Stu Pidass

Boa12: I guess Big Brother is watching. Maybe Stu is a bad word in a foreign language or maybe it's Pidass that's the problem. I just don't get it.

I love it when Bob sets things straight. You da MAN Bob! You da MAAAAAAN!!

Hitachi is to RPTV what Sony is to the tube market. Don't buy anything until you've looked at the 53" Hitachi 53SBX59B. This is one awsome analogue set. You really have to view it to appreciate it. I would have to say that the picture on this set is as good as the 35" XBR direct view. That's pretty fantastic for RP!!! Scan lines are only visible during credit rolls from a 13' viewing distance.

I have been researching for an A/V receiver for a Cornwall led surround system. Horn driven systems sound fantastic with the correct amplification and VERY harsh with the wrong amp. It's my understanding it has a smooth tube like sound. The Marantz SR-8000 is at the top of my list. If you also enjoy 2 channel audio, this receiver may be for you. Any other comments on the match of Marantz to Klipsch?

Currently running Vintage '81 Cornwall mains, KLF C-7 Center, KSP-S6 Surrounds. I'm looking at the 2 channel audio in addition to the movies surround sound. I read good things about the Marantz SR-8000 (MRSP $1300 US) and the Marantz SR-19 (MRSP $1700 US) integrated A/V receivers. Are there any rivals that will offer the "tube like" smooth power of the Marantz line? I know the Denon line is highly rated but is it suitable for Klipsch speakers? Of course with Klipsch awsome efficiency, I won't need gobs of power. Thank you PWK.

TalkToKeith: That being true you should replace the lamp cord used in your crossovers with Monster Type Cables. I'm not saying there's no difference. I'm simply skeptical that a short run of 12 or 14 guage wire will be that much improved using expensive cables. I for one won't be paying good money on the "chance" the improvement, if any, will be worthwhile.

I have been listening to vintage Cornwalls since 1981 and always with "lamp cord" speaker wire. I'm a long time happy customer. Well it's not really that bad as it's fairly thick wire but certainly no Monster Cables or the like. Having said that I DO believe that hearing is believing. I won't "dis" the speaker wire enthusuests before trying it myself. I may find an audible obvious difference. Maybe I personally and respectfully will believe it when I hear it.

I have been trying to decide between the Denon, the Marantz SR-8000 and the Outlaw. It's been a very tough decision. If your budget for a receiver or preamp is only at the $1000 price point and you want Surround and quality tube like sound for music, then the SR8000 is definitely for you. Having said that you won't go wrong with any one of these manufacturers.

Dum Bass: I think we met at that thar convention for the mentally challenged. My think muscle just can't quite remember.

AudioReview.com has no shortage of reviews on AV receivers and the following is a sample of only one. I would encourage you to visit this site. Excellant reference. I personally am not suggesting the Denon is not a good reveiver and I'm sure there will be reviews there that will support Denon fans. More than one reviewer of the Marantz made reference to the smooth (tube like) sound of this receiver being an excellant match for Klipsch speakers. "I have finally decided to pursue affordable quality home theater gear. An audiophile by nature, I first sought after stereo hi-fidelity that would maximize sonic performance for the dollar. However, with a mind to the future, I wanted home theater compatibility that would not intrude or compromise on my 2 channel stereo. Fortunately, enough hi-value products with characteristics far exceeding other items at the same price point were available that allowed for several options when trying to system match. I completed this stereo system almost a year ago and waited for the right home theater products to come along that would satisfy me at target price points. Unfortunately, the level of quality I was looking for was two to three times more than I was willing to spend. Towards the end of 1999, HT receivers with the features and capabilities I was looking for finally came on the market. The improvement in build quality wasnt where I had hoped it would be, but there still was enough of an improvement to consider these products. To equal the build quality of my stereo, I would still have to shell-out twice as much as I had budgeted. I have to give credit to the Denon marketing machine and the reviews of their AVR-5700 and AVR-3300 receivers for making me want to audition equipment. I also want to thank the consumers that were wrapped-up in the media hype of those products that they drove-up the selling price of said equipment but managed to ignore other like-gear or not make the effort to seek them out. This was important to me because dealers would still discount the cost of the SR8000 to make it price competitive with the much sought after AVR-3300 which was being sold (back-ordered, that is) at retail cost across town. However, I did discover too that quantities retailers first shipments of the SR8000 and SR7000 were selling out as well. I considered products from H/K, Onkyo, Yamaha, Denon, and Marantz that I figured I could buy for about $1000 U.S. Dollars + tax or less. Unfortunately B&K receivers and Adcom separates were out of my range. I auditioned the Yamaha RX-V995, Denon 3300, and the Marantz SR8000 seriously. For fun I listened to a Lexicon processor mated to Adcom amps earlier when I picked-up the NHT AudioCenter-1 that matched the NHT 2.5i main speakers. I was immediately not satisfied with the harshness of the Yamaha. Im particularly glad that I was able to listen to these on the unforgiving NHT 2.5i speakers so I could rule them out without question. I auditioned the Denon and Marantz together very briefly, but it was enough to know that they sounded quite similar and were both excellent pieces at $1000-$1200. In terms of build quality, warranty and remote (remote emphasized), the Marantz was a clear winner. This dealer and others I had talked to were unwilling to discount the Denon below retail, but was willing to provide a small discount on the Marantz. Note that he was out of stock on both pieces, but he knew when his next shipment of SR8000 would arrive, but had no idea when he would get the Denon 3300 back-orders in. That was a bit of a supply vs. demand economics lesson for me. I found it ironic that the Marantz, an overall better product could be had for almost the same price as the Denon which you would have to wait for. A week later, I attempted a more thorough audition of the SR8000s musical capabilities at a dealer that had one left that he would sell to me for $1050. The salesperson hooked the SR8000 to a CAL DX-2 CD player and Vandersteen 2CE speakers, a reasonable system that someone purchasing an SR8000 might have. I dont know what it was about this particular set-up, but it was a bit muddy. My fiancee even commented that it didnt seem very coherent and claimed to hear background noise or static as she walked into the show/listening room with a large package of shavings for her Chinchillas from the adjacent pet store. I decided this wasnt a satisfactory audition, but my previous listen was enough for me to buy it and scrutinize it at home with my gear and return it if it didnt work-out. Set-up was rather easy. I decided to program the remote later. Since my subwoofer is connected through a second set of main speaker outputs on my Adcom GFP-750 preamp, I had to ensure that all low-level information would be routed to the SR8000 main speaker outputs. This was done by setting the main speakers to large and the center to small. The rear speaker setting didnt appear to have much influence on the bass output at the subwoofer. I was a bit disappointed to discover that my Adcom preamps processor loop back-panel labeling and diagram in the manual didnt coincide with how the unit was actually assembled...turned out the processor input was actually the output and vice versa (a slight annoyance, but not worth the hassle of sending it back for repair and risk having something else malfunction or get the enclosure all dinged-up). In its permanent configuration, Im using an external amp for the front two channels routed through the Adcom preamps processor loop, and the SR8000s internal amps for the center and surrounds. However, I did experiment with the SR8000 connected directly to the main speakers through its internal amps and hooked the CAL Icon Mk II CD player directly to its CD input so I could hear what the receiver and its internal amps sounded like. I also listened to it connected directly to the external Adcom GFA-5500 2-channel amp (without first passing through the preamp). Fortunately, the SR8000 didnt sound incoherent in my system like it did where I made the purchase. I was very happy with the way it sounded. Listening to the receiver connected directly to the CD player and speakers, I found the Stereo-Direct mode to be the best way to listen to music. It provided a good image across the front. Instruments were distinctly separated from each other and defined by a hard edge that wasnt grating. I was surprised that it was able to bring out some inner detail which I didnt expect to hear through a receiver. It had a lot of punch and energy from its tight bass up through the high frequencies. The background and space between the instruments were dark and quiet as it should be. There was no hiss to muddy the sound and detail unless you had the system cranked all the way up. The midrange appeared ever so slightly emphasized, which was more noticeable at the higher volumes. The upper-midrange did suffer slightly from a little bit of grain. Sibilance was there in the high frequencies, but it was very subtle. It may have only been noticeable because the NHT 2.5i is known to be very demanding of components, revealing problem areas no matter how slight. The SR8000 did lack three-dimensionality using the 2-channel stereo-direct mode. The images were placed properly laterally, but there was no depth. At the higher party-level volume, this lack of depth caused the images to overlap one-another and obscure the detail. This is when you want to use the 5-channel stereo mode. Inner detail is lost and the high frequencies are rolled-off, but the images suddenly gain bloom and new life. The hard defining edge around the instruments is slightly muddied, but the separation actually improves since they now occupy their own space in three dimensions. Even though there is that loss of detail, the instruments seem more real. 5-Channel stereo really draws you into the music and envelopes you. I recommend you tweak the treble up a couple notches when using 5-channel stereo to force-out some perceived detail. As far as 2-channel stereo non-direct mode is concerned, dont even bother. Its like taking the worst traits of stereo-direct (lack of depth) and 5 channel (reduction in detail) and combining the two; totally un-involving and utterly worthless (unless you really, really, need those tone controls). As a stereo pre-amp, there was improvement. So it could be worth it to upgrade to external amps in the future, particularly if you desire more power. Hooked-up to the Adcom GFA 5500 Amp through Audioquest Ruby interconnects, the slight grain in the upper midrange was reduced significantly (although there wasnt much grain there to begin with). Sibilance was also reduced some. The music was more liquid and flowed better. The background noise that could be heard at the highest volume settings appeared to be cut in half. Inner detail was present, but it may have lost a little. My guess is that the SR8000s internal amps aggressively etched the information resulting in apparent better detail, but also bringing out those negative qualities like sibilance and grain. The SR8000 did continue to show a slight emphasis in the midrange and there was no improvement in depth of image. The casual listener who isnt concerned with soundstage would probably not notice the difference between my dedicated GFP-750 preamp and the SR8000 used as a preamp right away. When switching between the two, the sound doesnt seem to change obviously but the soundstage does. The difference in sound does become apparent the longer one listens. The depth induced by the SR8000s 5-channel stereo is easily recognized because it extends the stage from the speaker position, all the way up to the listener. Slightly unnatural, but very euphonic and enjoyable (and adjustible). The GFP-750 on the other hand creates 3 dimensions with just two speakers, without a loss of detail, and more believable, natural depth. The GFP-750 does not suffer from the overlap of images at louder volumes because there is front to back separation as well as side to side. Also, the GFP-750 puts a razor thin outline around its images, versus the SR8000 outline that seems like a hardwood frame in comparison. I was very happy with Pro-logic performance while watching VHS. Movie DSP was cute, and Hall DSP was absolutely the most perfect thing for certain concert videos. I was astounded as I watched Dead Can Dance _Toward the Within_ concert video. Just incredible. 5-channel stereo works very well for music videos on VHS. I had some new-found fun watching the Cleopatra Records _Industrial Nation_ and _Goth Box_ videos. Alas, no mode could cure the poor audio on Bauhaus _Shadows of Light_ video. I was floored when I hooked-up a DVD player for the first time at home. Im using the Marantz DV7000 in my system. I decided not to use the SR8000 as a video switcher and ran the Tributary Silver video cable direct from the DV7000 to the television. It seemed like the more economical thing to do, along with maximizing the video performance of the system (my current TV only has a composite video input and is a small 20-inch). My first DVD experience with this system was the German movie _Run Lola Run_. Caution: some viewers may be winded after watching this movie! It was almost like watching a movie-length music video because of the pulsing synthpop soundtrack (techno-like, just not as obnoxious). The voice-over english dialog took away from understanding the characters real emotion and was, of course, very detached. After switching to the german dialog with english subtitles, all was well. Dialog was rich and detailed, the musical soundtrack made you want to get up and thrash about the room (hey, who put this nightclub in my house?), and the few crashes in the movie were very startling. I watched Ronin next...thats what people do when they get DVD players, right? That story was just an excuse for cool gunfights and wild car chases. But hey, I grew-up on Dukes of Hazard, so you know I enjoyed the chase scenes alot. To make-up for that plot though, Ill have to buy something dark and humurous by Tim Burton. If your budget for a receiver or preamp is only at the $1000 price point and you want Surround and quality sound for music, then the SR8000 is definitely for you. If you really care a lot about music and were planning to spend $1500-$2000 on a preamp/amp, integrated, or receiver and only wanted surround as a bonus, then your decision is tougher. I was faced with this decision last year and went for the dedicated music system first. The Marantz SR8000 is an excellent receiver. It is perfect for upgrading to multi-channel surround if you are an audiophile with a dual purpose system and have a preamp with a built-in processor loop. Its built better and looks better than other competing receivers. The sound is much better than I had imagined possible in a receiver that cost me $1050. One thing I am curous about and should have checked was the sonics of the SR7000 in comparison to the SR8000. Spec wise, there does not seem to be any significant difference. Externally, the only noticable differenes is the HDAM label on the front, the copper chassis, and the gold-plated outputs on the rear. Audition this receiver and be happy!"

I too am planning on upgrading from my prologic to a true 5.1 or 6.1 receiver. My research so far has uncovered a couple of interesting contenders. The Marantz SR-8000 is ceratinly one I will look into further. The other that has caught my attention is the Outlaw 1050. They utilize direct distribution inan effort to keep th eprice reasonable. I must say the price $599 is very attractive for a 6.1 receiver. It's only 65 watts per channel, but with efficient Klipsch, that's not an issue at all. The Marantz, on the other hand is over double the price at $1300 is a 5.1 and has 105 watts per channel. Both have rave reviews. It's going to be a very togh decision to say the least.

It's my understanding that Klipsch no longer manufacturs the KLF C-7 due to lagging sales (not sure if this is actually true). In that event, is there another current Klipsch model that would be a suitable centre for my Cornwalls or should I simply search for a used C-7 which could be very hard to find?

I'm a rookie with this home theatre stuff. My setup consists of heritage Cornwalls for mains and paradigm cinema series surrounds. Currently I'm simply using the prologic decoder that's built into my 53' Hitachi RPTV. I'm also utilizing the TV itself as the center channel (it has 60 watts of power). The TV also powers the surround speakers which are hooked directly to the back of the TV. The TV's audio out RCA jacks run to my existing integrated 2 channel amplifier which allows me to seperately control the volume of the main speakers (Cornwalls). A little tweaking so the centre is not overpowered by the mains and the system is pretty impressive (That is until I heard a 5.1 system). After hearing a true 5.1 setup I have become obsessed with upgrading my home theatre. It was a Harmon Cardon AVR300 5.1 receiver with B&W speakers all around including a powered subwoofer. Now I have no doubt that my Cornwalls are the base to blow away this B & W system but I just can't go out and spend thousands of dollars. Instead I'll take it one step at a time. Starting with a center channel. Now I realize this is a Klipsch BB and I myself am the proud long time owner of heritage Cornwalls BUT is it possible that another brand might be as good or evan a (dare I say) better match for my mains? Any suggestions on what to look for when "matching" the center channel? Is sensitivity important or can this somehow be balanced with seperate volume controls for each channel? (I know next to nothing about the receivers and how they power each channel). The Energy AC300 has some spectacular reviews but it may not, for whatever reason, "match" my Cornwalls. If not, why? If Klipsch is "the way" then which one? Any advise would be greatly appreciated.

Vinyl sounds better than CD???? I personally couldn't wait to rid my system of the hiss and pops and lack of dynamic range of my old vinyl (not to metion feedback at loud volumes). I've got lots of audiophile series recorings that I keep simply for nostalgiac reasons. My cassette deck and turntable are packed away in boxes (good ridance). What's next?........8 tracks? Maybe AM stereo radio. Sorry I really don't want to offend but I'll need proof before believing.

Linda: You should save yourself all this grief & stress. I would recommend you cut all ties that might remind you of your ex-husband. I'll do you a huge favour and take those KHorns off your hands. How does $500 sound?

Marty: Apparently the Cornwall did utilize the same bass driver as the Khorn, LaScalla and Belle. My sincere apologies. If they use the same bass driver, can someone explain how they differ? Is it simply the fact that the Cornwall is a vented enclosure?

Why are people posting the same message twice? Why are people posting the same message twice? (I'm SUCH an *******!)

That's nice Marty but the fact remains that Cornwalls do NOT use the same bass driver as the Klipschorn or LaScala. That's all. I'd like some of whatever your smokin'. My comments remain as originally posted.

There are many free or cheap tweeks you can do on Cornwall l speakers in an effort to "improve" the sound. Do a search and you'll find a wealth of information. I personally have not tried any of them and am more than satisfied with the sound as Paul W. Klipsch intended it to be. Maybe I'm am minority but modifying these beauties would be like putting fender flares, a hood scoop and dingle balls on a vintage original 1967 Z28 Camaro. YUK!!! The single best thing you can do is experiment with speaker placement. Hopefully you'll have a large rectangular room with free corners on the short wall. The soundstage (imaging) is drastically effected by the placement. Make sure they are away from the back wall and in from the side walls. Experimentation is the key. Again a search will yield a wealth of information. Another consideration is your front end and specifically your amplification. Cornwalls will "cruze" with amazingly low power and as such do NOT require gobs of expensive amplification. Instead be concerned with the quality of power in the low wattage area. Many amps publish their THD (total harmonic distortion) levels at their best possible power output which normally is way more than you'll use for the Cornwalls. These same amps will produce huge amounts of distortion at low wattage which is precisely where you will most often run your Cornwalls. Remember about 32 watts will produce 115 db of "concert level" sound. You will often use less than 1 or 2 watts. Tube amplifiers , YES old tube amplifiers, provide excellant low wattage power and this is one reason why the people who use them swear by them. Again there is a wealth of info on this very topic. Search away, read away and enjoy away. Cornwalls RULE !!!

I'm not sure this is the proper forum to post articles for sale. Having said that I'd love to buy these. What is the original finish and please post the model and serial numbers from each. Any modifications, tweeks or driver replacements? Let me qualify my previous statement. Although I'd love to buy them, I'm sure the shipping (to Canada) would be cost prohibitive. Others, however, who are in a better position will find this info most useful.

No to be critical Marty but the Cornwall l shares the tweeter and midrange of the klipschorn and LaScala. The bass is actually where they differ. The Cornwall uses a vented port "normal" 15" woofer which I believe you correctly identified as the K-33. The LaScala and Klipschorn, however, use a horn loaded system (not sure the part number). This is why corner placement for these is essential for proper bass reproduction.

On the topic of exotic wood finishes. All I can say is my recollection of the oak finish in 1981 being $600 Canadian over and above the retail $1,750 for the plain birch plywood. It wouldn't surprise me to find out that teak and other "exotics" might have been an $800 or more option. Klipsch, at the time, had a solid and well deserved reputation for quality craftsmanship on their hand rubbed finishes. Those WERE the days!!!! Damn I wished I could have afforded something other than birch. Having said that, the birch has not detered their legendary sound.

I have owned and enjoyed the heritage Cornwall l for over 20 years now. Can't ever imagine trying anything else. Having said that, Klipschorns might be in my future but not at the expense of my beloved Cornwalls (I'm willing them to my son). I really really love these speakers. Sorry I have never listened to the Cornwall ll speaker so am not in a position to comment on there differences or similarities.

Interesting thread. I've been driving heritage Cornwalls with the same 70 watt amp for 20 years now. Tube amps are foreign to me, however, those who like them swear by them to the grave. With the Klipsch design being so efficient, it's not really a matter of how much power but the quality of power you should consider. Having said that there are reasonable limits to the minimum you should consider. Obviously you can't do much with 1 or 2 watts. Speakers have a sensitivity measurement usually in the form of "db @ 1 watt/ 1 meter" (that's 39 inches for you Americans ). Every time you double the wattage you will increase the sound output by 3 db. A speaker rated at 101 db would go as follows: 2 watts = 104 db 4 watts = 107 db 8 watts = 110 db 16 watts = 113 db 32 watts = 116 db You get the picture. Keep in mind that 115 db is generally considered concert level sound (it's pretty damn loud). The above is continuous watts and there will be need for short bursts of extra power for a loud drum beat etc.. This is known as "headroom". Decide how loud you want/need and make sure you amp has enough headroom. It's been my experience that any quality amp will have plenty of headroom for a heritage series speaker (Cornwall, La Scalla, Horn or Heresy). I am not, however familiar with the Forte ll. Remember: Quality over quantity.

Insurance 101: You should be indemnified for your loss. That meaning placed back in the position you were prior to the loss occurring. In theory there should be no loss and no gain. Of course, you will suffer inconvenience and stress for which there is no compensation. There also may be a deductible which you might have to pay. This is totally dependant on the terms and conditions of your insurance contract. Remember it is a legal binding contract on both parties involved. In the case of shipping there are actually 3 parties involved. The seller, the purchaser and UPS. Normally the terms and conditions are found on the "bill of laiding". It's the thing you sign when the goods are sent and received. It will spell out what party is responsible for what bla bla bla. Then there is the subject of "replacement cost" coverage vs. "actual cash value". Again this will be covered off in the terms and conditions of your contract. Get your hands on it and study it so you know where you stand. Replacement cost(RC)will pay for the cost of a new crossover (plus labour), while actual cash value (ACV) will "depreciate" its value based on age, condition and life expectancy. Here is the basic theory of this: The principle of indemnity applies to insurance. That being you should not "profit" or "loose" but rather be placed back in the position you were prior to the loss. If the crossover is used and you get a new one, you are now in a better position after the loss than before it. If you have ACV coverage, expect to pay the difference in price between the value of the used crossover and the value of the new one. Keeping in mind you now have a brand new crossover which is better than having a used one. How much would you be willing to pay for a used crossover? The same as new? Nope. I hope you have replacement cost coverage. If not I hope this will help you to understand what you can expect and why. Good luck!