ClaudeJ1

This is exactly what Klipsch did originally. Gary Gillum told me that Paul wanted to try just the double core units (my name for it) alone for PA with mutual coupling and stakcing the short units together and it didn't work. They tried firing it into a corner, it didn't work. When it was firing into the corner, they took a sheet of plywood and laid it on top, and VOILA, the thing pegged the meter, so to speak. So yes, it will work that way, you just have to put sheet of plywood on top of it, which is how they arrived at the MWM originally! Paul wanted a bass horn that was easier to build than a Khorn and they ended making (arguably) the best horn woofer they ever made and it didn't need a corner anymore for PA or theater applications. Gary Gillum left Klipsch and built lots of MWM bins for John Allen's HPS-4000 systems.Gary told me that when they set up the MWM at shows, it was deemed the best sounding bass anyone had ever heard. He still claims this is the case as of 4 years ago when I spoke to him. I'm essentially going to do the same thing, except, my cutoof frequency will be, by design, 20 Hz. higher ( 4.5 foot horn instead of 6 for the MWMs) I have the benefit of modeling it in Hornresp software first. Save time, money, and sawdust! Plus, if I ever want to keep the core, and make a full blown MWMs, I will have that option in the future. Since Klipsch no longer makes MWMs units, you have to find used ones (very rare) or make your own, as many on this board have done.

I spoke at length with Gary Gillum, the co-patent holder of the MWM, former Chief Engineer with Klipsch. He told me they developed the original MWM was a double bin, USING K-33 Woofers. The reason they had Eminence do a K-43 for power handling and greater output because people were frying K-33's, even then, people still managed to fry K-43's because they used high amp fuses and the woofers would blow to protect the fuse, LOL. They later split the bin in half and named it the MWMs (for single) because the roadies all bitched about how heavy it was (need 4 people to carry. Plus it woudn't fit though doorways narrower than 36" at small clubs. Whereas, two people can carry an MWMs. As to the woofer impedance, even the original double and current production units (now used in only permanent installations, so no singles required) use separate connectors and fuses for each driver. Also, all pro amps can easily handle 2 ohm loads if the modern K-43's are in parallel. When I had MWMs, I had both K-33 and K-43 woofers. The K-43 had slightly strong highs (higher BL product) while the K-33 went lower and had slightly stronger lows (lower BL product). Which is "better" depends on your application. If you use a midbass horn, like Mark does, the K-33 is better IMHO. But for PA applications, the K-43 is the one. For home use, the K-33 is the better cheaper choice and Bob Crites drivers woofers well also. They are sonically indistinguishable from a K-33 in an MWM bin.

LOL. Thanks Bob, that is hilarious.

From 40hz down, but if I shut everything off the sub is not doing a terrible lot really, to me with a little volume it not a necessity, I listen sometimes without it just to compare, also depends on the music. There are very few times where music contains notes below 40 Hz, since a low E string on a 4 string bass is 41 Hz. An MWMs is a 6 foot long horn and it makes it down there pretty well. A 5 string bass will hit 31 Hz. but most of the notes are on the other strings. Pipe Organ and synthesized bass is another matter altogether, but again, most music doesn't get that low. The main reason I use a sub is for movies, but I discovered that I can make a smaller horn to go to 60 hz. instead of 40, so it's about balance. For music, the MWMs was the best Sounding bass I've ever owned, and I lived with Klipshorns for 30 years. Jubilees come in second place for me, but they can look nice in a corner. Kinda wish I had them back now that I have the room for them again, but I wanna try a shorter/corner version of the MWM. I will build the center section so that I can make an MWMs out of it if the corner one doesn't work out. Pretty much everything below 40 hz. you feel rather than hear. Had 6 foot MWMs with all kinds of woofers in them, never an EVM 15L. LaScalas and FH-1's get to 100 Hz. then roll off. so in my situation going from a 2.75 foot horn to a 4. 75 foot horn will get me what I need without PEQ, hopefully. It's just lumber, sawdust, a little bit of steel and glue after all. For me, the simpler the horn, the better. For build and for sound. We shall see.

OK, I just modeled the MWM bin vs. the EV one. They are very similar in length/cutoff frequeny about 45 hz. modeled into 1 Pi space, but the MWM has slightly more bass output in the 40-60 hz. region. The EVM 15L models better than than JC's model with the K-43 (same MWM bin data interpretation, different drivers) in terms of higher frequency output, but the K-43 has more oomph with it's peak at 55 Hz.. I owned MWM's and they definitely had that peak in my basement room at the time I owned them. Kind of like a low disco bass boost built right in. LOL. Remember, the best sounding bass doesn't always measure flat, especially if you look at the ISO equal loudness curves where bass levels must increase substantially below 100 Hz. with 20 db or so higher output around 20 hz., so, it looks like a Factory Klipsch MWM bin would have that built in and would only need subs below about 40-45 Hz. Just so happens my Tapped Horn sub behaves likes the ISO curve with rising response below 60 hz. in my new room and it never sounds too bassy at all. My FH-1 is about a 3-foot horn and I'm building a 41/2 foot horn. Halfway between it and an MWM................with less folds of either. Trying to avoid' "W" bins from now on.

The EV is, I think 16 pieces of wood vs. only 12 for an MWM and slightly more complex to build. The sound path has an extra fold and looks slightly longer, so perhaps a slightly lower cutoff frequency. But I"m sure the higher frequencies would be a bit more ragged because of the extra fold. The EVM 15L is flatter and has higher frequency extension when modeled in an MWM single bin, so I suspect perfomance would be similar in the EV horn, It's also an extra 3 cubic feet of space or so, so the MWM is smaller by a smidge. I started to do a straight axis MWMs here: http://community.klipsch.com/forums/t/170741.aspx and decided that I wanted to use the corner space being wasted behind my FH-1's. Seems that in the late 70's and 80's, all the major speaker companies were making similar bass horns. Peavey had their "Project 1" bass horn with double 15's similar to Klipsch and EV's. I'm sure there were others I don't know about (Community?). I may model this TL4025 in Hornresp just for fun, but I'm still planning on building my adaptation of the MWMs bin..........much simplified.

Even thought the original name was "Motengator" (look that one up in your Urban Dictionary!!) the MWM stands for Magnificent Woofing Machine. the original system had the added "1900" number because MCM is the Roman Numeral equivalent. Clever naming conventions for a woofer horn that continues to kick royal but wherever you may find them, in homes, theaters, or stadiums. So "up your woofers" build or buy some MWM's today. Go to the Cinema Catalog and check out the modern version called the Grand-4-T!!

What you present here is correct. I have not disagreement with it as being factual. I was NOT the one who said it was lower distortion, only better HF dispersion to go 3-way with a JBL tweeter on another poster's Jubilee Clone setup with the oval tractrix horn. I had those tweeters on my Khorns and like John W's "super Khorn" setup, the JBL tweeters sound and Measure WAY better than the K77's I lived with for 30 years. The K510 works great for JWC, and I heard that top end on a Jube before, just as your have. I PREFER the lower Xover point to the 1133's which I now own and enjoy rather than the the higher Xover point of the 2-way Jube. Not better in all aspect, but different and better for my ears. BUT I chose a 1" tweeter over a 2" (way overkill for home according to Roy and PWK) because I don't have to punch through a 100 foot screen and it has superior dispersion and definitions characteristics over a K69 for the home. Read Geddes and Danley to find out why it's my tweeter of choice also. IF you can afford it, the TAD totally kills the need for a twetter in a 402, which I know you and many other forum buds here own and enjoy. Awesome stuff and yes, 2-way is superior with regards to what you point out, but there are still trade offs involved. Either choice is good and valid in my book. BUT if you throw in DOLLARS into the equation, I built my entire SYSTEM for less than the cost of a pair of TADS, which, when you throw in low distortion, high efficiency, micro definition, etc. and you factor in how much I spent, I'm still in the same league quality-wise as anyone here who spent 10X the amount of cash that I spent. but I digress. My main point before was about CHOICES of Klipsch or Klipsch derived horn setups. All are excellent and way above the other 99% of the general public PWK always talked about. I prefer Roy's top end vs. PWK's, which I'm sure they disagreed about. Roy developed the 2-way after PWK's passing, so it doesn't matter whether PWK would have approved or not. I think Roy's method is superor to what PWK wanted, but that's another opinion beyond the scope of this text. PS: I also think an MWM (as do many other 3-way/4-way Klipsheads, Mark or Eldon do) bass horn is far superior to a Jube bottom when one uses a subwoofer below it anyhow if space savings or appearance is not your goal (more compromises).

No it hasn't. (think Monty Python argument clinic). LOL

And yet PWK and Roy designed the Jubilee with 2-way as a prime goal..! Next time I talk to Roy I need to ask him how they could have made such a bad mistake..? Maybe Klipsch should hire some of our forum experts to straighten out this gross engineering screw-up... miketn Oh, come on, Mike. PWK's prime goal was to raise the high frequency cutoff in the bass horn to go 2-way with a 1 1/2 inch driver at 800 Hz.on a smaller horn (K 403?)with collapsing verticals to EQ up the hight end, not a 2 inch, like the TAD or K69 on the K402 CD horn which need passive or active PEQ to work right. Most of us have heard the 3-way vs. the 2-way, and some prefer the 3-way for various reasons. I like the 2 way just fine but the polar plots from ROY clearly show a narrowing at 8 Khz. For many people, that's not a big deal. Roy creating a 2-way solution was not a mistake, but it gives people a choice vs. the 3-way Jubillee, which is OFFICIALLY in the published Klipsch Cinema catalog. That's not a mistake either. You're a forum expert too.

Yeah, maybe a lot. But hey thats really pretty. I am sorry of I hadn't seen it before, but can you share the story of the origins of your system. The more details the better. I am using the same mid horn, but with a Faital HF200 alone to cover from 500 to 20,000. Thanks for chiming in. The JBL Baby Cheek Tweeters (had them on my Khorns about 5 years ago) are an excellent tweeter from 6K on up and provide much better dispersion angle the ANY midrange horn with any driver, including the TAD. There are several reasons for going 3-way instead of 2-way, and this is certainly one of the main ones, including lower distortion.

Yep. Quite similar soundpath, except mine will be bigger. The key here is SIMPLE sound path, which, I think, is what makes the full blown MWM sound so good.

I have been building speaker boxes since I was 12 years old. The first "good" box I built is when I was 19, using the Badmeiff-Davis book with the Nomogram. Now that we have had Thiele-Small parameters since the 70's and the excellent Hornresp program, we don't have to waste sawdust to get it right. I'm thinking the only reason Eldon got your spare MWMs was to be able to build his own and make them prettier for the home, right Dtel? Fact #1: MWM singles were rare to start with 30 years ago and are no longer being made. One could buy factory made twin woofer MWM bins from Klipsch, but they won't fit through a door of a house, so singles are must for the home. Finding used MWMs bins is rare and expensive to ship, usually with trashed woofers, so you end up shipping lumber. Fact #2: So, the logical step, like Eldon and other in the Klipsch community, it's easier to build our own because it's the simplest, easiest and, arguably the BEST souding bass horn Klipsch has ever made (better than Khorn or Juileee IMHO). In my situation, with the help of Hornresp, I have one of the best drivers to use for a bass horn above 60 Hz. So to build an MWM-like bin that fires into a corner, lowers the height of my tweeters (I sit about 10 feet away), and uses all of the present "dead space" in my corner with the simplest sound path possible makes the most sense. It models, in Hornresp, flatter than the MWMs bin, as it has a smoother, more constant flare expansion AND a bigger mouth relative to the cutoff point. Besides, If I ever choose to build a full blown MWMs instead of a 2/3 one, I can still use the core and buy $100 worth of large plywood to do so. Plus I can make them prettier like Dtels. So my answer to your question is: Yes and No.

I like the race engine analogy. If I could afford factory jubes instead of all my DIY meanderings, I would make sure to be a better driver, meaning I would run Roy's factory race engine but work on getting better recordings (fuel), and MORE importantly run them on the best paved road possible (a better room for listening).

2012 a year ago. Finally got my 402's. Plus more efficient Tweeter driver. Don't need midbass, since the 402 goes to 300 Hz.. Add better horn lens from QSC (mini me 402) and convert to EVM 15L drivers and sell Crites 1526. Add Tapped Horn Sub. and, look at my Avatar!

2011 no height problem but need a sub!

2010

Late 2009. Height Problem????

2009 after I decided two MWMs per side was overkill. With only a 7-foot ceiling in basement, I needed room for the JBL 2360a's and 2446J drivers I got from Ted Nugent's brother-in-law.

Late 2008

Evolution continued in 2008

LOL. Funny, Mark, since you and I got our 4 MWMs bins about 2 weeks apart over 5 years ago (yes time flies). Probably should have kept my last pair or even the clones, but having moved to a smaller space, there was just no room. However, without EQ and using Hornresp modeling, I get much flatter results without the 55 Hz. peak that's in all MWMs bins with either K33 or K43 drivers. I already have EVM 15L woofers in my FH1's which work well in standard MWMs, but even better in the smaller corner version that took me months to come up with. Besides, once I have the MWM core built, I can go back to full fledged MWMs clones in the future with better performance in the midbass and flatter response in the bass end. Besides, like JC did, it's more fun to do a Hornresp model and come up with a good bass horn, in my case, easier to build with only 11 pieces of wood including the standard MWMs coreas shown in my drawing. Mark, please note the twin VMPS Large subs on either side of the center LaScalas. Bass was NOT a problem. LOL.

One of the "big holes" in the audio electronics market right now is an integrated preamp (that can handle audio and video) combined with an active crossover, such that the extra D/A, A/D conversion can be eliminated, thus effectively eliminating passive or outboard active crossovers altogether. I haven't seen one of these yet, and especially not for multi-channel systems (e.g., 5.1, etc.). Handling all bitstream conversions (digital domain) and separating into bi-amp or tri-amp output channels would be a nice capability to have for higher-end multichannel systems.Another approach is for active crossovers to accept digital inputs instead of analog-only inputs like all the active crossovers that I've seen to date, e.g., an HDMI input channel to the active crossover(s), and HDMI output from the preamp. Complete immunity from noise and analog transfer issues is the holy grail, IMHO. Chris While I agree that such a product would be on the "nice to have" list, it would have to be expensive since the volumes would be VERY LOW.

The setups that Roy did for 2 different drivers (K69 and Tad 4002) in the K402 configurations for the EV Dx-38 were done in an anechoic chamber in Hope. this means the flattest response possible with time delays and a Xover point of around 500 Hz. where the polar responses of the 2 horns are matched up. If I had Jubilees with either of those drivers for my K402's that's where I would start. Then on top of that, use Audyssey's global room correction, which would take care of the room anomalies. But the inintital setting, though limited to 2 drivers would be the best place to be "out of the box."

Depends on the Xover point to the top end. More if you cross at 800 Hz. to a smaller horn.