2234 Butyl Surrounds from Japan

[1audiohack]

By the way, what is the status of the C8R2235?

As of this morning, 161 in stock.

Barry.

[pos]

Just enough for your different systems

[Mr. Widget]

Just enough for your different systems

I think you missed counted… I think Barry will be at least eight pairs short.


Widget

[grumpy]

[Joseph Smith Jr]

Wait - now you are advocating replacing surrounds with something other than what JBL used?

Lans-a-loy was eventually classified as a factory defect by JBL and treated as such and ultimately abandoned altogether, so in this instance, yes

And I wasn't making a big deal out of it, only that it would only yield truly meaningful results if compared, side by side, to two drivers with new surrounds of both types, not one on it's way out versus the new rubber one

I have had more than a few re-edge jobs meet factory specs completely, so in my view why screw with a good thing? Especially after the OP also made it clear that he usually re-cones anyway as a matter of personal practice

Those rubber surrounds have been around for a long time, Part Express has been hawking them for years, or at least they were

All I am saying is that if I a going to spend the time, and time is something once spent it is gone, to patch a driver, I'm at least going to try and use the closest thing to an original or correct part, known quantity, as is possible

Might consider the switch for some really nice high quality or specialty fit automotive driver, but otherwise I don't see the point as an end user, manufacturer? Yeah

Either way though, I wasn't making that big a deal of it, just wouldn't do it myself unless someone like Greg Timbers gave me a specific part number and said "here, use these instead"

[Joseph Smith Jr]

He clearly stated it was an experiment,

I got that part of it too

[4313B]

The fact that they are not original does bother me.

It would me too. But that damn foam!
It was totally fine back then when we didn't know any better.
Lans-a-loy was an even better termination but we all know how that turned out.

I finally solved this sticky wicket by selling all my 2234H's and 2235H's and using 2216Nd's and 1501AL-2's instead. It was amazing how liberating that was.

[JuniorJBL]

It would me too. But that damn foam!
It was totally fine back then when we didn't know any better.
Lans-a-loy was an even better termination but we all know how that turned out.

I finally solved this sticky wicket by selling all my 2234H's and 2235H's and using 2216Nd's and 1501AL-2's instead. It was amazing how liberating that was.

[honkytonkwillie]

I finally solved this sticky wicket by selling all my 2234H's and 2235H's and using 2216Nd's and 1501AL-2's instead.

Forgive my naivete, but how close are those drivers to being drop-in replacements for the 2234H or 2235H? I've not found much information on them yet.

I ask, because a pair of 15" drivers is next on my list to acquire for a 4430 build.

[srm51555]

Forgive my naivete, but how close are those drivers to being drop-in replacements for the 2234H or 2235H? I've not found much information on them yet.

I ask, because a pair of 15" drivers is next on my list to acquire for a 4430 build.

Hello Honkytonkwille,

The 2235 has a slightly bigger hole diameter and a higher DCR of 6 vs 5 than of the 2216nd. When I was looking to get a second pair of 2235's I found the cores and oem recones were about $750. A pair of new 2216nd could be purchased for little over 1K. I ended up getting the 2216's instead of them. If I was going to build a 4430 though I guess I would stick with the original design because I have no crossover design experience to integrate the 2216.


Good luck, Scott

[ivica]

Forgive my naivete, but how close are those drivers to being drop-in replacements for the 2234H or 2235H? I've not found much information on them yet.

I ask, because a pair of 15" drivers is next on my list to acquire for a 4430 build.

Hello Honkytonkwille,

You can compare T/S parameters of any of the mentioned, but I think that 2235 and 2216 are very different type of drivers.
On my opinion 2216 is good mid-bass driver, or may be used in the bass horn loaded configuration, but 2235 is a kind of very good bass driver especially used in the bass-reflex box type. If using two bass driver then may be 2234 can be used too, as a kind of mutual coupling in such configuration would happen.
Talking about 1500AL family drivers, I think is another story. You can see its T/S parameters so can conclude possible application.
Using 2216, I would suggest to be used with sub-woofer combination. I have no idea which one to be used as sub, may be 2269, or some from the 'older school' such as 2245, 2240, even 2242.
If all that in mind, may be 2235 or 2234 (in pair) would be the most effective solution.

regards
ivica

[Ed Zeppeli]

Hello Honkytonkwille,

The 2235 has a slightly bigger hole diameter and a higher DCR of 6 vs 5 than of the 2216nd. When I was looking to get a second pair of 2235's I found the cores and oem recones were about $750. A pair of new 2216nd could be purchased for little over 1K. I ended up getting the 2216's instead of them. If I was going to build a 4430 though I guess I would stick with the original design because I have no crossover design experience to integrate the 2216.


Good luck, Scott

Funny. I'm looking to upgrade my current mains from 4430 to a modular that includes a bass cabinet with SAM1HFs up top. I have a spare pair of 2235s but truly desire a 2216nd to supply the bottom end. In the interim, I have designed a cabinet that would perch the SAMs up top and be compatible with both 15" drivers. Do you know off-hand how much smaller the cut-out is for the 2216nd?

Hello Honkytonkwille,

You can compare T/S parameters of any of the mentioned, but I think that 2235 and 2216 are very different type of drivers.
On my opinion 2216 is good mid-bass driver, or may be used in the bass horn loaded configuration, but 2235 is a kind of very good bass driver especially used in the bass-reflex box type. If using two bass driver then may be 2234 can be used too, as a kind of mutual coupling in such configuration would happen.
Talking about 1500AL family drivers, I think is another story. You can see its T/S parameters so can conclude possible application.
Using 2216, I would suggest to be used with sub-woofer combination. I have no idea which one to be used as sub, may be 2269, or some from the 'older school' such as 2245, 2240, even 2242.
If all that in mind, may be 2235 or 2234 (in pair) would be the most effective solution.

regards
ivica

Interesting. Although I do have a 2242 sub I would certainly want my set-up to be able to handle the full musical range. Despite the M2 frequency response, why do you feel that the 2216nd couldn't handle the very bottom end well? My understanding is that it is quite responsive to EQ. I'm hoping to build some bottom cabinets that will serve both drivers with only a necessary adjustment in port dimensions....eventually.


Cheers,

Warren

[ivica]

Funny. I'm looking to upgrade my current mains from 4430 to a modular that includes a bass cabinet with SAM1HFs up top. I have a spare pair of 2235s but truly desire a 2216nd to supply the bottom end. In the interim, I have designed a cabinet that would perch the SAMs up top and be compatible with both 15" drivers. Do you know off-hand how much smaller the cut-out is for the 2216nd?



Interesting. Although I do have a 2242 sub I would certainly want my set-up to be able to handle the full musical range. Despite the M2 frequency response, why do you feel that the 2216nd couldn't handle the very bottom end well? My understanding is that it is quite responsive to EQ. I'm hoping to build some bottom cabinets that will serve both drivers with only a necessary adjustment in port dimensions....eventually.


Cheers,

Warren

Hi,
It would be very interesting to show us the results after finishing your projects...
I think that 2242 can accept EQ too...

ivica

[1audiohack]

I want to get a pair of 2216-1's as used in the 2367. JM said they use a slightly softer spider and have a slightly lower Fs compared to the standard 2216 but the number doesn't come up in pro so I came to a dead end that I haven't fought my way out of yet.

That would the the one to have I think, I would like to know for sure though.

Barry.

[Ed Zeppeli]

I want to get a pair of 2216-1's as used in the 2367. JM said they use a slightly softer spider and have a slightly lower Fs compared to the standard 2216 but the number doesn't come up in pro so I came to a dead end that I haven't fought my way out of yet.

That would the the one to have I think, I would like to know for sure though.

Barry.

Yes, I remember reading about that here. It makes me wonder if, despite its different specs, it will become the suggested replacement or if the two versions will co-exist.