Does anyone know which drivers are used by Westlake Audio in their Reference Series ?
HR-1 Series seems to employ JBL 2235h´s or TAD TL-1602....
TM-3 seem to use TAD TL-1601...
SM-1 maybe JBL 2245h...
But this is just a guess.
How does Westlake obtain these obsolete JBL drivers
Do they use TAD TL-1801 in any of their speakers?
Regards,
Olaf
It is my understanding that JBL and TAD drivers options where always proposed to the buyer.
I have seen several SM-1 versions equipped with TL1801 drivers.
But JBL 2235h and 2245h are obsolete.
I even cannot find the C8R2245 recone-sets anymore...
2245h can be refoamed in most casess. Good, maybe better, alternatives are the 2243H or the (rare) TAD1801 you already mentionedOriginally Posted by Dr.db
I even cannot find the C8R2245 recone-sets anymore...
But JBL 2235h and 2245h are obsolete.
I even cannot find the C8R2245 recone-sets anymore...
Westlake used the 076 tweeter in a lot of those monitors, and those aren't exactly off the shelf items.
2243H is not an alternative for low frequencyFor that kind of use 2242H is better, 2243H is more a bass/midbass driver than hifi sub.
Yes and our old friend Ken Pachkowsky who had a relationship with Westlake was scouring the planet for 076s when their stash of NOS drivers ran out. Westlake stocked up on the drivers that they liked to use and since these larger Westlakes have not been built in large numbers in recent years, I guess that has worked out for them.
Widget
2243/2245 have proper copper coils, 2242's use toy wire. Don't like the sound of it.2243H is not an alternative for low frequency
Surely correct what you say with respect to 2243 vs 2242 Xmax. 2242H does not offer Xmax as high as 2245H/J, though.
You pay with sensitivity for the large Xmax offered, see 2245H/J response graph :
In 2242, the sensitivity drop was in part countered by using the much lighter toy wire (magnet also is higher energy than in 2245)
Midbass? See here for the 2.83V response graphs in 10 cu ft. cab (2242H first)
If you download them and put the files into two open windows of a viewer (i used Irfanview) and switch between the two windows by ALT-TAB fast enough, you can kinda "superimpose" them for your eyes. What you will see first is that the impedance of 2242H is a bit lower. What you also notice is that 2242H offers between 0 and 1 dB more level up to 750 Hz or so. Just as you would expect from lower impedance drawing a bit more current from the amp that supplies the 2.83 V.
While the response graph of both is essentially the same, the sound if used to 250 Hz is warm solid bass vs something that remotely reminds me of the "shout" of titanium frams in mid drivers. Wouldn't notice that to same extent if you X/O at 50 Hz, as in a true sub application, i agree.
Ralph
I've had all 2242, 2243 and 2245 and it was my opinion that 2243 didn't have very much subwoofer in it... it lacked VLF compared to both 2242 and 2245, and I thought that this fits well when you take a look at what 2243 was meant for... bass in highout SP subs like 749 that are meant for 35hz->.
I agree midbass maybe was wrong expression, but I mean that it lacked VLF, but I never used 10ft box for them
I've had all 2242, 2243 and 2245 and it was my opinion that 2243 didn't have very much subwoofer in it... it lacked VLF compared to both 2242 and 2245, and I thought that this fits well when you take a look at what 2243 was meant for... bass in highout SP subs like 749 that are meant for 35hz->.
I agree midbass maybe was wrong expression, but I mean that it lacked VLF, but I never used 10ft box for them
Could be you heard them in applications where compression due to Xmax reached occurred for the lowest notes.
Would also explain why the tonal balance shifted so much that you labelled them bass/midbass.
Ralph
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote