$275 is stupid cheap for such a driver... if anyone can't swing that then sell the frames to those who know exactly what to do with them. These cores are only going to get more and more rare so pass them on if you have no clue what to do with them.Originally Posted by Mr. Widget
+1. Er, +1,000,000...
I'll pay shipping, to me!
bo
"Indeed, not!!"
For music, 2245 hands down. For SR, 2242!Hello all, i'm here to figure out the differences between these 4 (sub)woofers, and this seemed the best place to ask. What i will be using the driver for is mainly music and they will be crossed over at around 50~60hz, and i wont need extension past 25hz. A few differences i know is the 2245 uses a foam surround which has less excursion, but if someone can help me find the best woofer for my application i would be very happy.
+2..
Reviving a zombie thread.
Who has had good experience crossing a 2240 at 500Hz? Does it still sound good that high, or is this mud?
TIA
Lee
I have used the 2240 a lot and I don't push it pass 200Hz. I prefer to insert a 2118H or something similar to mate to a mid-range.
Large diameter driver have a tendency to get change their directivity pretty fast above 100Hz.
Pretty much what I anticipated. I don't use the 2245 beyond 80Hz myself. The cone is very damped and heavy. I hoped that perhaps the lighter 2240 cone would reach higher, but being a big cone, I understand the limitations. Thanks for the reply. So, I guess that when JBL claims it can be crossover at 2KHZ, it must be for a loud PA where sound quality doesn't matter...
The ONLY way you will ever know what a 2245 sounds like is to have one of those blown frames reconed by a reputable service with actual JBL parts. These parts are becoming rare and quite expensive. I paid over $400 each last time I had a pair reconed properly. That has been a while.
Hard to find any better bass for listening on the planet.
For live sound, a different type of driver is needed.
You have to understand that the 2240/2241/2242s were all designed for sound reinforcement, which means live dynamic, ballz to the wall output, while the 2245 was designed for (finesse, lower frequency response, while not quite as much output or abuse) studio monitor use and generally it was used with somewhat compressed signals.
I guess the important question is; What are you planning to do with your system?
So more concise ...
What he said!
Sorry, just realized this was a zombie thread, as you called it.
I definitely feel better with a couple of fifteens or maybe twelves for some jobs to take your sound up to where a large compression driver can take over. I do not really hear crap coming from an (I have several 2240s and 2241s, but only four 2242s) eighteen at 500Hz, but rather some beaming. I often use 200Hz to 300Hz as my XO point (or even 80 or 100 HZ if I need to push more bass, then I really appreciate having a few fifteens to take it up to 500Hz or so).
I just do not like beaming at all.
Another point is, if you are setting your eighteens on the floor for best coupling of the bass, I feel that the "vocal frequencies" should be well above head level in the crowd to increase overall clarity, even IF the bass drivers are capable of massive output all the way up to the midrange.
If you are flying the entire system, it might be less critical to cross over low, but I still think there are benefits to using smaller drivers for low mids, even in horn loaded systems.
The 2240h is a forgotten driver. Fs30Hz and low Qts of 0.23. Great for horn loading, or bass reflex. 30Hz is pretty low for a high output woofer. Sure, the power compression is better on the 2241 and 2242, but the 2240 sounds better in a home environment. and it will sound more "dynamic" than a 2245. More kick and presence. My next project in 10cft cabinets tuned to Fb30Hz
Lee
OK, different story.
I have used my 2240s inside, but never had the luxury of a truly adequate enclosure inside other than just party time in my dad's barn or something. I have always had to scale down enclosure size inside my home and try to make it up with power and EQ.
Hardly works.
If you are going for near field listening, then beaming (from crossing over in the vocal range with an eighteen) can be far less of an issue, since you can control the effect by angling the direct output.
I fully agree with you. I use two 2240H in a 4642a enclosure for "hifi" use in my living room (my "sattelite" is 4530/2226, 2360a/2445, Beyma TPL150, but that's another story) and finde it very usefull. The frequency range is crossed from 25Hz to 66Hz where the side sattelites take over. The kick is, of course, frome the sattelites but the filling low bass is very well produced from the 2240. Actually the xmax of 5mm is more than enough and in combination with a very light cone the bass sounds tight, for my ear.
I haven`t heard it yet, but I reckon the 2240 mounted in 10cub.feet tuned to 30hz should be JBL`s best sounding bass driver.
It should reproduce 30hz with a lot of power and still sound very very good above 100hz
I believe 2245h has more efficiency below 50hz, but won`t sound as punchy and well staggered above 100hz as the 2240...
The 2240 is well tuned to 30hz, but decreases sensitivity quiet early and rolls of gently from 100hz down to 30hz... this could mate very well with most livingrooms and their roomgain
So a 2240h should be very well mating a 2123 midrange at aprox. 250hz without any sacrisfy in midbass dynamics, whereas the 2245 might just be a lowbass-woofer.
Obviously I havn`t heard any of them two, so I shouldn`t be talking about them.
But these are my thoughts I wanted to share, respectively get them confirmed or disproved by you!
Hi Dr.db,
Yes, you where right that the 2240 will have a "slow" roll off towards the low end in this particular 4642 enclosure. The below simulated response of the frequency range is close to my measurements in the living room. I "cut" the woofers above 66Hz very hard (48dB steep, butt) in order not to interfere with the "sattelite" system due to a very high output above 100Hz.
The 2240 can be used to give low end if you consider this raise in frequency response. Due to the dual 2240's effeciency the output from 25Hz - 70Hz is very dynamic and powerfull.
For comparison is the same data for the enclosure but speaker data is from 2245. As can be seen the 2245 is very flat (probably due to higher cone weight) but the cost is a weaker step response compared to the 2240 (lighter cone)
The comparison also show that the 2245 is playing "louder" but for home use the 2240 in a 4642 cab. is more than enough when playing Metallica
I dont know how the f... to remove the last figure. It's not in the edit text when editing, hmmm ghost....
There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote