STL

Not totally because other crossover schematics (like the Forte II -- see the other current thread) show a T7A with completely different taps being used (but still yielding a 10dB drop). The schmatic I've seen for a KLF20 also agrees with the Forte II one. While we're at it, does anyone have any info on the 3507 transformer (used in the "newer" Cornwall II)? I've been told it's a T8A and a T4A but two different (reliable) sources.

Seeing the schematic spec a 10dB drop for the squaker, I had assumed the Heresy II used the T7A transformer (that's used in the Forte II and KLF20) -- but tap numbers you put on this schematic imply otherwise. Can anyone here confirm or deny that the Heresy II using a T7A transformer?

Here is the "old" published one for reference...

From what you've said, there is really nothing you can to fix it except to replace the woofer. If the other one sounds good and clean then I'd only replace the bad one. I think it's a K-25-K that you need.

papashawn, On the older speakers it is more complicated to replace the midrange diaphragm, but the Forte II has the H-52H so it's no harder the replacing a tweeter diaphragm. So did the replacements run like $29.84 each? jheis, Thanks for clearing that up. That was what I always thoughs too, but the other response implied otherwise.

Again, does leaking ferrofluid really mean the diaphragm is bad? I've never heard that before...I know someone (like PartsExpress or Madisound) used to sell small vials of ferrofluid, but I cannot seem to find it on their websites so maybe that's no longer the case.

Does leaking ferro-fluid automatically mean the driver is bad (forcing a diaphragm replacment)? Maybe horn lens just needs to be tighten so it's better sandwhiching the diaphragm to the magnet/motor.

Just get some more braided wire and repair them. The K-8-Ks won't word well replacing the K-2-Ks because of problable impedance differences. Somewhere I have the specs for the K-8-Ks, but that won't help much without some specs on the K-2-Ks. All that said, I highly recommend just repairing them. If you're not wanting to do that, I might be interested in buying the K-2-Ks off you if you'll let them go cheap.

I think 1 and 4 would be worth the effort/expense. For the latter just use rope caulk from your local hardware store; it's cheap and works very well. Personally, I think options 2 and 3 are mostly just snake oil. On number 3 my comment is really directed towards that insanely expensive ($17.99/ft) wire you mentioned. I can concede that rewiring might provide a marginal benefit, but just use some quality 14+ga. OFC wire instead of going overboard.

What kind of damage? If the dust cap is just press in then know that's only cosmetic.

On paper there is quite a difference around 1.8kHz (probably caused my the big spike I spoke of before), but you if cannot hear then it doesn't really matter! I see the graph only goes down to 100Hz; are you not able to measure below that? Just curious...

Actually the LP filter is only second order so it rolls off more gradually at 12dB/octave. Well I'm looking a slightly past 2kHz -- partly because you noted an output problem at 2kHz and because that Dayton driver has such a pronounced spike (which looks troublesome IMO). There is a 10db difference alone between that spike and 800Hz -- going down to 200 it looks to be close to 14dB deviation. Looking at the same range on the Audax driver the deviation is around 10-11dB. In addition, the Audax is clearly more efficient than the Dayton (and seemingly a closer match to the original driver). So how did you determine the Xmax of the K-1001-K driver? As far as I know, neither of us know that spec so your statement surprises me a bit. I don't doubt the new passives work, but I guess my analytical brain just finds it odd that you didn't even try the old ones -- especially since passives are tuned to the enclosure and not the active driver. It doesn't surprise me that those Daytons are capable of giving you more low end (they are subwoofers after all), but I cannot help but wonder if it is at the expense of midrange quality (at least somewhat). That's probably doesn't really matter though because it sounds like you need the increased low end to help keep your son from repeatedly blowing the woofers.

Did you ever try the 10" Dayton woofer with the original 12" passive? Like I said before, the stock Klipsch passive is properly tuned the to enlcosure whereas the Dayton one is not. And be aware that the tuning of a passive has nothing to do with the active driver, but instead just the enclosure. I know you said something about the passive and driver matching cosmetically, but it's not like you'd even see them with the grills on. Actually not all the dual coil drivers on Parts Express are rated as subwoofers, then Audax one I mentioned earlier is rated as a woofer. That's likely because it has a smoother top end response than the Dayton driver you selected.

I don't see any pictures (or attachements).

I called and they quoted me $54 per diaphragm. I guess that isn't too bad, but it's still a little risky since I'm not sure they will physically fit even or how well they will even work.

I think you are going to have a hard time working around that huge 2kHz hump the Daytons have without leaving a gap in the sound (between where the woofer rolls off and the horns take over). I would suggest returning those Dayton drivers (and the PRs too) and getting something better suited for the application -- whether it be the Audax drivers, some KG-4.2/4.5 drivers, or something else.

Really? Earlier in this thread you said that you had determined the crossover point to be 1000Hz -- and the Audax looks pretty good up to that point. Or do you no longer believe the xover point is that low? I just dug around my "notes" and found the xover point for the KG4.2 is 1600Hz; Klipsch used to publish that number in the specs on their website so that's how I got the number. So if the KG5.2 has a similar xover point (which would make since becuase they use the same tweeter horns) then the Audax driver looks pretty decent up to that point -- even with the dip between 800-900Hz. Nope, not the Audax I gave you -- it's only listed as a woofer and not a subwoofer. That said I will concede that their classifications might not be accurate in all cases, but I think it's pretty clear that the Dayton you picked out was really designed to be a subwoofer. You also might see what Madisound has to offer. Have you called 1-800-KLIPSCH to see if they still have the KG-4.2/4.5 woofers available? They would probably be your best match.

If you have relatively low ceilings (like only 8 foot) and/or hardwood floors then I would recommend against not rotating the horns like some have suggested. You don't want a bunch of reflections from floors or ceiling messing with the sound. You said the speaker will be located below the TV; so I assume the center horns will be lower than the horns in your front mains correct? If so, you should plan to tilt it your center upwards. Otherwise I think your current plans look fine.

The reason those Dayton drivers aren't working well is likely due to the fact the were made to be subwoofers and not woofers. I missed that before or I would have tried talk you out of buying them (even moreso that I previously did). Being the Daytons were designed to be subwoofers, little concern was given to the upper level playback -- and it shows. If you look at the Audaxs that I recommended (which are designed as woofers) you'll see that while they do have peaking near 2k, but it is only about 4dB -- whereas the Dayton's peak is close to triple that at around 11dB. So I can see how that might be causing trouble. You'll also see that the Audax driver has a much flater response (especially from 150Hz to 800Hz) than the Dayton driver -- which might due to the superior/stiffer cone material used by the Audax driver. Here are the graphs I am comparing: http://www.hautparleur.fr/_audax/ht240z0.pdf http://www.partsexpress.com/pdf/295-485spec.pdf Note the scale on the two graphs is different. I still think the Audax driver has a good chance of working well for you. You could also consider getting 10" driver from the KG-4.2/4.5 if Klipsch still has those available.

Okay, so tell me all about it then. Getting info out of you is like pulling teeth. []

I guess I incorrectly assumed the two drivers you have were the same. Now that I know they are not, I cannot recommend even considering and iso configuration. If you really want to attempt to reuse one or more of those drivers then you'll need to buy something that'll give you the specs on the drivers (like this: http://www.partsexpress.com/pe/pshowdetl.cfm?&Partnumber=390-804 ). But even then you still might find that you cannot reuse either driver -- and you'll just have to buy one that'll do what you need. That said, even if you have two subwoofers in like (as in both ported or both sealed) enclosures that are both tuned to 15Hz they can still sound VERY different overall (even if driven with identical amps). Maybe your new sonotube -- that you are trying to match -- is tighter or even looser than your current sub and that is what is leading to this perceived imbalance. This difference could be caused by the box's alignment, the driver's characteristics, or the amplifiers characteristics (including any signal processing it might do internally) -- so you're got a lot of variables. Is the subwoofer you are wanting to match one you bought or built?

I mentioned the iso config because I thought that a larger enclosure (effectively not literally) might allow the drivers to play lower than they could in the current enclosure size -- and it might allow an enclosure configuration change. That said, you would have to compensate for the lower efficiency by driving the speakers with more power which might not be possible physically (if you were already driving them at or near their power limit) or financially (meaning you don't want to buy another amplifier). So are you really saying you can locate the source of a 15Hz output? If so, I believe your problem might very well be due the resonances (octaves higher) caused by the 15Hz signal rather than that very low frequency itself. Have you considered that? Again what brand/model are the drivers? And tell us more about the enclosure they are currently in (and/or the one you want to put them in).

I hear you Bob! I've been close to just starting my Klipsch-Cerwin Vega project for years now. [] Maybe I'll actually get started on it before this time next year.

That depends how you set them up. If you do an isobarik setup then I believe that can help with extension issues (but then you don't gain the SPL increase), but if you just run two of them in an enlcosure that's twice as large (but the same design as the box that had issues) then you really won't gain anything but SPL. What drivers are they? What kind of enlcosure were they in before and what do you plan to put them in now?

Yet, huh -- does this mean you might be close to finding some?I did look around the Klipsch website and apparently the KPT-200 used a 1.5-inch titanium compression driver, but I have the feeling it will be a rather pricey part.