chops

---------------- On 5/15/2004 8:21:40 AM Zbullet wrote: It seems I can only add 1 picture at a time. If I am wrong please tell me Cory ---------------- Doing it the way you are, which is also the easiest, you can only post one pic at a time. BTW, the pictures look good! Welcome to the forum!

---------------- On 5/14/2004 11:53:21 PM T2K wrote: Check the specs at this site. I think the Tractrix/tweeter is the same as a KLF-C7. I have 3 of these in walnut oil and am going to try them with my Chorus II's in a HT setup if I ever get the time. I can tell you that they are pretty good sounding speakers, much better than the smaller KG line. Whether or not they would match well with the quasi Heritage or any other line I can't say. I did sell a KT-LCR to a member here 6 or more months ago (before I bought the Chorus) hoping that he would give a review here regarding the match with his Forte's. Fat chance. Hope this helps. Keith ---------------- Well, if you're ever interested in selling another one later down the road, let me know. I just might buy one off of you!

I know someone on here has something to say.....

Ive seen the KT-LCRs on eBay several times now and wonder why they go for so cheap. I've seen those Academy ones go for 400-600 bucks! Other than the fact they only have 6" drivers instead of the 8" Academy, but wouldn't the KT-LCR match up better to my KG 5.5s?

Thanks picky-picky. I'll post some more pics tonight after work. Actuall, I should just update my website and show it there. Oh well, gotta go back to work now.

---------------- On 5/13/2004 1:13:13 AM formica wrote: ---------------- On 5/11/2004 10:47:23 PM michael hurd wrote: It is however, very inefficient, coming in at 88 db/w/m. It's sole purpose is to play loud and deep in a small enclosure, while requiring thousands of watts and hundreds of amperes of current to feed equally massive amplifiers. ---------------- That's unfortunately the physics of it... if you want max SPL and bass extension in a small enclosure, you'll end up with an inefficient driver. There are tradeoffs and we even see this in home audio with subs like the Sunfires, etc... I've been itching to experiment with a new driver for my car... and was actually thinking of trying a DIY type driver (Shiva, DPL, GR Research 12... etc...) I haven't modeled any yet so I don't know how they would perform in a relatively small sealed enclosure. I'd be looking for SQ and not SPL, as I don't see much need to go beyond 125db... either in car or home. Rob ---------------- There's a lot of people out there using the Shiva drivers in both large and small sealed or ported enclosures with excellent results.

---------------- On 5/12/2004 10:53:42 PM michael hurd wrote: I hit 127.4 db with two Jbl power series 10" in a small sealed enclosure, in the hatch area of an 86 honda civic. ( 0.69 cu ft each ) They were being powered by an older kenwood kac-626? or 606 amp, and that was a peak measurement with a coustic rta-33. Playing music, and not sine sweeps! Granted, the subs rolled off early, but had a much higher efficiency ( 92 db ), than some. Given their relatively short x-max they would not be bottom dwellers, and probably have worked better in a larger ported enclosure. ---------------- Funny you mention those Kenwood amps. I used to own both of those. They were great little amps, sounded great for the money and power, and never gave me a single problem. I had those amps for years too. I used them to bi-amp my front components in my old car ('96 Nissan 200SX SE-R). I miss that car, especially when the turbo was in it... 344HP at the crank!!!! Hey look, you can kinda see me in there. BTW, I was in 2nd gear there when I did that drive-by. jt1stcav took the pic!

---------------- On 5/12/2004 9:08:06 PM TheEAR wrote: chops, This single 15" bruiser should be all the subwoofin any non deaf human needs in a car.When you use a long throw monster like this powered by a serious amp...you can reach with ease over 125dB in the driver seat.Brain shaker deluxe ---------------- 125dB??!! Please, I already pegged out my Rat-Shack SPL meter at 130+ dB without even trying. I was just doing some testing and tuning, then the next track started before I could get to the volume! OOPS! Anyway, I decided to let it play at that volume as I climbed out of my car, looked at how much the sub was moving in the trunk, and was majorly surprised!! So far, I've only seen this sub move maybe a quarter of an inch max!! This was WAY, WAY louder than I would ever play it normally. Personally, I can't stand super loud music in a car, but I just wanted to make sure I had something that can handle anything I throw at it.

---------------- On 5/11/2004 10:47:23 PM michael hurd wrote: It is however, very inefficient, coming in at 88 db/w/m. ---------------- Mine is 87 dB @ 1W/1M. Did I mention this thing is over 40lbs by itself??!!! I have mine tuned and built more for what they call "SQL", not just SQ or SPL. Although I'm still in the break-in period, I can tell I've made the right choices.

---------------- On 5/12/2004 7:44:10 PM Tweek wrote: lookin good lookin good ---------------- Well, thank you!

False floor, kinda. Will look much better when done.

Behind the seat... HiFonics BX1500D (sub) AudioControl Epicenter And yes, that is a pair of Cardas interconnects!

Here's a few pics of my system. It's not completed yet, but close. Precission Power PCX 440 Alumapro 5 Farad Cap 3.87cf tuned to 33Hz (slot ported like Cornwalls!!!! )

that being said, i would have liked to experience what 172 dB would feel like, even if it isn't clean...i can imagine painful as the controls are made to crank it up from the outside of the truck. ha! ---------------- Actually, with hearing protection, it's not painful at all. What you have to look out for though is that bass is so low and loud, it can actually cause you to stop breathing!!!!! Painful?! NO.... Deadly?! MAYBE! I wonder how that Pioneer would compare to my freshly installed Rockford Fosgate RF3115 15" Power HX2 sub. It has a 4" voice coil and can handle musical peaks over 2000 watts. I'm only running 1500 watts to it though.

Well, jt1stcav pretty much summed it up for me. However, I was only 4 years old at the time. I didn't really notice the Cornwalls until we moved two more times and ended up here in Lakeland in '82. By this time, I was about 7, and was already turned on by classical music, which I mostly heard through my dad's Cornwalls. So I guess I could say that I was 7 when Klipsch "got" my ear. BTW, on a side note..... I used to get picked on at school a little because on all my folders and book covers (made out of brown paper bags) remember that??!!), I used to draw pictures of pipe organs and write on them "Bach Is Better Than Rock!"

............... kinky.................

That's what I was trying to find. I knew I saw that somewhere before. I wish our house had a basement. I would love to do something like. Oh well, my four 15" dipoles will have to do for now, and they DO do good!!!

Hey, at least he's not selling human body parts and organs like someone else tried to do a few years back.

After taking that picture of my hard drive, now my computer won't work for some reason........ Odd, isn't it?!

Actually it's the armature in a hard drive that moves back and forth like a windshield wiper. Apparently, it moves rather fast in order to make any sound once connected to a cone.

---------------- On 5/12/2004 11:19:48 AM avman wrote: here's a shot of me and SWMBO in Mexico last summer. avman. ---------------- How long did it take to get those "corn-rows" done?! I bet I could uninstall and reinstall my whole system in less time!! LOL

---------------- On 5/12/2004 8:08:45 AM dantfmly wrote: i would think it would be better to seperate the signal to more drivers, that way each driver is doing less work, thus less distortion. Thus the reason the invented subwoofers, and by-amping also. The less work each component of a system has to do the less stain and the better it does. ---------------- That is absolutely correct. Making each driver do less work does help, but you have to remember..... The crossover network has to be more complex, one sound is coming from several different drivers at slightly different distances, meaning there should be some kind of time alignment, either physical or electrical. Also, like I said earlier, there will be phase shifts at the crossover points, which only gets worse with a steeper crossover slope. For those reason, that's why a lot of people prefer 2-way speakers over 3-ways. AND, that's also why a lot of people prefer fullrange single-driver speakers. That way, you have no crossover, no phase shifts, no time alignment issues, and no other types of circuits between the amplifier and driver. But, different strokes for different folks.

---------------- On 5/11/2004 10:51:25 PM Bartdude wrote: Well I liked this thread, it had real potential. Although I do think the Chops speaker could have used another horn somewhere near ear level, not ceiling (or attic) level. ---------------- Oh yeah... well.... umm...... The tweeter is ceiling loaded. Yeah, that's it! Just like the KHorns being corner loaded, but different. And if you or I took the time to try and figure out the dimentions to that speaker, I'm guessing it would be just under 9' tall. That would definately pose a problem for people who have 8' ceilings, like me. Man, that sucks.... That means I couldn't even listen to my own creation! LOL

Imagine how I feel. I live under the same roof as another Klipsch member!! (jt1stcav). It sucks! LOL j/k

three way speakers IMO sound better in the midrange area. But that is just personal opinion on sound. ---------------- However, most will agree that two-way systems are much better. Mainly because there are less components in the crossover networks and less phase shifts between the crossover frequencies and drivers. I've heard excellent two and three way systems. I've also heard terrible two and three way systems. What it all boils down to is how the loudspeakers and crossover networks are designed, and making the right choices on matching the drivers together. Although, I have always figured the simpler the design, the better. There's less chance of the original signal getting altered on its way to the drivers.