How good is the crossover in your loudspeakers?

BTW, JBL does note the dynamic compression for a 2226H at 1.5 dB between 1 watt and 100 watts.  The 2226H uses the vented gap technology, same as my 2241H, and JBL notes that this measure was instituted to reduce the power compression.

"JBL introduced the VGC products in an effort to reduce dynamic compression to even lower degrees and increase general power handling in the process. Figure 7 shows 1 watt and 100 watt superimposed compression curves for the JBL 2226H The curves show compression on the order of 1.5 dB over the range from 100 Hz to about 2 kHz, with virtually no compression at lower frequencies." 

Based on this, one would expect the 2234/2235 to exhibit more compression than the 2226H, though none of the literature states what it is.

@toddalin wrote:

I don’t think this means what you think it means.

 

I think what is referred to is the power linearity over the frequency response and they show plots of the response for the three power levels and look at the response to see that it does not so as to throw the curve off by more than 1 dB.   Otherwise, why are the three curves not 10 dB apart for the three power levels?

Naturally the 3 curves for each their power levels are superimposed to easily show the difference power compression makes at higher SPL’s. It shows the 4435’s with dual woofers per cab have close to no power compression up to 100W, and both models show virtually no signs of power compression above 500Hz with 100W input.
It would be interesting to know whether the JBL models were passively or actively configured for the measurements, because if the former then the crossover itself could also be a co-contributor to frequency response changes at varying SPL’s. 

OTOH, I would think that depending on the "compatibility" of the components, lesser speakers would show far more "areas" of compression because some components just can’t "keep up" with others when the going gets tough.

The JBL’s of this segment perform admirably compared to most any typical, lower efficiency hifi speakers, and I have little doubt JBL can actually be trusted with their measured performance here. These speakers are meant to be used in a pro environment where these things matter. 

They say they are 10 dB apart, but that would infer NO compression and that’s just not the case.

There are variances, as can be clearly seen, not least below 500Hz with the 4430’s, albeit not much. We’re talking 4" voice coil, pole piece vented woofers of pro origin with 93/96dB sensitivity, and very high eff. compression drivers above. Such drivers are more resilient to compression issues. 

"JBL introduced the VGC products in an effort to reduce dynamic compression to even lower degrees and increase general power handling in the process. Figure 7 shows 1 watt and 100 watt superimposed compression curves for the JBL 2226H The curves show compression on the order of 1.5 dB over the range from 100 Hz to about 2 kHz, with virtually no compression at lower frequencies." 

Based on this, one would expect the 2234/2235 to exhibit more compression than the 2226H, though none of the literature states what it is.

With 100W input close to no power compression isn’t implausible with the 4430/4435’s and their non-VGC woofers. VGC makes a difference, yes, but this becomes more prevalent - i.e.: handy with close to max. outputs above 100W input with cinema and PA usage. By comparison the JBL monitors won’t be sitting that close to their performance ceilings. 

For those who are truly interested, here is Danny Richie’s response to Andrew Robinson’s video regarding crossovers. The clips from Robinson’s related videos simply reveal that he (and his off-camera wife/girlfriend) is not a serious audiophile, and is in no way qualified to be considered a hi-fi reviewer/critic. IMO, as always.

https://youtu.be/OSCMw-lGwok?si=VX39SlTp3XRfN_0-

Danny Richie is certainly a polarizing figure.   I think that is his objective.   After all Danny is in the business to make money.   Danny gets well know speakers that have been in the wild for 20 plus years and measures them.  Making claims that the designers are incompetent.    I am sure some of the components have deteriorated or drifted.   Also, manufacturing has gotten much better.  Components are held to tighter tolerances and measuring equipment has gotten much better.  Out of curiosity does Danny measure these speakers in an Anechoic chamber?   I always take someone says with a grain of salt when the next words out of their mouth is for X amount of money I can make your unit sound better.   If you believe in Danny, good for you.  If you do not then that is your right!  I think the high end community can survive.

@chuck: Your question of "does Danny measure these speakers in an anechoic chamber?" suggests that you have not actually watched many of his videos. If you had, you would know the answer to that question.

You make an argument against Danny by theorizing "I am sure some of the components have deteriorated or drifted. Also, manufacturing has gotten much better. Components are held to tighter tolerances and measuring equipment has gotten much better." These are what we call specious arguments., the answers to which dispel your theories.

Have you watched the video I just posted above? You really should, it’s full of a lot of accumulated speaker design wisdom. If you haven’t watched it, your opinion is of limited credibility and gravitas. IMO.

It’s not a question of whether or not a person "believes in Danny", but rather if what he says holds up to serious scrutiny. We are all free to make that assessment for ourselves.