edwardre

Jim, the driver you see is not Altec but rather the University SAHF. Recall that this was the stock offering throughout the 50's for the Khorn. Just my humble opinion of course, but I believe that it is better suited for a wider dispersion horn like the Klipsch wood/fiberglass horn these were originally mounted to. The 511b is virtually the same size as the original horn, but is a much sturdier, solid unit. I believe that Klipsch went to the K55 series drivers as an option better suited for the straight horns they replaced the wood/fiberglass curved type that they used the SAHF with. I have tried K55's with the 511's many, many times and have come to the conclusion that for my particular taste, the SAHF simply sounds better. Increased clarity, less distortion at louder volumes, and an overall better integration with the other components. Here's a picture of one of my Khorns next to the finished Belle and next to the unfinished picture screen, per your request. I like the 'sports-bra' idea in your picture covering the mouth of the 511, but also like the exposed horn look. If my camera isn't acting up this evening, I'll take a shot or two of the Cornwalls with Cobreflex's atop. Would be interested in folks letting me know what they think visually.

Hi Dale, I've had my 511b's installed for well over 15 years now. Love'em. So much in fact that I've expanded the practice to my Belles and CW's, only in the case of the CW's, I used University Cobreflex's. I use University SAHF's to drive the mid-horns in all 6 speakers. All speakers have Stephens Trusonic 103LX2's for woofers. The Khorns have University 4401's for tweeters, the Belles have Jensen RP302's for tweeters, and the CW's have their stock K77 (round magnets) tweeters. Khorns have K500-5000 nets. Belles have AA's. CW's have B's. I find it amazing just how well all these components meld together. Truly a case where the whole is greater than the sum of the parts.

Here's the Belle almost completed. The plywood grille frame was then painted black and fresh black Klipsch grillecloth stretched and stapled on. The result is that you cannot tell from looking at the speaker that it is anything but stock.

Jim, I have to agree, neither Belle or Khorn have hurt my ears since the 511's went in. Attached is a pic of how I squeezed the 511 and other components into the confines of the upper Belle cavity. The next post will show the Belle with the 'lid' on and the grille frame I made to 'open up' the front to let out the sound. With the Belle, I wanted it to look absolutely bone stock after the mod. I likewise tend to agree with your findings regarding the placement of the tweeter. During the course of evaluating whether vertical or horizontal mounting was right for my room acoustics, it was clear that in either case, having the tweeter up a foot or so produced a slightly better listening experience. As you've said....better seperation. I'm located in the 'Northern' California foothills town of Penn Valley. In the general vicinity of the Grass Valley/Nevada City area, about 40 miles to the NE of Sacramento. I would be delighted to audition the system for you or any other members who find themselves in the area. BTW - My vote is for the semi-boxed in top as you've described, covered with the Klipsch-cloth color of your choice!

Jim - Yes, I like the 511's very much. If you search you will see that I've been endorsing and suggesting this 'upgrade' for several years now. In fact, I believe that some of my very first posts to this BB were of this nature. To me, there is no comparison. My Khorns are 1954 vintage and as such, came supplied with the wood/fiberglass sectoral horn. It was these horns that I replaced with 511's as the wood/fiberglass horns have a tendancy to emit a 'clacking' noise of sorts, especially with age and seperation. It is my opinion that the 511 provides a greater dispersive sound. More grandeur, more clarity, better tonal characteristics.....more pleasing to the ear. It is for these reasons that I replaced the stock straight horns in my Belles in favor of the 511b. I've recently replaced the stock mid-horns in my Cornwalls with University Cobreflex's. Refurbished with a fresh coating of Krylon Rust Tough Semi-Flat Black, they sit atop the CW and look pretty swank....to where the missus even accepts the look. This horn blends very well with the 511b's, and does not take up nearly as much 'depth', making them a viable option. 'Yes', I did remove the upper and lower mounting flanges. Used the trusty Makita angle grinder with 4" cutoff disk, took about 5 minutes per without a problem. I then mounted the front of the 511's with 'L' brackets, 1 per side, and supported the rear with a large 'L' bracket mounted to the 511's existing rear mounting hole. Piece of cake. Tweeters are mounted within the mouth of the 511, either horizontal or vertical works. Although, despite popular opinion here, I have to report that I prefer the sound of the tweeters mounted horizontally over the vertical mount. My ears hear 'more' with the tweets mounted in this traditional fashion.

Hmmm.....that strikes me as odd. My Khorns have 511b's, and they fit comfortably within the confines of the top section. However, they replaced the stock wood/fiberglass horns which are about the same size as 511's without the top and bottom mounting flanges. I've installed 511's into my Belles without too much sweat, and I thought that the Khorn has more 'headroom' in the upper cavity. Looking at the Belle now, you cannot tell them from stock.....except for the sound...

Hey Jim, Won't the 511 fit in a standard Klipschorn top section? I believe it will if you remove the top and bottom flanges from the 511.

Audio - I have not heard of the JR-200M, but I do have Stephens Trusonic 103LX2's in all 6 heritage speakers comprising my HT setup. I can tell you that the Trusonics have a sound quality that is very hard to put into words. The bass is deep, solid and almost 'airy' at the same time. I don't know how else to describe them. I have heard and tested several woofer types in my Khorns, Belles and CW's including JBL's, Altecs, EV's and iterations of K33's. To me, the Stephens sound better by a comfortable margin. The bass output is simply tremendous.

Mr Jazman.... Strike quick!! There are SEVERAL T35's on e-bay right now for a 'Buy-it-Now' price of $30 apiece!! Just search in the 'consumer electronics' section with "EV". I think that these will go very quick.

So John.....exactly how did you 'hotrod' a pair of AA's? Remove steel screw, snip diode wire, add capacitance? Or did you do something different?

I tried mod 1 & 2 on one of my AA's. I think I might have heard some difference, like in the upper bass region (?) after mod 1 (the screw). However, I heard no diff after mod 2. Will try adding 4uf tonight. Was curious how Solen fast caps would 'jive' in parallel with the AA metal cans? (Not the oil AA's)

Q, I'd be interested in your opinion of the HF206 tweeter. As I recall, it was you and Mike who were not as fond of the 4401 as the T35. I was wondering how the HF206 compares with both. I relistened to the Cobreflex used for the mid on one of my CW's. You recall I thought they were 'overwhelming' the woofer and the tweeter. This appeared to be the case at very low volumes. However, at normal listening levels, things sounded OK. I then dragged out the Rat Shack SPL and to my astonishment, there was a difference of more than 1db but less than 2db. That is to say the reading was fluxuating between 1 and 2db more than I had dialed it in with the K55/Klipsch. It appears to be a case where there is simply MORE, not LOUDER sound. More is not necessarily better unless it's more QUALITY sound. Indeed it is. I think Jim C summed it up....The K400 sounds like a bullhorn. Ditto. Couldn't have said it better. Think I'll leave one CW stock and the other w/Cobre assembly for a couple of weeks and see which seat I gravitate towards more.

I agree with Tom's suggestion to a point. I'm not sure that a 2-way using either 511 or 811 will go high enough for everybody's taste. I by no means offer my POV after trying multiple drivers, but I have heard a number of Altec A7 VOTs, and a couple of Altec Model 19's (which IMO is a gorgeous unit). 511b's and 811b's respectively. I found them to be in posession of an excellent blend of robust horn 'feel', solid tight bass, and effortless mid-highs. I also felt that they were missing the very top end, the part that is percieved as much as heard. Not quite 'airy' enough for me. If you're set on a CW clone, I would upgrade the bass driver. One thing I forgot to mention in my response to you in the 511 thread was that the Cobreflex with either SAHF or K55V will fit into a CW sized cabinet. I would use this as my midrange, with a SAHF. I have found it to be more open and detailed without any 'edginess'. None! For the tweeter, I would not recommend the K55/T35. I am in agreement with you as far as harsh horn edge is concerned, and feel that this item is very responsible for the 'bad rap'. My tweeter of choice is the Jensen Rp302. This is the silkiest, smoothest tweeter I have ever encountered. However, you will not be able to keep within your budget constraints as this little guy is 1. hard to find and 2. highly sought after (big $$ to the tune of $500 up for a pair). I also do not particularly like the University 4401, but it is IMHO, a better compromise than the K77 for those that do not like the scratchy edginess often associated with horns. The drawback as I see it....or hear it....with the 4401 is that it is generally useless above 15000cps. This downgrades the system to (sub)A7 level. You will find youself yearning for additional 'loft' at which point you may as well have made a 2-way. Perhaps the answer lies with a University HF206. These too are sought after, but generally sell for about $100/pair. I have not personally previewed this guy, but I will soon. Have had my eye on it as a suitable replacement for the remaining 4401's that I have not swapped out for RP302's yet. University specs this the same as the 4401, but instead of a 15000cps upper limit, they state 'up to inaudibility'. Of course there are many here who no doubt have infinately more knowledge than I do, especially with regards to modern day tweeter offerings. After settling upon a driver scheme, I would then try and work with Al to engineer a net that 'makes it all work' together, pulling out the best each component has to offer.

Hello Mr Tubelion...."yes"...I have great respect for your approach. I do not believe that I have read of anyone replicating an AA with all high end parts and comparing with stock. I for one will be very interested in your results as I have great admiration for the AA, especially for some of the qualities that cannot be adequately put into words. I was simply offering my view on Al's nets. From what I've read here on this board as well as personal communique, Al places a great emphasis on the engineering aspect. For the record, I would just like to say that PWK was THE MAN. Especially in the early days...'40's - '60's. We all spend hours and $$'s trying to improve upon his nets. Simple mods to full on replacements. But the fact is we're all building upon a truly unique thing especially in relation to what other mfg's were offering. Last week I purchased a vintage University xover. An N-3. Looking through my '50's University catalog, this was the top of the line. I received it yesterday. Very nice looking closed box unit. Stellar baked enamel forest green heavy box with a fine brushed brass faceplate, sporting 2 control knobs, also with brass faces. A real 'looker'. I naturally had to crack this thing open to check out the goods. What a POS. 2 leaky cardboard caps and 2 minute transformer looking things. Just for giggles, I hooked it up, replacing a Klipsch network. The resulting hodgepodge of noises was so substandard to the Klipsch net of the same era words can't even describe. I was completely embarassed for University. Likewise, I have a pair of late 50's Jensen xovers. The good ones used in their very positively lauded 'Imperial'. I can't crack these open as they are like sealed in a black epoxy-type resin, as if a big secret lies within. But I can and have hooked them up. PU. Weak. Not anything that I would ever consider using in anything. PWK was a true pioneer.

OK Dean.....here's my first CW input for your considerations.... My '85 Cornwalls have served as surrounds for a year now. A few months back, I 'retro'd them.....replaced the B2 networks with the much simpler and warmer 'B' networks, replaced the square magnet K77s with the older round magnet K77s, replaced the K52 mid drivers with K55Vs. I believe that in essence, the CW's are now representative of 70's era CW's. I've been able to deal with the scratchiness of the K77s and the lack of dispersion from the midhorn because these have been surrounds, lending an ambiance more than anything else. All this changed when I added DVD-Audio. Now, the surrounds play a greater role. In many cases the role required is both seamless integration with the other speakers as well as excellent stand alone abilities. It is during the playback of DVD-A material that some inherent CW weaknesses are fleshed out. One thing I did to more evenly match the Khorns and Belles was to replace the K33s with Stephens Trusonics. This helped considerably towards matching the other speakers. Based upon several glowing reviews earlier in this thread, I aquired a pair of Cobreflexs. 'Garage' tests indicated a very warm and detailed horn experience, so I dragged one in last night, set it atop one CW, and wired it in. Here's my opinion thus far: The Cobre plays louder than the original mid-horn setup. Since I have SAHFs in the rest of the speakers, I tested the CW/Cobre with this driver as the real intent is to more evenly match the others. Like I say, louder, considerably louder to the point of 'takeover' rather than blend. I would at this point estimate around 6 or 7db louder. This could possibly be a function of a more efficient driver/horn setup in tandem with the fact that I have the surrounds cranked up at the receiver to account for lesser efficiency in the CWs when compared to the Khorns and Belles. However, I'm thinking that a more likely scenerio will be that if I reduce the overall input to the speaker to bring the Cobre inline, the bass and treble will fall off to relative nothingness, right? Really the solution would be to reduce just the midrange by several db. So that's the negative aspect of this trial. On the positive side, the clarity, detail and dispersion cannot be rivaled by the stock K55/K(whatever horn is in a CW). My reference DVD-A of choice is the Eagles Hotel CA. I only had time to listen to a few tracks, at very low tones, but I can tell you that I heard things....lots of things....that I have never heard before. And I listen to this DVD-A a lot. To that end, I would truly love to somehow make the Cobreflex work. Any suggestions? Increase/decrease capacitance? Try a different tap? There must be a simple solution.....

Thanks Q for the Cobre input. Sorry to mislead you on the vertical vs horizontal thing, I was speaking about a 4401, not a T35. This is another one of those personal preference things.....I cannot listen to a K77/T35 for very long. Hurts my jaw gritting my teeth..... Are you designing a new top for your Khorns/La Scalas because you don't want to cut the flanges off the 511b?

Mr Mobile is correct. The two nets pictured are one and the same type. I also agree 100% with his rational for prolonged listening. The metal can type is very distinct from these, having several cylindrical caps about 3/4" in diameter and 3" long rather than the 'cigarette box' type oil filled caps. Upon closer look at the AA's on e-bay (which by the way went for only $51), the left one is clearly an oil, but the right one appears to be sort of a hybrid. I see 1 cylindrical cap and two squarish laying down caps. The metal cap one I have at home both have 3 cylindrical caps. Strange. So looking at mobile's pics, the diodes would be the two things mounted on a metal piece sort of in between and in front of the two upright caps? And the mod is to remove ONE of the wires going to this 'diode'? Chris, I would like to have your AA's if your not doing squat with them, but realize that there are members here who would also like them who don't have a couple already. If you don't get 'pinged' for them in a week or so, give me a yell please.

To be continuing. I have several of each, the oils and the metals. There is in my opinion, no need for prolonged exposure to each in an attempt to flesh out subtle differences. In the case of these two 'AA's, the difference is very pronounced employing the L/R or the 'quickswitch' method. Obviously detailed 'prolonged exposure' trials would add some measure of added difference identification, but to me there was absolutely no reason to go to this extreme. The oil filled's sound like an altogether different net than the metal cap ones. They are significantly more detailed, rich, and robust. The metals on the other hand sound muffled, confused and lack any mid-bass punch. This of course...IMHO. Neither type had the diode taken out of circuit or the metal screw removed or the added cap installed. Bone stock observation. I have since (like just the other night) removed the screw. To be honest, I have noticed a slight increase in bass response in the metal cap AA, bringing it closer to the oil AA as far as the bass is concerned. I have not noticed a significant change in the oil AA's I removed the screws from. These are installed in my front center Belle and rear center 'Belle to be'. However, there is currently so much clean tight bass in my HT room that I seriously doubt I would be able to immediately notice a change. This is where the long range listening experience that MH described comes into play. I will now (like tonight) go and employ the other AA 'mods' mentioned here.

OK, here's my added input. WRT the AA. As you all probably know, there are (at least) 2 AA networks floating around. One, pictured above, is as stated, the 'oil filled' version. The other has metal cylindrical caps. There is a person selling a pair of AA's on 'the bay' currently, one of each type: http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1390399751&rd=1 NOZ - you have 20 minutes if you want to take advantage, $51 is really cheap but they'll probably go for more. I'll submit now in case NOZ is currently reading or anyone else wants to make a move on these, and continue my input in a subsequent post.

The Type A looks interesting to me for it's low cost simplicity. Am I correct in interpretation that the xover relies upon the bass and mid driver's natural rolloff (upper), and that the xover establishes the 'cut-in' point? Guy - As I look at the picture of the network, looks like there are 3 caps. Is this a result of the need to parallel two caps to make the 13uF? (Great pic by the way, thanks MH) Are all three caps Hovlands? Thanks!

Tubelion wrote: 'For example, the popular ALK use a superior transformer, caps and coils etc, it should be better than type A or AB2, but not necessary better in the way of design.' Tubelion, I think that Al's 'claim to fame' as it pertains to enhanced networks designed for several Klipsch Heritage speakers lies with superior design. The fact that he uses, and suggests using superior components is more or less a bonus......

According to Mr Al, 'The AA will work in any of you speakers so they might be a good choice. A few mods will make them work pretty well. ' Mr Al, I would be interested in a quick rundown of the abovementioned mods, if you have a moment. Thanks!

Deang....I respectfully submit that 'basically can't handle the sound of a squawker for longer than it takes me to leave the room.' perhaps is based upon never listening to a 511b or Cobreflex properly networked and matched with it's tweeter and woofer 'mates'? Personally, I agree to a point....I find the stock application of K400/K500/K700 horns to be extremely grating and strident. There are however horns out there that are every bit as subtle and warm as a fine direct. Certainly the Edgar bowls qualify. These impart all the qualities of a direct without sacrificing the 'robustness' or underlying brute strength 'feel' of a horn. I would think that utilyzing high efficiency DR's for the mids would change these characteristics. Jim, I mount my tweeters within the mouth of the 511. Vertically in the case of my khorns, but when I was 'dinking' around with tweeter placement for my center Belle, I had my daughter, reaching over the top of the Belle with tweeter in hand, rotate it whilst I had eyes closed. Without peeking, clearly the sound 'bloomed' when the tweeter was in the horizontal position, so that's how I mounted it. I don't think that having the 511b up on high will detract from the listening experience too much. This horn has a very curved build. This 'pouty lip' construction I believe lends itself well to vertical dispersion. I don't think you will hear too much of a difference if it is angled down towards you, straight out, or even angled up a bit. I do however believe that soundwaves reflected off the ceiling and floor will be accountable for any percieved difference in sound. After listening to the flex's all weekend, and soliciting critique from numerous semi-interested folks, the unilateral opinion is that it is far and beyond mere 'better' than the K400/k55 or the k400/SAHF. With a stock AA network. The general concensus is that it is considerably less 'screechy', much easier to listen to, voices sound 'normal' instead of 'nasaly', and that the listeners 'heard things that they hadn't heard' which I took to mean like fingers sliding across guitar strings and other subtle sounds. I also compared the flex's to a K500/k55 combo originally removed from my Belle. If anything, the K500/k55 sounded even worse when compared to the cobre/k55 or cobre/SAHF. All these comparisons were through an AB2 network as well as with an AA network. I did not notice an appreciable difference hooking up the cobre/SAHF/k55 to the AB2 when compared to the AA. Though the AB2 had slightly more 'presence'. Regrettably, I have not had enough time to compare against a 511b yet. I'm thinking this week for that eventuality. However, my initial application thoughts lean towards using the 'flexys' as replacement mid-horns for my surround Cornwalls towards the goal of a more equal tonal balance between Khorns, Belles and CWs. Clearly there isn't room atop a CW for a 511b. There is however opportunity to set a cobre atop, either naked or in a cabinet 'add-on'. Naturally, my concern lies with crossover freqs. I'm thinking that the CW's horn is a 600 or 700hz unit and since the Cobre is a 450hz(?) horn, would there be too much overlap? Al?

Jim, they will most certainly not fit in the slot. In fact, you would have to replace the 'slotboard', either just across the front or including the grill covered wings with a open framework-type grill frame. That is providing you want to preserve the original appearence. Of course, some take the top section off completely and set it atop the bin. I believe it will fit comfortably within the top section if you cutoff the 511b's upper and lower flange. Then you could remove the grillboard assembly altogether and take your time working out the grill issue. On the other hand, it's quite a striking item on it's own. It completely dwarfs the K400.

Recieved my Cobre's last night. Turns out one is a "1", the other a "2". I can identify no differences. Interesting that the Cobreflex is a 'two-piece' horn. Top and bottom bolted together via 9 bolts. Gasket material makes the seal. So Al.....if you're still interested, I'm thinking of ripping one open just to check out the folded internals. I'll be happy to snap a pic or two. Additionally, the horn itself is fairly rigid and robust in construction. Much more so than I had expected. Don't know why but pictures make it look kind of thin and cheap. The 'extras' received were a driver (T-50) and an adapter to mount two drivers into one horn. Naturally, I spun in a driver and fired it up immediately. A SAHF driver. Same color scheme and basic look, looks like they were made for each other. Opposing channel sported the SAHF/K400 combo for basic R/L comparisons. Network was the venerable Klipsch AA, which BTW moments before I had located and removed the steel inductor screws from. ST70 amp/PAS2 preamp/late 70's vintage Sansui CD player. Media was an Eagles greatest hits CD. The difference in the two setups was more pronounced than I was mentally envisioning. As Q states, against the K400 horn, the C-flex is comparativly subtle to the tune of perhaps a db or 2. The greatest difference was tonally. I never realized just how 'ringey' the K400 is until last night. In this setup, the c-flex is flat out in another league. I am only sorry that you folks cannot come over and hear for yourselves. I find it very ironic indeed that the horn that 'looks' like a PA speaker sounds so suited for home listening while the 'home speaker' horn's output sounds well.....suited for outdoor use. Obviously this is a very preliminary report based upon 20 minutes of listening. I want to compare against the 511B, with K55's, different nets, yadda yadda yadda....We're hosting a going away 'git together' for friends moving to Minn. tomorrow. Mostly the guys hang out in the garage and BS. The only tunes in the garage is the test bench. Will be a great opportunity to get many opinions from folks that are um....'not into the audio scene as much (if at all)', as well as enlighten any 'Bose-O's' in the crowd.