130 and D131, plus an all new bass 15" speaker, and a new 10" speaker.

Since Fender was our largest purchaser, I did not want the headache of trying to re-introduce a whole new series so I kept the D130 name for the 15" and simply added an F (yes, the "F" is for Fender - don't know why to this day I did that, but I did). Since I was making up new model numbers, I decided where possible to keep it simple, so the 12" (originally the D131) became the D120F, and the new 10" became the D110F.

That left the new bass speaker. I didn't want to leave it in the 13x range because it was different and the 150 was already being used by our theater woofer. The 140 was not being used, so I named the new bass speaker the D140F.

After I left JBL, I understand they came out with the black crinkle finish and renamed them E series. The first major modifications were made in the K series, as I understand it.”

Harvey Gerst


9/19/97 alt.guitar.amps

the F is more rugged for portable use as a musical instrument speaker as compared to home use only on a fixed environment.

The "F" originally stood for Fender, since they were the largest purchasers, and at one time, the distributor for all the JBL guitar speakers. But the D130F speaker was not designed specifically by, or for them and the F eventually came to be just an indicator for all of the JBL musical instrument series speakers. The D130F did not have any significant frequency range differences, compared to the home version - the D130.
I feel I must tell you there is slightly more relief on the D130F top plate to accomodate a wider variety of mounting techniques (i.e., idiots who use torque wrenches to flatten these frames onto a warped baffle board).

Harvey Gerst



9/7/96 alt.guitar.amps

I saw a lot of D130's come through with fried voice coils that were running off a 12 Watt Williamson amp during the 50's and 60's. Integrated music from HiFi systems caused one kind of problem - using the D130 as a musical instrument speaker created other problems.

That's why I suggested the D130F (which was a redesigned D130), made expressly for musical instrument amps, as were the D110F (a totally new design), the D120F (a redesign of the D131), and the D140F (a new design using existing parts).

Power specifications for the F series were nominally 35 to about 60 Watts. How did I arrive at these figures? Pretty simple, I played guitar and bass through them and kept increasing the power till they blew. Then I downrated them from the power that fried them. Pretty hi-tech, huh? It seemed to work pretty well (of course we didn't have synth players back then).

The major amp manufacturers back then were Fender, Sunn, Kustom, and Ampeg. Rickenbacher and Mosrite also bought some, but nowhere near the volume of the other amp makers. All had JBL speaker options.

And yes, the "F" stood for Fender, since they were the largest single buyer, and also distributed the F series to music stores. They had no part in the design or the idea for the new series, I am solely to blame
for that.

Harvey Gerst


9/11/96 alt.guitar.amps

Q. Dick Dale seems to be the one claiming Fender went to JBL on behalf of him. In "Fender Sound Heard Around the World" he's quoted as saying the "F was invented as a result of melting voice coils & destroying surrounds". It's also stated that "the aluminum dust cover was Leo's idea". In his 9/96 GP interview he talks of the 'Dick Dale' kit available from JBL which includes a larger magnet, larger voice coil, thicker wires, aluminum dust cover, & rubberized front rim which brings the speaker (presumably a D130) up to Dick Dale & Fender specs! I'll be 'kind' and say that he comes off as 'a bit arrogant' in the interview!


A. I never had the honor of meeting or talking to Dick Dale, so I'd have to say that perhaps his memory has been clouded by the passing years. It's true that the JBL F series was partly about improving the current 2 models being used by Fender and others, namely the D130 and D131. It was my proposal to expand the line of speakers and at the same time, make some refinements to those speakers to make them more suitable to the guitar market. Here's what I did and why:

Opened the voice coil gap slightly on the D130F to allow more tolerance in mounting. Most people didn't realize that even though 8 mounting holes were available, only using four is the recommended mounting. And you don't screw them down tight to the board - that warps the frame. You use two fingers to do the final tightening - the casket will them complete the seal. When you warp the frame by overtightening, the voice coil can go out of round and eventually drag and short out. I opened the gap slightly to allow for this problem with just a very slight loss in efficiency - less than 1 dB.

Did the same thing on the D131 (and renamed as the D120F).

Using parts from the D130A and D150 woofers, I created a new woofer designed for bass guitar applications called the D140F. This had a copper voice coil and an aluminum dome.

Using the magnet assembly from the D123 and the basket from an LE-10, I added the D110F to complete the line of musical instrument speakers.

The surrounds were NOT "rubberized". JBL had developed a high viscosity coating to add to the existing hifi line of speakers that reduced ringing. I used it for a different reason. The hifi speaker surrounds dried out when exposed to excessive sunlight and heat, and I reasoned the viscose coating (we called it "goop" back then) would help prevent that.

Q. The other reference to Fender going to JBL was in conjunction with the development of the 1959 Vibrasonic. In Morrish's Fender amp book - Bill Carson recalls testing a protype JBL with a copper instead of aluminum voice coil & a thin paper cone? Can you shed some light on this obscure piece of JBL history?

A. Bill's probably refering to the D130A which was simply a standard JBL woofer at the time - all the woofers had copper voice coils. The 130A was basically a D130 with a copper voice coil and a paper dome and was used in the 001 system primarily (D130A, N1200 xover, and 175DLH driver/horm assembly). I felt the cone was too light for bass guitar and we wound up using the cone from the 150 woofer, a heavier unit. The duraluminum dome was added to the D140F, instead of the paper dome for cosmetic reasons at first, but later proved useful in adding a little more top end to the bass (not much though).

Q. regarding power ratings, I checked my official(3/70) JBL spec sheet for the F models and the 110F, 120F, & 130F are all rated at 100W continuous, the 140F @ 150W continuous. JBL defines 'continuous power' in my 4311B spec sheet as 3dB greater than RMS which would put the RMS rating of a D130F at 50W. On the other hand, D120Fs & D130Fs ran reliably in Showman 12s, Showman 15s, and early Boogies at considerably more power, so Mr. Gerst's & JBL's ratings are not marketing hype! It also appears that the 120F & 130F use identical magnet structures @ 11 pounds, 12,000 gauss flux density, and 275,000 maxwells total flux.

A. The D120F and the D130F, like their close cousins, the D130 and D131, all shared the same voice coil, dome, spider, and magnet assembies, except for the slightly wider gap on the top plate. I think the flux density was really around 11,700 gauss or so on the 120F & 130F because of the slightly enlarged gap, mentioned earlier.

Power handling was always a touchy subject and I just basically guessed at what I thought it could handle, based on normal playing. It was a little tricky since we were dealing with rock, country, jazz, and blues players and the power handling figures were just suggestions, regardless of how official the spec sheet looked.


The D130 and the D130F were essentially the SAME speaker. Exactly the same voice coil, cone, spider assembly, magnet, basket. The only things I did to the F are listed in a previous post, along with my reasons for doing them.

I revised the guitar ratings since those D130 ratings were for INTEGRATED music, like a symphony or a full band playing from the radio, tape or a record. The rating for a single live instrument like a guitar is much different, since there is nothing below 80 Hz or above 5 or 6 KHz coming out of a guitar (at least back then). A D130F (or a D130) could easily live with a higher power rating and we/JBL/I adjusted the rating accordingly. The new rating would also apply to a JBL D130 if used for that purpose.

If you had called JBL back then, you would have been transferred to me and that is what I would have told you. Since I was in charge of that division, I was responsible for creating those ratings and that was
our/my official position on the subject. As far as power handling, there was no difference - the rating was changed to more accurately reflect what the D130 or D130F could handle if used with a guitar as the source.

The lower rating also still applied if either speaker was used for full range music reproduction. These were my "babies" and if you want to disagree with me, that's fine. If you were at JBL at the time I was designing these, we could have had some rousing discussions about it. And besides, I think I also wrote those spec sheets for the D130 as well.


Q. A couple more Q's & I'll leave you alone  - Didn't know the D140F has a copper voice coil - is it an edgewound ribbon like the aluminum coils? What were the reason(s) for using copper (vs. aluminum) in the D140F?

A. Yes, the D140F had an edgewound copper ribbon voice coil. Copper has better heat conductivity than aluminum (think pots and pans) but it's heavier and not as responsive to high frequencies, due to it's weight. For use in woofers, copper is the wire of choice.

Actually, had I thought about it some more, I should have probably made the D140F more of a full range speaker, but it was basically designed as a replacement for people using D130A woofers for live music.

Harvey Gerst

So many Frequencies..So Little Time.
Title: Re: JBL D130f vs. D140f
Post by: basiklybass on January 05, 2008, 08:29:28 pm
Are we forgetting the 130AS? From what I can gather, this was a D130F made specifically for Sunn. Aside from the name, the rest appears to be the same. There was also a D130R or maybe it was a D140R. Allegedly made for the Rogers Music Company and used in their organs. Same speaker but with a paper dome instead of aluminum. Oh yeah...is the Fender orange frame D-series different enough to merit mention on this thread? Not really a different speaker...but if this is the definitive thread.....
Title: Re: JBL D130f vs. D140f
Post by: Free_Runner on October 02, 2008, 11:19:26 am
I really need help. I was just wondering whats the real value of second hand d140f? I've found this guy selling d140f almost unused for 150e! Is this fair price?


Title: Re: JBL D130f vs. D140f
Post by: HRobert on October 05, 2008, 05:23:38 pm
Isaac,

Just wanted to confirm your statement that the specs for the D-130F and the K-130 were the same, as were the specs for the D-140F and the K-140.  However, there were two differences between those eries speakers. First, the D series speakers have paper surrounds and the K series have cloth.  Second, the K series had the first version of the Focused Field Geometry for the magnet structure.  This change focused more of the magnetic field on the voice coil element, and created an equal magnetic field on both sides of the coil.  The result of these two changes was more RMS power by the K series speakers.  A D130 is rated at 100W RMS while the K130 is rated at 125W RMS.  I'm not sure about the power rating for the D140, but the K140 is rated at 150W RMS.  Now when you get to the E series speakers with those big ceramic magnets, the E130 is rated at 150W and the E140 at 200 W RMS.

Robert Freer
Title: Re: JBL D130f vs. D140f
Post by: Isaac on October 22, 2008, 11:23:32 am
I really need help. I was just wondering whats the real value of second hand d140f? I've found this guy selling d140f almost unused for 150e! Is this fair price?

In economics, a fair price is a compromise between what the seller wants for an item and what people are willing to pay for it. If he's getting 150e, then it must be a fair price. Judging by what they bring here in the States, I'd say that I think it's a fair price by that criterion, too.
Title: Re: JBL D130f vs. D140f
Post by: Isaac on October 22, 2008, 11:24:47 am
Isaac,

Just wanted to confirm your statement that the specs for the D-130F and the K-130 were the same, as were the specs for the D-140F and the K-140.  However, there were two differences between those eries speakers. First, the D series speakers have paper surrounds and the K series have cloth.  Second, the K series had the first version of the Focused Field Geometry for the magnet structure.  This change focused more of the magnetic field on the voice coil element, and created an equal magnetic field on both sides of the coil.  The result of these two changes was more RMS power by the K series speakers.  A D130 is rated at 100W RMS while the K130 is rated at 125W RMS.  I'm not sure about the power rating for the D140, but the K140 is rated at 150W RMS.  Now when you get to the E series speakers with those big ceramic magnets, the E130 is rated at 150W and the E140 at 200 W RMS.

Robert Freer

Thanks, Robert. It's always nice to get the details correct.
Title: Re: JBL D130f vs. D140f
Post by: yosemitesamiam on March 18, 2009, 09:42:00 pm
Hey guys!  I scored a D130F for free back in 1998.  It was pretty well blown and was being tossed in a dumpster as I left a gig (as a sound tech at the time).  Me and my helper each grabbed one.  If I knew what I know now, I would have kept both to myself.

The cone had a huge hole in it, and the voice coil was barely moving.  I called JBL in the San Fernando valley and had them redo the speaker over winter break from college.  $225 all said and done, and DAMN this thing has rocked ever since!  For the longest time, I wasn't using it, but had it packed up...I at one point added the speaker to a church's sound system that I was running.  Built a ported box, tuned it to 40Hz and mated it to a Marantz MA500U.  For those who don't know, this is a THX certified 150 watt monoblock.  These pieces were both my own personal parts that I had no problem putting on loan.  The speaker and amp had been together for a long time in my home theater system, but again, were collecting dust.  We ran bass and the kick drum through it only.  In a 25,000 cubic foot room, it overwhelmed the front of house, which were JBL Eon's running 15s as well!  Not my favorite house speakers...but they worked for the smallish room we were in.

Meanwhile, we picked up and moved away, and I left the parts behind...TODAY, literally 4 hours ago, UPS rings my doorbell.  17lb box from the church...its my D130F!!!  I knew they were upgrading their rigs, but dang!  Very cool!  I also knew that they were having trouble with the speaker...I thought the worst.  Well, I thought...I play bass, if it is shot, I'll have it rebuilt to D140F spec, no biggy.  What I found floored me.  The speaker is 100% fine...the amp is blown and won't even power up (yes, fuse is fine).  I would have never guessed the Marantz would have given up the ghost before this speaker.  I told them to hold on to the amp, have it fixed if they want...not worth the 30lbs of shipping to me. 

I'm currently building a 6L6 tube amp for this speaker...shooting for 4 6L6s even though 2 is enough!  :)

Rock on guys! 

Sam

Title: Re: JBL D130f vs. D140f
Post by: basiklybass on April 01, 2009, 05:56:20 am
From what I know about speakers, the biggest change between D's, K's and E's that affected power handling were new adhesives and voice coil materials. Today's VC's that are similar in size to the JBL's or even smaller are routinely rated for 400 to 600 watts...all because of better adhesives that do not melt as much as the old ones did. If you've ever seen a burnt VC, you know that in most cases, the windings  have shifted because the glue let loose.