boom3

Hi Bob, When you say the phenolic diaphrams are no longer available and have been replaced with titanium, for which drivers is that true? I believe the phenolics are still available for the K-77-what about the K-79 used in the CW II? thanks

///SOmewhere I've got more detailed data sheets on the range of EV raw components. I'll dig it up. it's my recollection that most of the ev horns had better horizontal dispersion when the horn was oriented vertically, contrary to popular thought./// I've always wondered about this. Theoretically, the narrower a radiating surface is, the wider the horizontal dispersion. However, the angle of the throat is the controlling factor for dispersion from a horn where the wangelengths are comparable to, or smaller than, to the size of the mouth. EV contended that their 'diffraction' horns used the edge of the mouth (and maybe the 'fins' holding the phase plug?)to 'diffract' the sound wave and make the dispersion wider. On a liquid flow table, this effect is readly seen in an essentially two-dimensional flow through a slot. Whether this works for an acoustic horn, radiating over two octaves into three-dimensional space, is another matter. It's interesting that no one else in the horn biz espoused this. My guess is that it wasn't a matter of patent infringement, but differing philosphies. Altec had their multicells, JBL had their acoustic lenses, and now we have tractrix flares.

20Hz? Why? If you are looking to reproduce X.1 sound effects (where X = number of main channels) from a movie track, you are better off buying a good (Klipsch or Velodyne) subwoofer. Far cheaper and much, much less space. If you are a regular listener to organ music, you know that 32 Hz is the lowest pedal note, and not many organs have that monster pipe anyway. Much of the very low bass experience we feel at a live organ concert is vibrations (conducted and sympathetic) of the structure, conducted up the pew to our backs and fannies. A good sub will help but can never quite reproduce the intrinsic structural tone of a particular church or concert hall. Very few CDs have anything musical below 40 Hz, no matter what the subject matter. Klipsch recommended an active 'rumble' filter for the Heritage products. 45 Hz for the LaScala & Belle, and 28 Hz for the Cornwall & Klipschorn. At least 12 dB/octave.

I am assuming you are asking for the dispersion. The T35 family actually has a 'nominal' dispersion of 80 degrees in the horizontal, 30 degrees in the vertical. Dispersion can't be specified without specifying a frequency. In this case, the 80 x 30 is over the main band of operation. Physics dictates it will narrow as frequency increases. That pattern is just fine for corner speakers, which address a 90 degree angle. 180 degrees was wishful thinking on EV's part.

---------------- On 12/28/2004 6:53:49 AM Bill H. wrote: Try this link.........hope it helps. http://www.taylormadesound.net/product.html ---------------- Yes, thanks. I notice the Atolls are rated for Impulse power..I thought that's what you use when you run out of warp drive

Interesting! Who carries this in the US? Googling yielded a number of "consumer review" sites but various links to the the manufacturer are all dead.

I would post this question over at the Audio Asylum tube area. There are members there who live, eat, breath and, um, excrete...tubes.

---------------- On 12/27/2004 12:48:13 PM elcapitan83 wrote: Hello all, I was wondering who could reccommend a few good books dealing with the principles of horn loudspeaker construction. As much as I enjoy the learning I recieve here, I want to examine how my LaScalas operate from a "textbook" point of view. Thanks, scott ---------------- In a nutshell: An acoustic horn is a transformer that transforms the high pressure, low particle velocity wave at the driver to a low pressure, high particle velocity wave at the mouth. It matches the impedence of the driver to the impedence of the air in the room. It can also be compared to an antenna, although the transformer analogy is more accurate. Lower frequencies=longer wavelengths=larger horns. A bass horn may be folded to conserve space. Midrange and tweeter horns cannot be folded without introducing severe response anomolies. See my post above for the reference to the Bruce Edgar articles in back issues of Speaker Builder. Bruce knows more about folded horns than anyone presently living and his articles will explain the topic very well.

"Loudspeakers" by Badiemaff and Davis. Some of the stuff is outdated, but the essentials are still correct. Don't think it's in print, but it was reprinted beaucoup times and should be easy to find. "Acoustics" by Harry F. Olsen. A peer of Paul's, Olsen was the technical guru of RCA's audio business for decades. "High Performance Loudspeakers" by Martin Colloms. Colloms is indeed an expert, even though I don't agree with him on every point. He's also one of those that tends to sniff at horns, particularly bass horns. Back issues of "Speaker Builder", available from AudioXpress. Although not published anymore, SB was a valuable pre-Web forum and in the back issues one can trace the development of Bruce Edgar's horn designs. If you have a university with an electrical engineering department nearby, they should have most of these references The papers of Paul Klipsch (of course). K&A used to sell these in a binder. He also issued a newsletter called "Dope from Hope". A few years ago, someone on this forum was offering a copy for a modest fee.

PWK addressed this question many years ago. He always felt that the delay was insignificant and the electronic delay devices then available were were too noisy and distorted to be useful in any event. It would be interesting to see an experiment with current technology. Time alignment (a registered phrase, I seem to recall) is one of those elusive phantoms of audio. My experience has been that when all other factors are accounted for in a balanced design, then temporal alignment should be included if it can be included without compromise of other, more important criteria. There were many designs of the 70s that started with temporal aligmnent as the controlling critera and worked backwards to other criteria. The result was a flock of odd-looking and unbalanced designs. How much temporal shift between drivers can be tolerated is very controversial. The usual criteria is 2 milliseconds, although that is highly subject to frequency, listener position, and subject matter. I own a pair of Dahlquist DQ-10s which were some of the first speakers to be designed for temporal alignment in the US. I have a more comprehensive review on my website, but in sum, I think the DQ-10's performance stems from factors other than temporal alignment. In any event, they can't compare with my CW IIs, which were designed to a different criteria.

Sad, really. There are some humans who've had this experience as well. I suppose that someone could generate an 'answer' signal and see if the whale responds and surfaces near the vessel emitting the sound, then the creature could be identified.

These look like they could be part of Pioneer's HPM series, which used a polymer diaphram to create omnidirectional sound. Even if they're not, I bet he could find a sucker, er, I mean buyer, over at Audio Aslyum. There is still a quadrophonic cult out there and somebody would probably snap those up. Not to mention the electronics. Many folks (myself included) miss our battleship Pioneer receivers of the early 80s.

Looks like either a Lowther or Tannoy design from the 50s. If you have the patience, I'd measure the horn dimensions all the way through and plug the numbers into a horn design program to see what comes up. I think those Knight speakers were really Utahs, and not bad for those days. My guess is that the owner disabled the concentric tweeter when he added the dome mid and piezo tweet. A very odd couple there. That dome (very similiar to the MG brand domes) is not very efficient compared to the bass and tweeter horns and is usable from about 800 Hz-3 KHz. My recollection is that it had a fabric dome heavily doped with sticky goo and probably has a high mass for its size.

The suggestion for a limiter on the preamp out is a good one. A simpler solution is to put a fuse in series with the speaker. Fuses are not a panacea against speaker destruction, but they reduce the liklihood of blown drivers greatly. They are also cheap. The downside is someone may put a higher amp fuse in the circuit than is desired. Right now I am using 2 amp fast blow fuses with my Corn IIs fed by a 120w/ch amp. At any volume I'd care to listen to, the fuses don't blow, but are there 'just in case'. I have always fused all my speakers over the 32 years I've been at this and have yet to blow a driver. Don't let anyone BS you about "fuse distortion". Fuses can never distort as much as a damaged or blown driver.

IR remotes all work on a narrow band of frequencies, which in the case of near-light energy, are specified as the wavelength, since the frequencies are up in the TeraHertz region and the notation gets unwieldy. IR remotes work by sending a series of pulses of a given frequency to the IR phototransistor on the receiver, which are then decoded to execute the desired function. This is why many remotes can 'learn' the functions of another remote by counting the pulses from the originating remote and associating them with a given function. In thsi case, a given series of pulses meant ON to one component, but meant OFF to another. Remote control has an interesting history. Low Frequency RF, visible light, ultrasonic, IR and UHF RF have all been tried for remote operation. IR's non-interference with RF devices and its containment within the boundaries of aroom is the main reason it was adopted in the 1970s as the mode of choice.

http://ldsg.snippets.org/HORNS/index.php

Garrards-I had 3-of 'em-were good, sturdy, medium priced changers in their day. They had one screaming problem, and that was the headshell contacts for the cartridge. Every Garrard I've run across developed bad connections between the cartridge carrier and the head shell contacts. They are flat v-shaped springs that corrode and work loose over time. If you're still in the vinyl world, I'd get a TT with a lower-mass arm. The best Garrards all reflected mid 60s thinking along those lines and along with the idler drives, they're way out of date.

The T-35 series tweeters were used at crossover points between 4 KHz and 7 KHz. PWK originally used them at 6 KHz; the newer Khorn has dropped that to 4.5 KHz, to clean up some response problems in the midrange which used to have a nasty 9KHz spike, so I am told. Unless you are going to have some other protective device(s), I am queasy about using this tweeter with a first order network. I'm not sure that 6 dB/octave will protect the tweeter well enough. I recommend you look at third or even fourth order, depending on home much insertion loss you can tolerate and what your crossover budget is.

Most of the questions you are asking really would be answered by a good grounding in the basics of acoustics. Here's a short list of stuff that would help you: "Loudspeakers" by Badiemaff and Davis. Some of the stuff is outdated, but the essentials are still correct. Don't think it's in print, but it was reprinted beaucoup times and should be easy to find. "Acoustics" by Harry F. Olsen. A peer of Paul's, Olsen was the technical guru of RCA's audio business for decades. "High Performance Loudspeakers" by Martin Colloms. Colloms is indeed an expert, even though I don't agree with him on every point. He's also one of those that tends to sniff at horns, particularly bass horns. Back issues of "Speaker Builder", available from AudioXpress. Although not published anymore, SB was a valuable pre-Web forum and in the back issues one can trace the development of Bruce Edgar's horn designs. If you have a university with an electrical engineering department nearby, they should have most of these references The papers of Paul Klipsch (of course). K&A used to sell these in a binder. He also issued a newsletter called "Dope from Hope". A few years ago, someone on this forum was offering a copy for a modest fee.

I have not seen any Heritage products advertised in a long time. Is K&A relying on word of mouth alone to sell this line? Some new print ads in the major mags (even those who tend to sniff at horns) would be nice and perhaps counter some of the misinformation out there.

There's someone not listed who deserves to be in the R&R Hall of Fame more than anyone. That's Cosimo Matassa, one of the fathers of the genre, along with Alan Freed and Sam Phillips. http://www.louisianamusic.org/cosimo_101.htm I had the honor of interviewing Mr. Matassa this year (not on music). I had known his sons and their grocery store for years before a TV special about the birth of R&R clued me in to who this guy was (and is). I just hope I am as full of life at 78 as he is!

From the discussion of removing the back panel, I'm presuming we are talking about the CW I here. (although we all know now that the line between the I and the II is blurry). As a configuration management specialist, this kind of vagueness drives me nuts. Ah well... As Lawerence Welk used to say, "Ah Wun Ana Too!" He even had a license plate that read A1ANA2. McMaster-Carr is the ultimate industrial supplier and I've bought felt from them for speaker projects over the years. They carry all grades and thicknesses. They will sell you a sampler book also. The sampler is part number 9248K222. http://www.mcmaster.com/

Nobody bats 1.000 and PWK disowned this design some years later, citing the lack of a controlling air volume (e.g. back chamber) as being the failing of the concept. In fact, in his ad copy about Major Breakthroughs he listed "Shorthorn by Klipsch-Yup We did It Too". Before I was really aware of Klipsch's work, I built something very close to this as a kid. It impressed me with the clean, uncolored sound but it had no real bass and I didn't have the technical background to follow up. So I wandered off into "air suspension" la-la land for many years.

I am a Deadhead myself-in a casual way, if that's possible. I like his tie designs, but I haven't bought any since the profits just go to his widow.I read "Garcia-An American Life" and wished I hadn't. He was not a cute, cuddly person at all. I doubt that, had we been contemporaries in space and time, that we'd have been friends. The best way to remember Jerry is to forget him (one of those Dead/Zen things) and listen to the music that he was the conduit for.

This is a perennial topic in audio. The vast majority agree that not all amps sound the same, yet there is great disagreement why that is so. I would stay with analog amps right now. Digital amp technology is not quite mature enough for high-resolution audio. Leave it to the boom car/"home theater in a box" crowd for the moment. I have no experience with the Quad amps, however, you need to be cautious about buying any product 34 years old, and a niche product at that. At least the Klipsch Heritage line has a solid foundation of factory and after-market parts support. Many folks on this forum drive Cornwalls and other Heritage models with tube amps. I will reserve judgement on that. However, tube amps do, and this has been proven many times, exhibit considerable variations of frequency response when driving real world loudspeaker loads. Some have pronounced all tube amps as high-priced tone controls. Again, I want to try tube amps with my Cornwall IIs, someday and make up my own mind. I am driving my 1986 Cornwall IIs with a Sumo Polaris power amp. It is rated at 120 w/ch RMS into 8 Ohms. It's an FET design, which was popular in the 70s but seems to have fallen out of favor. My experience-from 32 years of building many speakers- has been that bass-reflex speakers, like the Corns, need a solid-state amp to help control the low end. The Corns-as much as I love 'em-do have a bit of tubbiness in the bass, and I think a tube amp might exacerbate that. The Klipschorn is another animal altogether, so I can't (and wouldn't) make a generalization about how they interact with tube amps. Again, many K-horn owners are happy with tubes.