Author Topic: JBL D130f vs. D140f  (Read 57622 times)

0 Members and 5 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Soundmasterg

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 745
Re: JBL D130f vs. D140f
« Reply #28 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.

Offline EdBass

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,914
Re: JBL D130f vs. D140f
« Reply #29 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.

Offline Funkengrooven

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 5
Re: JBL D130f vs. D140f
« Reply #30 on: March 11, 2007, 05:09:35 pm »
Just came across this tonight:

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!!

Offline Soundmasterg

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 745
Re: JBL D130f vs. D140f
« Reply #31 on: March 12, 2007, 12:18:33 pm »
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.

Offline basiklybass

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 304
  • My Sunn's
    • The Old Days
Re: JBL D130f vs. D140f
« Reply #32 on: March 20, 2007, 08:49:36 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.

Offline mratcliffe

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 43
Re: JBL D130f vs. D140f
« Reply #33 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.

Offline basiklybass

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 304
  • My Sunn's
    • The Old Days
Re: JBL D130f vs. D140f
« Reply #34 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.....

Offline Free_Runner

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 1
Re: JBL D130f vs. D140f
« Reply #35 on: October 02, 2008, 12:19:26 pm »
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?



Offline HRobert

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 345
Re: JBL D130f vs. D140f
« Reply #36 on: October 05, 2008, 06:23:38 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

Offline Isaac

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,904
Re: JBL D130f vs. D140f
« Reply #37 on: October 22, 2008, 12:23:32 pm »
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.
Isaac

Offline Isaac

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,904
Re: JBL D130f vs. D140f
« Reply #38 on: October 22, 2008, 12:24:47 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

Thanks, Robert. It's always nice to get the details correct.
Isaac

Offline yosemitesamiam

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 1
Re: JBL D130f vs. D140f
« Reply #39 on: March 18, 2009, 10:42:00 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


Offline basiklybass

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 304
  • My Sunn's
    • The Old Days
Re: JBL D130f vs. D140f
« Reply #40 on: April 01, 2009, 06:56:20 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.