Any benefit of swapping the 2035's for 2226's in my 4639 LF system? Does it require x-over changes?
Printable View
Any benefit of swapping the 2035's for 2226's in my 4639 LF system? Does it require x-over changes?
I suppose you merant 2235 (not 2035)... If it is the case, those are very different woofers from your 2226. They are better for monitoring. And they won't play as "loud" as a 2226. If you want more deep bass, then get a pair of 18" 2245.
Hey Lee!
No, actually the 4622 uses 2 x 2035's (4639). My limited understanding is that the 2035 was the predecesser of 2225/2226, but I'm far from an expert. I already have 2 x 2242's, a 2245 and a TD-18H :D!
No the 2035 is a 3" coil lower power driver. It will work in the same bass boxes as the 2226.
Rob
Thanks Rob-
But does the 2226 offer anything substantial over the 2035? I guess since JBL did this upgrade, it must mean something.
It seems the 2035 is an econo version of the 2226 with a less "flattering" progression in the midrange.
http://www.audioheritage.org/vbullet...p/t-23356.html
Thanks Rob-
But does the 2226 offer anything substantial over the 2035? I guess since JBL did this upgrade, it must mean something.
OK, I just read some of the posts from a few years ago. I get it now. In my small theater, it probably doesn't matter...what about that I'm actively bi-amping...hmmm.
The 2035 has more "modern" motor than the 2226 (it is more recent than the 2226 indeed), similar to the 2020H and 2012H, and its shorting rings allows for an impedance curve that remains flat up high. This will give them a rising response (that can be equalized without any drawback) and a reduction in intermodulation distortion (you can read about this phenomenon on the aespeaker forum).
On the other hand it has a smaller VC and a less efficient venting system, so it will suffer more from power compression than a 2226...
For home use (ie low power) it could well be a better driver than the 2226 indeed.
(But as I never had one, nor had the chance to do a direct comparison with a 2226, take this opinion with a grain of salt ;). I do have 2020H midbass drivers though, and I can attest their low amount of distortion compared to previous designs like the 2123H)
Have you compared the TD18H and the 2245H?Quote:
Originally Posted by wrager
What are your findings?
I have used 2035's in my active set-up and they were quite nice. I ended up switching them out for E-145's. If you don't need the extra power handling of a 2226 they will be just fine. If you look at the older cinema cabinets the pecking order was the 2035 in the mid priced boxes and the 2226 in the premiums example being the 4638 vs 4648.
Rob:)
Great feedback from all, thanks! :applaud:
POS- I have both, the 2245 and TD-18 in their own ported 12 cu ft cabs on opposing walls.
Each is getting roughly 1000 wpch. Low passed at 125hz. I would say they sound very, very similar. I just got my calibrated mic
and Holm, (also have the Omni mic). I will measure them independently this weekend and post what I find. Your CD comparison has helped me tremendously!
The TD18's I had measured and sounded much more like 2242's except they were more than a full 5dB less sensitive across the board. They were back on their shipping boxes within an hour. :yawn:Quote:
Originally Posted by wrager
Glad to heard that :)Quote:
Originally Posted by wrager
What did you end up with?
2447 with Radian diaphragms?
On what horn? I read that you had both the 2352 and PT95, I would be curious to hear your opinion of these two.
I've had a few cinema setups with both 2035 and 2226 and they do sound very much the same.
When used in HT with subs, 2035 will play loud enough and I don't think you will find very much of a difference in them, but if used without subs and for music 2226 is better and will play a bit louder!