A better unit than the JBL 2245?

[David Ketley]

The old JBL 2245 has always been recognised as being very musical but do any of the modern transducers surpass its performance. Has to be obtainable of course. I cross up to a pair of 1400pros.

[engineerjoe]

http://www.lansingheritage.org/images/jbl/specs/pro-comp/2245/page1.jpg
I feel the newer ones are better. Higher power handling, longer vmax, etc. I think the 2242h was superior in every way.
I would use them for PA use though. So many 2245 failed out on the road that reconing was a regular thing.
I don't have much experience in the house. So what's you intended use?
I was amazed to get my hands on the 2258h and see it perform. It's so light I can't believe it. So then the 2268, 2278, 2269, 2279, and now the 2288 I haven't got my hands on. I've read of flaws like distortion or high heat loss of performance. I'm guessing that in the house, you wouldn't see the full benefits or even these possible flaws?

[David Ketley]

http://www.lansingheritage.org/images/jbl/specs/pro-comp/2245/page1.jpgI feel the newer ones are better. Higher power handling, longer vmax, etc. I think the 2242h was superior in every way.I would use them for PA use though. So many failed out on the road that reconing was a regular thing. I don't have much experience in the house. So what's you intended use?I was amazed to get my hands on the 2258h and see it perform. It's so light I can't believe it. So then the 2268, 2278, 2269, 2279, and now the 2288 I haven't got my hands on. I've read of flaws like distortion or high heat loss of performance. I'm guessing that in the house, you wouldn't see the full benefits or even these possible flaws?I want to try a unit in my 4 way active HiFi system.

[Mr. Widget]

Define better? If you want more bomb proof then the newer woofers are hands down better, if you want more hi-fi... that's subjective, but you might prefer the 2269. It is the woofer that Kevin Voecks based his ultimate subwoofer on. Admittedly he was able to have Harman's transducer engineers rework the driver into a different beast, but is was similar to the 2269.


Widget

[David Ketley]

Thanks Widget, my guess is that its the law of dinminishing returns and subjective. I cross the 2245s fairly high 160hz so it's a difficult act to better. I found the change from the 2123 to the 1400pro a huge improvement.

[Robh3606]

I agree with Widget you could go with a 2242 use the same box and tuning. But unless you are really pushing them hard I don't know how much benefit there would be.

Rob:)

[svollmer]

I absolutely love mine!!! I have four of them stacked and I've yet to hear a better home-stereo subwoofer. To be fair, my room is acoustically treated with bass traps and other devices, but still, most high end subs I've heard don't seem to go nearly as low or as taught.

[David Ketley]

Would 2x15 inch per side be a better option as per the Everest? I find the efficientcy of the 2245s fine and believe they are more Hifi than the 2242s?

[engineerjoe]

Would 2x15 inch per side be a better option as per the Everest? I find the efficientcy of the 2245s fine and believe they are more Hifi than the 2242s?

Probably a matter of taste here. I find the 15" version to be tighter and more punchy (up slightly higher freq towards 100). I find the 18" to be deeper ( closer to 40hz). IMO, the trouble is that with some music, the deeper 18" can be tiring to listen to for longer periods. Like a loudness button on a receiver, it's needed sometimes, and not other times.
I think that set to proper levels, both can be quite good. You can enhance a 15" so that with your eyes closed, you would think it's an 18".
I feel that an 18" sounds like an 18". Great, but not the same as a 15". Make any sense?
Notice that some of the subs out there are using 10". It's easier to enhance the bottom (in smaller rooms). It's harder to get that quick higher punchiness. Just my opinion here which maybe is not proper on this type of forum.

[David Ketley]

I raised this question out of curiosity, I thought I would find a new modern unit that would blow away the 2245. I also like the idea of a smaller cabinet, 10 cubic feet x 2 is large.
I will stick to the 2245s, we ae always seeking something that might be unobtainable. I guess the limitations of the room I listen in has far more influence on the sound than investing in drivers that give marginal improvement, if at all.

[Mr. Widget]

Probably a matter of taste here. I find the 15" version to be tighter and more punchy (up slightly higher freq towards 100). I find the 18" to be deeper ( closer to 40hz). You must be talking about 2226H and 2242H drivers? I personally am not keen on them for hi-fi applications.

I have compared dual 2235H and single 2245H and the output is similar, though subjectively I preferred the sound quality of the 2245H.


IMO, the trouble is that with some music, the deeper 18" can be tiring to listen to for longer periods. Like a loudness button on a receiver, it's needed sometimes, and not other times.In my experience a true extended low end response is never a bad thing. An exaggerated bottom end, say above 50Hz or so can get annoying, but having a properly balanced low end into the 20s is awesome when the material calls for it and is non-existent when the material doesn't have that content.


Widget

[Mr. Widget]

I raised this question out of curiosity, I thought I would find a new modern unit that would blow away the 2245. I also like the idea of a smaller cabinet, 10 cubic feet x 2 is large.
I will stick to the 2245s, we ae always seeking something that might be unobtainable. I guess the limitations of the room I listen in has far more influence on the sound than investing in drivers that give marginal improvement, if at all.In my system I am using a Sub1500. It is in a sealed enclosure of about 2.5 cu ft. That said, I would not push it up above 80Hz and it will only work in this small enclosure with an active EQ bumping up the bottom end.

I am not aware of another woofer that produces musical deep bass and is good up into the upper bass/lower mids as well as the 2245H. Unfortunately the trade off with it is that as a pro driver it was way too fragile. In a home hifi it has few peers.


Widget

[rusty jefferson]

.....I am not aware of another woofer that produces musical deep bass and is good up into the upper bass/lower mids as well as the 2245H. Unfortunately the trade off with it is that as a pro driver it was way too fragile. In a home hifi it has few peers.
Widget
I continue to believe the 2245h is the finest home audio subwoofer I've heard. I am not a fan of using it for duty above subwoofer, however. I know it measures quite well above that, but I just feel it gets congested.

[engineerjoe]

You must be talking about 2226H and 2242H drivers? I personally am not keen on them for hi-fi applications.

I have compared dual 2235H and single 2245H and the output is similar, though subjectively I preferred the sound quality of the 2245H.

In my experience a true extended low end response is never a bad thing. An exaggerated bottom end, say above 50Hz or so can get annoying, but having a properly balanced low end into the 20s is awesome when the material calls for it and is non-existent when the material doesn't have that content.


Widget

Yes, well very close. I forget the number exactly? I think they were 2205/6? 15" in my old JBL scoops? I ran E130/140s in my low mids. I forget what was in the folded horns used by others. I just ran them in clubs. The cabinets (and type of delivery) were big factors I'm sure. I got to try other's equipment when we went into "in house" systems.
Every once in awhile I would fire them up in a house or our warehouse for testing. I did later acquire 2225/6s.
I later toured with a sound system (w/INXS) that had Martin bins on the lows. They would fill an auditorium with bass and punch you in the gut in any seat. Again, was definitely the cabinet coming into play. I'm pretty sure they had both 15"s and 18"s for the bottoms. I never got any info on crossover points as I was just working for the warm up act for most of the '97 tour.
BTW I find your posts very interesting and always accurate with stuff I agree with. I'm not sucking up here. I'm just saying what I read.
I will bow out as again, I don't have a lot of home experience with this stuff. I have had it in my hands most of my life and feel like I should know what it does well.

[Mr. Widget]

BTW I find your posts very interesting...Thanks

As the well known quote goes, "Opinions are like... everybody's got one."
These days I try to make it clear when I post an opinion that may not be widely held, versus those that are nearly universally held.


While I still agree with many of my older posts, I do sometimes wonder what the heck I was thinking 10-15 years ago... or last week.:D


Widget

[Ian Mackenzie]

It depends on the application?

In a sub woofer application it a more defined choice in terms of output and extension.

An 18 comes into its own if you want both extension and output.

The 2245 is not a sound reinforcement woofer as such. They may have been used in commercial cinemas in banks of four or eight when first introduced.

In a multi way hifi system application l think it comes down to the specific system and what’s most important. The enclosure location and height Off the floor is often optimised for the smoothed bass response.

If you want linearity the 2245 is my preference.
I have used dual 2235’s and it’s not the same. The 2235 sounds like a loudspeaker. In comparison on a double bass acoustic recording the 2245 doesn’t sound like a loudspeaker (In my system at least abs that’s the feedback from other listeners)

Edit

http://www.audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?10654-2245H

http://www.audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?10651-2235H

The primary difference is sensitivity, cone area and diaphragm displacement for equivalent output.

At 50 hertz a 15 inch drivers cone has to move four times as far as an 18 inch drivers cone for the same acoustic output. That is where the linearity of the larger driver has the advantage.

I read that from a red loudspeaker book written by Don Davis and Alex Bradmanoff. I think Mr Widget also has a copy of that book. Don’t ask me what happens with two 15 inch woofers!

In a plug and play situation differences may be apparent. But l have rarely found plug and play a successful approach to comparisons.

The 1400 driver used in the S9500 was set up and tuned up for the Japanese market. They tend to prefer a leaner damped bass. The blue baffle systems (as they are known in japan) have the traditional Jbl bass which a lot of Jbl users prefer. That’s why they did two ranges.

Some DD67000 users plug the ports because that is their preference.

If you are after a sub woofer for Home Theatre that goes louder and is this and that there
are a number of specialist drivers that will meets your expectations. They have large spiders and surrounds, heavy stiff cones and massive Xmax but they generally don’t mix well with a hifi loudspeaker.

In diy loudspeakers anything goes and as such opinions are diverse which is fine. But l don’t feel asking for an opinion on a forum of one loudspeaker or driver over another holds much weight without a detailed account of the circumstances or conditions.

[engineerjoe]

I would disagree with any negative thoughts on the 15" if I could. I would just give this example. A friend (concert business partner) and I went to a local theater to see Asia years ago. I had heard Clair Bros. systems before. I'm pretty sure they were there for this concert again using their S4 cabs. For those that don't know, they have all JBL drivers, 18", 10", 2" and super tweets.
https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0251/2076/products/S4_4_480x480.JPG?v=1497452237
The second the concert started and all the way thru, the sound was amazing. The vocals were crisp and clear. No fatigue listening to any freq. Full rich warm sounds. If I close my eyes, 30++, some years later, I swear I can still hear that concert. I can only give an analogy that it was like you were part of the band and the speakers were connected to you directly. They didn't sound tonal, or colored in any way. I couldn't distinguish the sources of the sounds, like horns and cone woofers.
From then on, my opinion of 18" woofers totally changed. I used to dismiss them earlier as being too muddy or colored, from the old W bins I heard. No one I knew of ever had them in their house. Hearing them in that theater makes me think you are right about them. Of course, all the stars need to align with time alignment, room resonance, etc., to be like that night in the theater. My old PA system built after that concert, my new PA system I'm building now, both have 18"s for the lows. I have had great success with them choosing the correct crossover freq. (and power) to help get them dialed in. I still like my old JBL 15"s for their overall versatility and output. I do use 18"s in my PA so I can't make a stand here.
Wait! I do now have a new JBL studio 550p 10" sub in my living room so I am open to change! :bouncy: …. and it's almost broken in. :blink:

[tjm001]

In my system I am using a Sub1500. It is in a sealed enclosure of about 2.5 cu ft. That said, I would not push it up above 80Hz and it will only work in this small enclosure with an active EQ bumping up the bottom end...........


Widget

Is that the same as the Dayton Audio Sub 1500 like in: https://www.googleadservices.com/pagead/aclk?sa=L&ai=DChcSEwiS2OiV-qvnAhXMnLMKHeucD88YABASGgJxbg&ohost=www.google.com&cid=CAESQOD2G1TBiJe9E02JhEwf965jHi0X-A0jDP5faSf5KgUVX_rNpF_JJxZKv6ZkFg0FJ2s0yLucEmnklzE QAoZBpIY&sig=AOD64_1CV5uandAB2bziFY9MRwc3Z6cmJA&ctype=5&q=&ved=2ahUKEwj3p96V-qvnAhW4lnIEHSRhANYQ9aACegQIDRBh&adurl=
(https://www.googleadservices.com/pagead/aclk?sa=L&ai=DChcSEwiS2OiV-qvnAhXMnLMKHeucD88YABASGgJxbg&ohost=www.google.com&cid=CAESQOD2G1TBiJe9E02JhEwf965jHi0X-A0jDP5faSf5KgUVX_rNpF_JJxZKv6ZkFg0FJ2s0yLucEmnklzE QAoZBpIY&sig=AOD64_1CV5uandAB2bziFY9MRwc3Z6cmJA&ctype=5&q=&ved=2ahUKEwj3p96V-qvnAhW4lnIEHSRhANYQ9aACegQIDRBh&adurl=)

[grumpy]

https://www.parts-express.com/jbl-sub1500-15-subwoofer-4-ohm--299-750

(so, not the same)
(https://www.parts-express.com/jbl-sub1500-15-subwoofer-4-ohm--299-750)

[dkalsi]

Is that the same as the Dayton Audio Sub 1500 like in: https://www.googleadservices.com/pagead/aclk?sa=L&ai=DChcSEwiS2OiV-qvnAhXMnLMKHeucD88YABASGgJxbg&ohost=www.google.com&cid=CAESQOD2G1TBiJe9E02JhEwf965jHi0X-A0jDP5faSf5KgUVX_rNpF_JJxZKv6ZkFg0FJ2s0yLucEmnklzE QAoZBpIY&sig=AOD64_1CV5uandAB2bziFY9MRwc3Z6cmJA&ctype=5&q=&ved=2ahUKEwj3p96V-qvnAhW4lnIEHSRhANYQ9aACegQIDRBh&adurl=
(https://www.googleadservices.com/pagead/aclk?sa=L&ai=DChcSEwiS2OiV-qvnAhXMnLMKHeucD88YABASGgJxbg&ohost=www.google.com&cid=CAESQOD2G1TBiJe9E02JhEwf965jHi0X-A0jDP5faSf5KgUVX_rNpF_JJxZKv6ZkFg0FJ2s0yLucEmnklzE QAoZBpIY&sig=AOD64_1CV5uandAB2bziFY9MRwc3Z6cmJA&ctype=5&q=&ved=2ahUKEwj3p96V-qvnAhW4lnIEHSRhANYQ9aACegQIDRBh&adurl=)


No. I'm pretty sure Mr. Widget was talking about the JBL Sub1500. Few years back Parts Express had a blowout sale on them. I don't think the Sub1500 is around anymore.

[tjm001]

https://www.parts-express.com/jbl-sub1500-15-subwoofer-4-ohm--299-750

(so, not the same)
(https://www.parts-express.com/jbl-sub1500-15-subwoofer-4-ohm--299-750)

Thanks. Looks like that was quite a deal at $249 if I'm seeing the right price on the Parts Express website.

[Mr. Widget]

Thanks. Looks like that was quite a deal at $249 if I'm seeing the right price on the Parts Express website.It was a crazy good deal. Quite a few of us here at the time bought up hundreds of them... a handful had failures with improperly glued spiders, but other than that it was truly a once in a lifetime deal.

JBL subsequently re-engineered the driver making a few minor improvements to it and changing the model number to the W1500H.


Widget

[Dr.db]

I

The primary difference is sensitivity, cone area and diaphragm displacement for equivalent output.

At 50 hertz a 15 inch drivers cone has to move four times as far as an 18 inch drivers cone for the same acoustic output. That is where the linearity of the larger driver has the advantage.

Im sorry but I can´t comprehend your calculation.
An 18 inch cone has aprox. 50% more cone area than a 15 inch cone. If the 15 inch cone moves 1,5 times as far as an 18 inch cone it would move the same amount of air. And soundpressure is a product of cone area and cone movement if I´m not mistaken...
Why does it have to move 4 times as much?

[Ian Mackenzie]

I need to check that book when l find it.

However, the 2245 has increased linearity over 2235.
It also has greater boundary reinforcement that the 2235.

You have to hear it go to appreciate the differences.
I run an 800/800 watt stereo without any sign of strain.

[toddalin]

W15GTi and a shiite-load of power. Goes both lower and higher, smoother than the 2235.

[tjm001]

After reading this thread so far I have to ask this question.:confused: I just sold my 2245s after abandoning my 4345 project because I'm planning on downsizing. So what are some recommendations for a compact woofer to complement my L300s that are using 2235Hs? Any ideas without spending a fortune? Thanks.

Tom

[ivica]

After reading this thread so far I have to ask this question.:confused: I just sold my 2245s after abandoning my 4345 project because I'm planning on downsizing. So what are some recommendations for a compact woofer to complement my L300s that are using 2235Hs? Any ideas without spending a fortune? Thanks.

Tom

Hi Tom,

I think, looking from the hi-fi point of view, that it would be very, very difficult to get better driver, then 2231/2235 which is L300 bass driver, reproducing almost down to 30Hz.

regards
ivica

[1audiohack]

One thing that I believe contributes to our general fondness for the 2245 is that for some reason we tend to use them properly. It is a nice compliant low fs woofer that is well suited for a very large ported enclosure with a moderate power supply. Employed that way it has a very relaxed hi fidelity musical character. We all know it and against all odds we use them that way.

It seems like we just try to beat everything else into submission.

Barry.

[Ian Mackenzie]

Hi Tom,

I have no personal experience with this brand but as an add on outboard sub that looks appropriate in a 15 inch cube size. Like anything in Audio it’s difficult to make a recommendation as it’s a case of personal audition to determine if the product meets your expectations and budget.


https://www.svsound.com/collections/subwoofers

My suggestion is listen to program material you are familiar. You may prefer a seal sub for music reproduction.

The 2335 driver in the L300 enclosure tuning is useable to 35 hz with -6 dB in the low 30’s.

They are great for music reproduction but may not satisfy the requirements of a sub woofer driver for contemporary motion picture sound track effects.

[tjm001]

After reading this thread so far I have to ask this question.:confused: I just sold my 2245s after abandoning my 4345 project because I'm planning on downsizing. So what are some recommendations for a compact woofer to complement my L300s that are using 2235Hs? Any ideas without spending a fortune? Thanks.

Tom

Thanks for the responses. I apologize for the sloppy writing. I just realized that what I wrote was interpreted as using a 2235H in a compact sub woofer. What I was trying to say is that there are 2235Hs in my L300 clones instead the usual 136As. I have "2 hole" L300 clones.
85790

[dkalsi]

I know the W15Gti subwoofer doesn't get much love here, but in my opinion (after having owned the 2235H, 2245H, 2241H, and 2242H) its just as good as the rest of them.

The only thing that bothered me about the W15GTi subwoofer was that the Mkii had a silver dust cap, which I found really ugly.

I now own a single JBL W15GTi MKI for movies/music and I think its a fantastic driver.

[jmpsmash]

what's the smallest enclosure that a 2245 will allow?

[engineerjoe]

I know the W15Gti subwoofer doesn't get much love here, but in my opinion (after having owned the 2235H, 2245H, 2241H, and 2242H) its just as good as the rest of them.

The only thing that bothered me about the W15GTi subwoofer was that the Mkii had a silver dust cap, which I found really ugly.

I now own a single JBL W15GTi MKI for movies/music and I think its a fantastic driver.

I had to do a search to see what this was. The search brought me right back to this forum.
http://www.audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?21807-W15GTI-MkII-amp-W12GTI-MkII

[toddalin]

http://www.audioheritage.org/photopost/data//525/medium/Stereo_007.JPG
http://www.audioheritage.org/photopost/data//500/medium/DSC_0011.JPGhttp://www.audioheritage.org/photopost/data//500/medium/DSC_00461.JPG
http://www.audioheritage.org/photopost/data//500/medium/DSC_00088.JPGhttp://www.audioheritage.org/photopost/data//500/medium/DSC_00212.JPGhttp://www.audioheritage.org/photopost/data//500/medium/DSC_0032.JPG

[Ian Mackenzie]

Hi Todd,

Love it.

[Ian Mackenzie]

what's the smallest enclosure that a 2245 will allow?

8 cu ft3

[emilime75]

http://www.audioheritage.org/photopost/data//500/medium/DSC_0032.JPG
Do you have a build thread on this? Is that the W10 or 12? What's the HF combo? Crossover?

Thanks.

[toddalin]

Do you have a build thread on this? Is that the W10 or 12? What's the HF combo? Crossover?

Thanks.

Possibly, don't recall. Even so the pics are no longer out there.

W10GTis in the front and rear surrounds (~2 cu ft) and I designed/built the crossovers based roughly on the L200B circuits. But I added HF compensation for the horns and actually designed a different version for use with the 2370A horns too because the HF compensation was different to make the most of the combination. Ultimately the WAF for external hanging 2370As was low and I went with the internal butt cheeks. The bass was also better with the external 2370A because the cheeks/drivers took up internal cabinet volume.