Deang

10 watts huh? Hmmm...just enough to run my tweeters

Klipschorns

Craig, What about large value NOS electrolytics that have been sitting on the shelf for decade or so -- should they be brought up on a variac before use? I don't think I can go along with the tube sweet spot thing. Yeah, I'm an expert. Seriously though -- The average plate dissipation goes up with audio output -- the sweetest spot is the one with the least distortion. In other words -- less distortion at 20 watts with a 50 watt amp than there is with 20 watts on a 30 watt amp. My guess is that those big Heritage horns just can't handle the full bandwidth of a good Ultra-linear amp without yanking the ears off.

I love my amps I love my amps I love my amps I love my amps Now go away Sunny -- no more taunting.

If you don't mind me asking -- where did you get the "slightly used" Telefunkens? Since they are both "12AX7s" -- they should spec out the same as far as gain. One should not be "louder than the other." What you are describing is the sound of a tube on it's down swing.

The two most dynamic speakers in the Klipsch lines are the Reference RB-5 and the LaScala. Food for thought if you place a high value on dynamics and have limited space. With your musical tastes, either a set of Heresy I's or RB-5's would work fine. If you go with the Heresies, You want the older ones. Either of these speakers, raised up, and placed near corners and angled into the listening room will give you plenty of bass. I actually prefer the Heresies over the Cornwall -- I think they have more coherency. Box me into a corner -- and I'm taking the RB-5s. Give me more money and it's the RB-75's.

I think you low watt guys are nuts -- but you're still my favorite people I bet those do sound awfully sweet on those K-horns -- now Sunny, all you need is some Chevelle to really torture test those amps -- right Craig? I think Craig's LaScalas are still tying to recover -- as well as his ears.

I refuse to believe it sounds better than that beautiful amp you built and posted about here a year ago. Certainly a different presentation -- but not "better". Is it?

!

!

!

Don, I use the M1

Hee hee -- I'm better now -- I just needed a good crap.

No. Those are different tubes, and not interchangeable.

I was thinking the same thing -- an issue with placement. Do put your ear to that thing and make sure the horn is working. It ure shouldn't sound worse with it on than off.

Any product, well thought out and executed -- will sound good. After a week of living with something well made and thought out -- becomes very easy to live with indeed. Hey, I'm getting ready to fire up the DQ-10's I just restored -- still one of the best sounding speakers to my ears -- and guess what? They ain't Klipsch! Ears old buddy, you need to up your medication -- some of the best sounding speakers ever made used $15 drivers. Ain't much in a driver that can't be fixed with a good crossover design. BTW - weren't most of those fancy Dynaudio drivers designed for car systems? Using great drivers doesn't mean the speakers will sound great -- just ask any DIY'er. It's about the total design package. The world needs more speakers like the Rocket. Maybe someday they will be hated by "audiophiles" as much as Klipsch, Polk, and Bose.

A depressing thread in a way. I think the HT thing is kind of depressing. I remember the first time I dropped HBO because I got tired of paying to see reruns. Geepers, how many times can you watch a freaking movie and still really enjoy it? I own about 2 dozen DVD's -- good ones. I might play one once in a blue m00n. I still enjoy going the theater. It's an event. If I want to see a good movie -- I'll go to the movies and watch it on a real big screen. I guess I just don't get it. If I want to see it again later (much later) -- I'll watch it on my $6K 2-channel system. Which I cannot believe if anyone heard -- would actually audibly notice there was not a center channel, or would actually care that there wasn't any rear channel information. My system can make you forget about those things very quickly. I'm not bragging -- I'm dead serious. I cannot believe there needs to be such a thing as a "center channel". It's retarded. Sure, if you got a 20 foot long wall -- but for Pete's sake -- three RF-7's along a 10 foot wall -- three freaking feet apart -- with left and right crushed up against the walls!? Most HT's I see are similiar to this. Gear stacked everywhere, and speakers sandwiched anywhere they'll fit. I would love to do a frequency response plot of these HT rooms. I feel a rant coming on. Some of you with extensive 2-channel experience, seem to lose a whole complement of chromosomes when discussing or setting up multichannel. What? Do sensical sound acoustic principles vanish when you add speakers to a system? So, what happens when you place drivers, overlapping and covering the same set of frequencies -- close together? What happens when you overload a room with acoustic information -- especially low frequencies? What happens when radiators are placed close to side walls? Hey, I guess it's only HT -- m00n, you should have stayed with the RC-7 and saved some money. I ran RC-7's in my 2-channel rig before I had the money for the RF-7's There isn't anything wrong with the RC-7. Not only that, but the crossover and driver configuration were specifically designed to handle dialogue. As far as the other material pumped through the center goes -- when I had the RC-7's -- I sure didn't think they were bass shy or short on dynamics. Remember placement is everything. If you really want to take this thing to the next level -- get a separate amp to push those mains and center. Don't spend another damn penny on speakers. As far as the dipole/monopole thing goes -- I thought dipole rears were the THX standard? If this is true -- then that means recording engineers have this very much in mind when mixing things up.

Sounds like the best idea is to give this idea a quick burial. You know me Craig -- always trying to push the envelope.

Say like -- put the tweeter on the 8 ohm tap, and the woofer on the 4 ohm tap?

Same as it ever was -- there is no such thing as "neutral". No preamp? -- I call that flat and sterile Why advice only from Heritage users -- have they cornered the market on preamp knowledge? Gee, I got some good info, but since I only have RF-7's, I suppose I should bow out now.

"...make sure they are tested and test well." Don't mean to sound rude -- but how does one do that? You can find what you are looking for at www.audiotubes.com

uh...I wuz kidding.

"It simply means that the substance has increased it's charge." Well then, from now on I'll only be using fully oxidized cables. A cable with a higher charge HAS to sound better than one with a lower one!!

"I just question whether or not this distortion audibly exists at 95 db, 10 feet from the speaker in a 15 x 20 room." If I'm reading what John said correctly, I believe he is saying the 'distortion' is an artifact produced by the pressure loading in the throat of the horn. I don't think the size of the room, or how far away you are would have much to do with whether you can hear it or not. I certainly can see where it would relate to SPL directly. 95db is what I feel to be the limit of what the Cornwall can do before the signature starts to go south. Lots of caulk got me to near 100db. "...But the advantage of motor linearity is more than offset by the problems that arise in the high pressures generated at the throat. Air is not an ideal gas, its pressure-volume relationship is not linear. At low pressures its not too bad, but as pressures increase it gets highly non-linear and results in audible distortion." Since I'm someone who doesn't seem to have a problem with a cone doing my midrange up to 2 kH, the above statement helps me to understand why that is. OTOH, It does seem that using superior drivers, and lenses with a larger throat area would offset much of the described problem for home use -- where SPL's rarely go over 100db. I think someone like Tom Brennen might say you are simply trading one type of distortion for another. With my feeble thinking, it does seem that IMD would be higher with the cone than the horn. What do we call the 'distortion' resulting from what you describe? Some form of doppler distortion? If I had those speakers, and knew what the hell I was doing -- I would probably like to hear them as a four-way. I have never liked the idea of bottling up the lower midrange in those bass bins, and then having it squished out. I wouldn't take the 15 incher past 200Hz. 200 to 1000 on the cones, and 1000 to 6000 on a nice squawker. I guess my point here is that I'm thinking the answer to the problem your talking about is to minimize the loading in the throat by removing the lower frequencies -- those that generate, and are responsible for the most amount of diaphram movement. Dropping the crossover points and adding another driver should allow for lower IMD in the cones, and reduce the loading distortion artifact in the squawker. Wonder what it would sound like to run two sqauwkers per speaker? Sharing the load would reduce distortion too. Neat stuff. I'd love to hear those things -- RF-7's on steroids.

LOL -- hmmm...good point as well. Well, it would have to be a 'work in progress'. I also see Sayles point about it becoming so big and convoluted that one might decide not to bother with it, and just ask the simple question anyways. I do like the idea of working with the search (for what the worthless thing is worth), and finding the best threads where the most asked questions are asked and answered -- and just copy them into the thread. I suppose we could really use the Webmasters help here to give it a nice clean look. For some reason, copied links into a post, when clicked, don't load properly.