Chris A

When I setup my Magnepan MG-IIIa's (dipoles) without toe-in, I found the same thing happened. I wonder if the Forte IIs splash mf and/or hf around the room? Chris

Reconciliation of estranged family members... Having my own children close by and being able to witness as they grow into adulthood... My 91-year-old mother-in-law alive to see another year...and seeing the care of her daughters for her... Having both parents in good health... Having a good job and having had opportunities that most young folks now find difficult to find... My own health... Friends who have recently lost their spouses--witnessing their strength during their losses... Good tunes...new and old...(sounding much better now)...each day... Prayers answered... Chris

Note that I have a bit of a problem using a Heresy in my setup because of the height of the Jub's K-402 horns sitting on the Jub bass bins and looking up to my TV screen above a fireplace: the Heresy's bass performance doesn't work very well up in the air on the fireplace masonry. I was trying to get a center speaker whose hf drivers are closer to the rhumb line between the centerline of the K-402s. The Belle and the CW are equally good in this respect but I prefer the Belle's horn-loaded bass and it is very nice looking. Chris

Sure - no problem... When an amplifier reaches its limit on voltage output that it can produce it will usually "flat top" the output signal, which in turn sends most of the output to your tweeters (turning the sharp corner on the flat top of the output signal turns into lots of unplanned high-frequency power output). Most tweeters cannot absorb the kind of power input that midrange and low frequency drivers can absorb before failure. This usually results in "blowing the tweeter". A speaker's driver cones have a limit to the travel motion that they can move before they either run out of the magnetic field or the cone's center piece hits the internal magnet pole piece and stops suddenly (bottoming out). Chris

Yes, it's okay. It says that the amp will probably not clip up until you bottom out the speaker's driver cones, and this will keep your tweeters from being blown out if you really drive your system very hard with very dynamic music. Chris

If you're going to consider that, I'd recommend a Heresy instead, since the top two drivers/horns are very similar to the LS. Have you thought about a Belle or a vertical CW? They're only ~18 3/4" deep, where the LS is 24+.Rationale: I've heard a lot of negative things about the Academy from different users here, and a few that are satisfied. I think that the answer to this question is "yes". I'd recommend the best performing, most efficient, most full-range speaker that you can wedge in.The vertical CW would go the lowest, while the Belle would have the cleanest, most efficient lf. Chris P.S. Note that I'm upgrading to Belles (both setups) for centers from bi-amped Heresy/P.Audio horn+K-69-A driver because of the lack of clean lf. I'll let you know the difference once I get them integrated into my setups.

I believe that the distance used to measure the K-402 performance is on the order of ~10-15 feet inside the Klipsch chamber in Hope (I'm sure someone here has the exact distance...).Greg, I believe that I understand what you are driving at, but note that well-designed horn/driver units with not-too-undersized mouths will probably measure well in the near field like they behave in far-field. Where it gets tricky is where the horns cannot control their coverage pattern to keep the direct acoustic energy off the close side walls/ceiling/floor and diffract off of the speaker enclosures themselves. In this case near-field measurements can be limiting since you effectively have non-point acoustic sources. To take this to an extreme, think about dipole radiators and other speakers that are designed to splash their energy around the room (near field). There is one more subject of importance here: time-alignment of drivers in a multi-driver (and multi-crossover) speaker. Most Klipsch Heritage owners talk about "minimum listening distance" (especially with the Khorn), but I find that that distance collapses down to a very short dimension when the speaker's drivers are time-aligned electronically via active crossover delays, and the horn's polar response coverage is controlled down to about 400 Hz. The Jub's minimum listening distance (empirically) seems to be only a couple of feet at most and is more correlated whether or not you are listening on-axis vertically between the hf and lf horns. Chris

Just making sure that we are addressing the original questions... I believe that the answer is "both" but a lot more toward a flat performance in order to hear something like what the mastering engineer heard--assuming that the mastering engineer is trying to achieve something like a faithful reproduction of the original performance. That assumption often doesn't hold up for popular music--and especially multi-tracked recordings where I sometimes don't have any clue what the mastering engineer is trying to achieve.Typically, though, this is a valid assumption when listening to audiophile recordings. Note that this is an "bottomless pit" discussion that I do not care to slide into, but I think you will follow what I'm trying to say. This could be argued, if you are using quality speakers. I personally do not allow an automatic EQing unit to "correct" for room EQ imbalances. I use several techniques to minimize the effects of room acoustics that persistently color the sound reproduction over what the engineer heard when s/he mastered the recording. I've found that this approach results in outstanding results with great recordings and not so great results when listening to poor recordings--poor being defined in terms of poor recording, mixing, mastering, or production to physical media--throughout the whole chain of sound production. I find that many non-audiophile listeners often listen to poor recordings that together make up the relatively small set of recordings that they "like", and are very dissatisfied with their sound reproduction systems when they don't sound "the way they want it to sound", whatever that means (and it varies from recording to recording). The folks that I look up to on this subject seem to prefer to get speakers, amplifiers, preamps and input sources (including turntables) that are relatively flat in FR to begin with. In particular, I can attest to the effect of EQing high-quality speakers to be relatively flat in an anechoic chamber, then use the speakers relatively unaltered in their living rooms. I've found that the answer for me is somewhere in between and is a function of frequency. I personally do not change speaker EQ settings above about 200-250 Hz, preferring instead to use the anechoic settings (assuming quality speakers). The effects of doing this are dramatic, IMHO. However, it gets a lot more complicated below about 250 Hz where small room acoustic modes dominate and color the sound reproduction in undesirable ways. I've found that the combination of room acoustic treatment, good room speaker positioning and judicious use of EQ help to overcome room problems. This is particularly true below about 100 Hz, where I've found good EQ work usually pays off. I personally EQ for rising response below 100 Hz, and there is some documentation justifying this in the JAES articles. Chris

http://www.snodo.eu/wp-content/uploads/VOX_N40_manual.pdf

In its normal (landscape) orientation, the K402 horn is going to get about 50 degrees of coverage in the vertical dimension and about 100 degrees in the horizontal. This horn will hold that pattern to well below the typical crossover point (i.e., below 400 Hz). [8-|] Chris

Helmholz resonators typically have a fairly sharp "Q" or resonance band. How did you arrive at the length/damping of the tubes? Was it by ear, calculation via room dimensions, measurement, or by other means?Chris[Y]

The Audyssey in my AVP uses 5 10 swept-sine "chirps" for each speaker in each microphone position. The results of the EQ that it computes are not available for me to see and to modify - and that is not a good thing, IMHO. I've found that using different techniques--pink-noise RTA with an EQ unit, Room EQ Wizard [REW], and active crossover EQ functions--are great tools that work. The Audyssey function in my AVP is only good for setting delays and setting relative channel gains in my 5.1--the result of which I can see and modify to my needs. Chris

I would at least try out the short wall without a center channel for two-channel operation. I'd also make sure that the false corners allow you to pull the Khorns out of the corners very slightly--about 6-8 inches from the front wall and side walls--and aim them directly at your listening position or very slightly "uprange (pointed more at each other). Listen for imaging performance. Chris

I've done the same thing with the Jubs, and I've also got mine on either side of a fireplace (see profile pic). I've found that the reflections from the top-horn direct path (K-402/TAD-4002) off of: 1) the fireplace masonry, and 2) the far corner/Jub ...are the issues. I took care of issue #1 by moving the Jubs forward a bit and placing tapped horn subs behind them. I also moved them toward the center of the mantle by about 6" each, which also improved the imaging by a significant margin, too. Issue #2 is about to be addressed by moving the listening position back very slightly and aiming the Jubs downrange a bit more. I'm really surprised that this information about corner horn placement isn't widely disseminated around this forum, because it is a dramatic change and it costs very little if anything to accomplish. Chris

Apparently it is important to others...[8-)] Okay, I'll get with it... So how much power are you running and do you ever run out of headroom in your setup? [*-)] I'm biamping using Crown D-75As (~45 W/channel into 8 Ohms at rated distortion) and have never seen any hint of a clipping light, and I regularly run well above WAF loudness levels (~100+ dB© on the "fast scale" using very dynamic recordings. No hint of running out of headroom. We must be talking about a totally different regime of operation unknown to my ears. Or am I missing something? [*-)] Chris

I'm a little surprised that no one here has discussion dynamic headroom on amplifiers [:|] Back to the subject of boundary (room) gain--from the link provided by Lee (Arkytype): "Boundary loading is often touted as being desirable for subwoofers. While some impressive gains were seen at very low frequencies, it’s not likely that the boundaries available for such placements are sufficiently large and rigid to realize these benefits. Room modes will also dominate the subwoofer response in most applications. So, the ear remains the final authority on benefits of boundary-loading subs." This is an interesting subtopic on the "how many Watts for..." discussion, which, to me is interesting, but not wholly useful. I believe that instrumented in-room readings are most desirable to install speakers into rooms (small, medium and large rooms) and the effects of doing in-room EQ really can't be overemphasized, IMHO. But what about corner horns - like the Khorn and the Jubilee? What is the deal about room gain? Well--it's frequency-dependent--isn't it? There is a pretty good AES article that discusses the same subject with regard to subwoofers (T. Salava, "Subwoofers in Small Listening Rooms", 4940 (N5), 1999, JAES) except that the discussion is limited to that region where we typically want to have "room gain" -- the lowest-lf performance of loudspeakers and subwoofers. I don't think that I personally need room gain above the bottom lf region--do you? (I.e., in small rooms--the type that we all own unless we live in a large high-bay warehouse or a gymnasium.) What was his "surprising results"? Do what most acoustics "experts tell you NOT to do - put the subs into the corners to couple to the room modes: The reason why to place subwoofers in corners especially in small listening room seems quite simple. In this case all the room modes are fully excited, and can be transfer-active." Counterintuitive? Not for the guy that designed the Khorn. So what is the deal with room gain above, well let's say, 100 Hz? Placing your speakers into the corners will result in undesirable effects if the following is true: using "nondirectional" speakers. For instance, the problem with Bose 901s is that they sound bigger than they are but the sound image is very confusing to the ear, and they are taking advantage of the boundary gain effect in ways that many here in this forum abhor due to their "nondirectional" behavior. Many small-box loudspeaker aficionados like their speakers placed out into the room. Why? Nondirectionality of direct radiating drivers above about 400-600 Hz. This is a big deal. If you like direct-radiating loudspeakers above about 400 Hz, then--more power to you. However, it's definitely not my cup of tea. I have learned more about corner horn placement and room boundaries recently: it's really nice to be able to get the top horns (~400 Hz and higher) slightly away from the closest room boundaries and furnishings between stereo pairs of cornerhorns. How? By placing your horn-loaded subs behind your cornerhorns to form a false corner behind them (...notice how I slipped that one in). This way, decoupling the issue of room gain to get lf-only and allowing you to place your cornerhorns out into the room very slightly is a big deal in imaging since, IMHO, you don't want boundary room gain to couple to the hf above about 400 Hz. But your hf horns must control their polars down below their crossover point - in the vertical and horizontal directions if you want to decouple from those "undesirable boundary couplings". Chris [8-|]

Well, maybe not the Behringer active crossover, but I'd recommend a used EV crossover--like a Dx38 or a DC-One.Chris P.S. -- There are actually quite a few digital crossovers on the market and a few that are not digital (Rane, etc.) that are now represented well on the used marketplace, too. The EV Dx38 is what Roy Delgado , et al., use at Klipsch to test their developmental speakers. Any of these will probably work quite well for La Scala upgrades, and I believe will fairly dramatically increase the fidelity of your listening experience. Here is a thread on active crossovers/bi-amping that might answer some questions.

If you have an active crossover--such as a EV Dx38, DC-One, or a Behringer DCX-2496--you can do this and I think it is preferred if you are crossing over to your subs above, well, let's say 80 Hz, and your room is fairly large in plan view (i.e., length x width). However, if you are crossing at a lower point or your room isn't very large (i.e., less than 15 feet in x or y dimensions), then I think that the sub-out channel is sonically indistinguishable. Yes, if you are not using a AVP/AVR, then most '70s thru ~'80s vintage receivers didn't have a separate subwoofer channel. I think that you will need an active crossover downstream of your preamp and upstream of power amps if you want to be able to control the gain on the "subwoofer" channels.Chris

...Capacitors in the crossover: replacing them with something better and a lot newer since caps degrade over time (...some types less rapidly than others). "Something better" can be defined in multiple ways - I'd search this forum for Heresy cap refreshing threads and then pick your own price point/performance level. I bought my replacement Solen's at Parts Express for a few dollars, but that's only my opinion... Chris

Let's take this one at a time... The K77 is notorious for being a bit harsh, especially in its usual crossover region. The CT125 would like need a bit of a boost to compensate for the fact that you are listening at medium to low levels (due to Fletcher-Munson effects). I'd try pushing the gain on the high end a bit more when using the Crites tweeters. The La Scala and the other Heritage midrange horns all have an issue related to the midrange horn--and that issue is that the vertical dimension of the horn's mouth is too short to control its polar response down to the lower crossover frequency (400 Hz). What this results in is ceiling/floor bounce, and your room has a low ceiling-10' is much better but still a little low. I'd try putting a diffuser on the ceiling half-way between your speakers and your listening position, or alternatively placing absorbing foam strips on the upper and lower lips of the midrange horn's mouth to suppress some of that ceiling/floor bounce. This could be the tweeter harshness/distortion, midrange loss of polar control (the "ceiling bounce" that I referred to) resulting in a timbre shift in midrange, and/or your amplifier's characteristics (try using a SS amp and listening - this may make all the difference in the world for sparkle and airiness). Sorry I didn't read this thread earlier, but I would have recommended bi-amping (like Coytee) but at a much lower price point using P.Audio drivers/horns and a DCX-2496 active crossover (~$270 new), using whatever amps that you have to drive the woofers and your tube amp on the hf horns/drivers. This would have resulted in much improved performance, IMHO. You could have upgraded gradually to better equipment as your pocketbook allowed. Sorry about that... Chris[:#]

http://top40.about.com/od/top10lists/tp/thanksgivingpop.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thanksgiving_song

Actually, Toole stated that any speakers beyond 110 degrees from centerline just didn't add much of anything psychoacoustically, implying to me that 5.1 properly setup really equals a typical 7.1 setup (a fairly controversial comment, I might add, and one that might decrease sales for Harman International, the company that he retired from as chief engineer a couple of years ago). I'm not taking sides on this issue since I don't use 7.1, but I will say that I found very little in Toole's book that I thought was off the mark. [:|] Toole implies that you might be able to not use separate back surround speakers and still essentially get the same performance if you are willing to set it up well as a 5.1. Chris

Boy - did you make a mistake on that one...[6] Good height. It looks like the RS-52s and -62s have symmetrical hf horns, meaning that the on-axis response from each hf side (bipolar drivers) is parallel with the floor. I would try to avoid getting them too close to the ceiling to avoid ceiling bounce. Have you thought about angling the RS-52's down a bit? This would be an elegant solution to having them a bit too high. If you could use a wedge-shaped piece of wood behind the speaker to angle them downwards, that would eliminate any gaps between the speaker and the wall. One hundred ten degrees is optimal, according to Toole.Chris [A]