Jump to content

Tizman

Regulars
  • Posts

    363
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Tizman

  1. By too big, it's also optics that I am referring to. It is important, in my case, that the two ways look like something that the average person might put in their home. Jubilees are very borderline. MWMs are out of the question. I will be using a huge horn for lower frequencies. Wouldn't the only difference between a Jubilee and a MWM, in my application, be the required crossover frequency to the big bass horn? Is the MWM superior in ways other than low end extension?
  2. I asked the question about extending the La Scala bass bin to see if their was anyone with experience with it, and to gain the knowledge that a discussion would generate, but I should probably let you all know what it is that I am after. I am working on a project that will use a bass bin and a K-402 as a two way in stereo with a single very large bass horn for the lower frequencies. The goal is to achieve the best possible sound quality I can in a room of roughly 30' X 50' with 10 foot ceilings. I am not looking for maximum SPL, SQ is the priority. So far, based on extensive research on this and other forums (and assuming that a MEH is not used) that has led me to a Jubilee for the two way. The remaining question is whether or not I should use a different bass bin with the K-402. My concern with the Jubilee bass bin has been addressed by ChrisA... That said, would I be better off with a Beck California bass bin? Moray James is definitely a proponent. A pair of Jubilee bass bins are triple the money of what it would cost to have a pair of Californias built. That said, SQ is more important than cost in my case. Also, MWMs are just too big for my application. The big bass horn is another thing entirely, as is it's integration with the two ways....
  3. Thanks for all the replies. I have some more interesting things to think about. I was considering the Jubilee, but had heard that the dual mouths created issues with response. These issues are avoided by the La Scala because of the joining of the two mouths, or so I read somewhere in these forums. The idea of extending the horn loaded bass by adding to an existing cabinet is very attractive, as it is far less work than building an entirely new cabinet. That said, the Beck California is something that I have been very interested in for a long time. The California appears to be a relatively straightforward build, with one mouth and a horn loaded lower frequency that is lower than a jubilee bass bin. Moray James has been suggesting it in these forums for some time.
  4. Hi All. I did a search for this but didn't find any information, so here I go. Has anyone tried to make the La Scala bass bin longer/larger by extending the existing horn mouth? My understanding is that the La Scala is effectively horn loaded to around 100HZ. If the horn were made longer by extending the mouth outward, would it be possible to lower the frequency to which the La Scala bin would be horn loaded? I'm not sure what this could look like, or should look like. Would it be enough to extend the top, bottom and sides outward? Should the extension flare out on the sides? If so, what would be the correct angle? What should you do with the front point of the doghouse? Extend it out to the new opening, or leave it as is? Your thoughts, opinions and advice on this are much appreciated.
  5. I think I found it. This photo looks most like it. No front photo unfortunately, but it looks identical from the back (minus the label). T35B
  6. I had a look online for TW-35, but all the examples I could find had a ribbed horn lens instead of the smooth one that I have at hand.
  7. Thanks for identifying it filmofreddy. What is it about it that makes it not so great?
  8. Hi All. I picked up a single tweeter today and would like some help identifying it. The seller said it was a Jensen tweeter from the 1950s, but I think it looks more like an EV tweeter. There are no identifying markings or labels on the tweeter. The horn front is 1.3 X 4.5 inches, and the horn with driver are 3 inches from front to back (11.5 X 3.25 cm and 7.5 cm deep). Pictures attached. I'm hoping to use it as the tweeter in a three way center channel speaker I have in mind. Any help with identifying it that you can provide will be be much appreciated. Cheers, Tiz
  9. Thanks Islander. If I buy two, I'm unlikely to ever sell them, me being me. I'll try that after I give this a bit more of a chance.
  10. Sorry for not being more clear. As Geoff already mentioned, Toronto is the place, and surrounding area.
  11. Hi All. I'm looking for a single Heritage speaker to serve as a center channel in a home theatre that I'm working on. I have pairs of Quartets, La Scalas, Tangent 500 and Heresy II speakers, but will look at any Heritage three way. Please let me know if you have a single laying about that you would like to sell. The speaker doesn't need to be in great aesthetic shape, and I will consider speakers with some non working drivers as well. Please let me know if you have anything to sell. Something within a reasonable drive from the GTA would be great. Cheers, Tiz
  12. Thanks for the Tangent 30 crossover schematic Moray, and thanks to Bob Crites as well. I am pretty sure that this schematic does not exist anywhere else on the web, as I have done a lot of searching as well. Much appreciated!
  13. Hello All. I've been searching, without any success, for a crossover schematic for my Tangent 30 speakers, and am hoping that someone has one handy. The crossovers in my pair of Tangent 30 appear to have been modified, as the capacitors don't match from one to the other. Any help with this would be much appreciated, as I don't think there is a schematic available for any of the Tangents other than those that use the drivers and crossovers of the Heresy (Tangent 400, 4000). Thanks in advance! Cheers, Tiz
  14. Yeah sure, you’re rational. That’s what makes you comfortable suggesting forum members go elsewhere. Whatever.
  15. I thought Chris A was talking about the midrange horn’s radiating pattern coming out of it and then rolling around and off the top, and not the vibrations of the top panel. I would think that the top panel vibrations would be fairly low in level.
  16. I get it now. I didn’t know what I was looking at.
  17. How are these panels situated with respect to the speakers and your room?
  18. Thanks for all the replies and the excellent information contained within. I am getting a basement area ready for a listening room/home theatre, and will be using a DIY pair of Klipsch inspired speakers there. My La Scalas are upstairs in the family room and will remain there, unmolested. The ceiling in the new room is around 7.5’. Would a carpet and sound absorbing panels on the ceiling be the ticket if I use Klipsch Heritage style horns in my DIY speaker? Alternately, as may end up being the case, if I use CD horns instead, will these room treatments be less needed?
  19. Yes. A very good idea, and not a permanent thing either.
  20. I wouldn’t modify my La Scalas, but I will go to the effort of terminating the horns better in future DIY speaker builds that include horns. It’s a matter of many small differences adding up to larger ones. That’s why I asked about the LS II. Perhaps the termination isn’t audible. I wonder if anyone has modified their La Scalas to create a better transition, and have measurements or listening impressions to share?
  21. I just finished watching the video referenced by WMcD (thanks!), and it looks like the termination of the tweeter horn in the LS II is better than in my LS. The tweeter horn is surface mounted in the LS II. The midrange horn termination in the LSII is the same as the LS.
  22. Thanks for the replies and photos. I have been doing some reading lately about horn mouth termination and it’s impact on measured horn performance and subjective listening. I own a pair of 1976 La Scalas, and have wondered why they have a straight cutout for the midrange and tweeter horn instead of having the transition be bevelled to follow the angle of the horn’s mouth. Given the wavelengths in each case, this would seem to be a bigger issue for the tweeter horn, but is not ideal in either case. This is based upon what I have been reading online. I was wondering if the LS II corrected this. It looks like it is made in the same way as the older LS. The transition from horn mouth to the room is straight, and thereby interupts the expansion of the horn with a constriction and a small lip at a point where it would be best to have either a bevelled motorboard matching the line of the horn, or this bevel in addition to a rounded termination of some sort. They say that a little information can be a bad thing, and I am a relative newbie with respect to horn speakers, so I may be off base about this.
×
×
  • Create New...