E2 clone

[Robh3606]

The PTH1010 but I am looking for something different. I may bite the bullet for the 90X50 you have in your towers.

Rob

[4313B]

The PTH1010 but I am looking for something different. I may bite the bullet for the 90X50 you have in your towers.

Let's talk about it.

[Don C]

Great thread, but what is an E2? Never heard of it.

[4313B]

Great thread, but what is an E2? Never heard of it.

DD66000 Everest II

[Zilch]

Of course, now you've got me thinking about dual LE14H-4's...

LE14H-4:LE14H-3::2234H:2235H, i.e., it's a mass thing, best I can figure.

I've run the LE14H-1 pairs in 2.5 mode successfully, active. The cab design is weird -- two too-small chambers with a common port. The boxing issues for dual woofers (4435 vs. E-2, for example,) are not well defined.

In my Mini-E2s (SX2-1000), I used single-chamber, closed box, 2.5 mode.

I've also looked at the "correct" drivers for those cabs, but can't get better than SR bass extension out of them. :dont-know

http://www.jblpro.com/pub/tour/4894_90.pdf

http://www.jblproservice.com/pdf/Arr...s/4894A-90.pdf

Let's talk about it.

Help me, now, you just said there was nothing to talk about.

So little, apparently, even that has been deleted....

[4313B]

LE14H-4:LE14H-3::2234H:2235H, i.e., it's a mass thing, best I can figure.

I've gone over the 2234H/2235H thing countless times and I posted exactly what J.M did with the LE14H-4 at least twice so you shouldn't have to figure much of anything?

I've run the LE14H-1 pairs in 2.5 mode successfully, active. The cab design is weird -- two too-small chambers with a common port.

I would think that running LE14H-1's or LE14H-3's in 2.5 mode would be pointless, they already have plenty of extension as is ( reminds me of G.T.'s comment with respect to the 250Ti - "Those things go damn near to DC in a large room." ). I would imagine that the room loading with such an arrangement would be attrocious. I know some guys love prodigious bass output but that seems above and beyond...

The LE14H-4 looks like a candidate for 2.5 mode, ala some type of scalable E2 design, and it could be a fun project for someone with the time and money to throw at it. I'd have to give it more scrutiny to personally commit though.

I've also looked at the "correct" drivers for those cabs, but can't get better than SR bass extension out of them.

That's by design. JBL really does do complete system design and one size doesn't fit all. I don't have any of the data for that box you reference but you should be able to whip up reasonable data with your measurement tools. It simply may not be real suitable for much of anything beyond its original intent. :dont-know

The boxing issues for dual woofers (2435 vs. E-2, for example,) are not well defined.

I'm not sure what you mean.

In my Mini-E2s (SX2-1000), I used single-chamber, closed box, 2.5 mode.

SK2-1000?

[Zilch]

I would think that running LE14H-1's or LE14H-3's in 2.5 mode would be pointless, they already have plenty of extension as is. I would imagine that the room loading with such an arrangement would be attrocious. I know some guys love prodigious bass output but that seems above and beyond....

The point mostly was to eek more bottom octave out of these too-small cabs. Current plan is to convert them to single-driver, though I'm now thinking there may be a significant advantage to be realized in working with lighter-cone drivers....

[4313B]

The point mostly was to eek more bottom octave out of these too-small cabs. Current plan is to convert them to single-driver, though I'm now thinking there may be a significant advantage to be realized in working with lighter-cone dirvers....

Oh, yeah, they are probably just too small for those drivers or they are tuned all wrong. If the LE14H-4 would like the smaller volume then you might be good to go. I don't know what volumes you are working with and what they are tuned to and I haven't bothered to run the numbers on the LE14H-4. I do know the LE14H-1 and LE14H-3 are real solid in smaller boxes tuned a little higher at the expense of the lowest octave. I really prefer them in the tried and true three and a half to four cubic footer tuned to 28 to 30 Hz though.

[Zilch]

I'm not sure what you mean.

Dual or single-chamber? Tuned how? 4435 (late) is dual, E-2 single, no?

SK2-1000?

Well, it was a typo, but it's probably better that I not call them that, anyway....

[4313B]

Dual or single-chamber? Tuned how? 4435 (late) is dual, E-2 single, no?

Oh! Yeah, "best practice" is one volume for one driver but sometimes one has to compromise. E2 is a single chamber. I think the K2-S5800 is too but I could be wrong. I can't remember and would have to look it up again. I went ahead and used a single volume for my dual 1200FE-12's. That doesn't mean though that somewhere down the road...

Well, it was a typo, but it's probably better that I not call it that, anyway....

I thought you were using the H4348 horn instead of the K2-S5800/SK2-1000 type horn though. I don't remember which flavor of ten you ended up with.

[Hoerninger]

... to run the numbers on the LE14H-4

POS gave an example for the LE14-4:
http://www.audioheritage.org/vbullet...2&postcount=32
Volume 73 liter, tuning frequency 26 Hz in comparison with a 2234H with 140 liter and the same tuning frequency.
___________
Peter

[4313B]

POS gave an example for the LE14-4:
http://www.audioheritage.org/vbullet...2&postcount=32
Volume 73 liter, tuning frequency 26 Hz in comparison with a 2234H with 140 liter and the same tuning frequency.
___________
Peter

Ok, so approximately a 5.2 cu. ft. footprint for both LE14H-4's as opposed to 10 cu. ft. for the dual 2234H's. That sounds exciting.

[Zilch]

I thought you were using the H4348 horn instead of the K2-S5800/SK2-1000 type horn though. I don't remember which flavor of ten you ended up with.

Yes, that's correct, and it dictated the cabinet width. Ian (and others) heard them here, with Citation 7.4s under them for the LF.

Ok, so approximately a 5.2 cu. ft. footprint for both LE14H-4's as opposed to 10 cu. ft. for the dual 2234H's. That sounds exciting.

My towers are about half that, if even, as I recall.

Not gonna happen with those, apparently.... :dont-know

Conceptually, it's an interesting approach -- the best (or worst, perhaps,) of both common and separate chambers, the volumes "leak" through the shared port coupling.

I've done the measurements, but haven't been able to make much practical sense of them.

[Guido]

Is this LE14H-4 available to the public?
If yes, where?

[Ian Mackenzie]

Is this LE14H-4 available to the public?
If yes, where?

Hi Guido,

That is a question I have. I see little point talking up what might be unless the drivers being discussed are truely available.

Ian