boom3

Corvette, re: wood wedges in the throat: This refers to a thread about the "splitter" facing the woofer that is the first division of the two parts of the horn. I think this is the Type G Motorboard upgrade that appeared sometime in the 60s. Paul told me that the 'splitter" improved performance at the top end of the horns ranage, so the action is rather like a phase plug in a HF horn. I'd like to see that thread again myself and take the time to review current thought on it.

The picture is far later than 1959. I think it is 1985 or so. DRBILL knew PWK quite well and should be able to narrow down the date range. Overpriced in any event.

Carnival weekend, Lundi Gras and Mardi Gras were wonderful, best in years!

What you said, bro. This clown did not realize (nor did the editor) that he was no longer reviewing this "Impluse" but now a something else. I've read very simliar screeds in US mags where the tone is "...once we discarded the manufacturer's components and replaced them with [insert trendy cap/coil/wire here] the sound got fuller and the imaging more accurate..." etc. The manufacturer is wary of getting too rank with any reviewer, but they do have the power of advertising. My favorite example of this kind of nonsense was about 10 years ago a guy in Canada bought a pair of Tannoy Churchills, which even then were a four-digit price tag. Apparently, upon unpacking them, he immediatly dismantled them and filled all the voids with sand, thereby "improving them". That Tannoy posted his post-surgery glowing review on their own site was kinda sickening. No mention of voided warranties.

I will be in New Orleans, marching with my krewe, as I have for many years. Laissez Les Bon Ton Roulette! Anyone within driving distance of New Orleans, please come and support us as we rebuild! [<)]

Little Johnny comes home from Sunday school. "What did you learn in Sunday school today?" his mom aks. "We learned that Jesus was a Democrat" . 'Why do you say that, Johnny?' his Mom wondered. "Because the teacher said Jesus ate with Republicans and sinners!"

Au contrare...the integration between the CW woofer and the mid is better than the LS or Belle, since the shared baffle is larger. The bass of the CW is deeper but not as 'quick' as the LS/Belle. The K79 tweeter of the late CW IIs is much better than the K77 of any suffix. Said it before and I'll say it again...the LS was not meant to be a home speaker. The Belle was conceived as WAF friendly center as close as compatible with the Klipschorns as possible. The LS is no more a home speaker than a Black Angus is a Cocker Spaniel. This topic has come up before...if you want to tweak till you freak, try making an LS a home speaker. If you want the maximum Klipsch Heritage sound right off the bat until Klipschorns arrive, go with CW IIs of late vintage.

FWIW, there is a brand of woofer called Eclipse, sold by Madisound. I'm not sure if it related in any way to the manufacturer of these corner horns in question.

I agree with you. LaScalas were never meant to be home speakers, and, after Hereseys, they are my least favorite of the Heritage line (which only leaves Khorns and Corns [. I'm not sure Belles are different enough from LS to make a significant difference] If you want the maximum advantage of Klipsch sound 'right out of the box' with no mandatory tweaking then go with late-model Cornwalls. CWs can indeed be tweaked-the late model crossovers are functional and that's about the best that can be said for them. In some settings, they can have a boom that sometimes annoys. However, many Klipschheads and even the general public think the CWs are the best Heritage, apart from the Klipschorn itself.

Move your Klipsch babies yourself, with the help of some friends and a rented van. You are just setting yourself up for anguish if you let "pros" touch them.

A possible solution is to use snap-on ferrite beads (Parts Express and Radio Shack sell them) to your low-level (source to receiver) cables. Some apply these to power cords as well. It may take a bit of experimentation with the beads and cable arrangement to reduce this problem. It is quite possible that your local Bo and Luke Duke are using an illegal linear amp connected to their CB. Good luck on getting the FCC to care about it! The FCC no longer cares about interference with consumer devices that only receive signals. Read the fine print on the FCC Part 15 notice that should come with any device that uses RF. There are words to the effect that the consumer device must put up with any interference. If a emergency service is getting interference, that is a different matter. Because we have and will continue to have a mix of analog and digital devices receiving and transmitting in the same bands, interference will only get worse.

The Klipschorn and the RF7s are totally different speakers, designed to different philosophies. It is unfair and unwise to compare them to each other. Let's put it this way, I have late-model Cornwalls and would not trade them for RF7s. However, I would do whatever it took to make pair (or two) of Klipschorns happy in my living room.

There should be a choice for bass response. From time to time the boom in my CW IIs annoys me, but I have too many other irons in the fire right now to tweak 'em. Other than that, we love 'em!

Topper!

Impressive! So Bob, how did you achieve the flatter performance in the last octave? How do these compare with the K79 used in the later CW IIs? I'd love to see a comparison between the K79 and your tweeter!

round and square horns usually have one dominant standing wave at the mouth. Go with rectangular. Some people like ovals, too

Whirlybirds!

All I said was: It's possible to "fold" a tubular port to get the right length, but a folded tube in any commercially viable box is going to be small in cross-section, which promotes port noise and I think you're agreeing with that... Your answer to a statement I didn't pose (about the effect of turns) I am not sure I agree with. Any medium flowing through a turn will exhibit different particle velocities at different parts of the turn. If you listen to water flowing through household plumbing, you will hear most noise at the elbows. Is this significant for a loudspeaker duct? I'm not sure. The folded ducts I've seen have all been one turn of 90 degrees, and I would imagine the added noise-if any-is swamped in the total system response, not to mention room effects.

It's possible to "fold" a tubular port to get the right length, but a folded tube in any commercially viable box is going to be small in cross-section, which promotes port noise Small box, wide bandwidth, lower efficency=consider PRs. Big box, wide bandwidth with carefully chosen Fb, high efficency=ports best choice. Personally, I would not trade my ported CW IIs for any PR speaker.

A 'passive radiator" (drone cone) allows a lower tuning for the same cabinet volume versus an equivalant port, whose length might be too long for an acceptable box. A PR also provides a closure for the air in the box, so there is always a definite volume of air to control the woofer below system and driver resonance. A port does not offer this below Fb. A PR also prevents out-of-band (i.e.) midrange signals from the back of the woofer from getting out of the box. With all these advantages, I don't like PRs for most applications. If you optimize the overall system, you have adequate output down to the Fb and a rapid rolloff below that, with control of the driver down a point where the active electronics should be rolling off the infrasonic signals anyway. PR systems, by comparison to a correctly implemented port with a adequate box volume, (think Cornwalls) sound 'mushy'. If the PR is mounted on the back, you can have exaggerated bass from loading one part of the bass spectrum differently than another (i.e the PR is closer to the wall/floor boundary or a corner than the front facing woofer).

Looking at the Keele patent, it seems that this an application of the convergant-divergant principle of the DeLaval nozzle, which is widely used in rockets: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Laval_nozzle A mathematical treatment of the design is here: http://www.innovatia.com/Design_Center/rktprop3.htm The Beveridge electrostatic uses a similar arrangement matching a rectangular radiator with a wide-dispersion lens http://www.beveridge-audio.com/Technology.htm

Though not the same case as with popular music...it's well to remember that most classical issues never make a profit. I don't know any living classical artist that could live on CD revenues alone, it's touring what brings in the money, guv. The music business is like any other business now...the bottom line is the bottom line, and artistic freedom means pandering to garbage; corporate responsibility means accepting warning labels that are a joke, and making money is the vision statement, and to hell with artists and fans. We buy almost all our popular music via iTunes so we can pick and choose the songs we like. OTOH, if there is a classical or world music CD we discover, we have no prob paying up to $25 if the recording exceptional. There are very few DVD Audio mixes of pop that we will buy now...most we've bought are dreadful, the Revenge of Quad with idiotic mixing.

Oh yes, that and Fireball XL-5, another Gerry Anderson SuperMarionation opus. Watching these on moderrn TVs we now see the wires, but on a fuzzy monochrome TV, it was pretty amazing. I always thought (even as a kid) that the back story of "Supa cah" was that Dr. Beaker (the Brit) and Professor Popkus (the German) had found themselves out of work after WW II and decided to collaborate to build this vehicle. I also recall that Mike Mercury was forever forgetting to open the roof doors and busting through them as he lifted off.

In the late 50-s and early 60s, if my siblings were babysitting me because our parents had gone out, they'd let me sit up and watch The Untouchables and Peter Gunn, which were normally deemed off limits. In high school, when like most young people my sleep schedule went kablooey (technical term) I'd watch Perry Mason and The Untouchables reruns until I got sleepy.

Hi Al, I'm intrigued. When you get a chance, a run of plots between the K600 (or 601) with the K52 and your horn with the K52 would be great. I feel that there is a significant improvement in the K52/K601 vs the K55/K600, and if your horn ratchets that up even further I'd very interested!