Mitch will have the data or links available, but if I remember correctly the D2430K wasn't even considered the best sounding JBL driver with the M2 waveguide.
The 2216ND is readily available. It appears for the 4367 the part number is different, ending with 002 instead of 001.
The 2216ND is readily available. It appears for the 4367 the part number is different, ending with 002 instead of 001.
Last edited:
There's never been a 15" that does 20-800Hz flawlessly, neither does the 2216Nd.
I am sure the Faital 15FH500 and 15PR400 beat the 2216Nd in the midrange, easily.
Add to this the less than stellar performance of the D2430K down low and it becomes clear the M2 is a compromise, though still a good one.
I believe the lack of refinement in the midrange was also mentioned in the shootout between the M2 and the Revel Salon2.
If you'd increase the required low-end extension from 20 to 30 (or 35) Hz, you'll open up a whole world of alternative configurations.
Last edited:
From looking at the 2216Nd engineering datasheet, it seems JBL basically combined a midwoofer motor structure with a fairly heavy cone and semi-lossy suspension. It's well engineered with high quality parts which is reflected in the Klippel data.
Honestly, I doubt it'll appreciate long term high power levels.
On paper, the LaVoce woofer shown earlier will eat the 2216Nd for breakfast.
It's also obvious the 2216Nd, as used in the M2, is boosted at the low end.
Honestly, I doubt it'll appreciate long term high power levels.
On paper, the LaVoce woofer shown earlier will eat the 2216Nd for breakfast.
It's also obvious the 2216Nd, as used in the M2, is boosted at the low end.
Last edited:
I have a small multi sub studio myself, all subs are working.
Car audio simply disproves the myth that you can't reproduce frequencies longer than the dimensions of the room.
BNL
Based on the interest here, the following is a worth while read, if you have not already done so.
A lot of the JBL/TAD product referenced here is the results of Bart's engineering efforts. WHG
I do not doubt that. Although I think that there are many similarities between these 2 systems.
The TAD can be considered as a distant descendant of the WE757A.
If the TAD were not better, what would the meaning of progression be?
Still...I bet there will be plenty of folks who prefer the midrange of the WE757A to that of the 2404 in a 1 on 1 comparison. How could that be?
hint: these people are not all crazy
Based on the interest here, the following is a worth while read, if you have not already done so.
A lot of the JBL/TAD product referenced here is the results of Bart's engineering efforts. WHG
When I run modeling it tells me that I have good aspect on what to watch for when it comes to avoiding IMD....excursion. In my completely improper experiment, I watched the excursion of an 8" woofer while playing my reference track (drake - I'm upset) one of several reference songs in my arsenal with sub bass in 30's...and I increased the volume until the IMD was detrimental to the source. The excursion at the point of unacceptability was somewhere around 10mm-12mm but twas only a guess. Obviously I could of been more scientific but the objective was on point not to mention my definition acceptability isn't the standard for hi-fi lol. When I run modeling for the 15h ported, the 15m sealed, and the 2216nd ported....the Jbl has significantly lower excursion. This is with the jbl running at 300 watts and the 15H/15M running at 500, both matching the speakers rms, and both the 15H and JBL crossing 30hz at 114db...So when i set out to design a competing 2-way, shooting for the stars, you could say....using AE woofers, excursion was only within this personal acceptable range when I introduced the 2nd woofer....at that point its like....you now have 2 woofers, why aren't you just making a 3 way...
Which has me thinking, if the excursion of the JBl 2216nd is the standard.....The dual AE15m Ported, has lesser excursion than the a single 2216nd....did I jump to a 3 way too fast? The thing that persuaded me was the lack of limitation on the bottom end brought upon by the excursion abilities of the 15H, which would only be utilized during cinematic content per say.....hmmmm choices choices....Then when I look at modeled group delay, AE has jbl beat hands down, on the lowest register with a single AE15H beating out dual 15m's.....I like where this is heading
Which has me thinking, if the excursion of the JBl 2216nd is the standard.....The dual AE15m Ported, has lesser excursion than the a single 2216nd....did I jump to a 3 way too fast? The thing that persuaded me was the lack of limitation on the bottom end brought upon by the excursion abilities of the 15H, which would only be utilized during cinematic content per say.....hmmmm choices choices....Then when I look at modeled group delay, AE has jbl beat hands down, on the lowest register with a single AE15H beating out dual 15m's.....I like where this is heading
At lower output levels it's probably functional.
As regards car audio. I know a lot of money and effort is put into R&D of "in-car multimedia" which includes audio. To me, it's little more than "optimizing gadgets", which seems more important than the actual car these days.
Solutions for fundamentally flawed assumptions do not necessarily result in a high-quality (or desirable) outcome.
Hello camplo,
I have the JBL 2453h-SL 4" compression drivers mated to the JBL 2384 waveguide using a linear phase digital XO at 630 Hz as recommended by JBL when using active XO. The 2453h-SL are the cheapest 4" CD's as you can't drop in different phragms. I am very happy with the sound quality from these CD's. Very smooth and low distortion. Recommended.
If you go all the way back to post #15, I linked to a member of the AVSForum that tested a number of JBL CD's including the D2 on the 2384 waveguide, which wasn't the best match: Just purchased a pair of JBL 4722n speakers. - Page 122 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews It looks like the D2 is best XO'd at 800 Hz and designed for the M2 waveguide.
The advantage of the D2 driver is it's ring radiator extension as the 2nd diaphragm. I am fortunate of the Ti aquaplas, but the D2 has the extension to make it to 20 kHz for realz. The issue with the Be drivers is that they do not extend as high as the Ti aquaplas drivers and some add a supertweeter...but some don't and think it "marginally" sounds better than the SL JBL drivers. I don't know if the (significant) cost is warranted...
User pos has posted the eq for the M2 system so you can see for yourself what eq is being used: JBL M2 crossover - Google Docs
The JBL M2 and Revel Salon2 shootout folks refer to is a lot more even than most folks think. I think the real difference is the narrower directivity of the M2 as indicated by the "spinoramas". One may prefer more room sound if listening to classical music whereas others prefer more direct sound for rock (myself included).
My JBL 26SH-1 dual 15" driver are similar to the 2216nd as they are both dual voice coil and neo mags, but the latter being higher quality than the "cinema" version I use. Personally, I love the bass and midrange of these 15" drivers, they really track nicely, with a smooth response. I have not heard the AE drivers, but lots of folks love them for sure.
In my previous post, I linked to a diy M2 build thread. It is worth the time and effort to read through it. Regardless of what you choose, make sure you model the response with the cabs to get the low end you are looking for.
I am pretty happy with my 2 way with the addition of the subs:
Good luck with your build!
Attachments
1 You seem to assume that multiple subs don't work at high spl's. Do you have any argument about this, or just speculation?
2 What argument do you have that you can't reproduce frequencies larger than the dimensions of the room?
Not saying it doesn't, or can't work. From my experience both in small spaces and definitely in cars, very low frequency reproduction is not only compromised but often also highly uncomfortabele. It always puts a grin on my face once the panels begin to rattle in a €200.000 car. Even with the sub's output level behind the other channels.
But hey, it's a free world. This is just a matter of preference and opinion.
But hey, it's a free world. This is just a matter of preference and opinion.
Last edited:
I guess this is the story you refer to (from the JBL history):
Dr. John Frayne (Westrex), having worked with Jim Lansing previously, met with Bill Thomas and Bart Locanthi for a discussion that would become legendary. Dr. Frayne brought along an example of the Western Electric 594A compression driver.
He had a simple question: “Can JBL make a permanent
magnet version of this driver?” The answer would result in the famous JBL 375.
The 594A had been out of production since shortly after
Western Electric left the cinema market in 1938. Previously, it had been at the heart of Western Electric’s large cinema loudspeakers. It was a field coil compression driver that was unique in its size and output, utilizing a 4" diaphragm, 2" throat exit and four-slit, circumferential phasing plug. Since discontinuance of the 594A, Altec’s smaller 288 compression driver ruled as the standard high-power transducer for cinema systems. Westrex believed that a permanent magnet version of the 594A could offer a competitive advantage against the Altec 288 because of its greater output.
Last edited:
Hello camplo,
I have the JBL 2453h-SL 4" compression drivers mated to the JBL 2384 waveguide using a linear phase digital XO at 630 Hz as recommended by JBL when using active XO. The 2453h-SL are the cheapest 4" CD's as you can't drop in different phragms. I am very happy with the sound quality from these CD's. Very smooth and low distortion. Recommended.
If you go all the way back to post #15, I linked to a member of the AVSForum that tested a number of JBL CD's including the D2 on the 2384 waveguide, which wasn't the best match: Just purchased a pair of JBL 4722n speakers. - Page 122 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews It looks like the D2 is best XO'd at 800 Hz and designed for the M2 waveguide.
The advantage of the D2 driver is it's ring radiator extension as the 2nd diaphragm. I am fortunate of the Ti aquaplas, but the D2 has the extension to make it to 20 kHz for realz. The issue with the Be drivers is that they do not extend as high as the Ti aquaplas drivers and some add a supertweeter...but some don't and think it "marginally" sounds better than the SL JBL drivers. I don't know if the (significant) cost is warranted...
User pos has posted the eq for the M2 system so you can see for yourself what eq is being used: JBL M2 crossover - Google Docs
The JBL M2 and Revel Salon2 shootout folks refer to is a lot more even than most folks think. I think the real difference is the narrower directivity of the M2 as indicated by the "spinoramas". One may prefer more room sound if listening to classical music whereas others prefer more direct sound for rock (myself included).
My JBL 26SH-1 dual 15" driver are similar to the 2216nd as they are both dual voice coil and neo mags, but the latter being higher quality than the "cinema" version I use. Personally, I love the bass and midrange of these 15" drivers, they really track nicely, with a smooth response. I have not heard the AE drivers, but lots of folks love them for sure.
In my previous post, I linked to a diy M2 build thread. It is worth the time and effort to read through it. Regardless of what you choose, make sure you model the response with the cabs to get the low end you are looking for.
I am pretty happy with my 2 way with the addition of the subs:
Good luck with your build!
I've come across some of your post in the past and appreciate you sharing you experience. POS did a comparison of BE/Aquaplas/Ti diaphragms, Aquaplas has more dampening then all. Its response is smoother is well, pre-eq. I once considered the same waveguide, I'm don't remember what persuaded me to switch to a tractrix, maybe it was the uniform dispersion regardless of horizontal/vertical angle.
What do you guys think of a 2-way with dual 15'ms vs a 3 way with a 15m mid and 15h woofer?
I just found the force flat feature on winisd, lets see where this takes me
114dB at 30Hz at Home.
Camplo, you said you crossed both JBL and Ae at 30Hz, do you mean a HP?
114dB at 30Hz at Home
I meant on the modeling graph the plot crossed 30hz at the particular spl.
Forcing the response to flat has shown that the M2 woofer and the 15m are somewhat similar, though the M2 woofer has more excursion.
I am modeling for perfection at high level in order to expose weaknesses.
114db at 30hz....sounds like an extra fun movie night.
Still -
No its not a matter of preference and opinion.
Nature works like that or it doesn't.
In this case, multiple subs work and you can reproduce frequencies longer than the dimensions of the room.
Last edited:
Well it is not that simple I would say.
While you are definitley right when it comes to subwoofers this is not actually true for every type of woofer. When the driver has to reproduce midrange as well then there is not just the influence on frequency response (which can be dealt with) from Le but also the non-linear behaviour of Le versus coil position. This leads to midrange IMD. There are of course drivers with high Le and low variance of it where it doesn't matter that much and it might not matter very much when Le is small but the variance is increased as long as one stays away from the pole that is defined by Le and Re.
OTOH I built a 2x15" in order to have a speaker with very low excursion even at loud (but not insanely loud) listening levels. In this case it doesn't matter that much either I guess. When I have some time to spare I will remove one of the Woofers from the cab and check whether I can measure midrange distortion in the voice-coil current as a function of excursion from low frequencies.
IIRC the 4367 version is a little like the TADs form the TSP point of view.
Regards
Charles
Last edited:
How about my work:
15WU/8741+6640, 10 Liter cabient.
SPL and Distortion measured @ 100W input, 1m distance:
I will never use 100W input power for this speaker, because my small listening room is only 7m^2.
