- Jbl Driver For Windows 7
- Jbl Computer Speakers Drivers
- Jbl 2268hpl
- Jbl Bluetooth Drivers
- Jbl 2268h Driver For Macbook
- Jbl Drivers For Windows 10
Price refinements - Carousel
Showing slide {CURRENT_SLIDE} of {TOTAL_SLIDES} - Price refinements Intel pb-free e1 drivers for mac.
JBL 2268H Driver
Pre-Owned
From United States
or Best Offer
Customs services and international tracking providedBrand New
From United States
Buy It Now
Customs services and international tracking provided40 Watching
18' speaker cone for JBL 2268HPL speaker , JBL 2268H speaker cone
Brand New
From United States
Buy It Now
Customs services and international tracking providedParts Only
From United States
Buy It Now
Customs services and international tracking providedJBL 2241H 18' 8 Ohm High-Power Low Frequency Driver Speaker
Pre-Owned
From United States
Buy It Now
Customs services and international tracking providedJBL 2241H 18' 8 Ohm High-Power Low Frequency Driver Speaker
Pre-Owned
From United States
Buy It Now
Customs services and international tracking providedJBL12' Differential Woofer Aftermarket JBL 2262H for JBL SRX 712 Series 8 Ohms
Brand New
From United States
Buy It Now
Customs services and international tracking providedGenuine JBL Professional (8ohms) 2490H Mid-Range COMPRESSION DRIVER
Pre-Owned
From United States
Buy It Now
Pre-Owned
From United States
Buy It Now
Customs services and international tracking providedJBL 2225H 15' High-Power Low-Frequency Driver Speaker 8 Ohm
Pre-Owned
From United States
or Best Offer
Customs services and international tracking providedJBL 2241H 18' 8 Ohm High-Power Low Frequency Driver Speaker
Pre-Owned
From United States
Buy It Now
Customs services and international tracking providedPair of VINTAGE JBL 2225H 15' SPEAKER 8 ohm
Pre-Owned
From United States
or Best Offer
Customs services and international tracking providedJBL 2225H 15' High-Power Low-Frequency Driver Speaker 8 Ohm
Pre-Owned
From United States
Buy It Now
Customs services and international tracking providedJBL 2240 H 15' pro 8 ohm woofer
Pre-Owned
Time left3d left
0 bids
From United StatesJBL 15' Professionals Series 2225H Speaker Woofer 8 OHMS (12)
Pre-Owned
From United States
Buy It Now
JBL 2268HPL 18' Woofer RECONE SERVICE / Speaker Re-cone / 18' Speaker Repair
Brand New
From United States
Buy It Now
JBL 2418H High Frequency Driver Speaker 8 ohm 300-JBV
Pre-Owned
From United States
Buy It Now
Customs services and international tracking providedJBL 2104H REPLACEMENT MIDRANGE FOR JBL 4887 LINE ARRAY SPEAKER (ONE)
WE SHIP WORLDWIDE AND WE OFFER FREE LOCAL PICK UP
From United States
or Best Offer
Pre-Owned
From United States
or Best Offer
JBL 2169H 8' NEODYMIUM MID RANGE DRIVER (ONE)
WE SHIP WORLDWIDE AND WE OFFER FREE LOCAL PICK UP
From United States
or Best Offer
JBL 15' Differential Woofer Aftermarket (JBL 2265H) for JBL SRX 715 Series 8Ω
Brand New
From United States
Buy It Now
Customs services and international tracking providedJBL 15' Professionals Series 2225H Speaker Woofer 8 OHMS (01)
Pre-Owned
From United States
Buy It Now
JBL 15' Professionals Series 2225H Speaker Woofer 8 OHMS (02)
Pre-Owned
From United States
Buy It Now
Diaphragm for JBL 2415, 2416, 2417 all H driver 8 ohm
Brand New
From United States
Buy It Now
WE SHIP WORLDWIDE AND WE OFFER FREE LOCAL PICKUP
From United States
or Best Offer
Pre-Owned
From United States
Buy It Now
Replacement Repair Kit for JBL 2452H Horn Driver 8Ohm
Brand New
From China
Was: Previous Price$24.99
Free International Shipping
Pair (2) - JBL Professional 2240h 18' 600 watt woofers. 8 ohm speaker set.
Pre-Owned
From United States
or Best Offer
JBL 15' Professionals Series 2225H Speaker Woofer 8 OHMS (11)
Pre-Owned
From United States
Buy It Now
Voice coil for JBL 2262HPL,JBL 2265HPL,JBL 2268HPL ,JBL SRX 8 ohm aluminum wire
Brand New
Save up to 7% when you buy more
From United States+$45.10 shipping
Customs services and international tracking providedVINTAGE JBL 2225H 15' LF SPEAKER 8 ohm
Pre-Owned
From United States
or Best Offer
Pre-Owned
From United States
Buy It Now
PAIR OF JBL 2447H 8 Ohm 1.5' COMPRESSION DRIVERS
Pre-Owned
From United States
or Best Offer
Customs services and international tracking providedNew Listing Vintage JBL 2425 H Horn Driver with FLARE BAFFLES 4 bolt 8 OHM
Pre-Owned
From United States
or Best Offer
JBL,8 Ohm High Frequency Driver for SRX715
Brand New
From United States
Buy It Now
Customs services and international tracking providedPre-Owned
From United States
or Best Offer
Customs services and international tracking providedPAIR of JBL 338800-001 Horn & JBL 2412H-1 High Frequency Compression Driver
Pre-Owned
From United States
Buy It Now
Customs services and international tracking providedPair JBL 2431H 1.5 Inch 8 Ohm Neodymium HF Drivers w/3 Inch Aluminum Diaphragms
Pre-Owned
From United States
![For For](https://www.gigasonic.com/images/large/srx828s1.jpg)
what q are you shooting for?
come on. who cares about Q.
i need high efficiency, high power and good linearity.
i also need a driver that can take all this power and not start to make funny mechanical noises under high excursion.
with all the EQ that's gonna be needed for dipole operation does Q really matter ?
Typically around 0.5 is good for this application but you are correct, the Q of the driver isn't as critical as the conventional speaker designer would require. You're going to be doing a lot of EQ anyway to correct for the dipole effect so a little pole shifting in that EQ isn't a big deal. So I would agree that this isn't a parameter to focus on. If the driver is noisy or distorted then it becomes useless regardless of what the T/S parameters are. If the driver is low distortion and not noisy then who cares what the T/S parameters are. Those can be manipulated with the crossover whereas the noise and distortion problems can not.
mk
EP CS2..using just a Cheapinger DCX, got one of the most votes for best sound in local hifi show last year.
whats EP CS2 ?
something is missing in this. i'm not sure what it is, but something in driver q survives equalization and results in a different sound.
i've really searched extensively on this one, but with no luck.
Emerald Physics CS2
http://www.emeraldphysics.com/Speakers/CS2.html
Annnnddd a review ..
http://www.positive-feedback.com/Iss..ld_physics.htm
I know there's a member here at AVS that has a pair.
is the 'goldeneye' a selenium d220i mounted on a dayton waveguide? what do these speakers cost, $50? lol. okay, flame suit on.
well best woofers tend to have a Q of 0.3
if your woofer has a Q of 0.6 and sounds like crap its because it IS crap, not because of the Q
virtually all decent woofers have a Q between 0.2 and 0.4 .. anything outside of that range is pretty much guaranteed to be garbage
agree. which is why i am confused. lower q drivers tend to get better reviews in traditional configurations such as the jbl 2226h, but very high q drivers such as the eminence alpha tend to get good reviews ob. can you clarify?
Actually driver Q has little to do with driver quality. It's more a parameter that defines application. For Infinite Baffle or Dipole it can be more convenient to have a Qt between 0.5 and 0.7. Years ago Bob Carver was forced to argue with his driver suppliers to convince them that yes, he really did want drivers with very high Q for his 'Amazing Loudspeaker'.
So, it's a mistake to relate driver Q to the quality of the driver. This is something that is strictly a function of application and has nothing to do with quality..unless of course you use a driver in the wrong application. Having the wrong Q can cause problems especially in conventional box speaker designs that are not intended to be used with active equalization.
A resonate circuit is equal to the sum of the series and parallel circuits. Applying a bi-quad for the purpose of pole shifting is more than just amplitude EQ. This effectively changes the Q and resonance of the system. So if your Q is too low for a dipole or IB application and you fix it with a bi-quad then you effectively changed and fixed the issue. You did not simply band-aid it by correcting amplitude response, you created a network that sums to the desired values. It wouldn't matter if the proportions were redistributed using a driver with more or less Q and thus a correction circuit with a corresponding change. The total is the total whether you add 2+2=4 or 1+3=4.
Update: I suppose I should mention that many might consider drivers having a Qt greater than 0.7 to be of poor quality simply because they have no viable application. Even in that case however if the driver is very quiet and with low distortion it can be useful but it will require correcting the Q no matter what application it's used in since all non-boomy applications will require a Qtc of about 0.7 or less.
mk
That's ok, in theory a small cone moving a lot and displacing the same air volume as a larger one moving a little are doing the same thing and will sound the same but you will never convince me this is true. Like you, I'm not sure how to write a scientific explanation of why it's true but I'm convinced it's so regardless. The bigger or more cones moving a little will always sound better than a smaller or fewer cones moving a lot. I don't care what the math says! Actually I think something is just missing from the math and that's why the theory appears wrong..because it is wrong, and the math is incomplete.
Likewise, a light loose suspension cone will always sound better than a heavy stiff suspension cone all other things being equal. Based on the math, given the right box so that each has the same resonance and Q one being in a large box (the loose one) and the other being in a small box (the stiff one) they should be the same but you will never convince me that it's so. Again, I don't believe the math is really wrong but I believe it is incomplete, there is something missing that it doesn't consider.
mk
Our new radial driver called the KBH has a very low Q so its really designed for systems with the ability to EQ or a naturally small sealed or higher order box. Its fine in a large box or dipole if and only if you supply the voltage EQ down low. Remember low Q does not mean less bass efficiency as most people assume, the deceiving part is modeled frequency response is with constant voltage. But if you did constant power you can see that adding more BL always increases efficiency at all frequencies (even low stuff). Therefore if you can EQ with proper voltage, you can indeed have more low end bass from a very low Q woofer, this is what Bob Carver discovered btw.
driver efficiency always increases with BL but system efficiency does not always increase.
in order to realize the efficiency benefits of high BL you have to utilize a switching amplifier.
TD15 series (w/faraday motor) will sound better,
allow more than 80hz - 250hz coverage if you ever
needed it, and not be limited in application like the
rest. Have John build you Apollos if you are serious
The storm was gone, but dark clouds still hung around
The perfect setting for things to come...
the most common box alignment is bass reflex which optimally needs a low Q driver ( about 0.3 ). therefore a company like JBL which puts out well optimized drivers and has to shoot for most common application ( bass reflex ) will mostly have drivers with Q of about 0.3
a driver optimized for OB should have a Q of 0.7 but no serious company makes drivers for OB application because 0B is maybe 0.1% of the market.
therefore if you see a driver with a Q of 0.7 its either a dedicated OB driver from a super obscure company like AESpeakers
OR
its not an OB driver and is simply a piece of CRAP.
WORD OF ADVICE TO YOU MY CHILDREN :
don't get focused too much on Q when it comes to OB application. an ideal driver for OB should have low moving mass. increasing moving mass will increase Q but performance will only suffer.
never get focused on any single parameter. model the whole thing. and remember that flat response is not the goal ! the goal is a WELL BEHAVED response, high output capability and low distortion.
Thy, nice to see you around man!
Not sure if it was John that said it but there are a few people on the forums over at his website that have had interest in OB projects. The Dipole15 is mentioned as a good candidate but the TD15M even is considerable for use in OB designs. Just may take a bit of EQ and or it may not have the best lowend below 100hz without it.
Buy It Now
Customs services and international tracking providedJBL continually engages in research related to product improvement. Some materials, production methods and design refinements are introduced into existing products without notice as a routine expression of that philosophy. Find great deals on eBay for jbl 2268h. Shop with confidence. Toshiba l20 driver for mac. JBL Professional introduced the Differential. 2268H driver, which is intended for subwoofer use in the same general performance category.
102 JBL PROFESSIONAL THIELE SMALL LOW FREQUENCY DRIVER PARAMETERS AND DEFINITIONS November 3, 2008 Page 1 of 6 NOTE: The Parameters marked with an asterisk(*) are the minimum set required for a complete low. Lanier mp c3002 driver. JBL Professional introduced the Differential Driveconcept in the EON System in 1995 as a means of attaining maximum system perform. 2268H driver, which is intended for subwoofer use in the same general performance category as the traditional ferrite VGC™ Vented Gap.
Thread Tools |
post #1 of 67Old03-28-2009, 04:57 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
Location: DIY-AV.NET
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I have plans for dipole 'midbass' sections comprised of several 15' or 18' woofers to fill roughly 80 hz - 250 hz region.
now some alternatives for this role would be:
JBL 2268H
Lambda TD15H
Audiopulse Neo-Radial 18' Woofer
Overall JBL looks good except that it has no vent. In a box any chuffing noises coming from the back of the driver would not be an issue but for a dipole they would be.
So the question is - does it make these kinds of noises ?
now some alternatives for this role would be:
JBL 2268H
Lambda TD15H
Audiopulse Neo-Radial 18' Woofer
Overall JBL looks good except that it has no vent. In a box any chuffing noises coming from the back of the driver would not be an issue but for a dipole they would be.
So the question is - does it make these kinds of noises ?
![For For](https://www.gigasonic.com/images/large/srx828s1.jpg)
Sponsored Links | |
Senior Member
Location: Hermosa Beach, CA
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Advanced Member
Location: Green Bay, WI USA
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Quoted: 26 Post(s)
The Dipole15 would be typically the most recommended dipole option. However if 80hz is your low end goal as a midbass you could really get away with any of the options.
http://web.archive.org/web/200403072../DIPOLE15.html
The custom version done for Lynn Olson may be a viable option as well.
http://www.audiocircle.com/circles/i..?topic=62242.0
John
http://web.archive.org/web/200403072../DIPOLE15.html
The custom version done for Lynn Olson may be a viable option as well.
http://www.audiocircle.com/circles/i..?topic=62242.0
John
John E. Janowitz
Acoustic Elegance, LLC
'Learn from the mistakes of others.. you can't possibly live long enough to make them all yourself'
Acoustic Elegance, LLC
'Learn from the mistakes of others.. you can't possibly live long enough to make them all yourself'
Sponsored Links | |
AVS Forum Special Member
Location: Lawrence, KS
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
I know the TD15H's are quiet free-air. No vent either.
AVS Forum Addicted Member
Posts: 21,210
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Liked: 3676
Quote:Originally Posted by vasyachkin
I have plans for dipole 'midbass' sections comprised of several 15' or 18' woofers to fill roughly 80 hz - 250 hz region.
now some alternatives for this role would be:
JBL 2268H
Lambda TD15H
Audiopulse Neo-Radial 18' Woofer
Overall JBL looks good except that it has no vent. In a box any chuffing noises coming from the back of the driver would not be an issue but for a dipole they would be.
So the question is - does it make these kinds of noises ?
I have plans for dipole 'midbass' sections comprised of several 15' or 18' woofers to fill roughly 80 hz - 250 hz region.
now some alternatives for this role would be:
JBL 2268H
Lambda TD15H
Audiopulse Neo-Radial 18' Woofer
Overall JBL looks good except that it has no vent. In a box any chuffing noises coming from the back of the driver would not be an issue but for a dipole they would be.
So the question is - does it make these kinds of noises ?
what q are you shooting for?
post #6 of 67Old03-28-2009, 02:29 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
Location: DIY-AV.NET
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:Originally Posted by LTD02
what q are you shooting for?
what q are you shooting for?
come on. who cares about Q.
i need high efficiency, high power and good linearity.
i also need a driver that can take all this power and not start to make funny mechanical noises under high excursion.
with all the EQ that's gonna be needed for dipole operation does Q really matter ?
AVS Forum Addicted Member
Location: Mountain View, CA USA
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Quoted: 1894 Post(s)
'who cares about Q.'
people with a clue; do you think the Q of your car's dampers also doesn't matter?
people with a clue; do you think the Q of your car's dampers also doesn't matter?
AVS Forum Addicted Member
Posts: 21,210
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Liked: 3676
you may wish to take a look at these:
http://www.aespeakers.com/phpbb2/vie..e83d9109621ca6
not sure if the 4 for $400 deal is still on.
also, here is a bit on q that you may not have seen:
http://www.geocities.com/kreskovs/Box-Q.html
surprisingly, many folks seem to be getting good results o.b. employing the el cheapo eminence alpha 15. a search on that one should pull up many succesful projects.
o.b. isn't too popular around avs, so you may wish to poke around diyaudio.
just trying to help you out, vas.
http://www.aespeakers.com/phpbb2/vie..e83d9109621ca6
not sure if the 4 for $400 deal is still on.
also, here is a bit on q that you may not have seen:
http://www.geocities.com/kreskovs/Box-Q.html
surprisingly, many folks seem to be getting good results o.b. employing the el cheapo eminence alpha 15. a search on that one should pull up many succesful projects.
o.b. isn't too popular around avs, so you may wish to poke around diyaudio.
just trying to help you out, vas.
AVS Forum Special Member
Location: Austin TX Area
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 41 Post(s)
Quote:Originally Posted by vasyachkin
come on. who cares about Q..with all the EQ that's gonna be needed for dipole operation does Q really matter ?
come on. who cares about Q..with all the EQ that's gonna be needed for dipole operation does Q really matter ?
Typically around 0.5 is good for this application but you are correct, the Q of the driver isn't as critical as the conventional speaker designer would require. You're going to be doing a lot of EQ anyway to correct for the dipole effect so a little pole shifting in that EQ isn't a big deal. So I would agree that this isn't a parameter to focus on. If the driver is noisy or distorted then it becomes useless regardless of what the T/S parameters are. If the driver is low distortion and not noisy then who cares what the T/S parameters are. Those can be manipulated with the crossover whereas the noise and distortion problems can not.
mk
Advanced Member
Location: Green Bay, WI USA
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Quoted: 26 Post(s)
Regarding Dipoles, MJK and I had some discussion over on audiocircle awhile ago starting with this post:
http://www.audiocircle.com/circles/i..2199#msg532199
Some good info in there for people looking to build something.
John
http://www.audiocircle.com/circles/i..2199#msg532199
Some good info in there for people looking to build something.
John
John E. Janowitz
Acoustic Elegance, LLC
'Learn from the mistakes of others.. you can't possibly live long enough to make them all yourself'
Acoustic Elegance, LLC
'Learn from the mistakes of others.. you can't possibly live long enough to make them all yourself'
post #11 of 67Old03-28-2009, 11:34 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
Location: DIY-AV.NET
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
All right. From your responses JBL still looks like a winner.
When time comes i will have to probably need to get a few different units to sample them.
I don't trust *data* on paper any more.
When time comes i will have to probably need to get a few different units to sample them.
I don't trust *data* on paper any more.
Advanced Member
Location: Singapore
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:Originally Posted by LTD02
surprisingly, many folks seem to be getting good results o.b. employing the el cheapo eminence alpha 15. a search on that one should pull up many succesful projects.
surprisingly, many folks seem to be getting good results o.b. employing the el cheapo eminence alpha 15. a search on that one should pull up many succesful projects.
EP CS2..using just a Cheapinger DCX, got one of the most votes for best sound in local hifi show last year.
post #13 of 67Old03-29-2009, 06:28 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
Location: DIY-AV.NET
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:Originally Posted by 2100
EP CS2..using just a Cheapinger DCX, got one of the most votes for best sound in local hifi show last year.
EP CS2..using just a Cheapinger DCX, got one of the most votes for best sound in local hifi show last year.
whats EP CS2 ?
AVS Forum Addicted Member
Posts: 21,210
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Liked: 3676
Quote:Originally Posted by Montekay
Typically around 0.5 is good for this application but you are correct, the Q of the driver isn't as critical as the conventional speaker designer would require. You're going to be doing a lot of EQ anyway to correct for the dipole effect so a little pole shifting in that EQ isn't a big deal. So I would agree that this isn't a parameter to focus on. If the driver is noisy or distorted then it becomes useless regardless of what the T/S parameters are. If the driver is low distortion and not noisy then who cares what the T/S parameters are. Those can be manipulated with the crossover whereas the noise and distortion problems can not.
mk
Typically around 0.5 is good for this application but you are correct, the Q of the driver isn't as critical as the conventional speaker designer would require. You're going to be doing a lot of EQ anyway to correct for the dipole effect so a little pole shifting in that EQ isn't a big deal. So I would agree that this isn't a parameter to focus on. If the driver is noisy or distorted then it becomes useless regardless of what the T/S parameters are. If the driver is low distortion and not noisy then who cares what the T/S parameters are. Those can be manipulated with the crossover whereas the noise and distortion problems can not.
mk
something is missing in this. i'm not sure what it is, but something in driver q survives equalization and results in a different sound.
i've really searched extensively on this one, but with no luck.
Bass Enabler
Location: Clovis, CA
Mentioned: 201 Post(s)
Quoted: 5986 Post(s)
Quote:
Emerald Physics CS2
http://www.emeraldphysics.com/Speakers/CS2.html
Annnnddd a review ..
http://www.positive-feedback.com/Iss..ld_physics.htm
I know there's a member here at AVS that has a pair.
Scott's Wall of Bass Immersive Audio HT Room
AVS Forum Addicted Member
Posts: 21,210
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Liked: 3676
Quote:Originally Posted by Scott Simonian
Emerald Physics CS2
http://www.emeraldphysics.com/Speakers/CS2.html
Annnnddd a review ..
http://www.positive-feedback.com/Iss..ld_physics.htm
I know there's a member here at AVS that has a pair.
Emerald Physics CS2
http://www.emeraldphysics.com/Speakers/CS2.html
Annnnddd a review ..
http://www.positive-feedback.com/Iss..ld_physics.htm
I know there's a member here at AVS that has a pair.
is the 'goldeneye' a selenium d220i mounted on a dayton waveguide? what do these speakers cost, $50? lol. okay, flame suit on.
post #17 of 67Old03-29-2009, 04:34 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
Location: DIY-AV.NET
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:Originally Posted by LTD02
something is missing in this. i'm not sure what it is, but something in driver q survives equalization and results in a different sound.
i've really searched extensively on this one, but with no luck.
something is missing in this. i'm not sure what it is, but something in driver q survives equalization and results in a different sound.
i've really searched extensively on this one, but with no luck.
well best woofers tend to have a Q of 0.3
if your woofer has a Q of 0.6 and sounds like crap its because it IS crap, not because of the Q
virtually all decent woofers have a Q between 0.2 and 0.4 .. anything outside of that range is pretty much guaranteed to be garbage
AVS Forum Addicted Member
Posts: 21,210
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Liked: 3676
Quote:Originally Posted by vasyachkin
well best woofers tend to have a Q of 0.3
if your woofer has a Q of 0.6 and sounds like crap its because it IS crap, not because of the Q
virtually all decent woofers have a Q between 0.2 and 0.4 .. anything outside of that range is pretty much guaranteed to be garbage
well best woofers tend to have a Q of 0.3
if your woofer has a Q of 0.6 and sounds like crap its because it IS crap, not because of the Q
virtually all decent woofers have a Q between 0.2 and 0.4 .. anything outside of that range is pretty much guaranteed to be garbage
agree. which is why i am confused. lower q drivers tend to get better reviews in traditional configurations such as the jbl 2226h, but very high q drivers such as the eminence alpha tend to get good reviews ob. can you clarify?
AVS Forum Special Member
Location: Austin TX Area
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 41 Post(s)
Quote:Originally Posted by LTD02
agree. which is why i am confused. lower q drivers tend to get better reviews in traditional configurations such as the jbl 2226h, but very high q drivers such as the eminence alpha tend to get good reviews ob. can you clarify?
agree. which is why i am confused. lower q drivers tend to get better reviews in traditional configurations such as the jbl 2226h, but very high q drivers such as the eminence alpha tend to get good reviews ob. can you clarify?
Actually driver Q has little to do with driver quality. It's more a parameter that defines application. For Infinite Baffle or Dipole it can be more convenient to have a Qt between 0.5 and 0.7. Years ago Bob Carver was forced to argue with his driver suppliers to convince them that yes, he really did want drivers with very high Q for his 'Amazing Loudspeaker'.
So, it's a mistake to relate driver Q to the quality of the driver. This is something that is strictly a function of application and has nothing to do with quality..unless of course you use a driver in the wrong application. Having the wrong Q can cause problems especially in conventional box speaker designs that are not intended to be used with active equalization.
A resonate circuit is equal to the sum of the series and parallel circuits. Applying a bi-quad for the purpose of pole shifting is more than just amplitude EQ. This effectively changes the Q and resonance of the system. So if your Q is too low for a dipole or IB application and you fix it with a bi-quad then you effectively changed and fixed the issue. You did not simply band-aid it by correcting amplitude response, you created a network that sums to the desired values. It wouldn't matter if the proportions were redistributed using a driver with more or less Q and thus a correction circuit with a corresponding change. The total is the total whether you add 2+2=4 or 1+3=4.
Update: I suppose I should mention that many might consider drivers having a Qt greater than 0.7 to be of poor quality simply because they have no viable application. Even in that case however if the driver is very quiet and with low distortion it can be useful but it will require correcting the Q no matter what application it's used in since all non-boomy applications will require a Qtc of about 0.7 or less.
mk
AVS Forum Addicted Member
Posts: 21,210
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Liked: 3676
Quote:Originally Posted by Montekay
Actually driver Q has little to do with driver quality.
Actually driver Q has little to do with driver quality.
Jbl Driver For Windows 7
aren't you overstating it a bit here? almost all the driver reviews that i have read have suggested that lower q correlates with a 'tighter' or 'faster' bass line (let's not debate the subjective comments here, only note that this is how the responses have come in). more powerful bl, lighter cones, lower q. an equalized jbl 2226h and a maelstrom subwoofer will not sound the same even if eq'd flat across the mid-bass region. like i said, something about driver q is maintained even after similar eq is applied. i wish that i had more science behind my claim, but at this point, subjective response is all i have.AVS Forum Special Member
Location: Austin TX Area
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 41 Post(s)
Quote:Originally Posted by LTD02
aren't you overstating it a bit here? almost all the driver reviews that i have read have suggested that lower q correlates with a 'tighter' or 'faster' bass line (let's not debate the subjective comments here, only note that this is how the responses have come in). more powerful bl, lighter cones, lower q. an equalized jbl 2226h and a maelstrom subwoofer will not sound the same even if eq'd flat across the mid-bass region. like i said, something about driver q is maintained even after similar eq is applied. i wish that i had more science behind my claim, but at this point, subjective response is all i have.
aren't you overstating it a bit here? almost all the driver reviews that i have read have suggested that lower q correlates with a 'tighter' or 'faster' bass line (let's not debate the subjective comments here, only note that this is how the responses have come in). more powerful bl, lighter cones, lower q. an equalized jbl 2226h and a maelstrom subwoofer will not sound the same even if eq'd flat across the mid-bass region. like i said, something about driver q is maintained even after similar eq is applied. i wish that i had more science behind my claim, but at this point, subjective response is all i have.
That's ok, in theory a small cone moving a lot and displacing the same air volume as a larger one moving a little are doing the same thing and will sound the same but you will never convince me this is true. Like you, I'm not sure how to write a scientific explanation of why it's true but I'm convinced it's so regardless. The bigger or more cones moving a little will always sound better than a smaller or fewer cones moving a lot. I don't care what the math says! Actually I think something is just missing from the math and that's why the theory appears wrong..because it is wrong, and the math is incomplete.
Likewise, a light loose suspension cone will always sound better than a heavy stiff suspension cone all other things being equal. Based on the math, given the right box so that each has the same resonance and Q one being in a large box (the loose one) and the other being in a small box (the stiff one) they should be the same but you will never convince me that it's so. Again, I don't believe the math is really wrong but I believe it is incomplete, there is something missing that it doesn't consider.
Jbl Computer Speakers Drivers
So, while theory says that the total circuit determines all these factors like total Q etc, there may be something to your claim as well. I just know that if I have two drivers to choose from one having the perfect value of Q and Fs but is distorted and noisy and another driver having less than perfect values but is quiet and low distortion I will go with that driver every time. The theory says it should be exactly the same if I correct it with the appropriate circuit and thus far I have seen no reason to question these results as I have in the theories mentioned above. This doesn't mean you have not experienced reason to question this theory however. I think that's what makes speaker design so interesting..it's a never ending journey. It grows and evolves as we recognize more factors that impact performance. Sometimes things thought to be fact are later proven to be untrue so don't let me or anyone tell you you're wrong on this. You may be the one that one day proves the theory wrong. BTW, if you or anyone here knows or comes across proofs of my conflicts with theories above let me know.mk
Member
Posts: 79
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Liked: 10
Jbl 2268hpl
Q is not the answer to everything I guess. What about size of the voice coil, membrane/suspension type? Everything is being equal? I don't think so..
You can't choose your car only by the colour
You can't choose your car only by the colour
AVS Forum Special Member
Location: California
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Quote:Originally Posted by vasyachkin
I have plans for dipole 'midbass' sections comprised of several 15' or 18' woofers to fill roughly 80 hz - 250 hz region.
now some alternatives for this role would be:
JBL 2268H
Lambda TD15H
Audiopulse Neo-Radial 18' Woofer
Overall JBL looks good except that it has no vent. In a box any chuffing noises coming from the back of the driver would not be an issue but for a dipole they would be.
So the question is - does it make these kinds of noises ?
I have plans for dipole 'midbass' sections comprised of several 15' or 18' woofers to fill roughly 80 hz - 250 hz region.
now some alternatives for this role would be:
JBL 2268H
Lambda TD15H
Audiopulse Neo-Radial 18' Woofer
Overall JBL looks good except that it has no vent. In a box any chuffing noises coming from the back of the driver would not be an issue but for a dipole they would be.
So the question is - does it make these kinds of noises ?
Our new radial driver called the KBH has a very low Q so its really designed for systems with the ability to EQ or a naturally small sealed or higher order box. Its fine in a large box or dipole if and only if you supply the voltage EQ down low. Remember low Q does not mean less bass efficiency as most people assume, the deceiving part is modeled frequency response is with constant voltage. But if you did constant power you can see that adding more BL always increases efficiency at all frequencies (even low stuff). Therefore if you can EQ with proper voltage, you can indeed have more low end bass from a very low Q woofer, this is what Bob Carver discovered btw.
Senior Member
Posts: 338
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Liked: 14
other than lucking out on e bay how does someone obtain a 2268 or 2269? Does anyone know if a place like guitarcenter can special order them?
post #25 of 67Old03-30-2009, 08:22 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
Jbl Bluetooth Drivers
Location: DIY-AV.NET
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:Originally Posted by KyleLee
Our new radial driver called the KBH has a very low Q so its really designed for systems with the ability to EQ or a naturally small sealed or higher order box. Its fine in a large box or dipole if and only if you supply the voltage EQ down low. Remember low Q does not mean less bass efficiency as most people assume, the deceiving part is modeled frequency response is with constant voltage. But if you did constant power you can see that adding more BL always increases efficiency at all frequencies (even low stuff). Therefore if you can EQ with proper voltage, you can indeed have more low end bass from a very low Q woofer, this is what Bob Carver discovered btw.
Our new radial driver called the KBH has a very low Q so its really designed for systems with the ability to EQ or a naturally small sealed or higher order box. Its fine in a large box or dipole if and only if you supply the voltage EQ down low. Remember low Q does not mean less bass efficiency as most people assume, the deceiving part is modeled frequency response is with constant voltage. But if you did constant power you can see that adding more BL always increases efficiency at all frequencies (even low stuff). Therefore if you can EQ with proper voltage, you can indeed have more low end bass from a very low Q woofer, this is what Bob Carver discovered btw.
driver efficiency always increases with BL but system efficiency does not always increase.
in order to realize the efficiency benefits of high BL you have to utilize a switching amplifier.
AVS Forum Special Member
Posts: 3,880
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Liked: 23
Quote:Originally Posted by vasyachkin
I have plans for dipole 'midbass' sections comprised of several 15' or 18' woofers to fill roughly 80 hz - 250 hz region.
now some alternatives for this role would be:
JBL 2268H
Lambda TD15H
Audiopulse Neo-Radial 18' Woofer
I have plans for dipole 'midbass' sections comprised of several 15' or 18' woofers to fill roughly 80 hz - 250 hz region.
now some alternatives for this role would be:
JBL 2268H
Lambda TD15H
Audiopulse Neo-Radial 18' Woofer
TD15 series (w/faraday motor) will sound better,
allow more than 80hz - 250hz coverage if you ever
needed it, and not be limited in application like the
rest. Have John build you Apollos if you are serious
The storm was gone, but dark clouds still hung around
The perfect setting for things to come...
post #27 of 67Old03-30-2009, 08:42 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
Location: DIY-AV.NET
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:Originally Posted by LTD02
agree. which is why i am confused. lower q drivers tend to get better reviews in traditional configurations such as the jbl 2226h, but very high q drivers such as the eminence alpha tend to get good reviews ob. can you clarify?
agree. which is why i am confused. lower q drivers tend to get better reviews in traditional configurations such as the jbl 2226h, but very high q drivers such as the eminence alpha tend to get good reviews ob. can you clarify?
the most common box alignment is bass reflex which optimally needs a low Q driver ( about 0.3 ). therefore a company like JBL which puts out well optimized drivers and has to shoot for most common application ( bass reflex ) will mostly have drivers with Q of about 0.3
![For For](/uploads/1/2/6/7/126737698/407386700.jpg)
therefore if you see a driver with a Q of 0.7 its either a dedicated OB driver from a super obscure company like AESpeakers
OR
Jbl 2268h Driver For Macbook
its not an OB driver and is simply a piece of CRAP.
WORD OF ADVICE TO YOU MY CHILDREN :
don't get focused too much on Q when it comes to OB application. an ideal driver for OB should have low moving mass. increasing moving mass will increase Q but performance will only suffer.
never get focused on any single parameter. model the whole thing. and remember that flat response is not the goal ! the goal is a WELL BEHAVED response, high output capability and low distortion.
Bass Enabler
Location: Clovis, CA
Mentioned: 201 Post(s)
Quoted: 5986 Post(s)
Quote:Originally Posted by thylantyr
TD15 series (w/faraday motor) will sound better,
allow more than 80hz - 250hz coverage if you ever
needed it, and not be limited in application like the
rest. Have John build you Apollos if you are serious
TD15 series (w/faraday motor) will sound better,
allow more than 80hz - 250hz coverage if you ever
needed it, and not be limited in application like the
rest. Have John build you Apollos if you are serious
Thy, nice to see you around man!
Not sure if it was John that said it but there are a few people on the forums over at his website that have had interest in OB projects. The Dipole15 is mentioned as a good candidate but the TD15M even is considerable for use in OB designs. Just may take a bit of EQ and or it may not have the best lowend below 100hz without it.
AVS Forum Special Member
Posts: 3,801
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Liked: 22
John J builds high-quality, high-Q drivers if someone wants them. The urban legends about high-Q drivers sounding bad just come from crappy drivers used in crappy alignments trying to go for the midbass hump.
All you have to do to raise the Q of an OB driver is add a resistor in series. I was fiddling around with modeling a TD15M (Fs=35, Qts=.33) in an OB with a passive crossover and which could cross to an AV receiver at 80Hz. That means you need to dial the low end rolloff in at 80Hz, 2nd order, Q=.7 to match up with the highpass filters in most receivers. Depending on baffle size, something like 3.5 ohms and a 14mH coil in series gave the desired highpass behavior and a nice flat response up over 300 Hz where it started rolling off above there. Adjusting the size of a shunt cap (maybe with a series resistor) could dial in an LR2 lowpass in the 300-400 range. 3 or 4 components for dipole EQ, highpass and lowpass filters -- doesn't get much easier than that.
All you have to do to raise the Q of an OB driver is add a resistor in series. I was fiddling around with modeling a TD15M (Fs=35, Qts=.33) in an OB with a passive crossover and which could cross to an AV receiver at 80Hz. That means you need to dial the low end rolloff in at 80Hz, 2nd order, Q=.7 to match up with the highpass filters in most receivers. Depending on baffle size, something like 3.5 ohms and a 14mH coil in series gave the desired highpass behavior and a nice flat response up over 300 Hz where it started rolling off above there. Adjusting the size of a shunt cap (maybe with a series resistor) could dial in an LR2 lowpass in the 300-400 range. 3 or 4 components for dipole EQ, highpass and lowpass filters -- doesn't get much easier than that.
AVS Forum Addicted Member
Location: Mountain View, CA USA
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Quoted: 1894 Post(s)
'in order to realize the efficiency benefits of high BL you have to utilize a switching amplifier.'
Speaker efficiency and amp efficiency are not related.
Speaker efficiency and amp efficiency are not related.
Sponsored Links | |
«Previous Thread | Next Thread
Jbl Drivers For Windows 10
Posting Rules | |
You may not post replies You may not edit your posts Smilies are On HTML code is Off Pingbacks are Off |