Vintage Jensen Speakers

[jdfoosh357]

A friend of a friend has a pair of late 60's C12R's in mint condition. Are there any Jensen models or years were production was sketchy, anything I should beware of?

He's offering them for $100, but brand new C12R's are $70 a pair. What would you do???

[mark norwine]

My opinion only:

I'd listen to them if you can BEFORE you decide.

To my ears, the C12R is one of the worst sounding speakers ever made.

Just my opinion......

[Wally]

IMO, the value of those speakers would be determined by 1) do they make a vintage amp 'correct' and 2) do they sound good to you in the amp/s that you plan putting them in.
I have heard C10R's that are glorious..to my ear anyway. I have a '64 SR with C10R's that is maybe the best SR that I have heard. The speakers are Weber recones. I recently sold a Silvertone 147? that had an original C10R in it. The amp just screamed.
FWIW, that is not a bad price for those speakers IF you determine that you like them and/or they make an amp complete.

[Tremo]

C12R = small magnet, small coil. Low power. Probably somewhat lacking lows.

If you like the sound, go for it. Personally I'd pass.

[CancerLeoCam]

...the Jensen Reissues-always available and the price is nice. They sound great.

[Wally]

Re: C10R RI's.
A fellow TDPRI member has a Bandmaster Reverb in combo form with 2 RI C10R's in it. The speakers do not hold up to the 40 watt BMR with a tele and volume/tones in the middle of the range. They get very muddy and indistinct. The modern Jensens are not accurate remakes of the old ones, imo.
The '64 C10R's in my SR defintely do not exhibit the same problem. They have good lows and warm highs and hold up to the demands of the amp very well.

[Mr. Sparkle]

Originally Posted by CancerLeoCam

...the Jensen Reissues-always available and the price is nice. They sound great.

I just got rid of a Twin that had a pair of new C12N's. I did not like them at all. They didn't......well, I don't know what they didn't, but they didn't. They had this weird range to them...like they produced the highs and the lows but they were in another langauge or something. New Jensens, to my ears, are kinda weird.

[yegbert]

Originally Posted by Mr. Sparkle

I just got rid of a Twin that had a pair of new C12N's. I did not like them at all. They didn't......well, I don't know what they didn't, but they didn't. They had this weird range to them...like they produced the highs and the lows but they were in another langauge or something. New Jensens, to my ears, are kinda weird.

I have a pair of the Italian C15Ns that sound pretty good to me. I have them in a BF Bassman 2x12 cab and I play either a '67 BF BandMaster or a '69 SF Bassman through them.

My C15Ns seem to produce the frequencies across the spectrum fairly evenly, at least in comparison to other speakers I've played through. The mids may be just a little plump, rounded but not real fat or peaky (as represented on a frequency plot). The lows seem to extend reasonably low enough to me, without having a peak resonance in lows that's so strong it's noticeable in my normal playing.

I have one Italian C12N in a '69 SFDR. I don't like it as much as I do the C15Ns. Compared to the C15Ns, the C12N:
1) produces lows that don't go quite as low, and with a resonant peak in the lows that is more noticeable and that occurs at a slightly higher frequency;
2) produces noticeably stronger highs.
3) produces mids slightly less strong.

Sometimes the C12N sounds fine to me, at other times it doesn't. (As discussed in the Does your tone alter from day to day thread?!) But while the C12N doesn't sound like what I want to hear about a third of the time, the C15Ns almost always sound good to me, including those times when the C12Ns don't.

Anyone else notice similar character in an Italian C12N? Anyone else tried an Italian C15N and care to comment on its character?

[Mr. Sparkle]

Compared to the C15Ns, the C12N:
1) produces lows that don't go quite as low, and with a resonant peak in the lows that is more noticeable and that occurs at a slightly higher frequency;
2) produces noticeably stronger highs.
3) produces mids slightly less strong.

Bingo. I would add that the lows seem to move air, but not add tone.

I am building a 1x15" cab for my tremolux head. I am going to consider the C15N.

[mark norwine]

remember.....

R = 1" VC
Q = 1-1/2" VC
N = 2" VC

The C10R is "ok", but the C12R is not all that good....

A 1" VC can control a 10" cone pretty well, but is really a bit small for a large 12" cone

An N has a vastly larger VC, offering much better control over the cone......so beware any comparisons between a C12N and a C12R

[Tremo]

Originally Posted by mark norwine

remember.....

R = 1" VC
Q = 1-1/2" VC
N = 2" VC

The C10R is "ok", but the C12R is not all that good....

A 1" VC can control a 10" cone pretty well, but is really a bit small for a large 12" cone

An N has a vastly larger VC, offering much better control over the cone......so beware any comparisons between a C12N and a C12R

Actually Mark,

R = 1" VC
Q = 1.25" VC
N = 1.5" VC

But I agree with the gist of your remark, the larger the coil and magnet, the "stronger" the motor, and the more control it will have over the movement of the cone. This also then lets you use a heavier/stiffer cone which stays in control longer and has less breakup and a stronger low end. It's basic f=ma physics.

I really don't like R coils at all, except possibly in an 8 incher for a Champ, P8R. For a 10, gimmie at least a Q. For a 12, a Q or preferably an N. For a 15, as big as you can get, N minimum. IMO, JBL was on the right track by putting a huge 4" coil on the D130.

I asked a certain boutique speaker builder if it would be possible to fit one of his standard P12N style cone into one of the British frames with the 1.75" coil and the biggest ceramic magnet. Never got a response. Oh well..... You have any idea what size gap is used on the high power series?

J

[jdfoosh357]

Thanks guys...so it looks like I should look for a pair of Jensen C12N's. I might add that I'm using these speakers initially for an ext. cab for a 5 watt Champ. I hope the amp will be able to push the speakers good enough.

[Tremo]

To answer your original question regarding real deal vintage Jensens, no there are no years to avoid, all the Chicago Jensens are good. Better than the Italian reissues. And in particular, the RI C12N doesn't sound very good to my ears.

[CancerLeoCam]

...RI P15N's.

[Dacious]

For a low wattage amp, Rs are probably fine. That's what they were created for.

Making 5-15 watts push 50 watts-worth of magnet or cone is self-defeating. You are not going to be producing much bass from a Champ power section anyhow. I'd buy old Rs to keep just to use in 10-30 watt amps. That cone breakup is part of what makes Tweed to me.

[mark norwine]

Actually Mark,

R = 1" VC
Q = 1.25" VC
N = 1.5" VC

Duhhhh......

Thanks, John.

Believe it or not, I knew that! And I actually checked that post about 4 times looking for errors.... Oh well....

mn

[Tremo]

Originally Posted by Dacious

Making 5-15 watts push 50 watts-worth of magnet or cone is self-defeating. You are not going to be producing much bass from a Champ power section anyhow. I'd buy old Rs to keep just to use in 10-30 watt amps. That cone breakup is part of what makes Tweed to me.

Actually not. If you're running a recent production "tight gap" speaker (we all know who that is), then you would be well advised to go with a high watt coil. Those gaps are sooooo very tight that *any* distortion or deformation of the coil from heat or a slightly warped baffle will cause a rub. That's why I strongly recommend the 50 Watt coil option for use with a DR.

Now on large gap speakers like current Emmis, then yeah, it's not so critical.