glens

I agree it would be aesthetically pleasing, but feel the accumulating dust would be more obtrusive on a supposed-to-be-black surface, and that would require more housekeeping than with stained (however) finish in there. I don't know how close to a draw that is. How's about black cloth covering the openings?

You had two plugged out of, what was it, 7? Not much difference, I'd think, in terms of how when you get below the point that the ports offer resistance the driver is pretty much running undamped. Wouldn't the rated output vs. frequency require a high-pass at the bottom end for this design implementation? Were you running with or without one when you got driver bottoming? Beside the fact you stated it was without - I was more or less wondering whether this was a test being undertaken or routine operation.

Toed out.

Breaking and remaking connections? How much time has passed since that was done last? Possibly one factor...

If you don't buy them you'll always wonder what it could have been like. Kind of like the person with a barrel of apples, always picking one that's gone a little bad (before it gets even worse and they have to throw it away). Rarely to they enjoy a good apple 'cause the next marginal one will get picked next, and so forth. Pick the good apple now and enjoy it! You only live once (at least that you know of) and it's only money.

I'm gonna nay-say here. I don't see much change in cap value being required either side of the transformer. The impedance is the same enough either side, or at least should be. If anything, it might could cut down on the size of the parallel inductor required if you count the inductance of the transformer, but I believe a coil doesn't act like much of an inductor (the way the inductor proper is being used here) when it's being used as a transformer...

I, too, would be inclined toward "horizontal" as depicted above; reasons are a few.

Agreed! I was merely expressing a notion, not passing judgement or hurling insults. To continue the expansion that got truncated on the exterior would require it be done in the middle, and that might be desirable for another reason as well, but then the back chamber volume would need to be recovered, by what, shortening the primary horn section? Tradeoffs is tradeoffs. I'm anxiously awaiting measurement reports on this. I really like the idea.

Earthquakes and land/mud slides.

Perhaps I think out loud too much. I intended nothing derogatory in what I said, in case it came across that way. I believe they have trees and various undergrowth in both those other locations, too, but the soil doesn't have as permanent location as what you're accustomed to, for a couple of reasons.

Well out into the room plus on top of an open pedestal must really lighten the perceived bass output. Not sure I'd go that route, certainly not in my room. 'Course I'm using flat-response load-invariant class-D amplification, which might make a difference as well.

Oh, I'm sure that bass enhancement would be appreciated, whether or not in this particular case the result would be appreciable is what's in question

I think I got that quote right... From what I've been able to garner, decreasing the value of resistance in this mod doesn't "pad the tweeter down." Rather, it "unpads" the frequency-shaping elements in parallel with the tweeter, allowing greater "suckout" of the particular frequencies upon which the elements are operating. The overall level of the tweeter output would not change, but there would be a greater decrease in output centered at that one band, wherever it may be.

I can't believe you grown men are talking in extreme public about huffing, much less posting pictures... As bad as kids and their snapchat/instagram/facebook crap! On a serious note, I'd be inclined to maybe throw away a little more material if need be, and juggle things as necessary to form a LaScalaesque doghouse in an attempt to continue horizontal expansion all the way out. That final parallel-side-walls section would, it seems, create a great possibility for a (nasty?) resonant chamber situation.

Pulling them further out than you have them would take you backwards in terms of what you're seeking. Not only are there no room corners anywhere nearby, the opposite is the case with effective "holes" instead. I suggest just a couple inches from the wall, toed in. Yes many modern recordings (or even newly "remastered" old ones) have utterly atrocious frequency balance and dynamics. No way the Heresy will provide a better overall sound, in my opinion. If you need a sub, you need a sub. I'd just turn up the bass a notch or two if/when needed. I have a pair of Forte III with the right speaker about 4 feet from a corner and the left about 20' from the other corner, no way around it. The left speaker is obviously shy on bass compared to right, in all combinations of speaker and amplifier channel driving it. It's the nature of physics. I have no tone controls and absolutely no need for them with the Forte III, which sound extremely balanced from top to bottom from quiet to loud. What was your prior setup and how well did it do there? I noticed that, too. First on the right speaker and then on the left in different pictures.

Well, it's vinyl, so I don't know how well it'll take to wood surface treatments. It only appears in direct sunlight or direct any light? If only in sunlight (especially from the side) I could see how it would've been missed at the factory. Otherwise it's a bit of a mystery for sure. Could well have happened at any point during, or even prior to, manufacturing/assembly. The roll of vinyl prior to application could have had a wrap of tape or film to secure the flap and it sucked out some of the chemicals (seen that with floor covering), the material for this pair coming from the first wrap of a new roll, or material feed wheels lightly burnishing the surface at some point when feeding the vinyl sheet or the post-applied-to panels. All speculation as to the origin aside, if it only appears in direct sunlight and you can live with it otherwise, Crutchfield may work with you on a price adjustment as opposed to all the overhead involved with replacement. How well do you like them otherwise? Sound good?

I'm not going to argue either, just state the one time that "caster" means there's two axles at right angles to each other, the vertical axle offset from (so as to not pass through) the horizontal axle, thus the wheel is free to spin in both planes and allow for ease of directional changes while the wheeled object is in motion. Mounting the fixed (non-castered) wheels on the back of the enclosure so they bear no weight unless the box is tipped back is an excellent idea. Using castered wheels that way would work a bit maddeningly.

While you used the term "casters" I don't quite think that's what you meant, or would want.

SPF 2 x 4s with the core of the stem and 4 year's growth at work for you there... Likely where your bass is disappearing most.

Oh, part of "not too bright now" might involve ear-aging

Bolting on that driver might be worth the experimental effort, but you'd still need some frequency shaping for the horn. Somewhere around here is a schematic for a passive network for that horn (and the specific driver that was used). The LCR stuff (beyond the simple series capacitors and parallel inductors) in parallel with the driver does that shaping - the horn is more constant directivity (a good thing) at the expense of constant response. Level matching should work well with the L-pad in that network if memory serves.

Interesting perhaps but I wouldn't reach any conclusions when doing that. The Klipsch horn is going to need some frequency shaping not provided by that network.

Congratulations! Last time I'd heard any Klipsch "home" speakers was roughly 40 years ago and even (especially?) the Khorns just didn't "do it" for me. My sound space is rather difficult and the little "given-me" JBLs I'd been using had lost any allure, so about 6 months ago I got it in my craw that better-controlled directivity would be beneficial. I haven't a clue how I came to think a pair of Forte III would be nice to have, but without so much as driving an hour to hear them in a showroom I ordered a pair. Best decision I've made in a good decade! Welcome to the club.

I wouldn't include deliberate attenuation to match driver levels as part of "insertion loss" proper, and was wondering if you'd bring up that aspect. I'd primarily include attenuation by series reactive components (well) within the passband of any section. Components which provide shaping within a passband would perhaps be close to inclusion, but not quite there, in my book, since all shaping of frequency response is the purpose of the circuitry. It was partly laziness on my part to not flesh out my earlier question, and partly to see where you'd take it unprompted. The longer version of my question would be: Apart from "purely" resistive attenuation to match levels, as well as deliberately and selectively bleeding off energy within a passband (both of which must be done somewhere in the chain if/when required), what would you consider to be the level of insertion loss of adequate and properly-working components? I'd guess it'd be in the neighborhood of 1 dB. Obviously the best solution would allow the driver(s) to be connected directly to the output of a final gain stage with all leveling and shaping occuring upstream. But for good-enough results with passive components between the amp and driver(s) it's my contention there is going to be negligible power and/or driver control loss.

I thought you said you had a forklift. Bottom of that opening about belly high would've eliminated having to get up off the floor and likely easier beyond that.