Deang

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.

And I thought I walked alone. Absolutely wonderful stuff John. I'm surprised you didn't mate the cabinet to the shape of the bass bin though -- still, very impressive.

Almost time to change that signature Craig.

LOL: That's about the truth with Scalas, Belles, and Klipschorns -- but the Cornwalls aren't quite so sensitive. However -- 55 wpc is more than enough. The additional headroom for delivering clean dynamic peaks is important. "...don't know if 55wpc is enough. In reading this forum for a few weeks now, the general consensus seems to be more power is greatly beneficial." 55 watts constitutes "more power". Many of the discussions revolving around power are pretty much centered on comparing 3 watts of SET to 30 watts of push-pull. For hard driving rock -- 50 watts is more than you really need.

John, Artto wasn't attacking you, but being critical of the statement you quoted -- in context. Artto caught himself though. Silver does not 'oxidize', it tarnishes. "...silver doesn't oxidize at room temperature. The culprit is sulfur, which reacts with silver to form a tarnish that silver polish removes." O.K. -- so what's the problem here?

Good suggestions by everyone, and a couple of things in this thread I never knew. You really didn't do a very good job of describing the sound -- you only said what it is doing. What kind of repetitive noise? Clicking, ticking, ringing, crackling -- what does it actually sound like? Are you 100% sure it's the tweeter?

Interesting stuff John. I do like silver inside the cabinet between the drivers and crossover -- I just think copper sounds more 'natural' to me when used between the amp and speakers. Of course, that's with my RF-7's, and so doesn't mean this is what others would think with their speakers -- as you have evidently found out. Enamel coated Litz wire (magnet wire), like what Cardas uses, or poly coated like the Goertz -- won't oxidize either.

Uh well, that's not exactly what I had in mind. Just think SET is best experienced under those kind of conditions. Sometimes I miss the Apollos for that. No big deal though, it just means I have to turn it up a little more to get the all there quality the Apollos gave me at 75-80 db. I think maybe since SET is low powered, some of it might be related to the amp getting into the tube's sweet spot sooner. I just Mark's post. Funny. Might sound better to put the ST-70's on the woofers and something like the Paramours on the horns. I tried the solid state on the bottom/ tubes on the top thing once -- and thought it sounded wierd.

I agree with most of that. I do like the change quality caps exhibit on the signature in crossovers. Since I do near-field listening, the changes definitely were for the better. As far as cables go -- I like cables with simple geometries, good shielding, dielectic, single ended inputs -- and relatively cheap.

Good idea. I like it.

Thanks for the links John. Sweet.

Most of it, 99% of it in fact -- is voodoopoopoo. Let me ask you this though. Two capacitors: One film and foil, the other mylar -- both measure electrically the same in uF and almost the same in ESR. Why do they sound different once placed in the circuit?

Still got those hooked up huh? You should check them out late at night with the lights off, a good cup of joe and a smoke. They'll put you in the Twilight Zone. Any other time --- watch those tweeters big guy.

Hmmm. Good point. I was just going to add things to the thread, and leave it 'as is'. We could tweak the thread as we go along. Maybe we do need some kind of collective governing process. Might be best just to let the 'Solder Slingers of the Roundtable' handle the technical stuff (Leo, Eric, Lynnm, MarkD, you, etc) -- you guys usually agree with each other on the electrical stuff. I could have some general titles, and anyone interested could contribute to it at their leisure. This might work, because someone like me certainly doesn't have any interest in answering a question entitled: "Why are my tubes oozing green stuff and shooting blue sparks all over the room?" My thoughts were centered more on 'sound'. 'Why I like this over that and why' kind of thing. There is not usually a 'right' or 'wrong' with this -- just an opinion based on some general experience and listening.