LarryC

---------------- On 4/10/2004 8:13:38 AM DeanG wrote: It's funny -- I have no idea what it would sound like with RFI or EMI bleeding into the system...I do know some areas people live in are more prone to the problem than others.... ---------------- I had big RFI problems in the past, as intrusion of radio and buzzing on my phono, probably worsened by the high gain needed for an MC cartridge. This area (DC/Maryland) is supposed to be notorious for RF. The problem got worse when I switched the preamp to "record," which un-shorts the unused inputs as I understand it. It seemed to be helped by packing aluminum foil around the inputs/outputs behind the pre, supposedly to help screen it out. Unfortunately, the Cardas caps made little or no difference. Larry

---------------- On 4/9/2004 9:46:44 PM HornPenguin wrote: I tried the turntable in two other inputs, CD and "spare". It sounded equally as bad as if I had it in the phono input.... From the information that I gathered here and from testing, I now believe that the phone cartridge is not compatable with the phono input on the ARC. Most likely it is the lower impedence MC type. I should probably purchase as new MM cartridge. Brad ---------------- Brad, FWIW, I would come to the opposite conclusion. The Audio Technica is most certainly a moving magnet cart, and it's output is well-suited to an MM-based phono input, which the 9 most likely has. Moreover, a more up-to-date MM cart, such the excellent suggestions Wolfram made in the other thread, will deliver much the same output level as your AT! I would humbly suggest that MDeneen is right -- have your 9 checked out, especially since things work so well with your NAD. MC's frequently have output levels that are too low. You have to pay a lot of attention to output voltage specs, and be prepared to buy a phono pre. Larry

---------------- On 4/9/2004 7:45:09 PM HornPenguin wrote: Can anyone identify if my cartridge is MM or MC? If it is MC, then I guess that type is compatable with the NAD, explaining why it sounds okay with that preamp. Can I use an MM cartridge on my Yamaha turntable? ---------------- On 4/9/2004 7:29:03 PM D-MAN wrote: Sounds like an impedance mismatch alright. Try different inputs; if that fails, then deal with the resistor mod.... A MC cartridge is not supported by the phono section of your preamp as far as I know, however all MM cartidges are. Good luck DM ---------------- ---------------- Horn, While I can't find info on the AT 554, current AT models designated as AT-plus-a 3-digit number are all MM (moving magnet) with healthy outputs of 3.5 to 5.0 mv (5 cm/sec). To my knowledge, pre-amps with inputs labeled "phono" regularly have the extra gain AND the RIAA equalization needed to accommodate these MM carts. However, more and more preamps in recent years have been "line stage" models withOUT phono inputs. If the SP-9 has a phono stage labeled as such, a MM cart should have a comparable sound to that from so-called "line" inputs like CD players, tuners, etc.-- in other words, just like it does with your NAD. So, maybe your SP-9's phono input needs repair. If the 9 is a tube unit (I'm sure it is), it probably has specific phono tubes and perhaps even one of those is bad. FYI, MC carts have much lower outputs, but over a very wide range; low-output MCs can range from below 0.1 mv to 0.3 or 0.5, while higher-output MCs can deliver 1.0 to even 3.0 mv (at 3.5 or 5cm/sec). As you can see, a 3.0 mv MC could probably be handled by a phono input that handles a 3.5 mv MM. However, many pre-amps don't have enough phono gain to bring a lower-output cart's output up out of the noise floor, requiring a phono-pre that can handle those low voltages. To my knowledge, these all must plug into a line input, not an RIAA phono input.

---------------- On 4/8/2004 10:06:51 PM garymd wrote: A little out of my price range Rick. Anyone ever heard this one?: http://shopping.netsuite.com/s.nl/c.ACCT106601/sc.2/category.270/it.A/id.230/.f ---------------- Gary, pricier Clearaudio moving coils in my system have been bright and not tracked very well. To clear up those issues, you might have to go to http://shopping.netsuite.com/s.nl/c.ACCT106601/sc.2/category.270/it.A/id.320/.f Larry

Hear, hear, Boomac! I think the forum has been especially subdued lately, which I don't fully understand. While it's been a little turbulent, I think increased attention from the moderators is starting to help. I'd like to see it pick again, and to see more interest surface for this year's Indy day -- last year's was very interesting! Larry

Trey said June 11-13 in post # 22 or so on p. 2 of the "Trip to Indy II" thread.

Just about everything I've ever put into my system has gone through a break-in.

Oops, I think I misunderstood. The recordings are late '50s, the CDs made later. Sorry

edit

---------------- On 3/25/2004 1:51:22 PM Allan Songer wrote: The Power Plant P300 put out enough juice to power not only the CD player, but my preamp and turntable as well. It generated a PERFECT 117 volt at 60hz. BINGO--problem solved! But I also noticed that my turntable LOVED the prefect current as well--the AC synchro motor thrived! And the noise floor was lowered enough for me to hear a difference as well. ---------------- I totally agree with this. It regenerates pure sine wave power. Unfortunately, the price the last I looked is about where Allan says it is. I only use it to run my CD player, DAC, turntable, and tape decks, but with GREAT, undeniable sonic benefit. I didn't find much advantage for the preamp, but don't have great voltage variations. Be aware these use perhaps twice the power they generate and produce considerable heat. I believe the "300" is supposed to be its approximate maximum wattage output. Larry

I have limited info, and know others will have much more: somewhere in the past, I picked up a 1956 TWO-track stereo reel-to-reel pre-recorded tape, Charles Munch/Boston Symphony's recording of the Berlioz Symphonie Fantistique,about as early as stereo appeared. FOUR-track pre-recorded R2R stereo recordings (which, unlike 2-track, you could turn the reels over to play the "other side") were available by 1960, and I'm certain stereo LPs were available by then, as good CD perf's from the late 1950's are available (R2R was practically dead before it started). Record companies issued both mono and stereo LPs of the same recording for several years after that. Larry

All I know is what I was told (in 1994), that some statement in Klipsch files said this was a change in 1961-1963. Perhaps more details are available from Klipsch. Barring that, I suspect the only way to know is to go into the bass bin, take out the woofer, and look. My pics should help you determine it right away. Removing the woofer in K-horns of that vintage requires removing the wingnuts and angle iron from the side nearest the bin opening, loosening the wingnuts considerably on the far side, pulling the board away from the motorboard, and sliding it out. I did find, though, that the weather-stripping sealing the mounting board to the motorboard was deteriorated and gummy, so you may need to have new stripping handy to remount the board. Hope this helps. Larry

Regarding airborne hum possibilities, my suggestion is that you move some of those things away from the speaker, including the fridge (as well as stopping it) if it's immediately on the other side of the wall between them, and see if the hum decreases/stops. Moving my source of airborne hum away from the speaker reduced the hum and seemed to prove it was in fact the source.

---------------- It is extremely unlikely that the hum is being induced in the speaker wires. ---------------- However, I've had the recent experience of hum being directly induced in the woofer even without the speaker wires attached, by a strong electromagnetic field (from a variac) very close to the speaker. The bass horn's efficiency magnified it to audibility.

---------------- On 3/23/2004 10:32:03 AM arj wrote: ...i am Very happy with Redbook..could not notice that great a difference with SACD to actually buy a player as well as new remastered titles (So very few...especially of groups one would want to own) ---------------- The few SACDs I've bought have not sounded good on my non-SACD CD player. Instrumental balances shifted around in odd ways and some instruments had a vague, unclear sound. I guess this is because my player played the "CD" layer: two of those SACDs sounded much better on a friend's SACD player set to play the SACD layer -- but had the same poor sound when he set it to play the CD layer. Am I correct in inferring that a regular CD player may not bring out the best quality in some SACD's? I myself am not buying any more SACDs because of this. Larry

---------------- On 3/18/2004 7:36:48 AM Tom Mobley wrote: I'll look around for those recordings. What labels were they on? Something I could find at Amazon? Tom ---------------- Tom, Many recordings of the organ works; I have a favorite oldie on Columbia, Bach Great Organ Favorites by E. Power Biggs, CBS MK 42644. The Passacaglia is on track 13. Others might chime in with their favorites. A long-standing, spirited favorite of the Saint-Saens is also an oldie but has good deep organ pedal: Boston Sym under Charles Munch, RCA 09026-61500-2. The slow movement starts on track 2. The last movement (track 4) also has the organ, which goes to the 32.7 C at the ending. Hope this helps. Larry

---------------- On 3/17/2004 4:21:12 PM Tom Mobley wrote: ...After I first got them set up I got out one of the Stereophile test CD's and tried it, seemed like the response died off between 40 and 50Hz.... ---------------- Tom, While I don't have measuring equipment, I've used certain recordings to get a qualitative handle on deep bass from my K-horns. The Bach Passacaglia in C minor for organ heads right down to a low 32.7-Hz "C" within seconds of opening, and the Saint-Saens "Organ" symphony reaches low 34-Hz D-flats in the slow movement. There may be a problem if you can't hear and feel those low tones. These were very weak on my K-horns before the inserts were removed, but are nice and strong now. According to those factory notes, the inserts were used between 1961 and 1963. It would be interesting if yours had them, too.

Craig, Very recently -- the blocks were removed in the first week of March, and I re-mounted the woofers within a week. The build-up to that took a lot longer because of uncertainties about whether the blocks were really the problem and whether they could be removed without irreparable damage. My decision to move came after several things seemed to show these speakers had the potential to generate powerful low bass in my room, e.g., the temp 15WK, and Gary's report on Tom Longo's 2003 K-horns, which sealed the deal for me, since my drivers and network would be identical to his. Does that answer your question? Guy and Wolfram -- I didn't mean to leave the impression that I was always unhappy with them. I was very unhappy initially, but became more and more satisfied as I upgraded my system. It's actually been sounding very good over the past year or two, especially after I got a tube amp and the AK-4 helped improve a very peculiar blending problem between the three horns on each side. It was just that I always knew from what I'd heard before that they should be a lot more imposing. Larry

---------------- On 3/17/2004 12:49:05 PM DeanG wrote: I find it remarkable that Klipsch knew so little if anything about the inserts -- clearly seen in the Transparent Klipschorn below. http://forums.klipsch.com/idealbb/files/plexi.jpg"> At any rate, welcome to the world of the AK-4 Klipschorn!! ---------------- Dean, I think what you're seeing in the transparent horn is the splitter, the triangular cross-section piece on the forward wall of the first stage that points toward the rear -- take another look at my diagram. These blocks were on the rear wall of that first stage pointing forward, and were paired above and below the 13" X 3" throat -- they would have shown up rearward of the splitter and both slightly above and slightly below it. I think that 30 years between the speakers' manufacture and my asking about it had erased that institutional memory. And, yes, I do agree re the AK-4.

Around 1980, I bought this pair of 1962 mahogany laquer Klipschorns, KB-ML 1A836 and 1A837, from a friend, their second owner, who was vaguely dissatisfied with their sound: As I also came to think they didn't sound very well-balanced, I soon updated the drivers and crossovers. This unexpectedly produced a very peaky, uncomfortable sound. Because the problem seemed to be in the upper range, I sent the tops to Klipsch to have them tested and reworked as necessary. Klipsch modernized the top section, flush-mounted the tweeters, and shipped them back all without charge! My 1985 letter to Audio in praise of this act is on pp. 174-175 of the Barrett and Klementovich biography of Paul Wilbur Klipsch. The speakers sounded better, but still seemed not to have the large, powerful sound Ive always associated with K-horns. Numerous equipment changes over the years helped but never solved it in my mind. Then, around 1994, while changing out the woofers, I was astonished to see these wooden block inserts attached immediately above and below the other side of the 13" X 3" opening to the throat in the first stage of the bass horn: I contacted Klipsch and faxed them the following cross-section diagram of the bass horn throat. The inserts, which were pyramidal wood blocks, are marked in pink in the diagram. Also shown is a separate woofer mounting board, which was apparently discontinued in the early 1970s: Aside from the mounting board and blocks, this portion of the K-horn, including the splitter, ½-inch plywood motorboard, 3" slot width, and 3" front-to-back width of the first horn stage, is supposed to have been standard in K-horns since at least 1961. This is a picture of the inside of one of the bass bins at the start of this project (the green items are anti-resonance strips): Because of the 32-year interval between manufacture and my query, current Klipsch staff were not aware of the inserts. Notes found in the files indicated that this was a production change between 1961 and 1963, purpose unstated. I asked whether the blocks could be responsible for what I thought I was hearing in the middle range and bass, and whether they could be removed. Klipsch engineers were not sure about the possible sonic effects, and doubtful that they could be pried out without damage to the motorboard. Given these uncertainties, I looked at what else might be responsible for the problematic sound. For example, Id had the speakers in a series of inadequate rooms some were too long, some had incomplete corners, and my current room is small and has a badly-located glass-panel door. Perhaps these rooms just couldnt produce good bass. New components and the AK-4 upgrade which promised terrific bass never seemed to fully deliver. I was also aware that Klipsch had had to undertake a major change in its drivers when Electro-Voice discontinued the powerful 15WK woofer a year or two before these horns were made (the original drivers and network were long gone at this point), and wondered if the blocks were part of this change. More recently, I was able to locate and try out a pair of 15WKs. For the first time ever, the bass became very powerful and impressive, although it did not complement the overall sound. Also around this time, GaryMD heard a pair of 2003 K-horns that he felt produced far better bass in a room probably not that much better than mine. By some sort of logic and intuition, these experiences led me to conclude that, rather than the room, the problem was almost certainly the blocks. I again raised the issue with Klipsch and asked them to consider further the likely effect of the blocks. After review by Roy Delgado, Jim Hunter, and Mark Kauffman, the view was conveyed that the blocks were probably originally intended to improve the upper response of the low frequency horn, around the 400-500 Hz range, but that they would hurt the bass. Now that all the signs pointed in the same direction, I arranged for a local woodworking/antiques restoration firm to come to my place to remove the blocks. The prevailing view was that, unless the blocks could be pried out without damage, sections of the motorboard would have to be cut out and replaced by gusseted and glued sections of baltic birch plywood. As it turned out, the expert woodworker was able to use a hammer and pry bar to break the old glue and pry out the blocks and long staples that held them in without damaging the motorboard. Below are pics of (1) the blocks, (2) the horn mouth now without the blocks, and (3) GaryMD holding up a block to show the size and shape. After reassembly, Gary and I were immediately astonished at the increased power and depth of the bass! Cellos and basses were now full and dramatic where before they had been pallid and sometimes hard to hear. Lower mid-range instruments had a far more natural, real-life fullness, and even upper mid-range instruments were fuller and more connected with the bass. It was not easy to believe that they were the same speakers. So, am I all set? NO! something was still not right! Violins were shrieky in the upper, E-string range, and response seemed thin below that. The E string, the highest on the violin, sounds at 680 Hz, and the apparent peak was centered above that, most likely too high to be directly affected by bass horn output. But, if the upper part of the bass horn output were depressed, would it not leave higher frequencies standing out as a relative peak? It didnt seem difficult to subjectively assess this: the AK-4 crossover point between bass and mid-range horns is 450 Hz, easily "heard" in the mind's ear as the nearly-identical 440-Hz "A" used in tuning an orchestra, and the frequencies below this would be produced predominately or entirely by the bass horn. It seemed that something was lowering the upper range output of the bass horn. The only remaining major difference I knew of between my horns and todays, for which the current network and drivers are designed, was the separate woofer mounting board. Perhaps, after removing the blocks had reduced the 400-500 Hz range, the additional thickness of the 13" X 3" passage now reduced it too far. Klipsch staff thought it would increase compression at the throat, but were not sure of the effect. Below is a pic of the mounting board in place, sans woofer, showing the more extended passage combining the mounting board and motorboard throat, compared with not having the mounting board in place as seen in the pic before last: Mark Kauffman of Klipsch advised mounting the woofer directly to the plywood motorboard, using the largest wood screws that would fit through the woofer mounting holes. Carting the woof to the local Ace Hardware, I determined that #14, 1¼" screws would just fit through the basket mounting holes and reach nearly all the way through the plywood. I then used the bolt-holes in the mounting board as a template to locate and pre-drill the eight new holes in the motorboard, using this helpful gizmo: Finally, using the helpful lower mounting board rail to hold the woof up until the first two screws were started, I was able to tightly secure the woofer directly to the motorboard: Astounding success, at last! The whole range of both speakers now sounds just right powerful, very clear bass, full, accurate, even mid-range and highs. Well-deserved thanks go to the very committed and helpful staff at Klipsch! It is remarkable that this dedication and expertise continues to be available from the company that built these classics 42 years ago. I also want to express great thanks to GaryMD, whose quick, accurate judgments of sound and speaker quality were extremely helpful and supportive while I puzzled through what, if anything, was wrong, and what to do about it. I think I finally have the real K-horns that I bought over two decades ago. Larry

---------------- On 3/12/2004 2:50:36 PM Proko03 wrote: Wolfram and Max, ... recorded live in Berlin, yours truly in the orchestra. And yes, I did play under Karajan ... I can recall playing, and will carry with me forever, ... the hours, too few, spent with Carlos Kleiber. proko03 ---------------- Proko, Maybe I missed it -- what instrument did you play? Thanks, Larry

---------------- On 3/10/2004 7:46:52 PM garymd wrote: ...one of the great discoveries for me was Chopin's Piano Concertos 1 & 2. The particular CD I have is Martha Argerich on piano & Charles Dutoit conducting the Montreal Symphony Orchestra. EMI recording from 1998. I have nothing to compare to since I'm a beginner here but this particular recording is very good. If anyone has a favorite recording of these pieces, I'd appreciate a recommendation. ---------------- I'm not familiar with that recording, the music is a great find. I think Woodog and Wolfram are high on Argerich and Dutoit and the Montreal are exceptional, so its gotta be good. I've never found the hyped Evgeny Kissin/Moscow Philharmonic CD to be inspired (he was only 12). My favorite is a 1988 Naxos recording by -- bear with me, I'd never heard of these folks -- István Székely, piano and the Budapest Symphony Orch conducted by Gyula Németh. To me, this one has the great delicacy and feeling of the kind I like in Chopin. Why don't you borrow it and see what you think? Larry

---------------- On 3/8/2004 12:53:03 PM John Albright wrote: I would like some recommendations for lively string ensembles. . . I also think small groups like string quartets might be a good way to get into the music. What do y'all recommend? ---------------- John, I would recommend considering some of the following very great works. I don't know about recording availability. Beethoven: "Archduke" Piano Trio, Op. 97, some very noble music indeed. I have a Kempff/Szeryng/Fournier LP. Beethoven: Middle-period String Quartets, Op 59 Nos. 1, 2, and 3, and Op. 74, the "Harp." The Emerson Quartet is nearly unbeatable. Beethoven: "Triple" concerto for violin, cello and piano. This is one GaryMD especially likes. The Perlman, Yo-Yo-Ma, and Daniel Barenboim (piano and conductor) is a fireball recording which I strongly recommend: EMI 5-55516-2. Gary bought a DVD of this to both see and hear it performed. Mendelssohn: String Octet, Op. 20. Driven from beginning to end. The Academy Chamber Ensemble is very good: Phillips 420-400-2. Another fine work is Schubert's "Trout" Quintet for violin, viola, cello, string bass and piano. I don't have a recording to recommend, unfortunately. Hope this helps. Larry

---------------- On 3/5/2004 2:01:52 PM fini wrote: Ed, I'd like to not have to remove the shell from my PU (that sounded a bit odd, eh?). I'm thinking they'll have to go face down, HF sections removed (and fit in there somewhere). Can anyone give me a clear size of the "home plate" shape of the Khorn, as seen from above (I.E. the five sides)? ---------------- Fini, Go to http://www.hifilit.com/hifilit/Klipsch/1957k.jpg -- Someone needs to confirm, but I do not think the dimensions have changed since then! The top section of my B-style, including the insert, is 13.25" high (I myself like the B-style better). My home plate is 31.25" wide across the front, the parallel sides are only 12", the converging sides (which go along the wall) are 22.25", and the tip-to-front distance (max, measured perpendicular to the front plane) is about 27 3/8". Yes, take off the side grills, fastened on by famous wingnuts. Taking off the top, also held on by wingnuts (at least on mine), is a non-difficult two-person job. You need two folks anyway. Larry

---------------- On 3/3/2004 7:36:38 PM DTLongo wrote: ...it appears I am outta luck tone-control or equalizer-wise. Subjectively, the Jolida seems to be a little bass-shy, at least with my Khorns...So far, that combo is working well and it sounds great. ---------------- Tom, Congratulations! I've not had tone controls for at least two decades, and don't miss them a bit -- they never seemed to do exactly what was needed, nor did my '70's-era preamp with a 3- or 5-band equalizer. A good break-in period generally makes the bass fuller and removes initial closed-in hardness. Enjoy!