Number 9

I agree with Allan. Her singing style is not for everyone. She leaves me cold, cold ... make sure you know what you are getting in to.

What? This is the opposite of what I know. I alsways found my Cornwall's very "forward" sounding .. e.g. a prominent midrange.

Disagreeing with the prior posts where most everyone said: Sure, go for it. That's all.

I'll disagree. The tweeter will be aimed right at you, resulting in a very bright presentation because you are so close to the driver. You will also have poor driver integration sitting less than 6' away. And don't get me started on standing waves being exacerbated by such a small room, resulting in a muddled bass and mid-range region. At least in a larger room, you can play around in positioning the speakers to minimize this effect, but in a room that size, you have way fewer options. I moved into a smaller home a few years ago where I had to put my Cornwalls into a 16 x 19' room, previously 29' x 21'. I had to get rid of them because they not only visually over-powered the room, but sonically too. Using smaller Fortes now and much happier. My 2 cents, on the flip-side. If you wait long enough, I'm sure someone will pipe up and say those small-refrigerator sized speakers sound great in a closet too.

DrWho... I think that is what ALK has been doing with his xover networks (redoing for a flatter impedance curve). However, I don't think an ALK for the Forte would be something he would find worthwhile doing ... even with the venerable Cornwall, there was limited demand. I wish I had bookmarked the quote last night, but I came across an article on speakers where the writer was suggesting that a very wide swing in impedance can, with some amps, make speakers sound a little brittle. I wonder if that is why some find Forte bright? I've never felt that to be the case (I use McIntosh), but perhaps with some amps, that may explain what is going on.

Such a wild swing in impedance seems like poor design to me. Please correct me if I am wrong. Makes it a more difficult load for an amp to manage and will result in wide variation in sonic performance from one amp to another. Most speakers today are being designed to have a much more benign load.

Look for the Stereo Review 1986 Forte review scanned here recently. The speakers have a WILD impededance swing. ALK has made that comment a few times before too. They drop to as low as 3.7 Ohms at one point, and hit a peak around 130. Thank god they are effecient, but certainly not an easy load for an amplifier.

I've owned the Cornwalls and now use a Forte II. Spend time listening 50% Jazz, and 50% everything else include R & R. This may sound VERY strange ... but what is the era of your R & R CD collection? If much of it is comprised of CDs mastered in the 1980s, forget it, the Corrnalls are going to make you cry (in a bad way). Forte may be better. The Cornwalls are punchier and sound bigger (which is good) to my ears than the current Forte IIs. On good source material, they are great. But... there is so much R & R poorly recorded/mastered in the early days of the CD back in the '80s whereby the Cornwalls willmake them sound painful. The Forte II, with the smoother Trachorn may make them sound a bit more bearable. In a convoluded way, I'm just saying what many have said before, the Cornwalls have a forward sound and very revealing, and there are unfortunately, many very bad sounding R & R CDs dating from the 80s.

I disagree on this point. When Klipsch killed the Forte and Chorus when they did (circa 1997?), they could not have done it at a worst time. Why? The whole low-powered SET amp movement was just getting started. In fact, the movement back to tubes and vintage gear was also well underway with the arrival of the Internet. They missed out on an opportunity to ride this wave. How many speakers today can be properly powered by 5-10 watts and don't have to sit 5 feet out in a room? Not many. Sure you can get into Lowthers or Fostex stuff, but you then get into other compromises. This is where I see the niche for a Corwall III, or indeed, some other speaker in the resurected heritage line that can be introduced in the $3K to $5K a pair range. To feed those Paramours, Laurels, Decware Zens, McIntosh MC30s/MC225s, Scott 299, Aleph J and 30 amps which people appreciate for what they are, but are challenged in mating to effecient speakers that are reasonably priced and well-engineered. I think people what people really want, is a speaker that has all the best attribues of the Cornwall (high effeciency, slam, engagement) with some modern attributes (more modern dimensions, an impededance curve does not go all over the map). I do think if the old Cornwall dimensions are kept, there are few homes (and wives) who will adopt them. Why spend $5K on a marginally improved CIII when many C1s and C2s can be found for $1K or less. But if the CIII is made to fit the "needs" of modern times, then it stands a very good chance to be succesful.

I've got an MR67, which was updated by Paul Grzybek in Chicago and the bass improvement was the first thing I noticed when I got it. Much more solid than any other tuner I've tried to date. And voices, oh so natural. I think it must do to being in proper alignment. I also had quite a few of the old caps changed, and all the tubes checked out.

Not to make a mountain out of a mole-hill, but this "issue" of the standing waves in the CIII, resulting in the need to move the woofer up several inches, caught my attention. If the CIII has similar dimensions to the original Cornwalls and is using a similar woofer and is tuned in a similar way ... would that not mean that the original Cornwall and Cornwall II probably had the same issue? e.g. Has there been perhaps a standing wave issue with Cornwalls all along?

Also worth adding, these speakers were often designed to be placed in soffits in control rooms. Don't know if they would sound properly "balanced" in a home living room. The ones I saw in recording studios were also tri-amped using either Crown or BGW amps. These rooms were also designed to sound "right" through acoustical treatments. If you are familiar with the "JBL" sound, then you get a bit of an idea of what to expect with Westlake.

When I was in a couple of recording studios back in the late '70s, I heard a few Westake's. Not the particular model you speak of, but ones with 2 x 15" woofers or a single 15" mated to that large distinct-looking wooden mid-horn. These used Altec and JBL drivers primarily. Incredibly powerful. Effortless. If you go to the Lansing forum, a couple of people there at one time use them in their home systems. These speakers are huge and extremely expensive. So not for everyone.

If you've got the room, then for sure the Cornwalls will give you the "Klipsch" sound you like. They load a large room better than the Fortes. I moved a few years ago to a home with a smaller listening room, and that is the only reason I switched to Fortes. Paul Klipsch supposedly had a hand in designing the Forte II. He also supposedly had a pair in his office. That says something don't it? The Mundorfs can be had from various online mail-order places. I picked mine up from audiyo.com ... reasonably prices, quick ship and great service. I like Jazz, and espescially like listening to vocalists. The Mundorfs actually improve the details. You hear better delineation. But you lose the raspiness and dryness in the mids too, which is a veru good thing. Much smoother. Ella's voices slices the air now like "butta". If you eventually go with the Cornie's, Dean here does a special xover mod based on an all new design by ALK. The xovers in the Cornies were not all that great and are one of their biggest weakpoints. The ALK crossover smooths out the frequency response and impedance curve. This is more than just a parts swap. Talk to Dean. You may also hold off to hear the "new" Cornwall III or Scala II due to be out in the next couple of months. These may tickle your fancy.

I owned Cornwall's and now Forte IIs. Do a search. Which is better has previously been a huge debate here. Luckily no WMDs used as yet to settle the score. My 2cents. Cornwalls mate better to a larger size room, where they will sound bigger and punchier. In a smaller room, my vote goes to the Forte (which is why I used them now instead). The Forte definetly sounds less "aggresive" for good or bad, mostly I think due to the Tractrix horn. Both need to be mated to the right amp. A Cornwall mated to a cheap SS amp, will be painful and harsh sounding. If you've got the room, certainly aim for the Cornwall, if you've got a smaller room, the Forte would be a better match.