Jump to content

Chief bonehead

Klipsch Employees
  • Posts

    1416
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    92

Posts posted by Chief bonehead

  1. 5 hours ago, henry4841 said:

    Or in other words from what Chief said if you want to hear what the sound engineers at Klipsch liked best at the time your speakers were built stay with authorized parts for replacements.  

     

    Personally I like the concept of simple as it seems PWK did as well. PWK designed crossovers were as simple as one can build with just as few parts as were absolutely necessary. The A crossover network is a work of art. In the AA network a couple of extra parts were added in the tweeter section to protect it better from idiots listening too loud. I like simple. Those steep crossovers an after market vendor sells can suck the life out of the music as many say. In fact a member of this forum just posted pretty much the very same thing after purchasing those expensive networks. Family said he ruined the sound of his speakers. Lot more complicated with many more parts as well. 

     

    I am curious why Klipsch has not gone with active crossovers in the K-horn, LaScala, and Cornwall as done with the new Jubilee. Many prefer active X-overs over passive ones these days. At the asking price of those speakers the cost would not be that great going active on them. 

    Patience….

    • Like 4
  2. On 7/29/2023 at 5:39 PM, Idontknow said:

    In your guys opinion, what has more impact on differences in sound in most cases. I'm not necessarily saying for the better or for worse. If you had to choose what alters it the most. Of course there's other components, but let's just stick to these. I'm curious what the average one turns out to be.

     

    DAC?

    Room?

    Preamp?

    Amplifier?

    Speakers?

    Recording quality?

     

    Thanks,

    ---daniel

    Recording quality. Then speakers. 

    • Like 3
    • Thanks 1
  3. So….Paul W Klipsch’s museum is having a fundraiser. This forum and of course, the company he started, exist because of Mr K. Most of you know that Mr K meant a lot to me and so, of course, his museum means a lot to me. So much so, that I am intimately involved with it. And so I come to the klipsch forum…..would you consider helping the Klipsch Musuem of Audio History by making a purchase?  Think about it while you are listening to speakers his company created…….

     

    https://www.zeffy.com/en-US/ticketing/bd71b551-76e3-4469-ac96-df7780597381

  4. On 6/14/2023 at 6:43 PM, mikebse2a3 said:

     

    @Flevoman The speakers are spaced about 13ft/3.96m center to center (ie: tweeters) and the listener location is approximately 9ft/2.74m from the plane of the speakers (ie: tweeter).

     

    IMHO on good recordings both Vocals and Instruments are realistically focused and the sense of locations in the sound stage are very natural in width and depth with a pretty holographic feeling on some of the best recordings. On some recordings I do feel like the piano for example might feel magnified some while others are fine but if I place the speakers closer together at the next best (SBIR) speaker location spread (@ approximately 11ft/3.35m) then I feel like on some recordings the piano is a little to small so my preference is for a natural or slightly larger than life piano for example. Image/Soundstage Depth on some of my recordings can feel like it goes back nearly 20ft/6m and my room width is nearly 20ft and Image/Soundstage can often fill that space when appropriate yet if I play a mono recording it is very tight and focused in the center between the loudspeakers. The speakers truly  appear to be silent while the music is playing all around them on good recordings.

     

    I enjoy this setup so much that I recently mapped my room/setup so that has I experiment with different setups, loudspeakers and room acoustic arrangements I wanted to absolutely and easily be able to recreate this setup relatively easily. 🙂

     

    miketn

     

     

    IMG_4370.thumb.jpeg.62a7c8c866f1d92ef6ce408e073cae1b.jpeg

     

    IMG_4371.thumb.jpeg.044400eeedf6ba3a8994991eabd07d7c.jpeg

     

    IMG_4368.thumb.jpeg.e450cd1064bb83b3b1dabbd21480dddd.jpeg

     

    IMG_4374.thumb.jpeg.be16a1cce8586e65d9f422f8bb9cd195.jpeg

     

    IMG_4375.thumb.jpeg.9551adc1e3e7593c7ccd679feeb7bf97.jpeg

     

    IMG_4376.thumb.jpeg.8efc841027b6039733b1b3b2d51e6271.jpeg

     

    IMG_4377.thumb.jpeg.9db4ec7c32bb852536430ca603d25591.jpeg

     

    IMG_4378.thumb.jpeg.7d57d544ecfe1e5fca3ebbb4039c76d1.jpeg

     

     

     

     

    One of those is off by a half an inch……

    • Like 1
    • Haha 4
  5. On 6/6/2023 at 4:50 PM, KT88 said:

    Randy, If it is true that the sidewalls were 19 mm on the standard LS in 1977 then the stupid carpenter has planed off almost 2mm. see photo of the sidewall. 
    how thick is the motor board of the squaker. Can it be that the carpenter has also planed off? see photo.


     

    IMG_0152.jpeg

     

     

     

     

     

     

    IMG_0162.jpeg

    Back in today Klipsch used 9 ply (7 plus 2 veneer). And for the la scala in particular, the 2 plys under the veneer were made so that it would not telegraph to the veneer. 

    • Like 2
    • Thanks 1
  6. 8 hours ago, deafbykhorns said:

    Not saying someone can't clone them, I just don't trust anyone unless I could verify it. A simple change in throat diameter, corner pieces, angles or woofer opening will change the sound a lot. I built two pairs of LaScala's in 1981, the first pair wasn't even close, the second pair I started to pay more attention to dimensions.

    At 120 db, no one will really care or know the difference, at normal listening levels, its obvious.

    I agree. Clones are just that….clones…..wannabe’s

    • Like 1
×
×
  • Create New...