Can something become a Sub1500

[pelly3s]

is there any frame that can be reconed to a sub1500. Since noone wants to part with theirs I figure why not make them.

[Zilch]

Not likely. If you saw one you'd know why.... :D

[pelly3s]

not gonna work in a 2227? soon enough i'm gonna get tempted to get the plans for the motor and machine my own lol. I get kits for sub1500's for as cheap as humanly possible (still too much money for a kit)

[Earl K]

I imagine it would cost close to $1000.00 to make up 2 sub1500 wannabes that still wouldn't have the same performance as the original.

I wouldn't bother - there's a rumoured successor to this transducer . I'd wait for that transducer to become available .

The motor/magnet from the 2227h might be the same - but the vented basket for the 1500sub is unique to the sub1500.The second picture displays the unique venting built into the basket. This is one extra feature ( compared to other woofers ) that was added for heat evacuation from the voice-coil area.

Also, notice from the cross-sectional pic where the spider glue point is relative to other basket parts. I think the sub1500 has a higher metal collar underneath that spider ( compared to a 2227 ) . You might need to manufacture a shim for the 2227s' metal collar . A lot of hassle for a makeshift device .



( these pics come from the original sub1500 thread started by Roland ( Pangea )

EDIT : The bottom picture is a profile shot of one of my ME150h woofs. This woofer is also rumoured to have been built on the 2227 chassis .

From this pic, you can see that my concern might have been overstated regarding the heigth/depth differences of where the spider glues onto the baskets' collar.

But a comparison of the two pics does seem to indicate a different height/depth top-hat ( glued right onto the top of that slab of ceramic magnet ). A straight edge across the back of that tophat and then measured down to the ceramic magnet ( no rubber boot ) = 1.25" . The "top-hat" for the sub1500 looks to be quite a bit taller / deeper to my eyes .

[4313B]

is there any frame that can be reconed to a sub1500. Since noone wants to part with theirs I figure why not make them.No. It is a one-of-a-kind. The W1500H will also be different.

[johnaec]

Earl - in the two photos, notice also the rectangular cutouts in the basket of the Sub1500 that have foam in them, (right to the left of the connectors).

John

[merlin]

You lucky fellah! I've been keeping an eye out for that for over a year now.

No sign of those appearing on the market yet as far as I can see. Do let us know how you get on won't you.

[boputnam]

No. It is a one-of-a-kind. The W1500H will also be different.But a birdie told me the 2242H is a wunderkind in this league. It too has SVG (super vent gap) cooling, and an Xmax of 9mm... :blink:

I'm incredbily impressed with mine - are they worth considering?

[Mr. Widget]

But a birdie told me the 2242H is a wunderkind in this league.

I'm incredbily impressed with mine - are they worth considering?It depends on your application... the 2242s in my system stomped the Sub1500 which has very similar specs to the W1500H I believe, but the Sub1500 sounded much better... more musical, closer to the 2245.


Widget

[boputnam]

Dammit, Widget! :bash:

Why aren't you busy measuring those TAD's - pretty please? :rotfl:

[johnaec]

I wanna' know if they used the clear glue or the yellow for the spiders... :duck:

John (w/ two Sub1500's still in their boxes - clear or yellow? :hmm: )

[mikebake]

...built like brick houses and put into a wall.
Well, then make sure you DO NOT BLOCK VENTS DO NOT BLOCK VENTS DO NOT BLOCK VENTS

Congrats, and looking forward to your evaulation. They look quite potent.

[boputnam]

...Frankly, my personal opinion is that nothing beats a 2245H in 8 to 10 cubes for home use even to this day. The 2242H is scary clean though. Greg wasn't lying when he said "those things aren't even of this world". Agree, dood.

I'm using the 2242H in the SR system, and very pleased. They are very, very efficient and tonal. A remarkable improvement from other SR subs I've used...

[mikebake]

I personally prefer them in the 4645C instead of the S1S-EX.
Uh oh.:uhmmmm:

[mikebake]

Anyone heard any infinite baffle subs, perhaps using a JBL? Someone I know, a driver designer (not JBL) uses them in his house and digs them.

[Thom]

More because I'm curious than because I think I need one does someone Know how the Mccauley 6174 compares?

[mikebake]

Don't tell me you just bought a bunch of S1S-EX's...
No, I wouldn't have, since someone told me once that they preferred the
4645C..................can't remember exactly why, though............:D

[spkrman57]

I have heard the 2235 and the 2242. :)

I found the dynamic punch and speed of the 2242 to be more important than how deep it reproduces down low. :D

Maybe that is due to the type of music I prefer most of the time for my critical listening consists mostly of natural instraments(orchestra). ;)

The 2242 still does pipe organ well enough to shake everything in the whole house. The notes are felt, not heard though. :)

I am using Giskards 9 cu ft boxes referenced several times in this forum.:applaud:

There may be better subs, pick your priorities here: lowest response, fastest attack on transients or total spl output. :blink:

The speed of attack of the transients would be my best description of the 2242. And I need no EQ for my needs.:bouncy:

Thanks Giskard for my killer subs!!!!:applaud:

Ron

[Thom]

It isn't important, but I was looking for a comparison to Lansing. I'd be crazy to even try to make my case for having asked, sorry for interrupting your worship service.

[Guido]

EDIT : The bottom picture is a profile shot of one of my ME150h woofs. This woofer is also rumoured to have been built on the 2227 chassis.

Earl, it's no longer a rumour. It's confirmed by Jerry Moro through Giskard

http://audioheritage.csdco.com/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=137388&postcount=54

I'm waiting for the ME150 cone kits and will recone my 2227 frames soon.

[GordonW]

More because I'm curious than because I think I need one does someone Know how the Mccauley 6174 compares?

The McCauley doesn't have the midbass dynamic range of the JBL 2242 or 2245, or the 2235. Just doesn't seem to "snap" the same way.

If you're using the subs at REALLY LOW frequencies (ie BELOW 50 Hz, the McCauleys work fine. But, they're not my cup of tea on midbass...

If you're looking for something that should TROUNCE the Sub1500, the TC Sounds LMS-series drivers should do the trick. The Sub1500 isn't even CLOSE to as linear at high excursion as the TC LMS-4000 series 15". Like, the LMS has HALF the distortion at rated X-max... which is HIGHER on the LMS than the SUB1500! Yes, they're every bit as expensive as the JBLs (if not MORE expensive, IIRC), but they're pretty much the state-of-the-art in motor design right now, AFAIK. Takes BIG amps to drive them, but you get the rewards in an astounding LACK of colorations!

http://www.tcsounds.com/lms4000.htm

If those aren't impressive enough, check out the LMS5400 series. Way big money, but I don't think anything else on the planet will touch it, at this point in time...

Regards,
Gordon.

[boputnam]

It isn't important ...That's what I thought since you were so far off-topic.

You could start this topic in a new thread in a non-JBL forum - any of the Lansing Related area. That would make it easier to find, or ignore if readers choose to.
...sorry for interrupting your worship service.Clever.
Not... :no:

[Thom]

No need for a new thread. I do not wish to discuss other brand products. I now have all the information I need. To say more would be to poke a bear.

[LowPhreak]

There may be better subs, pick your priorities here: lowest response, fastest attack on transients or total spl output. :blink:



I'll take the first 2, thank you very much. :) SPL is relatively easy after that.