LarryC

Pretty good orchestra and leadership (IMO)!

My recollection is a Beechcraft Bonanza, a V-tailed aircraft, as I recall from around 1960. I'm not sure, but got the impression from the dealer at the time that he regarded it as an extravagance. Wouldn't that have been pre-Interstate?

Setting azimuth on AJ Conti's Basis Vector arm is quite easy, if you have the required very small hex key, 0.050", I believe. The arm has a dual pivot system that uses an unbalanced tonearm counterweight to create a rotating force counteracted by the adjustment (I don't understand it beyond that statement). Nice, effective, and stable. I got a set of handled hex keys for this arm that are a lot easier to use than the usual l-shaped ones.

Galen Carol (www.gcaudio.com) has a very nice discussion of phono alignment, including these paragraphs on azimuth: Azimuth: Even more critical (in my opinion) to proper set-up than VTA, is cartridge azimuth. Unfortunately VTA gets all the press, therefore many people are not aware of the importance of this adjustment. What is azimuth? Looking at the cartridge body from the front, it is the left to right tilt of the cartridge body. Contrary to popular belief, azimuth is not necessarily correct with the sides of the cartridge body are perpendicular to the record surface. What we're actually looking for is the correct relationship of the stylus to the groove. Unfortunately, the vast majority of styli are not mounted perpendicular to the bottom of the cartridge body, thus making azimuth set-up by sight alone erroneous. And with the current trend toward decreasing stylus size, even seeing the stylus without the aid of magnification borders on the improbable. The "eyeball" or "mirror" method should only be employed if other more sophisticated methods are unavailable. The gold standard for determining the correct azimuth is a dedicated cartridge analyzer or Fosgate Fozgometer from Musical Surroundings (see below). A test tone (typically 1kHz) is played on one channel while the analyzer looks at the output from the opposite channel. This crosstalk is a measure of cartridge separation. When the crosstalk is at its lowest, and equal on both channels, the azimuth is optimized. If you can obtain a test record, an oscilloscope or accurate digital voltmeter can be substituted for the dedicated cartridge analyzer mentioned above. Lacking the test equipment previously described, other less sophisticated methods may be employed to set azimuth. The simplest alternative, connect one channel of the cartridge out of phase with the other (simply reverse the + and - on one channel only) and play a test record with a mono track or a monophonic record (preferably one with simple instrumentation). Out of phase information cancels so adjust azimuth by tuning for least output. From Harry Weisfeld at VPI comes yet another rather simple method, requiring only a mono record and a pair of ears. He suggests that a simple mono recording of voice should provide a stable, non-wavering image, precisely centered between the two speakers. Adjust the azimuth to achieve optimum results. This method works well if you’re practiced enough to know what to listen for, though most listeners would be better served by using one of the tests outlined previously. Best option, use the Fozgometer. We recommend using the Fozgomet I set mine by eye, which is probably not as good as Carol's approach, especially since he says styli are not always set precisely on the cantilever. I'm reluctant to get that complicated, however. Unfortunately, cartridges differ dramatically in how easy they make it for the eyeball. In sharp contrast, Transfigurations have a beautiful vertical white line on the front of the cart that you can line up precisely with its reflection when you set it down on a mirror. Some time ago, Benz carts had multiplaner shapes which made it impossible to set by eye. They don't look like that now. At any rate, I don't buy cartridges like that.

OK, my plea was to go back to what made the Corn's I and II so attractive long-term. If it's more than just the Xover point, so be it. But, the last time I heard them (several years ago), the C III had the lesser Heresy treble, not the larger-speaker breadth of the C I and II. That has to hurt sales and reputation over time, it seems to me. JMHO.

I had balled-up wax removed from one ear and regained my hearing in that ear! I wouldn't have believed that had caused a sudden shutdown in hearing treble and mids in that ear.

I agree totally. I mostly have hearing in only one ear, and would't dream of going to mono or doing anything else based on theories you or I haven't tested. Diz Rotus said: I'd leave it the way it is also. You might turn your good ear toward the center. If you went to a concert, the band wouldn't all move to one side of the stage. Sound will still come at you from all directions. Hopefully this is a temporary adjustment. If not, you will still be able to enjoy music. Beethoven still loved and created music after his deafness. Right, sound comes from all directions. You'll find that you constantly make small adjustments to your head position, from which the multiple directions the sound comes from will create the multiple inputs that our very complicated ear-brain system will re-create the stereo listening effect for you. Don't fall for some poorly-based mythology that says you'll hear only from one side or that you have to switch to mono to adapt your hearing to your system. Try it and see, and let us know. Poor Beethoven -- he could never hear a note of music after he became totally deaf, after 5-10 years (around 1810 or later). He had to listen to music in his mind's ear, i.e., in his imagination. It was absolutely stunning that he could still hear and compose for instruments with purely that ability to imagine, and that includes what any brand new combination of instruments would sound like. It was only in his late period, after 1820 that he had occasional lapses in correctly writing for instrumental and vocal combinations. He still had an outstanding sense of individual and combined instrumental and vocal sound. Like this

I would not be overly enamored of the term "upgrade". The speakers you list can sound quite different to your ears, but all may not agree with particular judgements, as you can see from all the opinions. I much prefer the Heritage sound, like the Chorus, Forte, La Scala, and of course the Klipschorn. The K-horn has bass extending to 32 Hz where the La Scala does not; the others have good and adequate bass. What YOU have to do is listen to models you're interested in, as the Chorus sounds very different from the RF-7. Only you can determine whether you'll like it. I'd be a little cautious about jumping into crossovers and new drivers like tweeters, at least until you can hear them. They may be OK, after all. Good luck!

Like Schu says, if it's changed too much it's not even Klipsch any more. Some of these DIY adventures are liked by some individuals who hear or own them, but I haven't liked at least one that I heard. So, I intuitively like what PWK designed, like the K-600 -- it really worked and has been very popular with many fans and has stood the test of time. Dunno if everyone would say the same for the FastTrac. My 2 cents' worth and vote is for the K-601.

So, did anyone hear that? Chad?

I wish Klipsch would use this big-change opportunity to enlarge the mid horn and drop the lower Xover point from 800 to 600 and get the bigger, broader sound of the older Cornwalls! The Heresy treble of the current models (at least as I last heard them) just isn't worthy of the larger, more expensive cabinet IMO.

60 Minutes had a very good segment on Horowitz several years ago, which brought out his personality IIRC.

This Impromptu has six flats! It's from the first set of two, both written the year before his death. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impromptus_(Schubert)

To me, that melody, harmony, and counterpoint are like a great spoken oration meant for the ages. I like the great fun and happiness he shows in how he removes his hands from the keys after the last note.

If you have subforums, you forget where you put or saw the other interesting posts, and it becomes impossible to manage where things went to. I second your above reasons as well.

One person who added a lot in the day was "Paul Parrot", who is very articulate and very knowledgeable about classical music. I thought he made great contributions. He had an unbelievably good sense of humor. He seems to have run afoul of a previous moderator and was banned -- I never understood or agreed with that, speaking just for me. However, the forum was much more dynamic and broadly based in those days, so his returning now might seem dated and a tad out of place. I don't know of anyone else like that, fortunately.

Birch ply are usually the lower rung of K-horns, lacking the finely finished and veneered front and top panels of the "C" and "B" styles. Go look at www.hifilit.com and click on the PWK logo to become more familiar with this issue. I don't have a good sense of prices, but I'd say less than half the $3,000 you mention. I also don't get a sense of your room's geometry. Triangular is not suitable for K-horns. Rectangular as the basic room shape is probably mandatory for fit and good sound. However, I'm not sure from the pic that your room has the good, complete flanking corners that are needed for best room-filling sound.

The pyramidal blocks are the "splitters" which are apparently fundamental to the throat design. They apparently have been in every K-horn bass bin since time immemorial. You are confusing them with the pyramidal blocks that I described. You should not mess with them or try to reshape them in any way, IMO. You should look for bass horn expertise, such as Dana (D-man), if you can reach him, or Jim Hunter, if you want an explanation of what the splitter does and why it's there. The subject is extremely complicated, involving bass wave lengths and directions and the like. Note that the splitters are mounted on the BACK of the FRONT PANEL of the bass bin. They are immediately opposite the 13" X 3" slot, and on the front side of the horn throat passageway. The blocks I referred to are different. Those were on the FRONT of the MOTORBOARD, just above the 3" X 13" slot. This placed them on the back side of the horn throat passageway, opposite to the splitter. The splitters are on the FRONT side of the first stage of the bass horn, while the pyramidal blocks were on the BACK side of that passageway. The bottom line is that you should not fool with the splitters! These are entirely different from the blocks I was talking about. You would probably destroy some important way the bass horn throat works. There is no need to do that. The pyramidal blocks were a short-lived modification in K-horns made around 1971-73. They were gone by 1974. No one could recall their purpose by 2004. Also, be hesitant to remove the mounting board and rails, if you have them. That setup provides a longer passageway at the entry to the throat of the bass horn, so that removing anything in that area will alter the geometry of the bass horn throat, likely not in a good way. I think you may be trying to misapply what you're reading in my thread, which I don't think you fully understand, for an unstated purpose. What problem are you trying to solve? I can try to dig out those old pictures, but it wouldn't be easy. I don't think you'll need them.

Yes, vertical, but make absolutely certain that they aren't leaning.

I found the D/F very musical, and that's with classical music no less. The ballyhooed Jitterbug wasn't an improvement, so maybe consider waiting for others' comments.

Hi Tom! we once discussed looking to see if you had those unusual wedges in the throat of the bass horn,and possibly removing them. I'm glad you didn't, since I see you have a different woofer (a Jensen?) that may have been perfectly engineered to go with the original crossovers and bass horn configuration you got with these. I think your instincts told you that it sounded just fine and leave it alone and don't mess with it!! Thanks for writing! -- Larry

I agree re the phenollic for the mid -- this involves the character of the sound, and the TI in the tweeter contrasts with it too much for my tastes. I suspect the same is true re the woofer, since many bass notes are produced by the fiber cone, while many of the overtones are produced with either phenolic or TI mid and/or tweeter diaphragms (yes, bass overtones DO reach up into the tweeter's range!). This may very well artificially produce clearer bass notes, because the tweeter then reproduces clearer overtones. The trouble is, this can be an artificial clarity that DOES NOT BLEND WELL with the cone bass. I'd be careful about disturbing the even tone quality from top to bottom of the Corn II!

I would recommend the II's in any case. The mid horn is larger and is responsible for the special Cornwall sound IMO. I am not enthusiastic about the III's, with their slightly smaller mid horn and higher Xover point. Just MHO.

Oops, I just discovered the poll...

Hi Chad -- great progress! FWIW, I prefer the old square avatar pic instead of the round ones. The round ones appear to cut off interesting portions at the corners. Larry