Jbl 4350a 2231a vs 2235 recone sound quality

[JoeNelis]

Hi all

Does anyone have experience in a listening session with regards to JBL 2231a drivers in a pair of 4350's original compared to a new 2235 recone in 2231a baskets' in jbl 4350.:

I have bought some 4350's for a project and as the original recone kits for 2231a are no longer available. I have read some threads here, but just want as much info before I decide to go ahead...... Thanx !!!

[cooky1257]

Not in those monitors but TMA1's, in all honesty the difference is minimal to the point of being able to put it down to 'new'. The likelihood the 2231a's were optimal before recone is moot.The 2235 cone employs an improved 'progressive spider' so...
Same or better sound.

[JoeNelis]

Not in those monitors but TMA1's, in all honesty the difference is minimal to the point of being able to put it down to 'new'. The likelihood the 2231a's were optimal before recone is moot.The 2235 cone employs an improved 'progressive spider' so...
Same or better sound.

Thanx for your thoughts, I was thinking along the same lines. I know the 2235 can handle more power, but I have read on the forum that the spiders are rated on stiffness and then can change the sound...my thoughts are I maybe will refoam them and then do a listening session with 2231a in and then I have 4 2235h with new recone kits. I will post the outcome in the coming months

[speakerdave]

Not in that speaker, but I did try some 2235H's in my 4333a's when I had them just to see what would happen. The improvement in bass was not subtle and was immediately apparent. However, in that speaker my opinion was that the 2235 did not tie in well with the crossover(at 800 Hz) and midrange horn and because of that was a no go. Since the 4350 is biamp only and crossed over at 300 I would not see any problem at all, and you will be the beneficiary of the improved bass. Note, though, I was using the actual 2235H,
not a 2235-loaded Alnico frame.

[JoeNelis]

Not in that speaker, but I did try some 2235H's in my 4333a's when I had them just to see what would happen. The improvement in bass was not subtle and was immediately apparent. However, in that speaker my opinion was that the 2235 did not tie in well with the crossover(at 800 Hz) and midrange horn and because of that was a no go. Since the 4350 is biamp only and crossed over at 300 I would not see any problem at all, and you will be the beneficiary of the improved bass. Note, though, I was using the actual 2235H,
not a 2235-loaded Alnico frame.

Thanx for the advice, sounds wise. I have four 2235h with full recones that I will try
Am looking forward to the listening session. Thanx again !!!

[ngccglp]

Hi Joe, what was the outcome of using 2235 in 4350?

thanks.

[JoeNelis]

Hi Joe, what was the outcome of using 2235 in 4350?

thanks.

Hi never got around to trying them in the 4350’s. I just used the 2231a drivers, it seemed to work well with the 50’s. To me the Alnico magnet drivers sound a slight warm romantic sound which I liked in the 50’s.

joe.

[Challenger604]

I would definitely change to 2235’s. And an upgrade xover would optimize all!

The 2235’s is the best 15”! In my own opinion....

[ngccglp]

Hi never got around to trying them in the 4350’s. I just used the 2231a drivers, it seemed to work well with the 50’s. To me the Alnico magnet drivers sound a slight warm romantic sound which I liked in the 50’s.

joe.

Thanks Joe. I do agree the 2231A sounds great. Recently I went to listen to some of the modern speakers and begin wondering if the 2235s would tighten up the bass presentation and give me some of that modern bass sound.

[ngccglp]

I would definitely change to 2235’s. And an upgrade xover would optimize all!

The 2235’s is the best 15”! In my own opinion....

I used to have 2235s in 4508 enclosure. While it does not seemed to go as Low as the 2231As in the 4350 enclosure, the bass articulation sounded clearer and I could hear more details in the bass.

[Challenger604]

I used to have 2235s in 4508 enclosure. While it does not seemed to go as Low as the 2231As in the 4350 enclosure, the bass articulation sounded clearer and I could hear more details in the bass.

Could be that you don’t use it properly. You need a Frequency divider cutting at 290 Hz with 18DB per octave. If you don’t do that, you will not have what the 2235 can give you.
I recommend the 5234A. Not the 5235. Was not designed for the 43 series...

[dn92]

Could be that you don’t use it properly. You need a Frequency divider cutting at 290 Hz with 18DB per octave. If you don’t do that, you will not have what the 2235 can give you.
I recommend the 5234A. Not the 5235. Was not designed for the 43 series...

5235 is just a 5234A with a better output stage and symetrical input. From the two I'd chose the 5235.
Furthermore I had the opportunity to listen to a pair of 4355! They were crossovered with LR 24dB/oct (a m552) and were very good in sound.
18dB/oct filter card can be built from FFBREQ and CCBREQ cards that are easy to find (the ones used in theatre systems).

[dn92]

Does someone knows the exact volume and port tuning of 4350 and 4355 ?
Is the port tuning the same amongst 4350, 4350A and 4350B ?
Before thinking changing directly 2231H to 2235H these are the right questions.

Edit: some information there: http://www.audioheritage.org/vbullet...php?10614-4355
Port tuning of 4355 is 28Hz from the impedance curve
from JBL 4355 documentation volume is 9.5 cubic feet (269L), and Port tuning is mentionned being at 32Hz, which isn't what the impedance curve shows.
From http://www.jblpro.com/pub/obsolete/4350b.pdf, JBL 4350B port tuning is at 25Hz, with the same volume.
This is meaning if changing 2231H for 2235H port tuning will be a bit low.
Accordingly to http://audio-database.com/JBL/speaker/4350a-e.html ,in 4350A, using two 2231A, volume is still 9.5 Cubic feet.

[Ian Mackenzie]

http://www.audioheritage.org/vbullet...l=1#post361033

A quick simulation based on the actual ports dimensions should confirm the real system tuning

Based on the 4350/4355 drawings the tuning is around 28 hertz using the port dimensions as a guide. However the actual tuning in the real enclosure could vary due to mural coupling if the 3 closely spaced ports in the 4350 and the curvature of the port in the 4355 makes it difficult to determine the volume of air in the port.. Ie. lt could be a bit lower

With such a wide baffle and mutual coupling of the woofers a slightly lower tuning may have found favour empirically

[Challenger604]

5235 is just a 5234A with a better output stage and symetrical input. From the two I'd chose the 5235.
Furthermore I had the opportunity to listen to a pair of 4355! They were crossovered with LR 24dB/oct (a m552) and were very good in sound.
18dB/oct filter card can be built from FFBREQ and CCBREQ cards that are easy to find (the ones used in theatre systems).

I triee the 5235 and went back right away to my 5234A. I didn’t like the bass and highd with the 35...