JBL Versus RCF

Re: JBL Versus RCF

Another aspect to consider is that Jbl as a brand in India is with everyone. And thus it's a price war as to who gets the setup in the end. Although have to say that the Vtx is (as of now) only available with one guy in the whole of India. Don't think that will be for long.
The thing is we don't want to get into the same situation where we have to drop our prices considerably just to get business. That's the only reason I don't like Jbl. Want to stand out and have our skills at using the system to actually fix the cost.
Have heard both the systems. Jbl in a large formats 12 a side for an Edm party. And 8a side of Bellamy brothers concert.
Rcf not in a large format but for a demo and only just 4 tops and two subs. So not really heard that system. But what impressed me is the amount of output that was got from such few boxes.



Sent from my iPhone
 
Re: JBL Versus RCF

andrepaul said:
Another aspect to consider is that Jbl as a brand in India is with everyone. And thus it's a price war as to who gets the setup in the end. Although have to say that the Vtx is (as of now) only available with one guy in the whole of India. Don't think that will be for long.
The thing is we don't want to get into the same situation where we have to drop our prices considerably just to get business. That's the only reason I don't like Jbl. Want to stand out and have our skills at using the system to actually fix the cost.
Have heard both the systems. Jbl in a large formats 12 a side for an Edm party. And 8a side of Bellamy brothers concert.
Rcf not in a large format but for a demo and only just 4 tops and two subs. So not really heard that system. But what impressed me is the amount of output that was got from such few boxes.



Sent from my iPhone
Click to expand...

If I were you, I'd do my best to future proof and get stuff that makes you able to cross rent and possibly supply international riders if you get 'em - that means VTX. It's a long term choice too, I'd think.
 
Re: JBL Versus RCF

Brent Handy said:
The story JBL reps tell is there is a brilliant, tenured, Russian engineer who was the driving force behind the development of the driver. How are the JBL and BMS similar? My understanding from looking at pics of both drivers is that they do the same thing in different ways.
Click to expand...

Here is the patent ... have a look at figure 4

https://webmail.iinet.net.au/index....androv+BMS+Concentric+compression+drivers.pdf


.... have alook at figure 1 and Figure 2

Live Sound: Designer Notebook: An In-Depth Look At The New JBL VTX Series Line Array - Pro Sound Web
 
Last edited:
Re: JBL Versus RCF

Rider friendliness is a funny thing. Very location dependent, shouldn't be an issue today. Most pro level systems are at a level where the people deploying it is a bigger factor than the system itself as long as the system has enough ompf for the task at hand.

That said, none of those systems would be considered rider friendly over here. VTX is a good box, but JBL' reputation is pretty low here. I don't think JBL deserves it, they make some pretty decent speakers nowadays.
Haven't heard the RCF, but IME RCF systems is ok. I've had a couple of run-ins with RCF over the years and it worked out well.

For electronic music, out of these two systems I would choose the VTX based on it's low-mid output. You'll need it to keep up with the subs. And use enough subs. The VTX subs are decent, cross them over at 60 if you're bringing anything less than 16 subs for 24 tops. You'll need that couple of extra db's in the subs that you get by crossing them over at 60hz. And expect to cut out about -9db between 2 and 5k if you're using the LT preset for short throws and play loud EDM. The LT preset sounds better than the ST preset, but it's a bit hot.
 
Re: JBL Versus RCF

Peter Morris said:
Here is the patent ... have a look at figure 4

https://webmail.iinet.net.au/index....androv+BMS+Concentric+compression+drivers.pdf


.... have alook at figure 1 and Figure 2

Live Sound: Designer Notebook: An In-Depth Look At The New JBL VTX Series Line Array - Pro Sound Web
Click to expand...

Patent link seems to be dead. Here's the patent on the USPTO's website: http://pimg-fpiw.uspto.gov/fdd/48/781/058/0.pdf

Harmen seems to be well aware of this patent, as they reference it in this patent which seems to be directly applicable to the VTX driver, as well as in several other patents.
 
Re: JBL Versus RCF

Rob Timmerman said:
Patent link seems to be dead. Here's the patent on the USPTO's website: http://pimg-fpiw.uspto.gov/fdd/48/781/058/0.pdf

Harmen seems to be well aware of this patent, as they reference it in this patent which seems to be directly applicable to the VTX driver, as well as in several other patents.
Click to expand...

I’m absolutely sure JBL is aware of the patent(s), but the ideaof dual annular diaphragm in push- pull was originally BMS as far as I can tell.JBL design is just different enough …
 
Re: JBL Versus RCF

Peter Morris said:
I’m absolutely sure JBL is aware of the patent(s), but the ideaof dual annular diaphragm in push- pull was originally BMS as far as I can tell.JBL design is just different enough …
Click to expand...

The current BMS drivers have very little in common with the JBL (ex-from what I was told the designer is the same-I could be wrong on that however).

The approach (except for being ring radiators and not domes) is not even close.

The JBL has 2 diaphragms reproducing the same signal while the BMS is a true coax design with different sized diaphragms and different magnets reproducing different freq bands.

Maybe there is an old BMS design that was like the JBL-but not the current ones. Maybe there is a reason for that----------
 
Re: JBL Versus RCF

Marjan Milosevic said:
Which Russian designer are you talking about here? The BMS patent is under Svetly Aleksandrov name who is the co-owner of Coda audio and BMS.
BMS drivers are in number of JBL boxes but under JBL name. Like the ones in the VRX as an example.
Click to expand...
I just heard that it was the same designer-but I cannot confirm it-so don't quote me--------
 
Re: JBL Versus RCF

Ivan Beaver said:
The current BMS drivers have very little in common with the JBL (ex-from what I was told the designer is the same-I could be wrong on that however).

The approach (except for being ring radiators and not domes) is not even close.

The JBL has 2 diaphragms reproducing the same signal while the BMS is a true coax design with different sized diaphragms and different magnets reproducing different freq bands.

Maybe there is an old BMS design that was like the JBL-but not the current ones. Maybe there is a reason for that----------
Click to expand...

Drivers like the BMS 4592ND are different to the JBL D2430 D2. The JBL used 2 apposing diaphragms covering the same frequency range, the BMS uses 2 different coax diaphragms covering different frequency ranges .... BUT the BMS patent ... see figure 4 is very much like the JBL.

Peter
 

Attachments

  • BMS4.jpg
    BMS4.jpg
    42.9 KB · Views: 0
Re: JBL Versus RCF

Marjan Milosevic said:
Which Russian designer are you talking about here? The BMS patent is under Svetly Aleksandrov name who is the co-owner of Coda audio and BMS.
BMS drivers are in number of JBL boxes but under JBL name. Like the ones in the VRX as an example.
Click to expand...

No. You are making the wrong connection. It would be:

Dr. Alexander Voishvillo

Just because JBL uses OEM materials and products does not mean that JBL copied the D2. The D2 is different than the BMS. The D2 is not a rebadged BMS. Yes, JBL used BMS in EONs, etc. I think the VerTec 4887 has BMS.
 
Last edited:
Re: JBL Versus RCF

Brent Handy said:
No. You are making the wrong connection. It would be:

Dr. Alexander Voishvillo

Just because JBL uses OEM materials and products does not mean that JBL copied the D2. The D2 is different than the BMS. The D2 is not a rebadged BMS. Yes, JBL used BMS in EONs, etc. I think the VerTec 4887 has BMS.
Click to expand...


We are talking about 2 different patents in this case.

Voishvillo’spatent is about the phase plug, Aleksandrov patent describes the dual apposed diaphragms….

See Robs post above.
 
Re: JBL Versus RCF

Peter Morris said:
We are talking about 2 different patents in this case.

Voishvillo’spatent is about the phase plug, Aleksandrov patent describes the dual apposed diaphragms….

See Robs post above.
Click to expand...

My rep told me Voishvillo was the designer of the driver period. Since JBL and BMS do have an OEM relationship, and there seems to be a Russian connection, could it be that the two have worked together on this at some point? One of my reps is going to dig deep into this. I will post their reply when received.
 
Re: JBL Versus RCF

Brent Handy said:
My rep told me Voishvillo was the designer of the driver period. Since JBL and BMS do have an OEM relationship, and there seems to be a Russian connection, could it be that the two have worked together on this at some point? One of my reps is going to dig deep into this. I will post their reply when received.
Click to expand...

I suspected he did design the driver ... but my point is the similarity to figure 4 in Aleksandrov's patent. I sure your rep will have a wonderful explaination :roll:
 
Re: JBL Versus RCF

Just my 2 cents on the annular HF driver design.

1. The first annular diaphragm HF driver I am aware of was from JBL. I have a 1971 JBL Professional catalog with the 2405 Ultra-High Frequency driver listed. This is the slot-loaded driver. Surprisingly, the bullet version of this driver is not listed, apparently that came later. These drivers have been copied by many other companies in the decades since.

2. I have a spec sheet from Cerwin-Vega I picked up at a NAMM show about 12 years ago for their then new BC Horn Drivers (BC-101, BC-201, BC-301) that had annular (ring) diaphragms. This spec sheet was marked 'Preliminary'. I don't know if they ever made it to production. I do recall that around that time period there was a paper I saw in the JAES from a group of Russians that were working at Cerwin-Vega. Possibly one of those men is now the person with JBL, since both companies are/were located in southern California.

3. In my own limited experience with current annular diaphragm drivers from two different manufacturers, both the subjective and measured harmonic distortion is higher than in a comparable output dome diaphragm driver, by up to 10 dB on one of the harmonics when driven at high power in one case. The frequency response of the annular drivers is much smoother at high frequencies, and their impulse responses and spectral decays are better, however, since they do not suffer from 'multi-path' in the phase plug and diaphragm breakup.
 
Last edited:
Re: JBL Versus RCF

I am curious to know who manufactures the D2.

Maybe R2 is involved some way? ;-)

btw, based on Jon's #3 above, perhaps the question is which tradeoff is the best? Perhaps the distortion is the lesser of the evils?
 
Re: JBL Versus RCF

There is no Russian connection because Alexandrov is not a Russian but Bulgarian. I am no saying that JBL have copied the BMS design. Just that is uses the same principle, and as i have heard BMS is the one that is actually making the diaphragms for JBLs D2. So al in all it is the same technology under different name so i fill comfortable to say it is a BMS :-).
 
Re: JBL Versus RCF

Marjan Milosevic said:
There is no Russian connection because Alexandrov is not a Russian but Bulgarian. I am no saying that JBL have copied the BMS design. Just that is uses the same principle, and as i have heard BMS is the one that is actually making the diaphragms for JBLs D2. So al in all it is the same technology under different name so i fill comfortable to say it is a BMS :-).
Click to expand...

My rep pal said they are being told, there are no BMS parts or drivers in anything now.
 
Top Bottom