o0O Bill O0o

No need for a center channel, just stick with the two pair. ---- Background: I dug through some old photos to find one of my many versions of a Klipschorn Home Theater. Starting with..At one point I had a 5.1 Klipschorn left and right, and LaScala for everything else. I used a horn loaded subwoofer as well. Throughout the years I returned to just the Klipschorns. Mostly for the simplicity. I think they were about 18' apart. Anyways, I felt no need for a center. The speaker plain rocks. Music or Movies. Today, I have a "latest and greatest" tech type home theater. I moved, a while back, and I still have all the gear, just sitting in the garage until I get the itch again. This forum topic is feeding that monster. So much so I did do a rendering.

Makes sense to me. Circle back to my first comment in this thread, https://community.klipsch.com/index.php?/topic/161854-first-dsd-audio-files/?p=1979176 Play the version of the song you enjoy the most.

Explain what you mean here... Recording and playback of 24/192 is readily available. You can do multiple channels of 24/192 over a single Cat 5 cable. Time was, when any editing of DSD meant converting to PCM, but the tools are becoming more mainstream (if you have deep pockets). Bruce Hi Bruce, First watch some YouTube videos (linked above) about sampling theory. 192KHz sampling allows you to play up to its Nyquist frequency. In 192KHz it's half the sample rate, which is 96Khz. DSD64 has lots of noise at 100KHz, plus most players low pass these ultrasonic frequencies. I dont know about DSD at higher sample rates, but I'd imagine the upper limit is extended and there is an even more acurate "picture" or sample of the analog waveform. (5.6MHz DSD is ~5,600,000 samples a second!)A free DSD editing app is avaible on Tascam's website. PCM editors such as Audacity (free) are MUCH better. Still, if you are Archiving vinyl and just splitting tracks, then these DSD editors are fine. Think of DSD as Digital "Tape" - much of the rules for editing apply to both Analog Tape and DSD.

Check out Blue Coast music http://bluecoastmusic.com for more free samples.

Not me. I need C0 for pipe organ. Dave K as in Kilo-Hertz... https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Range_(music)

I'd put dollars to donuts that many can't tell the difference between 16 bit and 24 bit-depths of PCM. Did you watch the videos I linked?Switching gears to sample rate, 2.8MHz DSD is ~64 times the 44.1KHz sample rate. So yes, 2.8, 5.6, 11.2MHz and beyond DSD sample rates divide evenly into 44KHz, 88KHz, 176KHz and 352KHz. Further the noise shaped DSD, with it's high frequency noise, is low pass filtered upon conversion to PCM. (see JRiver's user guide for more info). Again, put even more dollars to donuts that many cannot tell the difference between any flavor of DSD and 24/96KHz PCM. I recommend transcoding DSD64 (2.8MHz) to 24 bit / 88KHz PCM and use a 6dB/octive Lowpass filter at 40Khz.

No conversion necessary. DSD can be played back through a DSD capable DAC (Hometheater AVRs to USB DACs). Simply convert DSD to analog and into your favorite analog inputs. There are lots of very affordable products out there that support DSD.Re: Archiving. You are mixing bit depth and sample rate. DSD has an 1 bit depth and can only tell you 1 or 0, thus only about 6 dB of signal to noise. Very noisey. However because the analog waveform is being sampled at 2.8MHz there is enough data to describe the waveform, or at least the direction the waveform is going. i.e. basically, 1 is the top of the wave, 0 is the bottom and the density of 1,0's can describe the waveform. 1111111101011011100000000011101101010111111. Then through noise shaping, all that in band noise we can hear is pushed just beyond 20KHz and rises all way up to 100KHz. Google Image search DSD for a plot, you'll see the climbing noise. PCM has none of these issues, but doesn't play past 96KHz - but that is a whole other topic on, "Do humans perceive ultra sonic frequencies." DSD is great for archiving Vinyl or recording your own music, but everything else was probably made in PCM. So, I am suggesting that you save your cash on DSD Downloads, save for a few where that's the only way to get the best version or master. If the recording is made in DSD all the way from microphone to DSD file, then that should be the purist view of DSD. All music lovers should be interesting in the future of music technology, including digital. I don't think there is a good "resolution" definition in audio like there is for video. Simply one uses the signal to noise ratio to describe the maximum dynamic range. example: in your listening room, it's probably 35 decibels of ambient noise. That means you have to raise the noise floor of a Digital signal, say CD, to above ambient noise floor. Otherwise anything that's 35dB or less on the recording is lost in your environmental noise. interestingly CD's music signals are recorded in the last 90-96dB of the CD's 96dB of signal to noise. This is for good reason, it keeps the noise way, way down - hence the CD's clean sound. But 90dB on to 35dB gets, you 125dB!! Dangerously loud signals. Even LPs with 70dB SNR provide a good medium for music playback, but at loud volumes you'll here either the tape noise or mechanical noise from LP system itself. DSD has a SNR, for inband or what you can hear, of 150dB! Watch these videos:

Problem with that. DSD is 1-bit with a 2.8224 MHz sampling rate. Above is PCM, not DSD. Dave Dave is DSD better than PCM, I am not sure which is better DSD - 1-bit with a 2822.4 KHz sampling rate. (I converted Mhz to Khz so we are looking at same units) PCM - 24-bit with a 352.8 Khz sampling rate. 1 bit but has almost 10x the sampling rate vs high bit (24) with lower sampling rate. There is no real consensus to what is better. What listeners should be concerned about: 1. Was my music originally recorded in DSD? 2. What master or final version of my music do I like best? DSD is an excellent format, but do not use it as qualifier for good sound, i.e. all recordings on Vinyl sound the best?

Sale Pending.

Consecutive serial numbers.

Hey All, it was and upgrade summer for me!:music: $1500 for all. will not ship, unless you know a smart way. Will deliver as far as Phoenix or Santa Fe, located in El Paso, Texas. Klipschorns - I believe they were walnut but have been re-done in Zebrawood. c~1978. OEM and aftermarket (ALK ENG) crossovers. B+ Condition. Lascala- Single, Walnut, OEM crossover, c~1980. C Condition. Used as shown in pictures. I purchased a pair Walnut Red McIntosh XR100 and single LCR80 as replacements. While I was at it a C2500.:D:D https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-8ukn3QVHcZE/Tn-iUrncCrI/AAAAAAAAAKg/TMEOgVNAjzc/w640-h355-no/11%2B-%2B1 Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

^Thanks what I am talking about! Excellent! THANK YOU!

^ Can you source some photos? Thanks.

But you may not want large casters, wheels, or feet to create a cavity under the Khorns or under the artificial corners.. I don't know how much of a cavity it takes to degrade bass response, but "No cavities" was one of PWK's cardinal rules. He warned that a cavity (what size??) deteriorated bass response in the bottom octave, and had some negative effect two octaves above. The advent of speakers on stands, legs, etc. annoyed him. I got a chuckle out your post. I know there is some reason for not having casters or cavities but I couldn't scientifically explain it here. There is a wealth of knowledge on spikes and stands for various components out on the internet and found books. Someone would have to do a hypothesis test (testing the null that there is no difference between stand mounted tower speakers and non stand mounted tower speakers) I am sure it would address the 2PI and "quasi free air' as a variable that contributes to the differences.

And by locked you mean they'd be too heavy or time consuming to adjust. Right? That's a win for the lightweight design you went with. Perhaps some casters/wheels to start, with a Wooden false corner, then lock in place and put in some 'feet.'