It's an excellent driver, is a darned good start. A great balance of all parameters. The edgewound coil, low distortion motor with the impressive effort to saturate the polepiece, the classic JBL build quality (and accumulated knowledge of the oldest 'modern' speaker company), the excellent balance of T/S parameters to work well in a mid sized vented alignment (mid sized by pro standards).....
It also has a great balance between frequency extension and cone breakup. Essentially, JBL got it REALLY right and thus, the driver has been in place for decades.
Of course, they had a pretty darned good idea of things in the 50s..... There's a balance JBL strikes that most don't. They make well damped, composite and/or coated cones, and compensate for the efficiency with motor strength. Expensive to do but certainly not in the long run, where the name brand carries so much weight.
It also has a great balance between frequency extension and cone breakup. Essentially, JBL got it REALLY right and thus, the driver has been in place for decades.
Of course, they had a pretty darned good idea of things in the 50s..... There's a balance JBL strikes that most don't. They make well damped, composite and/or coated cones, and compensate for the efficiency with motor strength. Expensive to do but certainly not in the long run, where the name brand carries so much weight.
TrueSound said:
For a skilled designer, I think this would be true.
The 2226 is a lot easier to work with though, due to the lack of rising response (that the 2227 exhibits). It also has quite a bit more overhang, though JBL specs them at 5 and 7.6 mm Xmax respectively.
To me, I'd happily take a pair of 2227H and love it. Low distortion, low Le. But, the 2226h is a more 'usable' driver for most purposes. There's also less impedance ripple shown in their datasheets....
So, we're basically doing something along the lines of a comparison of a very good paper peerless driver vs. a Seas Excel magnesium driver. The Excel is better, but only when it's exceedingly carefully managed.
Hi Badman,
here is a plot from my JBL 2226H; measured 5 inch from cone only raw woofer:
And here under the same conditions but with 3.9mH coil; 6dB:
This does not look promising!?
And this is the plot taken from the JBL spec sheet:
What is wrong?
Kind Regards
Barossi
here is a plot from my JBL 2226H; measured 5 inch from cone only raw woofer:
And here under the same conditions but with 3.9mH coil; 6dB:
This does not look promising!?
And this is the plot taken from the JBL spec sheet:
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
What is wrong?
Kind Regards
Barossi
Last edited:
Hi Barossi;
There are a few significant differences in the way JBL measures their drivers than what I think you have done if I read right. For instance, at JBL the 2226 was measured in true 1/2 space eliminating baffle step loss at low frequency and boundary reflection / cancellations at higher frequencies. The sealed box curve is created in a 280L box and the ported box curve from a box about the volume of the one you have that is tuned to 40Hz. Also most likely JBL measures at 1 or 2 meters. If your box is ported, and your measurement mic was at a distance of 5 inches from the cone it would not pick up the contribution of the box / port and the sharp drop in low frequency response would be expected. Also measuring very near the speaker has higher frequency limitations as well.
Don't be discouraged yet, maybe try a ground plane measurement or very near the dust cap and then at the port and combine the curves for a summed response. It is difficult in the extreme to get a nice broad band measurement without really working for it, especially indoors.
Also if you put into the equation the comment on the JBL sheet that says something like "production units will not vary more than +- 2dB from the above curve" that would get your curve within 1dB of flat from 60-800Hz.
There are a few significant differences in the way JBL measures their drivers than what I think you have done if I read right. For instance, at JBL the 2226 was measured in true 1/2 space eliminating baffle step loss at low frequency and boundary reflection / cancellations at higher frequencies. The sealed box curve is created in a 280L box and the ported box curve from a box about the volume of the one you have that is tuned to 40Hz. Also most likely JBL measures at 1 or 2 meters. If your box is ported, and your measurement mic was at a distance of 5 inches from the cone it would not pick up the contribution of the box / port and the sharp drop in low frequency response would be expected. Also measuring very near the speaker has higher frequency limitations as well.
Don't be discouraged yet, maybe try a ground plane measurement or very near the dust cap and then at the port and combine the curves for a summed response. It is difficult in the extreme to get a nice broad band measurement without really working for it, especially indoors.
Also if you put into the equation the comment on the JBL sheet that says something like "production units will not vary more than +- 2dB from the above curve" that would get your curve within 1dB of flat from 60-800Hz.
Fwiw, I like my TD12Ms over my JBL 2226Js but dual JBL 2226Js have incredible sensitivity and that gives me greater control over my entire setup (less power, effortless) performance.
I would not run JBL 2226 drivers past 700Hz myself but I know others do. This is where the TD series drivers from aespeakers.com are superior. The TD15M is a superior driver if sensitivity isn't the top priority.
The recent TD group buy was a great time for anyone to buy TD15Ms at almost 1/2 the price of JBL 2226s.
I would not run JBL 2226 drivers past 700Hz myself but I know others do. This is where the TD series drivers from aespeakers.com are superior. The TD15M is a superior driver if sensitivity isn't the top priority.
The recent TD group buy was a great time for anyone to buy TD15Ms at almost 1/2 the price of JBL 2226s.
That's a broad statement.
I'm on the hook for a pair of these as well as a pair of 18's. For hi-fi I hope the 15's are all they are cracked up to be, I currently use JBL 2227's. As for the 18's being JBL 2242 crushers, I'll be the judge of that, I have those too.
Last edited:
I believe it is a little too late, but here it is Acoustic Elegance • View topic - ** Official TD Woofer Group Buy Information **
Interesting thread though. I am waiting for three pair of 15" to compare test with. All of them intended for the same purpose, 2way with compressiondriver/waveguide crossed over at some 800Hz.
AE TD15M Apollo, JBL 2226Hpl and FaitalPro 15FX560.
For some reasons I have my highest expectations for the FaitalPro. The bass response simulation is similar to the JBL but should be a better midrange performer... hopefully
Oh... this is a long time ago. I'll try to recall.
The 2226 was IMO a disapointment. The mid was dull and bass was laid back compared to the others. I never succeeded bringing life to Music with 2226. Later I have found that many others also share more or less the same experience. AE TD15M has the smoothest, cleanest and most detailed mid and delivers also the best upper bass. Used 60Hz-70Hz up I believe it is hard to beat and I would love to compare them some day to good drivers like e.g. GPA 416 or 515. But it lacks deep bass compared to the Faital. I think Faital is a decent compromise for a two-way. It is relatively cheap, performs decent all the way and takes a lot of power. Anyway - the Faital was put in the cabinet and used together with SEOS15. The 2226s were sold and TD15M kept for other Projects
Unfortunately I don't have the measurements anymore.
The 2226 was IMO a disapointment. The mid was dull and bass was laid back compared to the others. I never succeeded bringing life to Music with 2226. Later I have found that many others also share more or less the same experience. AE TD15M has the smoothest, cleanest and most detailed mid and delivers also the best upper bass. Used 60Hz-70Hz up I believe it is hard to beat and I would love to compare them some day to good drivers like e.g. GPA 416 or 515. But it lacks deep bass compared to the Faital. I think Faital is a decent compromise for a two-way. It is relatively cheap, performs decent all the way and takes a lot of power. Anyway - the Faital was put in the cabinet and used together with SEOS15. The 2226s were sold and TD15M kept for other Projects
Unfortunately I don't have the measurements anymore.
Great, I trust you, even without measurements. Yes, JBL drivers can have such a thick cone material which sounds heavy and dull. I am going to try out an Eminence Kappa 15A Pro to see what those are like. Very cheap and powerful driver. I tried out a Fane 10M Studio, which has fabulous mids, especially in a horn. That it goes a little deeper makes it a more complete speaker than its brother Fane 8M Studio 8". But a cheap 12" GAS woofer manages to beat my ATC 12" woofers, my Philips AD 1200 12" widerange and my Fanes, because it goes just a little deeper while retaining some clean mids. The difference is it pushes air! Less dampened bass perhaps (not an expert) and slightly higher xmax. But cone material is plastic and crappy with little or no thought behind it. At least now I now sort of what it should sound like.
I now have a single Eminence LAB12 that covers sub frequencies, but I don't feel comfortable playing it above 80Hz. Also, I will need more of them, because I need to push this one so hard that it doesn't sound as good anymore. I see now more drivers means less distorted bass.
As for midrange, if I don't need the lower mids from the Fane 10M with its huge magnet, I am tempted to use a light midrange driver like the Saba Greencones or some similar fullrange but with a higher sensitivity around 100dB and very light paper (washi?) cone.
You people who started out with 15" midbass drivers have it so easy. Soon I am joining the club.
I now have a single Eminence LAB12 that covers sub frequencies, but I don't feel comfortable playing it above 80Hz. Also, I will need more of them, because I need to push this one so hard that it doesn't sound as good anymore. I see now more drivers means less distorted bass.
As for midrange, if I don't need the lower mids from the Fane 10M with its huge magnet, I am tempted to use a light midrange driver like the Saba Greencones or some similar fullrange but with a higher sensitivity around 100dB and very light paper (washi?) cone.
You people who started out with 15" midbass drivers have it so easy.
Soon I am joining the club.I don't know if the two-way solutions with 15" midbass is the salvation, at least not with a 1" driver. I've tried many combos, cheap and expensive and has given up that game. Listening to others as well (inclusive a famous OSWG) and my conclusion is still the same... making "high-end" speakers with just two drivers is really really hard and not my cup of tea. But... if you're into it, at least go for high quality large format compression drivers that you know matches a horn/WG for the purpose.
With regards to 15" drivers and so on... I've found the most tricky part to integrate a driver in the plus 100/150Hz to minus 600/700Hz range (I've never really succeeded using a 15" above this frequency). Above 600/700 you find really good horn/compression driver combos that don't become redicously large. Scaling is key in the bass/sub area . But the frequency band in between is IMO difficult if footprint is important. My honest recommendation is to not make any short cuts nor try to save too much on the budget. Go for the known ones, i.e. read Lynn Olsons "Beyond the ariel" thread. I've tried to reinvent the wheel too many times and have concluded that I'm unfortunately not cleverer than others
Since you're Swedish and probably understand Norwegian I will recommend you to also visit hifisentralen.no. You will find that there is quite a few guys doing some all out builds. If You first have had the opportunity to listen to one of these, there is no return, you're doomed - promise
With regards to 15" drivers and so on... I've found the most tricky part to integrate a driver in the plus 100/150Hz to minus 600/700Hz range (I've never really succeeded using a 15" above this frequency). Above 600/700 you find really good horn/compression driver combos that don't become redicously large. Scaling is key in the bass/sub area . But the frequency band in between is IMO difficult if footprint is important. My honest recommendation is to not make any short cuts nor try to save too much on the budget. Go for the known ones, i.e. read Lynn Olsons "Beyond the ariel" thread. I've tried to reinvent the wheel too many times and have concluded that I'm unfortunately not cleverer than others
Since you're Swedish and probably understand Norwegian I will recommend you to also visit hifisentralen.no. You will find that there is quite a few guys doing some all out builds. If You first have had the opportunity to listen to one of these, there is no return, you're doomed - promise
Last edited:
I will end up with 7 or 8 way. %-) Listening to a 4-way horn system right now (Trio/Goto-inspired with added ribbon supertweeter) with non-horn subwoofer. Alas! no proper midbass horn+midbass array yet.
I will try my Eminence 15" with a 2nd order BW at around 400Hz. In a horn, ofc.
Lynn's thread is like listening to meaningless Star Trek tech-talk. I think even Lynn stopped reading it.
Hifisentralen.no, yes, I have checked it out, but it contains a lot of disinformation too.
I am in the business of reinventing the horn, not the wheel.
I will try my Eminence 15" with a 2nd order BW at around 400Hz. In a horn, ofc.
Lynn's thread is like listening to meaningless Star Trek tech-talk. I think even Lynn stopped reading it.
Hifisentralen.no, yes, I have checked it out, but it contains a lot of disinformation too.
I am in the business of reinventing the horn, not the wheel.
Last edited:
I liked this article, compairing JBL, Eminence and BD 15" drivers. 15” Woofer Survey… A Tale Of Three Woofers Article By Jeff Poth