I have 2441/2397 also. Can this work? It looks like the 2269 is good to 1200hz....or..how would the 2269s fare as ob subs to augment my Acoustat Monitor 3?
I have 2441/2397 also. Can this work? It looks like the 2269 is good to 1200hz....or..how would the 2269s fare as ob subs to augment my Acoustat Monitor 3?
Just wondering. Anybody?
“Good to 1200Hz” seems like an unqualified stretch.
I have no open-baffle sub experience, but it does seem that there might be less expensive and more appropriate alternatives for such an experiment.
That's me, unqualified. I'm looking at the response graphs in the transducer forum. I acquired them them to upgrade my current subs, a pair of Velodyne DPS12. I also have no OB experience, so no idea how suitable they could be. In any case, they will no doubt be an improvement.Originally Posted by grumpy
I'd use them as subs for your Accustats, but I'd go with traditional ported cabinets. Personally I have never been impressed by any speaker's open baffle bass response. I think it is a fascination and not a solution. Just my 2 cents.
Widget
Hi gasfan,
I have no personal experience with JBL 2269 drivers, but from the technical data I think that 2269 (as one of the best bass driver) would be good up to 300Hz, so a kind of mid-bass ( 2262h, 2206h, or 2202h...) has to be applied with 2441/2397 (over 1kHz)
regards
Ivica
I think their transient performance would better suit the ESLs than 2245s which I also have. I suppose I could swap drivers and compare. If they're good to 300hz, then why does the graph extend beyond 1000? I'm clearly at a deficit here.
This part of it: http://www.troelsgravesen.dk/Beaming.htm
Yes, part of it.
There is also the cone mass and other less obvious factors that simply make large woofers poor midrange performers.
Widget
Right. I have no idea why I keep forgetting about this. It's those confounded graphs!
Thanks guys.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote