DizRotus

Like the boy who was given a box of manure only to exclaim with excitement, "There must be a pony in here somewhere!", I figured an EV woofer might mean EV tweeters like these could be close at hand.

While putting real trash in a dumpster I spied this.

The article is attached.

Yes. The Altec horn and EV T-35, alone, are worth the asking price. The Stephens woofer is probably (depending on condition) also worth something.

That site reminds me of those old "Draw Winky" or "Draw the pirate" contests in the backs of magazines or comic books. No matter how pitiful the rendering you submitted you were declared a winner in need of burnishing your raw artistic talent by signing up for mail order art lessons. This pitch also appeals to one's vanity. Instead of being hailed as an undiscovered artist, this site seeks to convince the gullible that they're budding, albeit lonely, Einsteins. It would be interesting to see what it takes to get rejected. My suspicion is that it's difficult to fail their test, i.e. to be rejected as a customer.

I saved the article to my hard drive, as I do with most of the interesting articles that Gil finds and shares on this forum. Anyone who missed it, just send me your email address and I'll send it to you.

Glenn, Circumstances have conspired to prevent me from enjoying your hospitality this weekend. Yesterday was our younger son's 18th birthday. Our plans to include his older brother via phone from Afghanistan got pushed back to today. As much as I'd like to see you, Verna, Rose and forum members, sharing the younger son's birthday with his soldier brother comes first. As the Cub fans say, there's always next year. Let me know if you're as far north as 15 Mile and we'll get together. Similarly, I'll let you know when I'm in or near Allen Park. Regrets,

Thank you Gil; again.

Glenn, I'll shoot for Sunday May 4th. I'll call to confirm. Until then, say hi to Verna and your mother.

Michael- What do you think of those Heresies I sold to you? They have the very CT125s that Allan Songer didn't like and sold to me. I thought they were an inmprovement over K-77s but the difference was not as dramatic to me as has been described by others. Perhaps there would be a larger difference in La Scalas or Khorns.

Bruce, Try it. You'll Like it As I stated before,I would do this to any La Scala that I planned to use for 2-channel. It can always be reversed. What's the risk? I've attached (in no particlar order) links to other threads on this topic. Some of the info is redundant. Ported La Scalas http://forums.klipsch.com/forums/thread/761099.aspx Bass Reflex Mod For LaScala? http://forums.klipsch.com/forums/644842/ShowPost.aspx LA SCALA BASS BIN MODS CHECK THIS OUT!!! http://forums.klipsch.com/forums/259794/ShowPost.aspx Adding bass to a pair of La Scalas http://forums.klipsch.com/forums/thread/179206.aspx What is the DJK bass mod for La Scala's? http://forums.klipsch.com/forums/thread/638314.aspx Lascala Bass Bin Mod http://forums.klipsch.com/forums/thread/513242.aspx lascala bass bin remodel http://forums.klipsch.com/forums/thread/253880.aspx LaScala porting mods - with data http://forums.klipsch.com/forums/thread/345616.aspx .

I agree with the sentiments expressed by my buddy Glenn aka Picky on page one. Notwithstanding serious questions regarding her business integrity, there should be no questions regarding her talent. Anyone who saw the Grammies last (?) year and heard her sing RESPECT in the BLUES BROTHERS segment and then follow it up with Nessun Dorma on less than an hour's notice (Pavarotti called in sick) should have been impressed. I'm not an expert on opera but that performance was beyond Beyonce. Hey Glenn! Do you want to invest in the Christmas store I'm thinking of opening near the cider mill at 14 Mile and Franklin Rd. I think I'll call it WREATH ' O' FRANKLIN. On another note, what happened to the quote feature and the ability to cut text from threads to be pasted and quoted in subsequent threads? Have I been away too long?

Congratulations to my favorite beef smuggler. Darn! It would have to happen just after my subscription ran out.

PWK told me (the one and only time that I met the man) that Klipsch never made kits, but they did license the Klipschorn patent to EV (and possibly others) who might have produced kits, but PWK would not have liked that. He was uncomfortable permitting EV to build something with his name on it, which is why the licensing experiment was short lived. It's unlikely that he would have been comfortable with kit Klipschorns masquerading as the genuine article. Perhaps the original owner started with the unfinished "decorator" model and finished them. Assembling everything but the bass horn is easy. Constructing the folded bass cornerhorn is extremely difficult.

Although he lives close by, the last time I had contact with Shapeshifter was two (?) years ago when we rendezvoused to check out a pair of white Khorns (there was a thread) for sale in Grosse Pointe, MI. I know he has a Harley and a girlfriend, so apparently life outside the forum occupies his time.

This discussion serves to illustrate the limitations of using words to describe physical phenomena. The actual wording of the original problem might be irrelevant. Whether expressed in terms of wheel speed or the plane's speed, the premise indicated that the plane's motion would be matched by the motion of the conveyor in the opposite direction and at the same speed. However that might be accomplished, the result would be a plane that did not move relative to the conveyor belt. Any motion of the plane relative to the belt would cause its speed (wheel or otherwise) to exceed that of the conveyor belt. Take away the prerequisite that the sum of the speed of the plane and the speed of the conveyor always equal ZERO, and the whole problem dissolves. Leave it in and under no circumstances can the plane move forward while the sum of the plane's speed and the speed of the conveyor equal ZERO.

Oldenough said, "Diz, sorry to say but you are wrong, the conveyor could be moving at absolutely ANY speed, it would have absolutely NO consequence in the planes ability to move forward and hence take-off. Back to the corner" We are not in disagreement. The conveyor can move at any speed in any direction and it alone will not prevent take off. Many pages ago I stated that the plane would take off. Nothing within the laws of physics and mathematics will cause the conveyor belt to prevent take off. Are we clear on that? Nevertheless, my comments were directed at the faulty word problem and the original fallacious premise of the magical wheel speed matching conveyor. If you accept that premise and ignore the fact that X=X+Y is not possible, then it's not hard to accept that the plane won't take off. In order for a wheeled plane sitting on a conveyor belt to move forward relative to the conveyor belt, the plane's wheel speed must exceed the speed of the conveyor belt, at least until lift-off. The original problem asked the solver to accept as fact that the wheel speed and the conveyor speed would ALWAYS BE EQUAL AND IN OPPOSITE DIRECTIONS. The premise was impossibly flawed. Asking the solver to accept the magically offsetting conveyor belt is tantamount to asking the solver to accept the fact that the plane would be absolutely prevented from moving forward relative to the ground, if not by the conveyor belt, then by a magic genie, a brick wall, chains, etc., and then asking if the plane would take off. Without forward motion at a speed sufficient to develop lift greater than the weight of the plane, it cannot take off. Let's not confuse the issue with giant fans blowing air over the plane's wings with sufficient speed and force to generate lift enabling the plane to lift straight up. While that's theoretically possible, it is beyond the parameters of the original poorly worded problem. If you are forced to accept the impossible premise, then the plane can't move relative to the conveyor belt. It's not the belt and not physics that prevents the plane from moving (Myth Busters demonstrated that) but the words of the problem. When the plane moves forward relative to the conveyor the speeds will not be equal and opposite cancelling each other out as the premise dictates. The only way for the plane's wheel speed to constantly match that of the conveyor, as the premise says IT MUST, is for the plane to not move forward relative to the conveyor. The words keep the pane still and grounded not reality or physics. The words are the problem.

Dean (and everyone else who thought for even an instant that the moving belt would prevent take off) don't feel bad. The original problem was so poorly worded as to appear to require the solver to accept impossibility as the premise. As Myth Busters demonstrated the moving belt does not inhibit takeoff. But the original problem was different. It asked the solver to accept the fact that the conveyor belt was somehow (magic?) able to match the wheel speed of the airplane. As the wheels began to move, so would the belt in the opposite direction and at the same speed. That is impossible, the same as saying X=X+Y. If it were possible for the belt to do that the plane would not have taken off, it would have remained stationery relative to a fixed point on the ground, but the problem could just as well have said, "A genie is holding the plane's tail, can it take off?" That would have been just as possible as the magical accelerating wheel speed matching conveyor belt. Myth Busters demonstrated that, irrespective of the speed of a conveyor belt in the opposite direction, a plane will still take off. They did not, and could not, prove or disprove that the magical hypothetical belt that created the impossible premise would have kept the plane from gaining flight.

It's somewhat counterintuitive, but the fact that both are bad suggests that they both are truly defective. That's more likely than that they both suffer from bad connections. With Bob's help replacing the diaphragms is easy. Nevertheless, I'd first disconnect the tweeters from the balancing networks and confirm that they're fried. With a DVM you can test for continuity on the voice coils. If you don't have one, use a battery (AA or AAA) to test each tweeter. Touch one lead to one end of the battery and scratch the other lead across the other end of the battery. If it makes noise it's good; if it's quiet, it's shot.

AFTER

Probably not, but it needs to be.

Gil- Thanks for locating and sharing the interesting patent. You might want to correct the subject line. From the "UPS . . ." title I thought it was going to be a tale about a wayward shipment. I too have found it impossible to get accurate results on a keyboard while wearing mittens.[]

Mythbusters does "Plane on a Conveyor" next Wednesday at 9:00 PM EST. Don't miss it! http://dsc.discovery.com/video/?playerId=203711706&categoryId=210013704&lineupId=229524134&titleId=1344511100

According to the Discovery Channel site at http://mythbusters-wiki.discovery.com/page/Episode+94%3A+Air+Plane+Hour?t=anon, the show will air Jan. 30. Mark your cakendar.

Speakmeister, Welcome to the forum. I advise getting the best you can get used within your budget. The advice about needing a quality source with efficient horn-loaded speakers is well taken, as is the comment about the resale value of Heresy speakers.Some recent systems I put together were: Harman Kardon 430: $125 on eBay Heresy speakers: $300 on eBay Toshiba DVD/CD player: $60 new online TOTAL $485 And Harman Kardon 730: $195 on eBay La Scalas $500 from a forum member New woofers and capacitors: $250 from forum member Bob Crites Miscellaneous paint, trim, etc. $100 Toshiba DVD/CD player: $60 new online TOTAL $1105. You said, ". . . bought exotic stuff touted at the local high end stores." It helps to keep Klipsch in perspective by asking yourself what the resale value of other “SOTA” products would be today. Very few of yesterday’s “latest and greatest” audio products have held their resale value like Klipsch. Good luck in your quest. You can’t go too far wrong with used Klipsch as there is a ready market that will allow you to change your mind with little risk.