Help with HT sub, possible 4645C clone paired with Danish 90's L series speakers?

Hello all.

I have recently developed an affection for older JBL speakers.
The reason was that we had no real stereo in the new house, and while looking for what to do, I kept discarding the small modern wife-friendly boxes, they all came up short in my opinion...
The wife like big speakers, so I was rather free to find what I wanted.

So I fell in love with a series fo JBL speakers that was built here in Denmark
The L-series from the 90's.

I have found and aqcuired the following:

2x L100 fronts (050TI, 705G, LE120H)
2x L80 for surround (050TI, 705G, 708G)
1x L-Center for center (dooh) (050TI, 705G x2)

All driven by a Denon avr-x5200w...

BUT I need a sub!

The Wife have approved a 4645C, but I have some questions/considerations

(But please be patient with me, I am a novice)

My thoughts:

1. A 4645C is almost impossible to find used here, but a rather easy box to build, so I'm considering finding a driver and build the box myself.
2. I think I will integrate in a shelf wall, and use it as the base for the TV...

My questions:

1. The 4645 came with both 2242h and 2245 driver (right?) which would be best for HT/home audio?
2. Would another (JBL) 18" be a better match?
3. What amp type of would you use?
4. Would something like the PWR-ICE250 from miniDSP https://www.minidsp.com/products/pla...ers/pwr-ice250 replace the use of the BX63?

Thanks,

Christian

Well... I've read on...

So the consensus is the 2245H is superior and excellent in a 12 cu.ft cabinet (as per Greg Timbers, 1983

But Greg states that: "(...)often promote severe standing wave problems. For the same reason, it helps to mount the driver approximately one-third of the way down the long side." As I plan on making it a center piece in the living room, and actually place the center channel and TV on top of it, I would like to put the driver in the center and have two ports, one on each side of the driver, any thoughts?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChristianJS

Hello all.

I have recently developed an affection for older JBL speakers.
The reason was that we had no real stereo in the new house, and while looking for what to do, I kept discarding the small modern wife-friendly boxes, they all came up short in my opinion...
The wife like big speakers, so I was rather free to find what I wanted.

So I fell in love with a series fo JBL speakers that was built here in Denmark
The L-series from the 90's.

I have found and aqcuired the following:

2x L100 fronts (050TI, 705G, LE120H)
2x L80 for surround (050TI, 705G, 708G)
1x L-Center for center (dooh) (050TI, 705G x2)

All driven by a Denon avr-x5200w...

BUT I need a sub!

The Wife have approved a 4645C, but I have some questions/considerations

(But please be patient with me, I am a novice)

My thoughts:

1. A 4645C is almost impossible to find used here, but a rather easy box to build, so I'm considering finding a driver and build the box myself.
2. I think I will integrate in a shelf wall, and use it as the base for the TV...

My questions:

1. The 4645 came with both 2242h and 2245 driver (right?) which would be best for HT/home audio?
2. Would another (JBL) 18" be a better match?
3. What amp type of would you use?
4. Would something like the PWR-ICE250 from miniDSP https://www.minidsp.com/products/pla...ers/pwr-ice250 replace the use of the BX63?

Thanks,

Christian

---

I would use 2245h or 2269g/h in 4645, 4645B, 4645C enclosure, both woofers are better for sub duty than 2241g/h or 2242h in HT system

Ari

Thanks Ari
After having read a lot here, I have settled on the 2245H, the 2269G/H is just too expensive and would be overkill in a HT system IMOP...
Cabinetwise I am looking at a 4645 clone, but do you guys think it will be ok to put the driver in the center of the baffle and have two ports, one on each side?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hlaari

I would use 2245h or 2269g/h in 4645, 4645B, 4645C enclosure, both woofers are better for sub duty than 2241g/h or 2242h in HT system

Ari

---

I disagree about 2245H, I think 2242H is a better choice for HT in 4645 cabinet. The original 4645 with 2245H was tuned to 35hz and really doesn't dig deep enough for HT use. 4645B and 4645C With 2242 is tuned to 25hz and works much better, but also need some EQ. If you EQ 2245H in either cabinet you will run out of excursion very soon :(

2245H is a very musical and nice sounding woofer but is not ideal for HT use, or at least it need a HUGE Box tuned to around 20hz.

2269H is probably by far the best solution, but also the most expensive one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by baldrick

I disagree about 2245H, I think 2242H is a better choice for HT in 4645 cabinet. The original 4645 with 2245H was tuned to 35hz and really doesn't dig deep enough for HT use. 4645B and 4645C With 2242 is tuned to 25hz and works much better, but also need some EQ. If you EQ 2245H in either cabinet you will run out of excursion very soon :(

2245H is a very musical and nice sounding woofer but is not ideal for HT use, or at least it need a HUGE Box tuned to around 20hz.

2269H is probably by far the best solution, but also the most expensive one.

---

I have owned 4645C for many years ago and also 4881 with 15" 2256g and the 4881 out perform the 4645C in the lowest freq.
you need a lot of EQ for 2242h to work as a sub, 2242h have fs around 35Hz and 2245h around 20Hz
2242h are good in PA system and 2245h in HT system


Ari

As you know, I also use 4645 (4 of them) in my HT, and 2242 really don't need to much EQ to be flat to get 20-25hz inroom response. I've also had several 4645 with 2245, it doesn't work better, quite the opposite.

Low FS isn't that important when it will need a huge box.. 2245H is great for HT IF you have a huge Box (12-14 cu ft) and low tuning, but in a 4645 Box (8 cu ft), 2245H is not very good in my opinion and therefore 2242 works better.

I have no doubt 2256/W15GTI works better than 2242 in the lowest freq, the same for 2269.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by baldrick

As you know, I also use 4645 (4 of them) in my HT, and 2242 really don't need to much EQ to be flat to get 20-25hz inroom response. I've also had several 4645 with 2245, it doesn't work better, quite the opposite.

Low FS isn't that important when it will need a huge box.. 2245H is great for HT IF you have a huge Box (12-14 cu ft) and low tuning, but in a 4645 Box (8 cu ft), 2245H is not very good in my opinion and therefore 2242 works better.

I have no doubt 2256/W15GTI works better than 2242 in the lowest freq, the same for 2269.

---

you might be right about at 2242h work better in smaller enclosure than 2245h
there is also the 18" woofer from Revel, I have pair of them and need to find time to try them

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by baldrick

I disagree about 2245H, I think 2242H is a better choice for HT in 4645 cabinet.

---

The original 4645 was tuned to 25 Hz (think B460) but the 2245H's kept blowing up. The 4645 was then tuned higher to 30 Hz in an attempt to better protect the 2245H. It didn't work. The 2242H was designed to take significantly more power and the 4645 was tuned back down to 25 Hz to extend the 2242H as low as practical (it doesn't go as low as the 2245H does naturally, primarily because of the inbalance due to its rising response). One difference between the 2242H and the 2245H was how insanely "clean" the 2242H sounded by comparison. It really was a "theater" subwoofer, ultra-high power, ultra-low frequency, ultra-low distortion without blowing up during its service years.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hlaari

you might be right about at 2242h work better in smaller enclosure than 2245h

---

Yes, the 2242H had a lower compliance and higher Fs compared to the 2245H. JBL was able to get them to maintain the same bandwidth in a much smaller volume and with greater maximum output.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hlaari

there is also the 18" woofer from Revel, I have pair of them and need to find time to try them

---

Yeah you do! Nice! :yes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 4313B

The original 4645 was tuned to 25 Hz (think B460) but the 2245H's kept blowing up. The 4645 was then tuned higher to 30 Hz in an attempt to better protect the 2245H. It didn't work. The 2242H was designed to take significantly more power and the 4645 was tuned back down to 25 Hz to extend the 2242H as low as practical (it doesn't go as low as the 2245H does naturally, primarily because of the inbalance due to its rising response). One difference between the 2242H and the 2245H was how insanely "clean" the 2242H sounded by comparison.Yes, the 2242H had a lower compliance and higher Fs compared to the 2245H. JBL was able to get them to maintain the same bandwidth in a much smaller volume and with greater maximum output.

---

neo 2258h are very similar like 2242h in bandwith and both have greater maximum output than 2245h

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hlaari

neo 2258h are very similar like 2242h in bandwith and both have greater maximum output than 2245h

---

Gotta love that weight savings eh?

Now we are getting somewhere!

From what I have read, the 2242H 4645 works excellent when more than one is applied, so Baldrick might be right, along with the rest of you guys.
From all I have read, the 2245H is the best option in a normal HT or Hifi environment...

I have been offered a pair of 2245H 4645(?) with good drivers, only issue being I don't need 2!! (I think...)
The (very nice) guy wants to sell both...

Damn, I'm tempted!

Another very good point! The 2242H works better with boundary reinforcement and mutual coupling via multiples. The 2245H works better stand alone.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 4313B

It really was a "theater" subwoofer, ultra-high power, ultra-low frequency, ultra-low distortion without blowing up during its service years.

---

Yeah right :p:D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by baldrick

Yeah right :p:D

---

Stop doing things like that Baldrick!!!
It's like throwing food out in front of starving children!!!:crying:;)