2226H for a 4435 DIY ?

[pos]

I have been playing around with WinISD and found that the 2226H has a nice response curve in a 4.95 cu ft box tuned to 30-35hz, quite similar to the one of a 2234H in the same enclosure tuned to 26hz.
The 4435 uses two 2234H is such boxes, with mutual coupling under 100hz, and seems to achieve a very good LF response.
Could this be a solution to obtain real LF from 2226H ?

Considering that 2226s are much easier and cheaper to find than 2234H (2225/2234/2235 backet and 2235/2234 recone kit), this could be interesting. Group delays are higher, but the 2226H are not that bad in this situation.
The 2226H is also 1db more sensitive and has a much greater Pe.
Could a 2226H be a good substitute to the 2234H for a 4435 DIY ?

WinISD does not show driver excursion, so maybe I am missing something here?

[Zilch]

It derates to ~100 watts, but still has appreciable output. We know 2226H subwoofing works in assisted alignments.

Worth a try, probably, using a second as "helper." I don't know if any members who have the dual boxes from the Tent Sale have tried doing that with them.

Getting two in the same enclosure to combine well is "tricky," in my experience. I do better with separates, as it would appear was ulitmately concluded in 4435....

[pos]

I have run some simulations in Unibox to see driver excursion.
It give slightly different results than WinISD regarding frequency response (even when playing with box fill, "virtual" Vb and such), which I find strange.

Driver excursion is quite high with the 2226 in this configuration. It starts to exceed its max just under 25hz.
Tuning the cab a bit lower (25hz) seems to resolve this issue, and I was able to push the driver to 150w without exceeding xmax. This gives similar SPL as a 2234H at the same power (Pe for the 2234).

Then I ran another simulation with a car driver: the 1500GTI.
Is uses a 2226 basket with an heavier cone assembly (an mms of 115g I think).
The results are quite good, and even closer to the 2234 than the 2226 is.
Once again I had to play with the tuning to prevent exceeding xmax (around 40hz this time, in the excursion bump), but it works quite well.

These drivers are even easier and cheaper to find on ebay than 2226Hs, so maybe it would be worth a try. If the results are bad then a reconing to 2226 could be done.

But this gives me two questions:
- Would these drivers go up to 1000Hz nicely? The MMS of the 1500GTI is only 10g heavier than the one of the 2234H, but are there other parameters that I should consider?
- The 1500GTI is a 4ohms driver. Would it be possible to do the low pass passive crossover with these drivers without forcing the amplifier to handle a 2ohms load ?

[spkrman57]

It has its limitations though.

I use it up to 1.6khz to a compression driver/horn.

I currently have some installed in a pair of L200 cabinets. They would sound pretty good except for the driver is located to close to the ground and that muddies up the 250hz area.

If I had the room, I would raise them off the ground a bit. Alas, that option is not available to me in my house.

I also use small wattage tube amps so "X-max" is not a concern for me.

Response is usable in the upper 35 to 40 hz range according to my ears.

Just another viewpoint to take in consideration!

Hope this helps!

Ron

[pos]

Thanks Ron

Do you think 2226 is a better driver than 2234 in the midbass? (less power compression, less coloration and distortion?)

One thing that is strange to me also is the Xmax: the 2226 has a 7.6mm xmax, but in the 4648a doc JBL says that "The total linear excursion capability of each transducer is 10 mm (0.4 in), peak to peak".
http://www.jblpro.com/pub/cinema/4648a.pdf
10mm would be really great for that particular design!
The 2234/2234 have a Xmax of 8.5mm. Is it also a conservative measure?
Maybe these 10mm are just a "good enougth for PA" thing whern used in 4648 ?

Response is usable in the upper 35 to 40 hz range according to my ears.

I hope to be able to go down to 25-30hz using a 4435-like allignement.
I really like this concept of mutual compling under a given frequency

[toddalin]

It has its limitations though.

I currently have some installed in a pair of L200 cabinets. They would sound pretty good except for the driver is located to close to the ground and that muddies up the 250hz area.

If I had the room, I would raise them off the ground a bit. Alas, that option is not available to me in my house.

Ron

To get my L200 cabinets a little closer together, I was able to just glue some 1" by 2" (actually 3/4" x 1-3/4) right to the existing bottom stand. This raises the cabinet 1-3/4" and even this seems to help the bass a little. It also puts the mid and tweeter more at ear level.

Note that in the pic, raising the cabinet gets it higher than the bricks such that I can move it toward the center by the width of the cabinet between its outter wall and its stand.



I did the same for my center channel to get it up some and put the drivers in view from the seating area over the coffee table.

[Robh3606]

What are you going to be using these for??? If they will be your main set-up why not bite the bullet for 2234's. You can get any number of drivers to do things they are not normally used for. What you want is the best use out of what you have. Running a 2226 below 40Hz or a Sub driver up to 1K is not best use. Sure they can be run that way but they were not designed to do so. If you want a pair 4435's then build a pair. Don't short change yourself trying to make things work.

Rob

[spkrman57]

Your audio needs are the factors that determine which drivers would work best for you!

Thanks Ron

Do you think 2226 is a better driver than 2234 in the midbass? (less power compression, less coloration and distortion?)

I like the 2226 for the midrange qualities it has. It is the cleanest 15" driver I have heard in that regard(I can't afford the really nice ones that would do better, ie:1500AL that is!)


I hope to be able to go down to 25-30hz using a 4435-like allignement.
I really like this concept of mutual compling under a given frequency

If you need down to 25hz to 30hz, don't bother with the 2226. There are better drivers for that purpose.

[Zilch]

Xmax is one-way, not peak-to-peak, I believe.

Xmech is peak-to-peak, without regard to linearity.

The linear peak-to-peak range would be somewhat less than that.

2234/5's progressive spider was designed to extend the linear range within Xmech.

I'd have to look all that up to be certain, tho. Better you do it....

[Baron030]

Hi Pos
I have 2226h drivers installed in 5 cu. ft. boxes. And initially, I had the enclosures tuned lower then I do now. What I found was that bass seemed to be lacking with the lower port tuning. Oh sure, they did would reach down to a lower cut off frequency with the lower port tuning. But, the roll off below 200Hz gave me an impression that the bass was lacking. After shortening the ports, which rises the tuning up to just about 40Hz, the 2226h drivers have a nice clean punchy sound. This higher tuning gives a much flatter response in the 40 to 200Hz range, which to my ears gives me the impression that bass is quite satisfactory. But, I have noticed that on a few CDs, the severe roll off below 40Hz to be quite noticeable. So, while the 2226h is a really excellent mid-bass driver, don’t expect it to perform well below 40Hz.
Baron030

[Robh3606]

Xmax is one-way, not peak-to-peak, I believe.

Hello Zilch

Yes JBL rates them one way. You double it for peak to peak.

Rob

[soundboy]

I used 2226's extensively for live sound years ago...they were in 4.5 cu ft boxes tuned to 40 hz. They were great for midbass up to 500 hz or so.
I noticed at the time that they lack visceral slam, and didn't have enough low end to use them, even in multiples without 18's below 80 hz(2240's at the time tuned to 30 hz, 8 cu ft).
They just aren't for low end thump. 2235's, 2234's....much more balanced in that department.
If you are going to the expense and time to do a clone....do a clone.
If the 2226 was ok for this application, JBL would have used it.
Good luck, and have fun, whatever you do!

[spkrman57]

JBL recommends bandwith limiting the 2226 to 80hz to 800hz and they will do everything they were intended to do!

Because I am using them with very low-powered tube amps, I am getting what I want in oversized/lower tuning cabinets without pushing them anywhere near their limits.

I also can accept on 85% of my music to reproduce what I need.

The other 15% requires a sub-woofer.

Your needs will dictate what you can accept. Good planning will help you pick the right drivers/cabinets and the electronics to make them sound as close as what you want to hear.

Because I understand the different possibilities and the compromises involved, my decisions are easier to make than those who have not spent time experimenting.

Regards, Ron

[pos]

Thank you guys for your answers! Thanks also to Ounesh for his advices by PM.

So you have decided to break my dreams ?

Sure they can be run that way but they were not designed to do so.

But WinISD and Unibox tell me that it is a viable solution (similar to a 2234). So are there things that T/S parameters cannot render but are important when listening?

Oh sure, they did would reach down to a lower cut off frequency with the lower port tuning. But, the roll off below 200Hz gave me an impression that the bass was lacking.

What I want to do is use 2 of them with a low port tuning, and one of them "helping" the other only in the LF (maybe up to 150hz instead of 100hz as in the 2234H). So I will have a 6db boost under 150hz. With the 6db/octave rolloff of the helper driver above 150hz that could give me a flat response down to 35hz.
I will try to simulate this with Unibox, using the filter fonctions.

I noticed at the time that they lack visceral slam, and didn't have enough low end to use them, even in multiples without 18's below 80 hz(2240's at the time tuned to 30 hz, 8 cu ft).

I want to use two of them but only wants the overall SPL level of one in the midbass. So that may change things. The 2226 response curves in my simulation are very close to the 2234 ones, so what would prevent it to be a viable and pleasant solution?

Because I understand the different possibilities and the compromises involved, my decisions are easier to make than those who have not spent time experimenting.

Your point is good. I want to experiment different designs and discover what truly fit my taste, listening habit, and listening conditions.
2226 are just the easiest JBL woofer to be found on the used market here. I could resell them afterward. Even if it does not sound good I would have learned things.
I would prefer 2235, but they are difficult to find. There is one currently on ebay.de, lets see what the final price will be.

I know that I am wrong. After all, as soundboy said if it was the right driver for the task then JBL would have used it. So I must be wrong, but I can't see why

[Ruediger]

I know that I am wrong. After all, as soundboy said if it was the right driver for the task then JBL would have used it. So I must be wrong, but I can't see why

When JBL designed the 4430 / 4435 there was no 2226 driver.

Ruediger