JBL 2242H Build Thread - Page 3 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #61 of 80 Old 05-10-2012, 06:31 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
nichol1997's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 262
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Just a heads up for anyone who replicates this design. I am getting some port chuffing noises when the drivers are really pushed below 20 hertz or so. It is not a big deal since I don't normally listen to them that loud.

Otherwise, I am still really enjoying them. They sound great with anything that I throw at them.
gpmbc likes this.
nichol1997 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #62 of 80 Old 05-10-2012, 06:42 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
LTD02's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 15,971
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 133 Post(s)
Liked: 852
pushing the drivers really hard below tuning might not be the best idea. you were at 22hz tuning iirc.

Listen. It's All Good.
LTD02 is online now  
post #63 of 80 Old 07-24-2012, 02:26 PM
Newbie
 
Jose Perez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I have to say this!! im in pain!!I had to put the Srx 728s with the 2268 driver to rest !!it put smiles in my Shows!! Never Blew A driver and i Never heard of a customer Blowing one even thoug it had A 3 inch Voice Coil !! still impress with the 2268 driver and i just Purchase the Stx 828 more money but with the 2242 Driver !!all i heard from Pros its that its a premium Driver And Very Hard to beat!! I cant Wait To Fire them up!! I have High Hopes And Considering the JBL name I think I cant go Wrong!!! do I think its a better Driver I would Say Yes!! Just because Of the Reviews Of the Driver,But At the Same time I wonder If anything is Better then Something That Hit Hard For Hours Of Torture and never Blew and Sounded like a Million bucks
Jose Perez is offline  
post #64 of 80 Old 07-24-2012, 02:45 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
LTD02's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 15,971
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 133 Post(s)
Liked: 852
there was a guy who compared with 2268 to the 2242 in the same cab and thought the 2268 was a real disappointment. ymmv.

http://forum.speakerplans.com/topic8969.html

Listen. It's All Good.
LTD02 is online now  
post #65 of 80 Old 04-13-2013, 06:12 PM
Member
 
mantha3's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 54
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I built one of the DIY 4645Cs like this thread. Real nice and enjoying it big time.

mantha3 is offline  
post #66 of 80 Old 04-14-2013, 05:08 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Martycool007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 3,406
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 104 Post(s)
Liked: 144
How does the 2242 stack up against the 2226 or maybe even a 2225? With the 2226 routinely selling for under $180 bucks on the used market, I have always considered it to be one of the best bargains in the used audio-stuff market.
Martycool007 is offline  
post #67 of 80 Old 04-14-2013, 05:45 AM
Member
 
mantha3's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 54
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I am running JBL 2226 in the horn 2 way speaker to the left of the subwoofer. I built a pair of speakers using the 2226 and my set are a tweak of Wayne Parhams 4pi.

The 2242 is a true subwoofer. I think it sounds excellent running along side the 2226 speakers.

The 2226 is not a subwoofer and it is thought of as more a Mid woofer... I think running the 2226 as a sub would be pushing it to do something it isn't necessarily made to do.

Some don't like this old school JBL 2242 / 4645C due to the low freq... These go down to 25Hz but drop off. I think a sub built with a 2226 would have the drop off above that.

I like watching live concerts. Having this DIY 4645C is nice for concerts. This thing sings well in the wheel house range it runs in. I got the 1000 W Dayton subwoofer amp. This has a 3dB bass boost at 25Hz. The boost is nice. The amp is pretty solid. A good $$ to performance ratio I guess. This does 500W to 8ohm. Just 500W into this sub is louder than hell !!! At a moderate volume this has a nice fast and warm sound to it.

1000 W Dayton subwoofer amp

I've thought about build up another sub for the low end. I'd be curious to hear peoples thought on just a low frequency sub to run along with this JBL 4645c. Something that would run in just the 35Hz or so down. A Subwoofer subwoofer.
mantha3 is offline  
post #68 of 80 Old 04-14-2013, 11:04 AM
AVS Special Member
 
N8DOGG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Canada
Posts: 5,614
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 60 Post(s)
Liked: 261
I would say the 2242 is right on the edge of what a true sub is. It's not good below 30hz IMO in any alignment but it's does just good enough that it can be used for one. I love my 2, I cross them over at 50hz because in my boxes, they are -15 dB's from 50 to 40 hz and -5 from 60 to 50hz. I know it's not the same in the ported design but for ULF, You'd need to look elsewhere as they just don't have the xmax. Though they state 9mm, they for sure are comfortable with more as I really rip mine up LOL

Blasting brown notes for 10 years and counting!

N8DOGG is offline  
post #69 of 80 Old 04-14-2013, 11:09 AM
Member
 
Dezmond's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: WNY
Posts: 168
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
The 2242 has a higher bl rating then any of the mach5 woofers.I guess true subwoofers have a lower magnetic force. cool.gif
Dezmond is offline  
post #70 of 80 Old 04-14-2013, 11:31 AM
AVS Special Member
 
N8DOGG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Canada
Posts: 5,614
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 60 Post(s)
Liked: 261
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dezmond View Post

The 2242 has a higher bl rating then any of the mach5 woofers.I guess true subwoofers have a lower magnetic force. cool.gif
No true subwoofers are truesubwoofers, the 2242H is a pro woofer that people use as subwoofers. It's not designed to be played under 20 hz in it's ported alignment. Has nothing to do with BL. It's good all the way to 300hz, where as most other actual subwoofers are not that great over 100hz. 2 different designs for 2 different goals.

Blasting brown notes for 10 years and counting!

N8DOGG is offline  
post #71 of 80 Old 04-14-2013, 12:29 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Bill Fitzmaurice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: New Hampshire
Posts: 9,318
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 1213
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dezmond View Post

I guess true subwoofers have a lower magnetic force.
They have lower Fs and higher Mms, which results in higher Qes and lower BL.

Bill Fitzmaurice Loudspeaker Design

The Laws of Physics aren't swayed by opinion.
Bill Fitzmaurice is offline  
post #72 of 80 Old 04-14-2013, 05:40 PM
Member
 
Dezmond's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: WNY
Posts: 168
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Well they beat the pants off the ixl 18.2 as far as sound quality goes. They are usually flat to 20-25hz depending on room and eq. I guess half of the cinemas around the world don't have true subwoofers. Only a few guys with mental issues and $ to burn have real subs to enjoy there 1% of the movie. I would much rather have 98% of the movie with the highest sound quality possible, then a few seconds of a explosion .
Dezmond is offline  
post #73 of 80 Old 04-14-2013, 06:31 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Bill Fitzmaurice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: New Hampshire
Posts: 9,318
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 1213
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dezmond View Post

I guess half of the cinemas around the world don't have true subwoofers.
True, they don't. Pressuring the large space of theaters below 30Hz takes too much speakerage, wattage, and most important, dollarage. IMAX tickets don't cost twice as much for nothing.

Bill Fitzmaurice Loudspeaker Design

The Laws of Physics aren't swayed by opinion.
Bill Fitzmaurice is offline  
post #74 of 80 Old 04-14-2013, 07:44 PM
AVS Special Member
 
N8DOGG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Canada
Posts: 5,614
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 60 Post(s)
Liked: 261
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dezmond View Post

Well they beat the pants off the ixl 18.2 as far as sound quality goes. They are usually flat to 20-25hz depending on room and eq. I guess half of the cinemas around the world don't have true subwoofers. Only a few guys with mental issues and $ to burn have real subs to enjoy there 1% of the movie. I would much rather have 98% of the movie with the highest sound quality possible, then a few seconds of a explosion .

Why are you arguing that they are better than mach 5 drivers? No one is bad mouthing them, they are fantastic drivers, I have 2 in my setup but they are not meant to be used at sub 20hz drivers. I don't know why thats hard to grasp or why you are so defensive about it. Hell, I added them to my system because it was lacking in exactly what the 2242's offer and are best at.

Blasting brown notes for 10 years and counting!

N8DOGG is offline  
post #75 of 80 Old 04-15-2013, 04:20 AM
Member
 
Dezmond's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: WNY
Posts: 168
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Easy, I have a ixl and 2 mj's to compare sound quality to. The company started out building subs for car and spl contests. The 2242 on the other hand is a professional subwoofer that is world renowned.So your using 2242's in a sealed box , something that jbl does not recommend to do with them. Of course its not gonna go as low or sound as good .
Dezmond is offline  
post #76 of 80 Old 04-15-2013, 10:30 AM
AVS Special Member
 
N8DOGG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Canada
Posts: 5,614
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 60 Post(s)
Liked: 261
Huh? well for 1, i would hope they sound better, $1000 vs $175. 2 you dont seem to grasp that just because i have my 2 in a sealed box, doesnt mean i havent heard them in their ported boxs, which i have, in my room which is the reason i bought them in the first place. JBL says is perfectly fine to run them in small sealed boxes and was their recomendation to run them in the exact size of box the are in. i talked to jbl before i even made my boxed to make sure it would work. all they needed was more power. You dont seem to have the right info since you have no idea what you are talking about when it comes to my system.

Blasting brown notes for 10 years and counting!

N8DOGG is offline  
post #77 of 80 Old 08-21-2013, 10:32 AM
Senior Member
 
colofan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: loveland,co
Posts: 338
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I have been reading all the posts on the different low frequency drivers and I currently have LEAP-5 as well as LMS from LinearX to test drivers. Question for the forum is what is the current leading driver for Home Theater application?

I used to have JBL 2245 but found them lacking in Xmax I had them reconed to 2241H. They work fairly well I was going to upgrade to 2242H however lots of talk about other drivers causes me to pause. Xmax is always a question but sensitivity and acoustical power are very important parameters to consider.

I have briefly looked at SI 18, Dayton 18 HO, Mach5 drivers and the acoustical power are pretty low compared to the 2242H.

Input?

I have been designing and building speakers since 1970; but always interested in new ideas and inputs.
colofan is offline  
post #78 of 80 Old 08-21-2013, 12:42 PM
AVS Special Member
 
A9X-308's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Australia; now run by adults.
Posts: 5,178
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 40 Post(s)
Liked: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by colofan View Post

I have been reading all the posts on the different low frequency drivers and I currently have LEAP-5 as well as LMS from LinearX to test drivers. Question for the forum is what is the current leading driver for Home Theater application?

I used to have JBL 2245 but found them lacking in Xmax I had them reconed to 2241H. They work fairly well I was going to upgrade to 2242H however lots of talk about other drivers causes me to pause. Xmax is always a question but sensitivity and acoustical power are very important parameters to consider.

I have briefly looked at SI 18, Dayton 18 HO, Mach5 drivers and the acoustical power are pretty low compared to the 2242H.

Input?

I have been designing and building speakers since 1970; but always interested in new ideas and inputs.
I find this a really odd post. If you found the 5's had too little Xmax, why recone them to a cone with 2mm less?

The JBLs (224x) have far less output capability than the sub drivers you mentioned, though they have greater sensitivity. If you are looking for a PA sub or a midbass, then the JBLs are the better choice. For a dedicated HT sub, then the other drivers are far better choices and having (often considerably) higher Vd and therefore higher acoustical output capabitlity than the JBLs in this role.
A9X-308 is offline  
post #79 of 80 Old 08-21-2013, 12:57 PM
Senior Member
 
colofan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: loveland,co
Posts: 338
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 10
So the aspect of acoustical maximum output is not a deciding factor in chossing HT subwoofer's. Maybe I am looking at it wrong as the speaker is a transformer of energy between the electrical input and the atmosphere, The acustical output I was referring to was to take a 6 cuft box ported to 25Hz looked at the maximum velocity generated through the port since that is an opposite reaction to the cone movement to determine the Vd a driver uses to reproduce the electrical input.

Some "transformers" are more effective with coupling to the air than others. Cone stiffness, spider materials and surrounds are what I recall were inportant. That was also what horns are such a pain to build but do have much better coupling qualities.

Honestly on the change on reconing was to make them more bullet proof at higher frequencies and be less likely to pop out due to over driving.

Do you have a favorite HT sub that I should look at closer?

Thanks for reading.
colofan is offline  
post #80 of 80 Old 08-22-2013, 04:48 AM
Senior Member
 
mobeer4don's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 427
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 42
The big issue here is that the JBLs were designed for maximum output above about 30 Hz and nothing below 20 Hz mostly based on the crazy theory that your hearing really drops off below 20-24 Hz and most musical instruments don't produce fundamental notes below 32 Hz or so. So you will find the JBL 2245 used in the B460 subwoofer (8 ft^3) tuned to 24 Hz.. Throw in the BX63/BX63A crossover and that was more or less state of the art in 1982....the dawn of the CD era when 400-800 watts/channel was pretty serious power (and heavy) and efficiency was king.

Fast forward 30 years and you have HT fanatics searching out movies with LFE content in the 10-20 Hz range and running 3000-5000 watt amplifiers. Cheap power means efficiency doesn't matter much so smaller and deeper is all the rage.

For >20 Hz, 500 W, and a big ported box, the JBLs are hard to beat.

Lots of good testing results here....including running a 2242 (2241?) to melt-down.
http://www.data-bass.com/home
mobeer4don is offline  
Reply DIY Speakers and Subs

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off