boom3

I see a shift to the low-fi by many people out of convenience and a continued minority high-end market, some of which, as we all have observed here, spins off into the la-la land of pseudoscience and any price the traffic will bear. Which leaves the middle, where most of us started out, POOGE'ing our Pioneers and Kenwoods and Brand X speakers...and working our way up to better stuff.The middle I see starved for components that are actually good values-there are some but the market tries to ignore them or use them as loss leaders. When Stereophile describes a $15,000 pair of speakers as a bargain, you know "where their head is at." And yes, I am talking about the infamous Klipschorn review...not taking issue with the product, just the perspective. What kind of blows my mind is that there are so many ultra-high-end brands out there now. But there is a market to support (most) of them and a magazine corps that will yap their praises and would not be caught dead reviewing a speaker under $1K or an amp under $3K. It is debatable whether this reflects growing income disparities in the West in general, or that this "cost disparity" is just a coincidental echo driven by the rise of cheap and easy digital media.

which brings up the point...when is Klipsch going to offer active electronics (including DSP) for the Heritage line?

Our four cats have scratching posts, and each other, for their amusement. The grille cloths have not been clawed in many years..

another cat entranced by Klipsch sound, on a spread placed for her comfort atop a Cornwall

Were you bringing this to my attention? If so, thanks; if not, sorry for the presumption Scott

High Fidelity did a "review" of the LaScala in the 70s, I think. The published curve was really bad. PWK was able to closely duplicate the curve by putting a LaScala on a stool away from walls and putting the microphone behind the system. He raised so much hades that HiFi withdrew the review.

Roger all. The public and audiophile expectations of reproduction have changed a lot since that monumental three-channel experiment in 1933. I am not sure if PWK attended it, but he included it in his first set of published papers and referred to it often. Live orchestral concerts (to my ear/brain combination) offer more dynamic range and less imaging than a good quality home system. Most of what we think of as "imaging" in speakers is upper midrange beaming. At a live orchestral concert, our eyes tell our ears that the woodwinds are on one side and the brass is on the other. With eyes closed, it is harder to tell in a hall that is many times the volume of a typical home listening room.

No, these area not horn loaded. The first draft has footprint of 17 x 19 inches (100 liter class bass box) and that is the largest free-standing size I can tolerate.

Thanks Chris. The problem I have is that a lot of wall space its already spoken for for bookshelves. Bookshelves are mediocre absorbers and lousy diffusers. I have resolved not to have any more "dead storage" in my study but that may only be dream, it may only be possible to reduce the unused items and not eliminate them. The room is now tiled so it is very lively. Another pal suggested that in that room I might be happier with flat panels, he was suggesting Maggies.I have not heard any in years and with the drivers I have I would prefer not to spend a lot of money on store-bought speakers. My initial design has footprint of 17 x 19 inches (100 liter class bass box). That footprint is about the largest I can tolerate in free-standing speaker. I will look at the links you provided,thanks for all ideas!

Yes to all questions I have pair of Great Heil AMTs and two Visaton 12 inch woofers, plus a couple of Phillips AD5060 series mids from the dear departed Dahlquists. Final config not decided. The Heils like sharp crossovers so if I go 2 way I will probably go with 4th order L-R, served me well before.

A clear day and a remarkably clear airliner window as we approached O'Hare...

Hi, My restored study is 11 x 14, and before the storm I had Dahlquist DQ-10s in there. They were very good in the study for close listening, but they are history now. I have thought about Klipsch products to replace them, but I also have several drivers laying around that need to be put into service, so I will home-build a pair of speakers. My desk will only be 7 feet away from the speakers at best. The room has 8 foot ceilings. My question is: In a room of this size and shape, is there any point trying to implement live-end dead-end (LEDE)? The floor is now tile (no more carpet for us!) and as you might expect, the room is very lively. Pre-storm, I rarely cranked it up beyond about 90 dB and usually listened in the 70-85 dB range. Thanks for any ideas

My opera-loving mother had a big picture of him on her icebox. I teased her that it was her erotica

Well, I'm not sure I've found Nirvana, audio or otherwise, but my hearing is on a plateau and it's down hill from there. The various audio systems I use are all more than adequate. I do wish to have bass horns someday, simply for the very low distortion and dynamics, which I can appreciate even if my hearing rolls off about 13 Khz or so. So, I've invested what I need to, and aside from some tinkering and experimentation for own curiosity, this is it.

Well, her mum lived to be 101

my perspective

There are accelerometers made for shipping high value items that report location, sorry I do not have a model at hand...

I replaced the caps in my 86 Corn IIs but left the autoformer and inductor alone. The factory boards are crudely made, shockingly so. The cap replacement is the most cost effective way of making permanent fix. Replaced all the caps with MKP types-the tweeter and mid caps with WIMAs (the little red rectangular units favored by guitarists) and the 68 uF woofer shunt with a Solen. The recapping really made no diff to the sound, nor did I expect it to. Recapped for long-term stability, once & done. Esthetically, I've certainly seen better crossovers than the stock. One caution about replacing inductors. The DCR of the stock inductor should have been factored into the system design. I'd be astounded if Klipsch did not do that given the level of engineering talent (Keele, Gillum, Hunter, Delgado, etc) they've had over the years. Replacing stock inductors with "lower DCR" types may upset the system's alignment. Another reason I left my stock inductors in place.

Ummm...why the tape on the level controls?

If we go back to PWK's original paper on the Klipschorn (which is in my storage unit right now) , it looks to me like he set the taper rate not for the physical length of the horn as it is, but as it would be if it was a straight horn. In other words, for the horn "magnified" (my term) by the corner .

One of my favorite authors, William Manchester, wrote an excellent and very balanced biography of MacArthur, "American Caesar". Also, he wrote the best book on the individual experiences of a man at war, "Goodbye Darkness" in which he interweaves his story of being a Marine in the Pacific theatre with his dealing with PTSD after the war.

Interesting that Paul never tried (that I know) to one-up the Patrician. I did read a Dope from Hope where Paul wrote that if he went to more powerful drivers, deep nulls would show up in the response not to mention even bigger cabinets. PWK never understood (nor do I) why a home listener would not be content with a maximum output of 121 dB.

One nuance of the design video deserves some comment. The Klipschorns, when tucked into corners, look smaller than they appear straight out of the box. Emphasizing the "stance" by the riser (which protects that nice veneer from vacuum cleaners and feet) and pulling out from the corner (not my notion of proper operation, enclosed back not withstanding) makes them look bigger, more in-you-face.

Could this extra "mystery length" be the width of the front panel where the two paths join?

I wonder if horns are subject to the "end correction" practice (?) (theory?) that is used to fine-tune vents and T/Ls. The end correction for vents is usually assumed to be the length that is equivalent to the circumference of the vent. In other words, the mass of air existing the vent is, for some distance, still about as compact as it is inside the vent, and therefore the effective vent is longer than the calculated vent, meaning the vent tube must be shortened. I would think this would not apply to the Klipschorn, unless we count the distance across the front of the bass bin where the two horn paths converge.