Chief bonehead

Well then go there and spill your nonsense. Because he doesn't want to get it? And he doesn't piss on people that do. You could learn a lesson from Marion. It's called respect and being humble. Eat a slice.

Well then go there and spill your nonsense.

You can find them silly all day mr expert. It doesn't change the facts.

According to some bonehead expert titanium sucks.....unless you get the "right" crossover.

WHAT??? Dangerous....you are.....

Too many people more interested in selling their crap then being objective. And it is amazing how many people fall for it!! And these are the "experts". Amazing.

So you knew paul pretty well huh?

Quick!!! Recap those suckers!!!!

Wow. Where is mr klipsch's yellow button when you need it?? Experts galore and no common sense in sight......sigh!

Lol!!! I can imagine if ones business was to build "circuit boards with all those traces" what the perspective would be then!!!! Hee hee!!!!

What's wrong with calculations? Side point: do calculations or measurements carry more merit? Is there a physical reason to doubt the addition of acoustic pressures in this scenario? If so, what magnitude of error might be expected in that regard? Concerning voice coils, thermal compression is very real. I've measured it myself and there are several papers discussing the topic. Klipsch isn't even being consistent with their own calculations.....93V into 8 ohms is 1100W, but they claim the system is 6ohms, which would actually be 1400W. That's a 2dB difference - maybe that's a sneaky way of ignoring the power compression issue? Or is someone just being lazy about always using 8 ohms for the power numbers? You are the one that dissed calcutions. You can't have it both ways.

Every time you play a LP you are being forced to use EQ (RIAA)... Passive or Active loudspeaker crossovers are EQ networks as well.... EQing isn't the problem it's the improper use of EQing that's the problem...!!!! miketn Mike, honestly do you have to come back with such a simpletons response? I'd think it is fairly easy to realize I'm referring to an "active" EQ. Do you really need to be so childish? Do you really think I do not know a RIAA curve is a EQ or the a speaker crossover is a EQ... give me a break... My point is most of us spend a good chunk of change on high end really good performing sources, preamplifier and amplifiers.... the last thing I would do is take the signal from these components and pump them through an active EQ... I'd much rather fix the problem at the source in the simplest possible way without having to resort to using yet another compromising piece of electronic equipment in the signal path. A simpleton response to a very simpletons comment.....

Well I've been working on several approaches for a good 3 years or so.....you're right, it's crazy near impossible to do. However, I do think an improvement can be made if you only target an LF corner of ~80Hz or so....and can get away without folding the horn. If I had big dollars and better tools, I'd have it done already, but I've been limiting myself to simple construction methods (and that phase plug requirement gets annoying). Btw, the Othorn blows away anything that has come out of the Klipsch gates - and that was entirely DIY. I'd be willing to stack that design up against anything that takes up the same volume and covers the same bandwidth - it's just that good. The only piece missing in an ideal 3-way system is that MF unit to go between the Othorn and the HF unit... I've been stubborn about hitting a 1kHz corner with constant polars so I can use a 1" throat tweeter. Relax that to a 500Hz xover to the K402 and that's already finished. I've also been stubborn about the 80Hz xover frequency - even though the Othorn sounds just fine up to 150Hz or so... But the short summary is that there will always be compromises...even with that "ideal" system floating around in my head. Blows away anything from klipsch huh?? Another "expert " opinion...... Allow me to clarify what I feel are facts and not opinion: Klipsch claims 130dB at 1m ground plane: and it is a calculated maximum - not measured. Usually that's a convenient way to ignore power compression and claim a big number. But let's take that number at face value... At 1m ground plane, the Othorn measures 132dB with a CEA - 2010 measurement: http://www.data-bass.com/data?page=systems&col=7&type=1&sort=desc&mfr=-1 http://www.data-bass.com/know-how (NOTE: Ricci uses a 2m measurement for a variety of reasons, so I added the 6dB to correlate to a 1m spec). One might even claim 134dB with a more insane driver. The Othorn dimensions are 2x3x3 feet, which is over 3x smaller than 6x4x2.5. Coupling three Othorns together will net 141dB versus a (calculated) 130dB in the same footprint. By my measure, that's a 10dB improvement and justifies using language like "blow away". I'd be all ears if someone from Klipsch comes back with numbers showing greater performance with the same solution size. CEA-2010 numbers would be a great start. I don't want to diminish the genius of the 1802-HLS design, which clearly is doing a lot more with a lot less. However, there's only so much room in the back of the truck, or your living room so I think it is very fair to compare designs that take up the some amount of space. Amplifier power requirements and cost are inaudible traits so I don't worry about them too much if there are existing solutions that meet the needs.... Anyways, that's where I'm coming from. I'm all ears for another way to make the comparison. Is there something about the 1802 that will sound better for other reasons? Obviously maxSPL is a completely arbitrary spec for normal listening, but it does give insight into the potential linearity of a system (generally we see distortion decrease as level is reduced until we hit the noise floor). The Othorn is under 1% THD even all the way up to 110dB.... Coupling three othorns.... Gee. Isn't that a calculation???

Bill Fitzmaurice has been using ported horn design for some time. Not the same

Well I've been working on several approaches for a good 3 years or so.....you're right, it's crazy near impossible to do. However, I do think an improvement can be made if you only target an LF corner of ~80Hz or so....and can get away without folding the horn. If I had big dollars and better tools, I'd have it done already, but I've been limiting myself to simple construction methods (and that phase plug requirement gets annoying). Btw, the Othorn blows away anything that has come out of the Klipsch gates - and that was entirely DIY. I'd be willing to stack that design up against anything that takes up the same volume and covers the same bandwidth - it's just that good. The only piece missing in an ideal 3-way system is that MF unit to go between the Othorn and the HF unit... I've been stubborn about hitting a 1kHz corner with constant polars so I can use a 1" throat tweeter. Relax that to a 500Hz xover to the K402 and that's already finished. I've also been stubborn about the 80Hz xover frequency - even though the Othorn sounds just fine up to 150Hz or so... But the short summary is that there will always be compromises...even with that "ideal" system floating around in my head. Blows away anything from klipsch huh?? Another "expert " opinion......

Horns

I wonder if the frequency response was changed.

Horns.

Now who is full of himself?

Be careful. Soon "the experts" will show up to crap on pwks musings....

Geesh!!! Horns don't have a low pass filter unless they are folded. And if you have a ragged freq response....DON'T BLAME THE HORN. So much for the experts on this forum.....

Isn't that wonderful... so what happens if I build a bass horn using a 15" cone driver and, in fact, realize a reduced cone excursion but the problem is that the reduction occurs over a range of frequencies that's narrower than the frequency range I'm trying to operate my bass horn over? This is what happens, you end up with a horn that has a high sensitivity over that region where you've realized this reduced cone excursion. In other words you end up with a Klipschorn folded bass unit... What??? You never heard of path length differences???

Hey Dean.........not sure what document you might be thinking of but I can tell you that I had a conversation with Jim Hunter shortly after buying some new LaScalas in 1984 about the sidewall resonance and he and Klipsch was well aware of it and suggested a brace from the dog house to sidewall as one solution. He also explained that due to how the majority of the LaScalas were used(ie: sound reinforcement) and production issues of the dog house not being perfectly centered thus making each brace would have to be custom fit so they hadn't put it into production. I will say that if one does the bracing there might be some benefit to tweeking the crossover as my understanding was done in part for the LaScala ll due to it's stiffer sidewalls. miketn Yeah, I hear it, even at moderate levels. It's irritating to be sure. It's like the resonance is being used to augment the low frequency performance. I'd forgotten how the character of these speakers (Heritage) change as the volume goes up. As long as I keep it below 90dB, it sounds very nice, and I can't really find much to complain about -- most of the complaints would be centered about the fact that my poorly recorded material has been rendered unlistenable -- something I think we're all used to by now. I'm double handicapped. I'm not a wood worker, and I'm not an engineer with a lot of cool test equipment -- so I can't properly design new filter arrangements. I know my limitations and I'm not embarrassed by them. With good numbers and reliable plots, I've have managed to stumble into some simple things that work pretty good. Having Bob, Dennis and John willing to accommodate me, provide input, and do testing for me, has been nothing short of awesome. Last night I added a 128uF electrolytic in parallel with the K-33. I was curious to see what the effect on the resonance might be. Sure enough, it was greatly reduced, but then something else didn't sound right and I need to get my laptop down there to see what's going on. The real problem right now is that I'm eight builds back and can't do any serious testing until I get these networks done. Did you try a 124.57 uF cap?