glens

Assuming there is a (stacked?) pot, remove it, measure the resistance across the two outside terminals and find one that also physically matches. I'd assume an "audio" (maybe "logarithmic," it's been a while...) taper rather than "linear" would be appropriate, if you find a choice. Stacked volume controls have always been a weak point. The surest way of obtaining best channel balance at any given volume setting is to switch to "mono" and lift the speaker common leads, with them tied together. Adjust the balance knob until you hear the least volume, and plug the common speaker leads back in, going back to stereo. Surprising how much variance there can be in balance throughout the normal range (though I've never spent the bigger bucks on electronics, yet I feel safe in saying nits could be picked even then in this regard). Edited to add: if you haven't twisted the knob back and forth stop to stop, madly, in some time, try it. Do it until you get tired or bored. Then do it some more. See what that does for you before any disassembly.

Certainly the OP got it worked out some way (even if that meant returning the soundbar and going another route) but has shown the discourtesy of not providing closure if so. At any rate I'm just seeing this thread, and I'd be inclined to agree with Edgar for the very most part. The only caveat is that unless the unit is subtracting left from right instead of adding them, for the middle channel only, but leaving everything else alone, if a single channel somehow got reversed polarity early on, there should also be a marked lack of overall bass as well. My '12 Harley touring bike has a CD player in the factory H/K head unit. I forget what it does with a "straight" CD but think it's proper, but when playing a disc with MP3s, it swaps the channels! I have to swap channels while encoding the music so it plays back correctly. They haven't had a firmware update in years, so I doubt it'll ever get fixed (perhaps in part my fault for not conveying my findings to them, and they're a regular customer of my kid sister [freelance safety/compliance engineer, or thereabouts] up by Milwaukee, so I'm sure I could get "heard"). I guess my point is, (I should say that "thumbing" through the Harley firmware images, I recall character strings of "Mercedes" [just maybe "BMW", but I think not], a definite German influence is indicated, as I believe the "H/K" that did this was a German branch) these "folks" (Harley, Klipsch [I surmise]) are "buying" an electronics package to become part of their product. Their folks are tweaking the code, at a minimum, and passing it on. My NAD C338 integrated amp has a "Librewireless" module for the Bluetooth/DLNA/Chromecast_audio. Same thing. The OS on that module contains much impertinent stuff for the specific implementation. Back to my point. If Klipsch is in fact buying their electronics elsewhere, even to their specification, or whatever they're doing, it's been my impression over the past couple of years here on the forum that they'd be better off sticking with passive loudspeakers only.

DizRotus' suggestion early on of the purpose-built fixtures is the best so far IMO. Though I'd spread the load out on the speakers's mounts a bit more with larger plates and more screws for MDF.

Interesting. https://tidal.com/nad says: I don't believe NAD alters the BluOS in any way so the statement should equally apply to a Bluesound product. I would expect by that statement you should be able to "seamlessly ... manage and control" your Tidal music via smartphone/tablet running the BluOS app..

Were you unable because there was no such method available, or that the method was ineffectual?

I guess that depends which direction you're looking at it. In terms of other uses you might have for the radio spectrum, going hardwired would limit the amount (now none) of interference from streaming music. In terms of streaming music the reason hardwired beats wifi is reliability, plain and simple. I'm unsure about DSD rates but at least otherwise a good wifi connection is great for streaming music, a hard wire is intrinsically better (and more secure if that matters) if doable. I think here you're clarifying your earlier similar statement? The noise is problematic mostly for the connection maintenance / reliability, coupled with the increase in program content packet retransmissions. The sound quality change of an affected connection is not something subtile. It has mostly to do with moments of silence while waiting for data to fill the buffer which has run dry. I believe that last phrase to be incorrect, at least as a blanket statement. I'd swear I've seen mention of plugins allowing remote control, though I forget which software package it was. Something doubly free, I'm sure, and possibly doesn't run on Mac or Microsoft (though it might). Surely both those platforms have something available with which to stream and remotely control music files.

Just don't make plural something which is intrinsically so, like RPM. More than one is still RPM. Saw a video by a guy who somewhat famously "improves" speakers. He mentioned an anomaly occuring at "one kiloHert." I swear to God. He said it multiple times just that way. So I guess if there's only one (thousand) you should "singularize" Hertz's namesake part of the value?

Plus it's slimming.

Sometimes formulating a plan can take longer than whipping a few spit-wads at the wall, so to speak. Both methods have their place, I think.

Cosmetic differences does not mean scratched, although that's always possible. The factory may decide that the veneer is slightly different, or there may be shading differences, or there may be excessive grain, or knots in the veneer. I have seen all of those considered B stock. While the common notion seems to be the "B" refers to cabinetry, it could also refer to componentry, couldn't it? I hope not because I really don't see anything about my B Forte IIIs that would cause them to be so designated.

That rings a bell. I always was a fan of JBL pro stuff. Those speakers likely sound good enough, but like I said, I have no idea whether $800 represents a good value or not. The chances they sound better than what you've cobbled together have got to be pretty good.

I didn't know you were familiar with where I work. I swear to God, if they came up with a good idea they'd implement it to conform with what they see when holding that idea facing a mirror. Great thread. Thanks.

Did you see a purplish tint to the marker's "black?"

https://jblpro.com/products/3678 Looks like they still make 'em? Look interesting to me though I have no idea on that price. What do your huge stacks currently consist of?

Just looked. Ncore rate to 2 ohms, though not as linearly from 4 to 2 as from 8 to 4. I'd do it if I could justify the $.

If by daisy-chaining you mean "wiring them in series" then in terms of amp load you'd be fine. Though I believe the variable impedance characteristics of the speakers will thus more greatly influence the balance of sound in the other than if they were wired in parallel. Even wiring them in parallel I should think you'd be fine. I bet that amp will intervene on your behalf if you're getting out of hand. You don't and I'd characterize it as unnecessary for your application anyway. I'd fit my listening to match the M10 if I had to, but it's built for what I do already. I have no experience with it. I do have its lesser sibling and understanding that everything about the M10 is better-done, I cannot fathom how anybody could rightly be unhappy with the M10. If memory serves, you'd not need the phonograph pre-amp box with the M10. And you should get busy ripping your CDs to flac files so you can serve them up. It's so much more convenient and the sound quality is 100% the same.

Give that scenario a little more thought. Any advantage gained by expanding the footprint would be, to some level (could be more, could be less), negated by allowing the spikes (or just feet) to move relative to the floor beneath them. "Decoupling" does indeed mean "allowing relative motion" so far as I understand the term.

I'd appreciate being able to justify an M10! Something I find curious about that model is its bridging capabilities. They don't offer a standalone companion amp, so to what purpose does one bridge the unit? Is it expected to buy two of them to run bridged? Then doubling up on all the pre-amp / control hardware, needlessly? I'd have to go back through the thread trying to meticulously ferret out the pertinent parts of the questions to offer any help, but frankly it seems a daunting task. Could the question be re-phrased?

Here's some perspective: https://www.harley-davidson.com/us/en/motorcycles/touring.html Granted, you bought less than half the weight of even the lightest bike on that page, and the maximum exhilaration possibly available via the speakers may be less, but it's more consistent, any time of any day, snow, rain, or shine. And don't forget the ongoing costs of fuel, maintenance, tags, insurance, and at least several hours several times a season cleaning and polishing... Everything costs more over time as the built-in devaluation of the fiat dollar runs its course. It's been said that a good horse or a nice 3-piece suit has always cost about an ounce of gold. How much is that nowadays? How many ounces of gold did it take to buy a nicely-finished pair of LaScalas in 1979 vs. today, I wonder? (https://www.dollartimes.com/inflation/items/price-of-gold-in-1979)

I've dealt with Crutchfield and have never felt violated in any way. And it's really them, not Klipsch you dealt with, it seems. They do look good. Congrats nonetheless.

That's my motto, too. Speaking in terms of experimentation only, of course. A complete revamp using a known recipe is okay.

Wow, what a beautiful photo! Yes. Except for that open passageway in the corner!

To be pedantic, if the driver ain't doin' it, the horn gets nothing to work with.

I bought my Forte IIIs without driving the 40-some miles each way to listen to them first. No regrets. None whatsoever.

Am using a C338 to drive Forte IIIs, quite happily. I bet the proposed combination will satisfy well enough.