mark1101

Well, my signature looks like crap and makes no sense now since it is multiple systems. Looks like a change is in order.

Happy Birthday Paul. Thank You Very Much.

OK, I had a birthday last week, and went in and bumped my age. Now the signature is wrecked. Is it possible to get back the small font with colors, separated columns, etc. I forgot how I did that. How do you get the small fonts back, colors, and separated columns?

When I was shopping for LaScalas I found a dealer in S.C. to have the best prices I could find anywhere. Hundreds cheaper than Atlanta dealers, as one might expect. However, they all were willing to order Heritage products. When asked they all responded positively almost immediately. The SC dealer said he had various Heritage products on the floor. This was last summer.

Dean, True, you do have to go through the Ebay thing which could be easy or hard, short or long wait. Maybe an insane drive, like I did. But you may not have to do the restoration thing at all. However, if you do go through all this what comes out is about a $2,000 savings, minimum. And I still say it can be done in far less time than he already has waited. By the way I did it. I have '90 LaScalas, absolutely mint with ALK-3s in them. You don't think they are "equivalent" to what you can buy today? If not, would it be worth spending another $2,000 + to make up the difference? Just trying to make a point.

I agree that you should get a refund and end the nonsense. A used pair will sound equivalent and there are various options to make them look like new again. In Atlanta and a single dealer in S.C. I found new LaScalas anywhere from $3400 - $3900. You could buy at least 3 pair on ebay for that cost.

I read your complaint and disagree somewhat with what I have read from the others here. You complain on the Khorns but said the amp makes your other speakers sound good. That's what got me thinking it may not be too big a problem, if one at all. You should be able to tell from your experience alone if it is grossly bad and needs a repair. Many on this forum have not had the opportunity to hear different Scott amps. And surely if something is in fact wrong, Craig will fix it ASAP. Or modify it for more bass response. But you can see what I have below, and now I have an LK-72 as well (which I have not heard yet). The 2 I have sound different, and the 299 is definitely brighter than the other. Mine is great, not shrill. But definitely brighter than the 222. Either you like it or you don't. I use a DBX EQ to adjust various source material, and I find myself brigning up the bass as well as accentuating the highs sometimes too. The DBX might be a solution for you. I think it may be what your ears were used to, and then connecting up the 299 was a big difference. In time a fresh rebuild settles down some and balances out. I did notice this point. I'm thinking that you just prefer something with a little better balance and more bass. But the 299 can be a fine amp. I hope it comes back home to your liking.

Gary, All this is making me realize we may all have a problem. Albeit I think yours may be worse than all of the rest of us. Buddy, you can confide in me anytime. And by the way... I may need your help down the line. Again, Happy Anniversary. I'm starting to feel weird about this.

Hey Gary, congrats. Mine is coming up shortly. Remember how much more money we USED to have? It sure continues to be a great ride though doesn't it?

And I sort of represent the other end of the spectrum. I'm a distortion freak . You can see the DBX EQs I use. With careful and minimal adjustments they can make a big difference. I know they are pro units but I do not have audible distortion. The trick is using them correctly. My Scott integrateds have tone controls that I leave flat.

I too use the EQs ever so slightly. Switching the unit on/off you can just barely hear a difference. In other words I'm very careful with the gain controls. Obviously distortion could be an issue. However, the source material I play is old Dead music and generally less than optimal recordings with large variations in the quality and sound levels. The EQs are perfect for bringing those type of recordings up to snuff and helping with the room when I want to "have a moment" and thump a little. When I play a new SACD or newly recorded Redbook, it's pure heaven with or without the EQs. But that's not what I do most of the time. So the EQs are a very handy tool for the 60s and 70s tunes.

If none of Mark's solutions are possible, there is another way without making mods. Take a look at the EQs I use. Each of the DBX products has variable gain controls that allow you to adjust the output signal into the amplifier individually per channel. Alot of folks don't like EQs on this forum. But I have had great results and swear by them. The DBX models below are decent units.

I have the 299A, excellent! See below. I have just purchased an LK-72 which I believe is the kit version of the 299C. It is being shipped to me right now, so I haven't heard it yet. I know it has more power though, and that's why I bought it. The 299A has plenty actually. I bought the 72 mostly to replace the 222 I have on my Las system. The 222 will move to the Heresy system. If I could find a more powerful 222, such as the 222D, I would buy that instead of another 299 model. That's just me. The 222 has an impressive sound different from the 299. Both are great but that little 222 is really something special after it has run for a couple of hours. Basically, I have probably just confused you more, but others will jump in on this.

Hey Dean, As I look at the picture the Khorns are certainly not the problem. It's that high school AV rack. What does the wife say about that? By the way the horns are gorgeous.

a lot Klipsch, You hit about the most sensitive spot on this forum anyone could have hit. Everyone is trying to just keep it light. Hang on dude. Your amp is safe with either guy.

Not trying to be a jerk here Ryan, but this was setup perfect. I think if you want to really get 800 HP, you'll need NOS (nitros Oxide System). Couldn't resist. Sorry. All in good fun.

Hey no problem Gary. This is a show I downloaded a while back. Not a super fidelity recording, but a classic soundboard. You will like it.

Sorry to cause such a stir. But this is all good (or good all) info. Right now I'm listening to The Dead 2/14/03 soundboard download with Joan Osborne (and Sammy Hagar on 1 tune)on the 222 system and I have to say the Auricaps are producing. It's excellent, absolutely heaven. I have been extremely busy lately and haven't done much listening.

I have found that the auricaps sound brighter in the 299 than in the 222. The 222 sems to sound flatter more balanced. But, since I heard both of these amps together before they were rebuilt, I can say the auricaps opened them up tremendously. I would also venture to say that the auricaps simply allowed the things to play to their true characteristics. In other words, both have auricaps and both still sound different. I thank everyone for their info here. Becasue I really need the eduaction on this before I make a rebuild decision. But I still say after reading everything here, noone has shown me that there's anything head and shoulders better for a Scott than what I already have. And I love the sound I'm getting now. Sounds like this helped me narrow it down to 2 or 3 types. Thanks again.

My 222 keeps sounding better for up to an hour, maybe 2. The detail blooms slowly on that one. In fact, the dynamic range seems to increase as well with time. I might be saying it wrong, but the sound keeps improving for that much time. I actually enjoy listening to it gradually achieve its peak prerformance. My 299 seems to get to best sound much sooner, maybe around 30-40 minutes.

Can anyone explain their expereince with the various brands of coupling caps in your Scott? For instance, my 222 and 299 have Auricaps and sound fantastic. However, I have nothing to compare them to. I just acquired an LK-72 this morning and will be getting it rebuilt of course. What caps do people recommend and why? I lack parts smarts. Thanks

What's the application? They can both be Cadillacs depending on how they are put to use. Or, they can be mis applied and cause undo additional spending (which will eventually happen anyway).

I like how he grouped both Bose and Klipsch together as crap. Apparently, 95% of all speaker owners have purchased crap. I kinda like my crap.

Holy Toledo, those are NICE cabinets. I just checked them out. If I was smart I would be trying to have prettier equipment. I am more for the GO than the SHOW right now. But I smell a possible WAF in the future which could cause banishment to the basement for sure. She has no idea about audio equipment. But if it was pretty......Nah. On second thought, I need a place I can spill a little homebrew now and then. Basements can be nice, no? Enough said for now. Thanks for all the info, and the fit and cabinet comments.