top of page
Jean Michel LeCleac'h Horn, 3 similar compression driver test.
20190113_140713.jpg

January 2019

 

I'm admitting full force that I'm biased towards the JMLC horn profile. While not necessarily a lifelong affair, it certainly is the current strong flirtation, until the next exciting thing comes to convince me to change once again. I was an ESL fan and tube believer at one point in my life, but not so much anymore.

​

  1. The far-left image is BMS 4526 .63" exit JMLC 2000hz horn, which was custom made by a friend.

  2. Middle image is the Radian 950PB, 2" exit JMLC 340Hz horn 

  3. Right image is the Eminence N151M, 1" exit JMCL (Horn is Autotech brand, made in Poland)

  4. Silver Beyma CP22 bullet tweeter with its 40° conical horn.

  5. The far-right image is the Celestion CDX1-1425, Custom made 2000 Hz JMLC 1" throat, starting with a negative profile to match the 1425 Celestion.

Below are measured results of the three JMLC horn/driver combination. At all the same 3" distance, the SPL is roughly matched and on axis. More measurements may be added later, but for now, I'm burning-in the BMS 4526 and am forfeiting any subjective evaluations. What I can tell you is that already the N151M, the BMS and the Celestion do sound different. And will leave it at that for the time being. Obviously, those horns all have a 2000 Hz cut-off, optimum crossover point is at 3000 Hz and above. Besides, I usually avoid splurging on superlative because by the time you read this, I may have changed my mind. 

BMS 4526 

​

Neo, ring radiator, 5/8'' tweeter.

​

2000hz JMLC horn

Celestion CDX1-1425 

Custom done JMCL horn for the cdx1-1425 

​

Neo, dome, 1'' tweeter.

​

2000hz JMLC horn (negative initial profile horn.)

Eminence N151M

​

Neo, Ring Radiator, 1'' tweeter.

​

2000hz JMLC horn

Overlay measurement:

 

Well, all of them would require a super tweeter, as they all die quickly at 18khz (BMS having a under damped break up)

​

Distortion is often unreliable, as a sound quality indicator. The 1425 fares worse and is also less efficient than other two Ring Radiator designs.

​

Time domain measurements do show limits of Ring Radiators, as the 1425 outperforms both BMS and Eminence by a good margin.

​

Subjective evaluation forthcoming, but do not expect a lot of comments on each. I'll likely simply say I like “X” and “Z” is my least favorite.

Verdict February 2019

​

All Subjective comments!

​

I out started with the Celestion CDX1-1445 on the Faital PRO tractrix horn. Was good but not great. 

I listened for a while…

 

Next up was the Celestion CDX1-1425. It was a big step forward with the same Faital PRO tractrix horn.

Listened for a while...

 

When I put the Eminence N151M online, I felt that despite the higher efficiency over the both previous Celestion models, I lost detail and resolution. Though the Eminence is quite a bit cheaper and is a copy of BMS driver, it must be the brand and manufacturing shortcuts giving this sound signature. I decided to find out for myself. I ordered the BMS 4526 and the custom JMLC horn for them. When they arrived, I immediately put them to into play. Once equalized, it felt musically similar to the N151M on a similar JMLC horn.  Perhaps the BMS 4526 needed burning in time.

Listened for a while...

 

I'm not lying if I thought the BMS4526 was a step backward versus the generic Eminence N151M at half it's price. Maybe it was the EQ or the time alignment that was off. I don’t know.  The German made BMS must be the best here. It measured better but I didn't feel that it was subjectively more rewarding at all.

Kept listening for a while...Burn in may be long process here.

 

I actually listened the system less than usual (shorter sessions) but needed to log hours on it. Then, I put back the CDX1-1425 on new custom JMLC horn instead of the previous FaitalPRO tractrix horn.

BANG!!! back to great sound again! Immediately, I knew my memory wasn't failing me. I KNEW the system didn't sound the way it could. The 1425 is the winner.

​

SUBJECTIVELY… in my room and my system, the CDX1-1425 simply outperform both the Eminence N151M and the BMS 4526. And whilst it wasn’t a total humiliation defeat, it was a defeat nevertheless. Both Eminence and BMS being Ring Radiator design and the CDX1-1425 are conventional domes design.

​

The cdx1-1425 just sounded more realistic as a tweeter. I verified this by playing just the tweeter with some heavy cymbal music, carefully paying attention to attack, weight and decay. This eliminated the big Radian 950PB to interfere with my judgement.

​

The CDX1-1425 also happens to subjectively integrate better with the 2" JMLC midrange (Radian 950PB) as both have similar aluminum dome diaphragms.

Perhaps, using 2 different technology compression driver together (dome and annular ring), rendered integration problematic.

​

​

Side by side comparison… I have to give a slight nod to the BMS over the Eminence if used above 4 kHz.

My test were done at 3 kHz crossover point, that gave an advantage to the bigger N151M.

If 2.5 kHz crossover point is to be used, then I would rather use the Eminence or a Bigger 1" BMS model over the tiny 0.63" exit the BMS4526.

​

​

YMMY

bottom of page