2216 nd1’s In L300s

[Bluegrassmaven]

What is the correct porting for the L300 cabinet if 2216 nd1’s are installed?

[grumpy]

If it's already tuned to be ~30Hz (say 5-6ft3 vol, 4" long x 4" diameter port), I'd just start with it as-is (running through some scenarios).

I would expect that to be fairly close to neutral (no 50-60Hz bump and not unnecessarily rolled off). Can be surprising how much a tuned box influences things.

You could tune it for more thump (and less low bass) by shortening the port, but I think you're in uncharted waters -and- there's no one
particular correct answer.

[nedseg]

I'm running ND-1s in my L200s.
I was prepared to make port changes, but found I get excellent sub-30hz response as is - but the L200 ports (LE15Bs) are different from the L300s, I believe. (IRCC, the calculators showed them to be tuned to around 28hz on those boxes.)
With a bit of EQ, I get very close to 20hz with them.
Several of us have done these L200 'mods' - documented over on audiokarma.
FWIW, the ND-1s completely transform not only the LF, but also lower MF, of these things.
Highly recommended - have fun!

[johnlcnm]

My comments are not from measured data. I did substitute 2216nd's that I had purchased several years ago for the 2235's in a pair of 4333B's. I also replaced the existing crossovers with charged coupled Nelson Pass/Zonker92 boards. I have listened to these for several months now. My opinion is, the 2216nd's are a serious step up from the 2235H's. The lower midrange now matches the mid horns in clarity. The mid bass is smoother in that I can clearly follow the bass instruments. Also smaller drums have a snap that was lacking with the original 2235's. Low bass around 30Hz seems to be down a little, but still good. Voices are much clearer and more natural compared to the original crossovers and drivers. If you have the bucks, the 2216nd is the way to go.

[Earl K]

My comments are not from measured data. I did substitute 2216nd's that I had purchased several years ago for the 2235's in a pair of 4333B's. I also replaced the existing crossovers with charged coupled Nelson Pass/Zonker92 boards. I have listened to these for several months now. My opinion is, the 2216nd's are a serious step up from the 2235H's. The lower midrange now matches the mid horns in clarity. The mid bass is smoother in that I can clearly follow the bass instruments. Also smaller drums have a snap that was lacking with the original 2235's. Low bass around 30Hz seems to be down a little, but still good. Voices are much clearer and more natural compared to the original crossovers and drivers. If you have the bucks, the 2216nd is the way to go.


Thanks for your testimonial John. I follow all the comments ( over at AK ) praising this upgrade.

I'm sure I would like that woofer since I value clarity over out-right ULF extension.

I think your 2216nd is another positive development ( in large signal track-ability ) that started way back in the early 90's with the introduction of the Me150H.


:)

[johnlcnm]

It would be interesting to compare these modified 4333's to the 4343's. It can't happen here in the outback, but the folks living in the old JBL stomping grounds might have that ability. This mod. makes me hanker for a new pair of 4367's! It was Nedseg and some others over on audiokarma that planted the seed in my head to try the 2216's, although they used the dash one versions. I am running the pads set to zero, though the 2216 is specified as 2dB more efficient then the 2235.

[Mr. Widget]

I'm running ND-1s in my L200s.
I was prepared to make port changes, but found I get excellent sub-30hz response as is - but the L200 ports (LE15Bs) are different from the L300s, I believe. (IRCC, the calculators showed them to be tuned to around 28hz on those boxes.)
With a bit of EQ, I get very close to 20hz with them.
Several of us have done these L200 'mods' - documented over on audiokarma.
FWIW, the ND-1s completely transform not only the LF, but also lower MF, of these things.
Highly recommended - have fun!I have no idea what the difference is between the ND and ND-1, but hearing the 2216ND in a pair of M2s really impressed me.

I'm sure that either version will be an upgrade over the 2235H (especially in the lower mids) and I doubt the port tweaking required is that drastic.


Widget

[nedseg]

Thank you Mr. Widget!

I accumulated pages and pages of links and references over the course of several years, and chose the ND-1s.

I don't really recall why now; perhaps b/c the 4367 does not require DSP, or I was thinking worst case I could buy the 4367 LF crossover if active xovers didn't work?
The technical differences I could find documented seemed minor.

In any event, at the time I purchased the first one, they were the same price as the ND.
However, the last ND-1 I purchased was quite a bit more expensive (~$800), so I doubt that whatever difference there is, is worth it now.

Alobar published some of his REW measurement results on AK, which are nearly identical to what I've measured (also very similar to the measurements made with the Venu360 RTA).
I'm crossing over to the horn at 1150hz, I think he's running the ND a bit higher.

And, while the dramatically improved mids are impressive and a pleasant surprise, it has to be said that the bass response improvement (esp from the - original 2216! - le15b) is night/day.
From muddy & boomy to clear, deep & precise - crisp?

I spent a lot of time in my youth around 4350s and L300s, and was continually critiquing the L200's poor bass/lower mid-range (I did the 077/N8000 upgrade shortly after purchasing them in '74) - this now brings them up to par finally. Worth waiting nearly 50 years for? :)
And so simple to do - a straight drop-in replacement, and DSP makes the crossover issues go away.

The 4645C sub I have matches the 2216ND freq response (up to a point), but trades off 'cleanliness' for Power - makes for an interesting combo.
These woofs make the modified L200 3-ways truly full range.

PS. And a huge Thanks to SRM51555 (Scott) - and all the others who contributed to those threads - whose M2 DIYs really inspired me to take the risk.
He has heard my upgraded L200s, and I think its fair to say he was favorably impressed.
:D

[Robh3606]

The difference between a 2216Nd and a -1 is aquaplas added to the -1 so a 2216 is a 2234 vs a -1 2235 as an example.

Rob:)

[srm51555]

PS. And a huge Thanks to SRM51555 (Scott) - and all the others who contributed to those threads - whose M2 DIYs really inspired me to take the risk.
He has heard my upgraded L200s, and I think its fair to say he was favorably impressed.
:D

Thanks for the kind words. I did like the way they integrated into the L200 so well. When I get time I will be stopping over to hear them with the 4645C.


The difference between a 2216Nd and a -1 is aquaplas added to the -1 so a 2216 is a 2234 vs a -1 2235 as an example.

Rob:)

If I remember correctly, this is exactly why nedseg (Todd) chose these woofers instead of the non dash versions. Less DSP help needed in the lower spectrum.

He also mentioned to me the LE15B's pro version is the 2216a which I found interesting.

Thanks,
Scott

[Earl K]

The difference between a 2216Nd and a -1 is aquaplas added to the -1 so a 2216 is a 2234 vs a -1 2235 as an example.

Rob:)


Rob,

Do you have private intel that the 2216nd-1 has around 15-30 grams more MMS than the 2216nd ?

If so, please share.

:)

[Alobar]

Count me as another 2216Nd1 convert.. I've had them in my L200's for a year now, first with just the LX16a xovers, then biamped and now triamped using a miniDSP 4x10hd. I'm running the ND1's from 20 to 1200hz and they are just crisp, very deep and nothing like the LE15B's. Especially in the boom dept. I did add a bit of PEQ to get them flat (+- 4DB at my chair) down to 23hz, and I have to say that after a year I am still gobblysmacked everytime I sit down and play them! 45 years with these and I have about zero reason to upgrade now. Thanks to Nedseg and the others for getting me going on these very fine woof's!

[Bluegrassmaven]

Thanks for all the good info. Have been playing the 300’s for several years with the Pass crossovers and 2235 H’s with very satisfying results. Will build the charge coupled LF networks as shared by 4313B on 12-10-2015 for the nd-1’s. The excitement is starting to build.

[Robh3606]

~ 10 grams of mass added via aquaplas on the rear of the cone reducing Fs to ~ 28 Hz along with a modified edge treatment on the cloth surround. Well controlled and very consistent with very good performance.

Courtesy 4313B

Rob:)

[nedseg]

Thanks Rob!
Ah, yes here it is:
"The woofer used in the JBL 4367 is JBL’s latest version of one our most advanced woofers, the 2216Nd-1. The 2216Nd-1 is a 15" (380mm) cast-frame woofer with Aquaplas-treated Pure Pulp cone that uses the latest Differential Drive® motor system. "
http://www.newaudio.it/JBL/4367%20JBL%20(1)/JBL%20Synthesis%204367%20White%20Paper.pdf

And for future reference, an earlier discussion of Earl and Scott's:
http://www.audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?37659-Project-M2-DIY-Thread&p=420490&viewfull=1#post420490

Also, I cribbed (stole) a bit from POS's M2 curves - adding about 6db of overall gain (to match the LE85+077 via the N8000 xover) and about 5db around 22hz - but from there up it was pretty flat in my (admittedly non-expert) REW near-field measurements.

Also, I very carefully measured the inside dimensions of the L200(A) and existing ports, which is how I got to the 28hz tuning figure on those cabs.
In retrospect, it sure seems like an amazingly lucky "fit" - almost as if someone at JBL decided to finally 'Fix' the original 2216 (LE15B)! I'm sure grateful, regardless.

Having lived with the LE15B 'deficiencies' for 40yrs, Every Time I fire these things up now I am gobsmacked!
Nice.

PS. I was able to re-use the rubber gaskets from the LE15s on the ND-1s, too.

[macaroonie]

I'm delighted to hear all these positive comments, while I have 2235's I have long held doubts about the mass ring and it's effects , positive and negative. TBH I doubt that it behaves properly above 500Hz. It just sounds dark.
It seems that the more agile 2216 addresses this issue.
My question is , is there a 12" that is the same motor but with a smaller cone ?
Like 2226 and 2206.

[Earl K]

~ 10 grams of mass added via aquaplas on the rear of the cone reducing Fs to ~ 28 Hz along with a modified edge treatment on the cloth surround. Well controlled and very consistent with very good performance.

Courtesy 4313B

Rob:)

Thanks Rob ( +4313B ).

:)

[ivica]

I'm delighted to hear all these positive comments, while I have 2235's I have long held doubts about the mass ring and it's effects , positive and negative. TBH I doubt that it behaves properly above 500Hz. It just sounds dark.
It seems that the more agile 2216 addresses this issue.
My question is , is there a 12" that is the same motor but with a smaller cone ?
Like 2226 and 2206.


Hi macaroonie,
may be 2262hpl
the respone can be seen at page 5. of
https://www.jblpro.com/pub/technote/JBL_TN%201-33%20rev3.pdf

regards
ivica

[johnlcnm]

Plot of the freq. response with the new 2216nd. No changed to the crossover. Measured @ one meter.84815 These sound and measure like plug and play. With Nelson Pass crossovers.

[ivica]

Plot of the freq. response with the new 2216nd. No changed to the crossover. Measured @ one meter.84815 These sound and measure like plug and play. With Nelson Pass crossovers.

Hi johnlcnm,

I think that for such large box speakers measuring from about distance 3m would show more realistic results.
Applying only 1st order network (instead of 3rd applied by JBL) for UHF (2405) would introduce strong 'comb filter' effect (as can be seen).

regards
ivica

[johnlcnm]

Yes, a lot of interference. The setting is not a good one for measurements. Looking at the spectrum, I'm a little concerned about the anomaly at 700Hz. I need to check the polarity of the mids and woofers. I did reverse the input to the 2216nd's, as their phase should be the reverse of the former 2235's. The crossover outputs to the mids were not marked. I did meter back to the crossover inputs and mark them. I need to make sure the phase is reversed between those two drivers.

[johnlcnm]

84822
Good advice Ivica. About 1.5 meters. At tweeter level. Still a little sickout at the mid crossover. Stock L-pads are at the zero position.

[Bluegrassmaven]

Yes, a lot of interference. The setting is not a good one for measurements. Looking at the spectrum, I'm a little concerned about the anomaly at 700Hz. I need to check the polarity of the mids and woofers. I did reverse the input to the 2216nd's, as their phase should be the reverse of the former 2235's. The crossover outputs to the mids were not marked. I did meter back to the crossover inputs and mark them. I need to make sure the phase is reversed between those two drivers.

Nelson Pass reversed the polarity only on the mid driver.

[ivica]

Yes, a lot of interference. The setting is not a good one for measurements. Looking at the spectrum, I'm a little concerned about the anomaly at 700Hz. I need to check the polarity of the mids and woofers. I did reverse the input to the 2216nd's, as their phase should be the reverse of the former 2235's. The crossover outputs to the mids were not marked. I did meter back to the crossover inputs and mark them. I need to make sure the phase is reversed between those two drivers.

Hi johnlcnm,

If You measure the distance from the mic and center of the bass driver You can get the length distance differences, not to mention floor surface influence. So some measurements can be done while speaker box is laid on its back side, and put the mic on top over it, as high as possible away from the speaker.....


regards
ivica

[johnlcnm]

Good advice Ivica. I need to summon help from my neighbor to move the speakers from the stand to the floor. I want to pull the woofers and check the midrange polarity again. One of the reasons that I rejected making the measurements Ha Ha! Blue. Nelson did reverse the polarity on the midrange. I want to make sure that I was not confused when I checked that the first time during the crossover build. Both terminals read minus on the PC Card.

[johnlcnm]

Nelson Pass reversed the polarity only on the mid driver.
Finally checked the polarity. All was good. Midrange and 2216nd phase reversed. I will re-iterate. The 2216nd seems to be plug and play with the L-pads set to zero. Shot of the crossover mounted behind the 2216nd. 84859

[Bluegrassmaven]

Got the drivers, built clones of the 4367 LF network: what an awesome epiphany! No need for any more tweaks or equipment purchases. I have a brand new music library.

[nedseg]

Got the drivers, built clones of the 4367 LF network: what an awesome epiphany! No need for any more tweaks or equipment purchases. I have a brand new music library.

Excellent!
Did you have to make any port changes? (the ones on my l200s did not require any)
Did you go charge coupled (like the original, I believe) on the 4367 LF xover?

I definitely get the 'all new music library' thing - every recording I own requires a second listening now!
(And other upgrades on the way.)

Enjoy!

[Bluegrassmaven]

Excellent!
Did you have to make any port changes? (the ones on my l200s did not require any)
Did you go charge coupled (like the original, I believe) on the 4367 LF xover?

I definitely get the 'all new music library' thing - every recording I own requires a second listening now!
(And other upgrades on the way.)

Enjoy!

No port changes. The 4367 network is charge coupled; I retained my passive Pass networks for mid and tweeter. My Pass networks use Clarity Cap bypassed with Mundorf silver oil. It sings so sweetly that I resent having to go to work!

[johnlcnm]

One thing that has become apparent with the Pass network, driver integration. I really cannot hear different drivers. Nothing stands out as a three way system. In other words, the sound is not bound by the box. I think Nelson mentioned that this was one of his goals. I think he pulled that effect off in spades. These modified speakers are one of the smoothest I have ever heard, plus the detail is really excellent. I do hear what Nedseg is saying about the bass, 'clarity is very good.' Does it beat the 4429? Hope I don't get flogged for this, but yes it does.

I am going to look into the 4367 LF network, even though I don't have the 2216nd- ones.

[Bluegrassmaven]

One thing that has become apparent with the Pass network, driver integration. I really cannot hear different drivers. Nothing stands out as a three way system. In other words, the sound is not bound by the box. I think Nelson mentioned that this was one of his goals. I think he pulled that effect off in spades. These modified speakers are one of the smoothest I have ever heard, plus the detail is really excellent. I do hear what Nedseg is saying about the bass, 'clarity is very good.' Does it beat the 4429? Hope I don't get flogged for this, but yes it does.

I am going to look into the 4367 LF network, even though I don't have the 2216nd- ones.

Yes the driver integration is excellent and the edginess of horn drivers is eliminated. You can listen loud and for extended periods without earburn.