PDA

View Full Version : 2225 vs 2234



Niklas Nord
05-23-2003, 07:37 AM
What do you think about that?

2225 vs 2234

any regards, the 2225 sound great to

4313B
05-23-2003, 09:09 AM
Same basket, different cone assemblies, different intended applications.

Niklas Nord
05-23-2003, 11:03 AM
what was the intended application för the 2225 then?

Mr. Widget
05-23-2003, 11:15 AM
Originally posted by Niklas Nord
what was the intended application för the 2225 then?

Mid Bass PA

The 2234 was designed solely for the 4435 to be used in electrically asymmetrical pairs. (They are both operating only at the lowest frequencies.)

Niklas Nord
06-10-2003, 07:57 AM
But running from 60hz to 300hz, would the
2234 be a mouch better driver than the 2225?

the cone seems the same, but not the suspension.

is the group delay better then the 2225..

has anyone any exsperience with the 2225 as an hifi-
loudspeaker driver ?

Niklas Nord
06-10-2003, 08:51 AM
Thank you Giskard, theres is not a BIG difference i think..
The 2234 goes lower and has a little better group delay!

Thank you for the graphs, i will look on them more later today!

4313B
06-10-2003, 09:21 AM
Yeah, the biggest difference is the lower usable response of the 2234H versus the higher power capacity and sensitivity of the 2225H. I highly doubt you could hear the difference in the group delay characteristics.

The graphs show each transducer in what Bass Box 6 Pro deems as their maximally flat alignments. Swapping tranducers in a given volume is where everything changes e.g. both transducers in a 5.0 cubic foot volume.

4313B
06-10-2003, 01:25 PM
"Thank you for the graphs, i will look on them more later today!"

Sure! However, after close inspection I noticed some errors, and I want to try to reduce the data size, so I will repost them in awhile.

4313B
06-10-2003, 02:34 PM
Here are the corrected runs:

4313B
06-10-2003, 02:36 PM
And:

Niklas Nord
06-10-2003, 03:07 PM
The standard 4.0 feet gives bad plots,
the ones before is great.

the 2225 seems to be nice stuff also!

jbl
11-14-2003, 11:44 AM
Hello Niklas,

I have been useing the 2225's along with the 4507 (5 cubic foot)
cabinets as my main stereo system for the past 18 years. The bass response is full and deep-window ratteling when it's in the music!
To answer your question, I don't believe that there would be much (if any) difference between either driver in a 5 cubic foot enclousure. You did'nt say what you plan to use. The only difference that I can see is that the 2225 is more efficient than the 2234 and will play somewhat louder. Again, I have never heard the 2234's in any size cabinet, so I can't compare the two.
I hope that my experience is of help to you.

4313B
11-14-2003, 12:35 PM
"To answer your question, I don't believe that there would be much (if any) difference between either driver in a 5 cubic foot enclousure. You did'nt say what you plan to use. The only difference that I can see is that the 2225 is more efficient than the 2234 and will play somewhat louder."

Just for clarification - the 4.0 cubic foot example above that I posted has an Fb of 40 Hz. JBL recommends using a 40 Hz high pass filter with all it's systems tuned to 40 Hz. The 2234H is a high compliance transducer with a longer voice coil winding depth and is capable of greater output than the 2225H below 40 Hz. The 2234H is used in the 4435 Studio Monitor. The volume per driver is 5.0 cubic feet and the tuning frequency is listed as 26 Hz. The 2225H used in a 4435 application would suffer mechanical damage when played anywhere near the same levels the 2234H can handle.

jbl
11-14-2003, 02:49 PM
Hello Giskard,
Once again JBL is confusing regarding the intended use of their woofers. I'm not saying that you are wrong, but rather JBL is inconsistent. I forget the subwoofer model, but it used the 2225 and was rated down to 30Hz or less. There is no mention of either a filter below a certain frequency, or any chance of damage to the driver(s). Sorry I can't be more specific. I will try to find the ad unless you have some info. on it.

Regards
jbl

4313B
11-14-2003, 03:28 PM
"Once again JBL is confusing regarding the intended use of their woofers."

Well I suppose from a consumer point of view it might be confusing but from a professional point of view it might be a little more straight forward. To my knowledge the 2234H was never offered to consumers as it was a system specific transducer (along the same lines as the 112/2108/2121/2122/121 transducers).

"I'm not saying that you are wrong, but rather JBL is inconsistent."

I don't think you will get an argument from anyone regarding that statement.

"There is no mention of either a filter below a certain frequency, or any chance of damage to the driver(s)."

That's actually common knowledge among professionals. It's a pretty good idea, especially under high power applications and when unfamiliar with a program source. Times have changed and some of today's source material could seriously stress many of the older JBL designs regardless of whether they are consumer or Pro.

jbl
11-14-2003, 05:47 PM
hi giskard:
your attachment makes sense. now, let me see... where is that jbl spec sheet that contridicts that last statement.
just kidding
thanks for your attachment.

regards
jbl