JBL2226 VS black widow1504 folded horn FH-1

[erez]

hi
I have been looking for a folded horn for a long time, I almost built one, many thanks for @garyeanderson.and then I found the peavey fh-1. buy it for 400$. with new black widow 1504.
I understood from reading in the forum that the jbl2226 speaker is very high quality for folded horn, so i buy one, in addition to other forums they preferred it over the peavey black widow 1504.

What do you think about the results?

the black widow 1504 is little more punchy

[Marvel]

The BW 1504 probably, without a doubt, has more distortion. I know John Albright had some FH-1s, and replaced the woofer, but I can't recall what he used.

 

@JohnA

[erez]

i think i know how to here distortion in high frequency, but how to do it in low frequency?

add the distortion measurements.

 

Edited April 8, 2021 by erez

[Chris A]

If you dramatically increase the drive level (i.e., at least 90 dB, and better at 100 dB at 1m, assuming that you're taking your measurements at that distance, which you haven't indicated, above) you will see the real difference in harmonic distortion levels between the two.  The harmonic distortion is but an indicator of the type of distortion that is most objectionable (modulation distortion). 

 

You really can't see the relative distortion levels between the two woofers at 70 dB (1 metre).  It's called "nonlinear distortion" because it's sensitive to drive level, and you have to be at much higher levels to really see it.  What you're seeing above is probably dominated by random errors in measurement.

 

Chris

[erez]

thanks Chris

take the measurements  from 40cm and low level.

 

Attached measurements at a distance of 1 meter high level. It can certainly be seen that the black widow has changed.

 

 

 

ZOOM

 

Edited April 8, 2021 by erez

[Chris A]

If you change the plot type to "distortion" and post, we can see the differences, too.

 

The SPL response of the "Black Widow" is actually smoother and flatter (not considering the harmonic distortion levels).  This indicates to me that I'd consider that woofer.

 

Do you know what average SPL was for your "high level" measurement?

 

Chris

[erez]

again, thanks. in high level, the jbl become more flat from 55-300hz, and the black widow the opposite.

Attached distortion measurements 

Edited April 8, 2021 by erez

[Chris A]

Your getting a little more bass extension with the JBL, but that's easily corrected using a bit of boost at 60 Hz.  You're going to need EQ anyway (at least, I'd EQ the bass bins to flatter SPL response). In the plot just above, the JBL actually has a flatter response.  I'd investigate that a bit more, if I were in your shoes.  That could be the factor that tilts the scale one way or the other.

 

I don't see any "smoking guns" in terms of distortion levels in the plots above.  I think the JBL probably has a higher Qts than the Back Widow (which I'd probably avoid in a woofer--all other things being equal--but that's just my viewpoint). 

 

Chris

[Chris A]

What SPL are you driving them at?  It looks like you're actually driving them at the same level.  Do you have a way to measure a calibrated SPL, like a handheld SPL meter?

[erez]

OK

calibrate the mic and measure with high level (i have crown amplifier for the bass)

with no music its 35 dB(z)

 

 

 

 

 

Edited April 8, 2021 by erez

[Chris A]

That's not close to 100 dB--which is my point.  It looked like your microphone level may not have calibrated to absolute SPL, above.  If it is calibrated, then turn up the gain by about 35-40 dB, and take another measurement of each.  You really can't check at levels below 90-100 dB and get useful distortion data.

 

Chris

[erez]

ok' the wall is moving 😀

 

 

 

Edited April 8, 2021 by erez

[erez]

i don't know about the results, but the  black widow is more boomy and punchy.

here is the jbl vs BW in the same chart.

the jbl is more high in the low mid (~200hz)

the BW in more punchy (<100hz)

measure at 1.2 meter normal level

 

Edited April 8, 2021 by erez

[erez]

measure with white noise, put the horn in the same corner, 1m distance. 500hz cut.
i think the jbl is more high level and more flat.

[Marvel]

Peavey specs for the FH-1 are 58-500Hz (-3b at 58Hz), so the bottom end of the graph looks right on. They have the upper end past 500, closer to 800Hz

 

 

Peavey_FH-1.pdf

[erez]

thanks

i continue with the JBL

[Tom Mobley]

Both good, don't see how you can lose here.  I'd probably go with the 2226 "just because."

[JohnA]

I did not change out the BW 1504-4 woofer in my FH-1s.  The system was built for random users, outdoors, at my church and wanted it to be bullet-proof.  Below about 70 Hz, there is more distortion than fundamental.  It's easy to hear using sine waves, less so with music, as it fits in better.  For inside use a K-33 would be an excellent replacement.  A K-43, or Eminence equivalent, would be a good overall choice and allow higher power levels.  JBL's 2226H is the balls to the firewall choice with its 600 watt capacity, but it is an 8 Ohm driver.  I crossed it to a pair of Klipsch Pro subwoofers at 70 - 100 Hz and solved the distortion problem. 

 

FH-1s will readily respond to 1200 Hz and required a 3rd order crossover to smooth the response at a 1000Hz  crossover point.  That made protecting my 902-8B on 511B horn easy, though. 

 

If you can't find it, I will give you my crossover design.  It is, however, driver specific.