taviran

Bought a year ago. Have option to tune the tweeter volume, and rolloff frequency of the squeaker. Price new: 599 Euro. I am asking 300 USD. Shipping 80$. PayPal add 3% Shipping from Israel. Quote Edit

Bought a few months ago. Have option to tune the tweeter volume, and rolloff frequency of the squeaker. Selling because I am downsizing my system (i.e. selling the Klipsch). Price new: 599 Euro. I am asking 400 USD. Shipping 80$. PayPal add 3% Shipping from Israel.

About 2 years old. Free Shipping to the US. Price: $110 for the pair.

Yes, but that is not what MIT are saying about their network, do they? It is just what some people guess is going on there.

Thanks for all those who replied. I perhaps should say that I have no doubt that cables can make a difference to an audio system. I am in the audio hobby more than 30 years and I have had my share of experimentation. The first time I witnesses a marked improvement in sound was many years ago (20?) when I connected XLO 5.1 to my quads 57. It was as if I suddenly changed into an amplifier 10 times more expensive than what I had. So I am not very much convinced by all those who say cables don't make a difference, although I'm sure it also depends on which cables you use. Right now I have both the Quads in one system and the La Scalas (with Crites tweeters) in another, using DIY speakers cable on the latter. But I believe I can do better than that. About the MIT, I know about their interface boxes, which are some kind of impedance matching network between the amp/cable and the speakers. The idea being, I believe, is that cables have differential impedance characteristics with respect to the signal's frequency range, and that the network is supposed to compensate for that (like a kind of equalizer, albeit with properties like capacitance, inductance etc.). This sounds logical to me to an extent but I can appreciate the point of view which says that this introduces a further stage into the signal's pass and that 'simpler is better'. (Not in my experience, though: I, for example, detest passive pre-amplifiers). Anyhow, I did have occasion to hear a few expensive MIT cables at a dealer's place, and I always found the sound to be very relaxing, wide, and detailed, characteristics which the Klipsch, I believe, might benefit from. But it is true that they (MIT cables) were mostly used in SS systems (Krell, Madrigal), with big speakers. Hence my question. But perhaps the fact that very few people do try them in Klipsch shows something too. Thanks.

I was wondering if anybody here has a good experience with expensive MIT cables and Klipsch La Scala (or Klipsch Horn). I am thinking MH-770 CVT or the Shotgun Series (like s3), or even the new Matrix series. I would also appreciate suggestions for other high level cables. Thanks.

From my Klipsch la Scala. Condition: seems OK. Price: 230 USD including shipping. Item Location: Israel.

Hello forum members. In the last couple of months I have been trying to improve my La Scala speakers by turning my attention first to the crossovers and tweeters. With respect to the latter, I tried both Sequerra T1 ribbon tweeters and now Bob Crites. In both cases, I felt that while I got much better 'hifi' sound (smoother, more detailed etc.), I lost the amazing dynamics of the speaker. I do not mean the speakers didn't play loud with the new tweeters, they certainly did, but that the impact of instruments, their ability to move the air in the room, was much affected. At first, I didn't want to believe that a tweeter, which can hardly be heard on its own, could have such dynamic impact on the speaker as a whole. But after playing with and without the K-77 tweeter a couple of times, and going back and forth between the K-77 and the others, it was obvious to me that indeed it has such an effect. I was wondering if other people here have experienced something similar and whether they found a substitute for the K-77 which didn't suffer from a loss of dynamics.

Hello forum members. In the last couple of months I have been trying to improve my La Scala speakers by turning my attention first to the crossovers and tweeters. With respect to the latter, I tried both Sequerra T1 ribbon tweeters and now Bob Crites. In both cases, I felt that while I got much better 'hifi' sound (smoother, more detailed etc.), I lost the amazing dynamics of the speaker. I do not mean the speakers didn't play loud with the new tweeters, they certainly did, but that the impact of instruments, their ability to move the air in the room, was much affected. At first, I didn't want to believe that a tweeter, which can hardly be heard on its own, could have such dynamic impact on the speaker as a whole. But after playing with and without the K-77 tweeter a couple of times, and going back and forth between the K-77 and the others, it was obvious to me that indeed it has such an effect. I was wondering if other people here have experienced something similar and whether they found a substitute for the K-77 which didn't suffer from a loss of dynamics.