Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: 2241 vs 2242

  1. #1
    Senior Member louped garouv's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    formerly "the city where imagination takes precedence over fact"
    Posts
    2,152

    2241 vs 2242

    so... i searched the threads, and found no topic 'exactly' on this one...
    maybe i searched poorly...

    anyway, i did glean than most folks seem to prefer the 2242 due to the almost indestructible nature of the driver...

    i saw this elsewhere on the interwebs...
    any thoughts (both on the transducers themselves and the snippet below)
    you all could share would be much appreciated!

    http://www.livesoundint.com/lab/lab/...ve2/36039.html


    The 2241 and 2242 are different drivers designs for somewhat different applications. 2241 is great when you only need to use a few drivers (or a couple of boxes) for subs and they're going to be placed in full space (on a stage or thereabouts).

    The 2242 is a higher Bl (magnet/coil strength) driver, which makes it better for instances where there are many drivers covering the subwoofer range, or when the subs are going to be loaded into the corners of a room.

    Let me see if I can explain why. . . When you have only a few drivers, each driver is projecting into full air space. There is only a little back pressure from the air. The 2241 was designed for this loading and does well in this situation.

    When you have a lot of drivers, each driver, instead of radiating in all directions is loaded by the other drivers. It's like each is pushing its own small column of air. The back pressure from the air is higher. It's analogous to each column of air having rigid walls like a horn. It takes a driver with a stronger motor -- the 2242 -- to push this air load. Same thing with corner loading. The driver sees more back pressure. And same thing with horn loaded subs -- more back pressure, so the 2242 is a good choice.

    Another consideration is that the 2242 has a response curve that falls slowly at the bottom end but starts falling at a higher frequency. This is perfect for multiple driver situations, because there is a natural frequency up-tilt at the low end when you have a lot of drivers (or corner loading). The 2241 could sound too boomy. If you're only using a few 2242's, the very low end can be boosted with EQ, but there may be headroom downsides to that.

    Lastly, it depends on what kind of sound you want. In a single front-loaded box, 2242 has a strong mid-bass sound, whereas 2241 has a more extended bass.

    The 2242 handles more overall power and has longer excursion.
    In summary, it depends on how you're going to use them and what kind of sound you want. I hope that helps.

  2. #2
    Moderator hjames's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    NoVA - DC 'burbs
    Posts
    8,548
    Awesome info - thanks for the information!



    Quote Originally Posted by louped garouv View Post
    so... i searched the threads, and found no topic 'exactly' on this one...
    maybe i searched poorly...

    anyway, i did glean than most folks seem to prefer the 2242 due to the almost indestructible nature of the driver...

    i saw this elsewhere on the interwebs...
    any thoughts (both on the transducers themselves and the snippet below)
    you all could share would be much appreciated!

    http://www.livesoundint.com/lab/lab/...ve2/36039.html
    2ch: WiiM Pro; Topping E30 II DAC; Oppo, Acurus RL-11, Acurus A200, JBL Dynamics Project - Offline: L212-TwinStack, VonSchweikert VR-4
    7: TIVO, Oppo BDP103D, B&K, 2pr UREI 809A, TF600, JBL B460

  3. #3
    Senior Member Lee in Montreal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Montréal
    Posts
    2,487
    Yup. Good info. Strangely, it seems I often read the 2241 was a dog. Not as natural sounding as a 2240 and not as powerfull as a 2242... I don't know why.

  4. #4
    Moderator hjames's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    NoVA - DC 'burbs
    Posts
    8,548
    Quote Originally Posted by Lee in Montreal View Post
    Yup. Good info. Strangely, it seems I often read the 2241 was a dog. Not as natural sounding as a 2240 and not as powerfull as a 2242... I don't know why.
    That seems odd - specs look good - and with the accordion surround looks like it'd be a longer lived than the 2245s.

    Maybe the issue is where its used - perhaps what works badly in a club or theater may be just fine for home use?
    2ch: WiiM Pro; Topping E30 II DAC; Oppo, Acurus RL-11, Acurus A200, JBL Dynamics Project - Offline: L212-TwinStack, VonSchweikert VR-4
    7: TIVO, Oppo BDP103D, B&K, 2pr UREI 809A, TF600, JBL B460

  5. #5
    Senior Member Lee in Montreal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Montréal
    Posts
    2,487
    Quote Originally Posted by hjames View Post
    That seems odd - specs look good - and with the accordion surround looks like it'd be a longer lived than the 2245s
    I was refereing to the 2440, not the 2245. The 2240 has Fs at 30Hz while the 2241 has it at 35Hz. And it also has an accordeon-type suspension. Soundwise, 2240 to 2241 is most likley like 2225 to 2226.

    One obvious advantage of the 2241 and 2226 baskets over their older 2240/2225 sibblings is that they are noticeably lighter.

  6. #6
    mikebond
    Guest
    Hello and HNY!I'm looking for 18" driver for my new project and I'm not sure what I have to buy. From the previous thread I saw:In a single front-loaded box, 2242 has a strong mid-bass sound, whereas 2241 has a more extended bass. WinISD showed me that 2241 (yellow) is very similar to 2245 (blue) except box volume, but 2242 (green) did not looks nice in recomended 8 cubic foot. I'm going to use 18" driver up to 150-200 Hz in 4-way cabinet for home stereo use and I would like to get deep bass. What can you recomend?
    Attached Images Attached Images   

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Jättendal (Giant Valley), Sweden
    Posts
    763
    If you have he opportunity to build really large boxes, the 2241 fits a tapered TL (Transmission Line) and the 2242 fits a MLTL (Mass Loaded Transmission Line). These kind of boxes will give you plenty of output deep down and sound better than a traditional BR.

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Jättendal (Giant Valley), Sweden
    Posts
    763
    Since Hornresp now has the possibility to simulate airflow resisitivity and I wanted to learn, I have made a simulation for a 2241 TL of about 300 liters (11 cu feet):



    Maximum SPL placed in a corner is 130 dB

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    309

    2241g

    Name:  0808131930.jpg
Views: 3504
Size:  60.9 KBI've been running these 2241G's ..corner, rear firing, (pulled out for pic) woofs
    in a 24 x 28 ft rm using a digital eq and sorted amps and they've worked good for me...


    Fort Knox

  10. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    49
    My first post here,
    Having used in the past the 2241 for subs and now the 2242, I have to say the 2242 goes deeper. I made clone pair of the 4645C, not really same cubic feet but a bit narrow and deeper. I have it cut at 80Hz with a BSS FDS360 and a Crown Macro 2402. I use Mogami W3103 and the bass is deep down to 27 HZ.
    Angel

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. 2226 vs 2241
    By barossi in forum Lansing Product DIY Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 10-22-2010, 11:50 PM
  2. Replace 2241 with 2242 or 2268 -- Can I ???
    By though in forum Lansing Product General Information
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 07-11-2007, 04:34 PM
  3. 2241 or K151 ?
    By Tom Loizeaux in forum Lansing Product Technical Help
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 07-10-2003, 09:54 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •