Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 28

Thread: JBL Synthesis 1 Subwoofer

  1. #1
    pfreak
    Guest

    JBL Synthesis 1 Subwoofer



    Hello,

    I would like to announce gladly the JBL Synthesis 1 Subwoofer copying if plans or other has please. I am very much interested in the interior life of the housing. Are for each answer gratefully


    Here still a few technical data

    Sorry for my bad English

    18" THX Subwoofer
    Sensitivity ( 2.83V @ 1m ) 95dB
    Impedance 8 Ohms Bass Driver 18" Aquaplas cone
    Power Rating 800 Watts
    Frequency Response 18Hz - 1000Hz
    Dimensions ( H x W x D ) 876mm x 533mm x 559mm
    Weight 55kg [/b]

  2. #2
    Obsolete
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    NLA
    Posts
    14,548

    Re: JBL Synthesis 1 Subwoofer

    See
    http://www.jblpro.com/pub/cinema/4645c.pdf
    for Pro version

    The Synthesis One Subwoofer originally used the 2245H LF transducer, it now uses the 2242HPL LF transducer as shown in your photo.
    Last edited by 4313B; 07-01-2003 at 05:08 AM.

  3. #3
    pfreak
    Guest

    re

    What ist better now !

    Because the 2245 H have a very low frequency (20 HZ). Are you sure that in den Picture is the 2242H ?

  4. #4
    Obsolete
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    NLA
    Posts
    14,548

    Re: re

    Yes, I am sure the transducers in your picture are 2242's. I am quite familiar with both the 2242 and the 2245.

  5. #5
    pfreak
    Guest

    re

    and witch one is better now !!!

    2245H

    Power Capacity: 600 W
    Sensitivity: 95dB SPL, 1W@1m
    Frequency Range: 20 Hz to 2 kHz


    2242H

    Power Capacity: 800 W
    Sensitivity: 99dB SPL, 1W@1m
    Frequency Range: 25 Hz to 1,6 kHz

  6. #6
    Obsolete
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    NLA
    Posts
    14,548
    Short answer - 2242H primarily due to it's lower power compression and lower harmonic distortion.

    *****

    The power capacity of the 2242H in the same terms as the 2245H is 1600W. Pe of the 2245H is 300W, Pe of the 2242H is 800W.
    You might want to read this as well http://www.jblpro.com/pub/technote/tn_v1n22.pdf
    Last edited by 4313B; 07-01-2003 at 07:25 AM.

  7. #7
    pfreak
    Guest

    re

    Whatever loudspeakers you would recommend to me thereby I a good and clean bass have where the frequency are correct. You know yourself there better out

  8. #8
    Obsolete
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    NLA
    Posts
    14,548
    I'm not sure I understand your last post. What are you trying to accomplish? A "better" Synthesis One or 4645C?

  9. #9
    pfreak
    Guest

    re

    Actually I want a Synthesis 1. But where is there exactly differentiated

  10. #10
    Obsolete
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    NLA
    Posts
    14,548
    The Synthesis One currently retails for $2400.
    2242H/HPL (originally used the 2245H) in 8.0 cubic foot volume tuned to 30 Hz.
    The 4645C currently retails for $1203.
    2242H/HPL in 8.0 cubic foot volume tuned to 25 Hz with option to add 25 Hz (Q=2) auxillary filter.
    JBL is going to re-tune the Synthesis One in the near future to follow 4645C specifications. http://www.jblpro.com/pub/cinema/4645c.pdf

    If you are going to build your own, the specifications to use are 8.0 cubic feet tuned to 25 Hz. Use 1" thick MDF liberally braced. The internal dimensions I personally use are 29-7/8" x 24" x 19-1/4". This puts the lowest internal standing wave at ~ 225 Hz. You can build your enclosure(s) to model the Synthesis One styling. The 2242H retails for $839 and the 2242HPL (no rubber tire on magnet) retails for $803.

  11. #11
    Registered User MJC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    800
    An 18" driver certainly moves a lot of air, but from what I've read elsewhere, smaller transducers can respond quicker. Thus in a move soundtrack that has a series of explosions in a row you will hear the separate explosions with a smaller driver instead of just one massive explosion.
    What is your thoughts on this?

  12. #12
    Administrator Robh3606's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Rocinante
    Posts
    8,054
    "An 18" driver certainly moves a lot of air, but from what I've read elsewhere, smaller transducers can respond quicker. Thus in a move soundtrack that has a series of explosions in a row you will hear the separate explosions with a smaller driver instead of just one massive explosion."

    I don't know about that. Giskard just had the calculations up for the force to cone weight ratio for the E145 as an example. I doubt many other drivers can compare to the acceleration that motor and cone mass are capable of. It depends on the individual drivers, motors, cone mass so I don't think you can generalize. Depends on the box tunning too. Lots of variables. I have never used 18's but my 15's and 14's are barely moving so they are well within there linear range even at high SPL's. The bass from them beats the pants off of any 10 or 12 I have ever used. You have to look the distortion too. A 10" drivers is going to be working a lot harder for the same SPL. Basically it all boils down to the most air volume with the lowest distortion, lowest power compression. I think a well designed big driver properly tunned will win in most cases.

    Rob

  13. #13
    Senior Seņor boputnam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    northern california
    Posts
    7,009
    "...it all boils down to the most air volume with the lowest distortion, lowest power compression. I think a well designed big driver properly tuned will win in most cases."

    Hear, hear! I second that, Rob, and can validate it from recent experience with the 2245H's (18-in) - these badboys are astonishingly responsive, tight (punchy where the source material is so) and at the same time full, beyond anything you might expect. You may match (or exceed...?) the response using two 2235H's (15-in) due to combined surface area, but you'd get only close with a one-on-one test.

    MJC: "...in a move soundtrack that has a series of explosions in a row you will hear the separate explosions with a smaller driver instead of just one massive explosion."

    With a larger format transducer you will not only hear the individual "explosions" (in your example) but you have the added pleasurable experience of having been knocked off your feet! The REAL Reality TV!

    Go large, high quality, properly tuned.

    IMHO!!
    Last edited by boputnam; 07-01-2003 at 08:45 AM.
    bo

    "Indeed, not!!"

  14. #14
    Dis Member mikebake's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Lima, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    2,634
    "An 18" driver certainly moves a lot of air, but from what I've read elsewhere, smaller transducers can respond quicker."..."
    What is your thoughts on this?"

    This is an utter (and common) fallacy, and one that won't go away. It has been discussed ad nauseum on the high efficiency forum at Audio Asylum, and definitively put to rest.

    Repeat after me; at a given hz, smaller drivers are not "quicker". There are some possible reasons why people think this, such as
    they have heard "mudmotor" drivers with poor control/distortion, etc.

    Put this concept out of your mind; it is incorrect.
    Remember this, too; we are talking about a volume displacement function, i.e. you can empty a swimming pool faster with a bucket than a teaspoon.
    Smaller drivers may have other characteristics (good or bad), but being "quicker" ain't one of them.

    The large magnets on JBL woofs and subwoofs, for example, provide great cone control and start, stop, and reverse very well!!!

    The dumb (#*^(#@$ that think that some cabinet with a bunch of small drivers is going to combine to make great, deep bass, with additional "speed" are morons...............

    But then, ask me how I really feel!!!
    HAR!

    MBB
    Attached Images Attached Images  

  15. #15
    Senior Seņor boputnam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    northern california
    Posts
    7,009
    There was a most interesting post out here earlier - suddenly gone missing - from the inimitable Giskard. The bit I recall the most, was attributed to the 2245H and said (I paraphrase...)

    That's what I've always admired about the 2245H - you give it 1 watt, and you Get it All!
    bo

    "Indeed, not!!"

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. Jbl Sub1500 15" Subwoofer 4 Ohm
    By pangea in forum Lansing Product General Information
    Replies: 519
    Last Post: 05-21-2017, 09:03 AM
  2. Subwoofer Project with JBL 2226
    By 10 Watt Street in forum Lansing Product General Information
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 12-08-2009, 02:48 PM
  3. Subwoofer JBL HT1S THX
    By alnico in forum Lansing Product General Information
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 12-01-2004, 05:31 PM
  4. Subwoofer JBL 4688
    By Lionel PAUTY in forum Lansing Product Technical Help
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 10-15-2003, 03:43 PM
  5. JBL S120PII subwoofer...?
    By boputnam in forum Lansing Product General Information
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 08-01-2003, 10:47 AM

Posting Permissions

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