Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 19

Thread: SUB18 Clone

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Location
    Annapolis, MD
    Posts
    91

    SUB18 Clone

    Okay...I did a search and though there is other SUB18 threads in the forum, none are in the DIY section so here it goes...

    I'm building a home-theatre (mine) using clones of the M2 and desire to use the JBL 2269 driver as the basis for my subwoofer(s). That driver just has me so intrigued. I've generally liked JBL's LF drivers, particularly the 2242, which has always done me proud but the 2269...that thing is a monster! Whereas the SUB18 is listed as the compliment to the M2, I figured, why not? While I've worked with JBL (and Altec) for nearly half a century, I'm not a speaker designer, by any stretch. I'm thinking that a SUB18 clone would be a decent project.

    Has anyone measured the thing (internal volume). My best estimate is that it is a 9-cubic foot enclosure. What are the ports tuned to? I'm not bent on necessarily having an exact clone either. While I do have depth available, since this will be in a home-theatre environment and they/it will live below the stage speakers, height will be at a premium.

    Has anyone here cloned the SUB18 yet? Does anyone have it/them? If so, what are your impressions of it, including working in conjunction with the M2? I do plan to use it just as an LFE type subwoofer and NOT merely provide a bottom end to the M2.

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    381
    Quote Originally Posted by sguttag View Post
    Okay...I did a search and though there is other SUB18 threads in the forum, none are in the DIY section so here it goes...

    I'm building a home-theatre (mine) using clones of the M2 and desire to use the JBL 2269 driver as the basis for my subwoofer(s). That driver just has me so intrigued. I've generally liked JBL's LF drivers, particularly the 2242, which has always done me proud but the 2269...that thing is a monster! Whereas the SUB18 is listed as the compliment to the M2, I figured, why not? While I've worked with JBL (and Altec) for nearly half a century, I'm not a speaker designer, by any stretch. I'm thinking that a SUB18 clone would be a decent project.

    Has anyone measured the thing (internal volume). My best estimate is that it is a 9-cubic foot enclosure. What are the ports tuned to? I'm not bent on necessarily having an exact clone either. While I do have depth available, since this will be in a home-theatre environment and they/it will live below the stage speakers, height will be at a premium.

    Has anyone here cloned the SUB18 yet? Does anyone have it/them? If so, what are your impressions of it, including working in conjunction with the M2? I do plan to use it just as an LFE type subwoofer and NOT merely provide a bottom end to the M2.
    I hope this thread develops as I have recently acquired a pair of 2269. All I know so far are the published specs and that they are built to take a serious beating. How would the 2245 fare with an accordian surround?

  3. #3
    Senior Member baldrick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Haugesund, Norway
    Posts
    759
    Not a "clone", the cabinet is also bigger, but a fantastic build:











    The Whole setup:


  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Location
    Annapolis, MD
    Posts
    91
    Well that DOES look like a lot of fun! So a 2360/2446 AND the baby cheeks (2404). Sort of the old meets new. I'm REAL familiar with the 2360/2440-2446 (and the 2450) since I'm a cinema guy. It is a very predictable/deliverable combination. Personally, I never could get behind the 2404 but I've never combined it with the 2360 so you will have gotten past its nasty region. Are you crossing it in around 9-12K to stay out of the 2446's nasty area? I could definitely see that working.

    So what do you have for us on your SUB18 like monsters? In particular, dimensions and responses? Whatever I end up doing, I'm going to need to constrain my height to 2-2.25 feet but I do have depth available to make up the volume and to accommodate ports (though I'm considering a sealed box).

  5. #5
    Senior Member baldrick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Haugesund, Norway
    Posts
    759
    Itís not mine

    iíve had a pair 2269h and used 4645b boxes, 8 cu ft tuned to 25 Hz, I guess itís very comparable to Sub18 which Is aprox 9 cu ft tuned to 25hz. Sub18 is meant for Music but for use in hometheather like I was, I think they would gain with larger cabinwt tuned lower. I plan buildig 4 new, useing aprox 12 cu ft cabinets tuned to aprox 18 Hz.

  6. #6
    Senior Member Ian Mackenzie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    6,874
    Below is s starting point

    http://www.audioheritage.org/vbullet...l=1#post412444


    The idea is you trade a some what smaller box for x4 amplifier power and 1/2 octave extension below a QB3 alignment. That’s an F3 of 24 hertz.

    The port area would need a min of 3 four inch pvc pipes to avoid non linear power compression at high power.
    It’s a very interesting driver with a huge Dayton plate amp. The on board dsp can manage the EQ boost, sub crossover and parametric EQ for the room.

    The 2266 is also a great driver 15 inch driver . See Roberts project
    Only 2 1/2 cuft 3 .

  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Location
    Annapolis, MD
    Posts
    91
    My SUB18 clone might have hit a slight detour. A friend has convinced me to try a sealed box with the 2269H. Running the numbers, the 2269H does indeed qualify for a sealed box, about as well as for a vented box. It is tiny. Just 3-cubic feet. It should be flat to about 55Hz and then take the turn down. I'm thinking that I'll have plenty of power to drive it as low as the room (smallish at 15 x 20 feet) can reproduce. I'll have two of them. If they do the job, I might stop right there. Otherwise, I might pick up and continue down the SUB18 clone path. I really like how small these sealed boxes are.

  8. #8
    Administrator Mr. Widget's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    9,636
    Quote Originally Posted by sguttag View Post
    My SUB18 clone might have hit a slight detour. A friend has convinced me to try a sealed box with the 2269H. Running the numbers, the 2269H does indeed qualify for a sealed box, about as well as for a vented box. It is tiny. Just 3-cubic feet. It should be flat to about 55Hz and then take the turn down. I'm thinking that I'll have plenty of power to drive it as low as the room (smallish at 15 x 20 feet) can reproduce. I'll have two of them. If they do the job, I might stop right there. Otherwise, I might pick up and continue down the SUB18 clone path. I really like how small these sealed boxes are.
    That sounds very interesting. Will you use DSP to flatten out the 6dB slope below 55Hz, or count on room gain?


    Widget

  9. #9
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Location
    Annapolis, MD
    Posts
    91
    DSP. The system will have a QSC Q-SYS Core (110c) processor. it will be handling the M2s DSP and most everything else audio in the system (and probably the control).

  10. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Location
    Annapolis, MD
    Posts
    91
    So I have an update. Based on the T-S parameters and using an on-line sealed box program, I came up with a ~3 cubic foot enclosure. The results came up with the predicted response with the f3 = 55Hz (1/3 octave analyzer). Note, a 250Hz LPF was applied to the signal (pink noise).

    Name:  2269HSealedBox.jpg
Views: 315
Size:  238.1 KB

    Applying a complimentary EQ to the signal did not flatten the response well enough. While I could get a flat response (within 3dB) down to about 20Hz, it took significantly more boost below 35Hz to get there than the response would otherwise indicate. When listening to the unit, it was clear that about 35Hz was about as low as it would go and sound good. You could make it go lower and the cone will go crazy trying to achieve it, there just isn't what I would call good sound coming from it (1/6 octave analyzer).
    Name:  JBL2269EQedSealed.jpg
Views: 315
Size:  91.0 KB

    So, unless you all can think of a better sealed box solution with the 2269H (I own a pair and there will be two in the system), I'm leaning back to cloning the SUB18 though I might trade height for depth (I have more depth available than height).

    So what do we REALLY have for the SUB18 information? That is, has anyone actually measured the box volume and ports? I've seen conjecture posted and I've done my own estimates based on a 1" MDF and using the overall dimensions while guessing at the height of the feet, but has anyone actually measured the inside of the SUB18 the way that the M2 was measured? How about the resonant frequency. Again, I've seen 24Hz thrown around but how solid is that number. Getting another box built won't be a big deal but I don't want to waste time (or much time) guessing. I expect to experiment to get the ports just right but I'd like to know what frequency I'm tuning for.

  11. #11
    Senior Member baldrick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Haugesund, Norway
    Posts
    759
    Iím not surprised sealed didnít work that well

    I used mine in 8cu ft tuned to 25hz. Sounded very good but I was still a litle dissapointed in the UHF, so tried a 18hz tuning but still... So I ended up parting with the 2269, but might try again

    But If so, use a larger vented box tuned to 16-18hz since hometheather is main use for me. For music the sub 18 box og aprox 9 cu ft tuned to 25 would be fine.

  12. #12
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Location
    Annapolis, MD
    Posts
    91
    Mine will be for a home theatre as well.

    I'm temped to try the SUB18 + listed here: http://www.avsforum.com/forum/155-di...ttle-help.html

    I'd like to start with the SUB18 itself though. I estimated at 9ft^3 and they are estimating just a little less. It is an estimate but I don't know where the 24Hz tuning came about (I haven't seen it mentioned in anything JBL or by someone that has the SUB18).

  13. #13
    Senior Member baldrick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Haugesund, Norway
    Posts
    759
    Neither SUB18 or 5628 is tuned for <25hz, so if that's a goal I would og different than the org.

    My new cabinets @ aprox 12,5^ft... will be used for either 2269H, TC Sounds LMS Ultra, Beyma 21 or 8 of the new Peerless/Thympany monster drivers.

    Name:  19330C54-D821-4209-923A-3455A47F3E59.jpg
Views: 265
Size:  92.3 KB

  14. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Location
    Annapolis, MD
    Posts
    91
    How do you know that the SUB18 is tuned for 25Hz (or higher)?

  15. #15
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Location
    Annapolis, MD
    Posts
    91
    So my SUB18 adventure continues. The first one is pretty much done. After looking at various JBL subs, I think you are right that JBL probably used a 25Hz port tuning, if for no other reason, out of habit. I've noted that the boxes they've made for the 2241, 2242 have tended to be 25Hz tunings (e.g. 4641, 4645C, 4642A) and they have put the 2269 into the 4642A box, with reasonable results.

    So my first pass at port tuning was to shoot for 24Hz since I could make them shorter for 25Hz (harder to make them longer).

    The boxes are just shy of 9.5ft before allowing for internal bracing, driver displacement and the like. So I'm guessing the effective Vb is about 9ft3 give or take. I used two 4" precision ports from Parts Express to make the ports. We the cabinets were first estimated that the empty box would be 9ft3 .Using the on-line calculator, we estimated each port to be about 11.1" and using the on-line instructions, subtracted 6" for a center tube length of about 5.1".

    Yesterday I measure the port tuning using a sine wave generator and AC voltmeter as well as feeling the cone and noting the air movement in the ports. Without a doubt, the actual tuning is 21.7Hz. The meter drops to the minimum there, cone motion drops to almost nothing and the air in the ports is...impressive. The ports are really too small but I wanted the height of the cabinet to be small so using 6" ports, with the flare would have been dicey...I toyed with just flaring the inside of the port to keep the exterior hole(s) to a minimum but decided to give the dual 4" a go.

    I don't quite get the 21.7Hz port tuning with the ports that short. The cabinet is nowhere near 11+ cubic feet, which is what it would have to be to cause that variance so my head is scratching on that one.

    On the upside, the tuning seems to agree with the system quite well, particularly for a B6 alignment. It looks like it will be reasonably flat down to 18Hz and I'll high-pass it at about 15-16Hz (depending on how it performs in further tests). I have, essentially, unlimited power for them (there will be two) and the room will be relatively small for them (just over 20-feet deep).

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. To Clone or Not to Clone?
    By mortron in forum Lansing Product DIY Forum
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 05-21-2016, 11:30 AM
  2. New JBL SUB18 high output studio subwoofer
    By hlaari in forum Lansing Product General Information
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 02-14-2016, 04:16 AM
  3. To clone or not to clone? 4344 vs. 4345 vs. XPL-200 Advice will be appreciated.
    By Amnes in forum Lansing Product General Information
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: 02-09-2011, 02:03 AM
  4. E2 clone
    By Ian Mackenzie in forum Lansing Product DIY Forum
    Replies: 100
    Last Post: 07-27-2008, 05:21 PM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

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