Jump to content
The Klipsch Audio Community

garyrc

Regulars
  • Content Count

    3340
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

974 Revered

1 Follower

About garyrc

  • Rank
    Forum Ultra Veteran

Profile Information

  • Location
    The Milky Way
  • Interests
    Music, audio, film, psychology, psychology of film, philosophy, religion, history, mythology, audio electromechanical mythology.
  • My System
    Main room: 2- 1982 Klipschorns with K-401 fiberglass mid horn upgrade (1987), and AK-4 Klipschorn stock upgrade (2006), Modified Belle Klipsch (2005) center channel with K401 horn in an enlarged hi hat, flush mounted, behind AT wall fabric, buried in the wall between flanking Khorns, 2 NAD C- 272 ss 150 wpc stereo power amps, Marantz AV7005 AV preamp/processor, Heresy II surround speakers driven by 1/2 NAD C-272 and a Yamaha 135 wt amp, NAD C-542 CD player, OPPO BDP-93 CD/SACD/DVD/Blu-ray player, Klipsch RSW-15 subwoofer, for movies only, Panasonic projector, 130" true width 2.35:1 projection screen (141.3" diagonal).

Recent Profile Visitors

7033 profile views
  1. garyrc

    '56/'57 Klipschorn restoration/repair

    I'm glad. I believe PWK told a Speaker Builder interviewer that the University 4401 was "a sad tweeter," but was the best available at the time, and that it had a sizeable peak at 8K. He replaced it with the K77 (selected, tested EV T35) in about 1957. I like the T35/K77; some don't. A couple of forum members installed "upgrades" and went back to K77s. One writer said "they never meet their EV frequency response specs," but I have had three pairs, one pair from directly from EV, one in 1982 Khorns, and one post EV pair in AK4 upgrades, all of which met the specs/graph EV published. The AK4 pair had close frequency response curves, and Audyssey managed to make them identical in FR, which Audyssey couldn't achieve with the K55X/K401 or the K-33E.
  2. garyrc

    Cables, Coffee, and Cocktails

    Some rather important people may not be fully aware of that.
  3. garyrc

    crossovers

    So, what would the predicted life of my AK4 crossovers for Khorns be? I bought them from Klipsch in 2005; they were new.
  4. Dissipation factor, and more. https://www.illinoiscapacitor.com/pdf/Papers/impendance_dissipation_factor_ESR.pdf
  5. Thanks! I think that must be where I heard that.
  6. I wish I could find PWK's article on making capacitors out of whiskey bottles.
  7. See Chris A's post on this forum on "Corner Horn Imaging." Chris A Heritage Members 1982 7253 posts Posted November 2, 2011 The is the third in a series of FAQs ("Frequently-Asked Questions") , the first of which was the Klipsch serial number FAQ, and the second is the Active Bi-amping/Triamping FAQ. This thread discusses corner-horn loudspeaker imaging, in particular, how to achieve outstanding imaging, and typically encountered issues with corner horn imaging. Klipsch currently makes two corner-horn designs (i.e., the Klipschorn and the Klipschorn Jubilee), and has made smaller corner-horn speakers in the past (e.g., the Shorthorn series). Other manufacturers make or have made corner horn speakers (e.g., Voight, ElectroVoice, JBL, and smaller companies like Pi and Decware, etc.). "Can I get Outstanding Imaging from a Corner-Horn Speaker?" Yes. Good corner-horn imaging can be "unsurpassed". "What are the Advantages of Corner Horns?" A corner horn is designed to be used in a corner of a room or outside structure (such as an outdoor stage backstop). While this type of speaker is not new, it is not often seen in today's audiophile circles. Many misconceptions about corner horn potential performance and proper setup exist: 1) They provide dramatically lower bass distortion, in particular, modulation distortion, than non-corner-loaded loudspeakers(Part I and Part II). Bass modulation distortion has been found to be quite audible. 2) They provide much greater low frequency dynamic range without resultant woofer compression or other forms of distortion, which limits achievable sound reproduction fidelity of other types of speakers 3) They have the potential to achieve full range controlled directivity in-room if designed/produced carefully "What are the Disadvantages of Corner Horns?" 1) They require good room corners to fully achieve their lf response, or a large footprint in order to accommodate "false corners" 2) They are physically large and heavy speakers if they are to reproduce all needed low frequencies (e.g., piano, organ, string bass, etc.) 3) They require amplifiers of high quality for the critical "first watt" of input power to achieve full potential 4) They require careful placement of objects and/or acoustic treatments in-room in order achieve their full imaging potential "What is Different About Corner-Horn Imaging?" Corner-horn imaging performance is a strong function of the room they're in, i.e., 1) The room's absolute and relative dimensions, its shape (including the ceiling), and the uniformity of the walls next to the Khorns (i.e., front and side walls near the speakers) 2) The placement of the speakers within that room on the boundary (e.g., tailpiece-to-corner fit to seal the two mouths of the bass bins, the length of the corner extensions from the bass bin on front and side walls, and whether there are any intrusions into the room by bricks and other architectural details (yes, brick fireplaces and mantles can significantly affect imaging...) 3) The absence of near-field furniture or equipment that reflect acoustic energy, and 4) The judicious use of acoustic treatments (...it usually doesn't take very much, but it usually takes some). 5) The quality of the "first watt" of amplifier power driving them 1 YK Thom reacted to this Quote Chris A Music Enthusiast Heritage Members 1982 7253 posts Location: Arlington, Texas, USA Report post Posted November 2, 2011 "How Do I Set Up Corner Horns to Increase Their Stereo Imaging Performance?" One commonly heard complaint from corner horn users is that their speakers seem to have trouble achieving the same imaging performance as free-standing speakers. Example cases of this include the Khorn vs. the La Scala or Belle, Cornwall, Palladium or Klipsch Reference series, etc. When La Scala or Belle owners would profit in greatly increased bass performance and much lower bass IMD of their speakers if they were placed in the corners of the room, toed-in to the listening position. When these same owners are polled about where they place their speakers in-room, invariably the answer is either "along a wall" or "a few feet from the front and side walls". Why would this occur? PWK himself stated: "The conclusion is pretty obvious. Whether you are using KLIPSCHORN loudspeakers, or speakers of some other make or type, you will get best stereo geometry and best tonality with corner placement of the flanking speakers (whether you use a center speaker or not). and the corner placement should be with the flanking speakers toed-in at 45 degrees." (Taken from Dope from Hope, Vol. 15, No.2, 01 August, 1975) There is something involving room acoustics and corner horns that is critically important to achieving excellent corner-horn imaging. It turns out, the psychoacoustic effect that comes into play in this is a special case of the Precedence Effect of listeners, called the Haas Effect, and the issue is early reflections of high mid-bass and midrange frequencies (i.e., about 250-4000 Hz) off the walls of the room closest to corner-horn midrange and high mid-bass horns. Here is a correspondence from the co-inventor of the Klipschorn Jubilee (Roy Delgado): "Imaging and creating it by having two varying acoustic signals is an interesting undertaking. I have found that a smooth, unobtrusive boundary between the two speakers works very well with well-behaved and consistent polar patterns [of speakers]. The other thing that I have noticed that works well is no boundaries--like playing the speakers outside. Both do a very good to excellent job of accomplishing the imaging goal, but the caveat is that no boundaries forgives non-consistent polar patterns while a smooth boundary is a strict enforcer of consistent polar patterns. Pretty cool how that happens." These early reflections should be controlled (i.e., a "Zero Reflection Zone" that one acoustic panel manufacturer uses) in order to achieve much greater imaging performance with speakers in corners of rooms (especially corner horns). What is the easiest way to control these reflections? Have a smooth boundary between the speakers (i.e., nothing between the speakers) and smooth front and side walls. If this is not possible for your room and setup, the next easiest fix is to employ absorption panels. Many companies make "fuzz" panels and tiles that can easily be placed along side walls and front walls of the your listening room. How much? It turns out (from the Haas Effect) that controlling the early reflections should be done for about 10-20 milliseconds of delayed reflections from side and front walls. This translates into about 11 to 22 feet (3.4-6.8 meters) of total path length at room temperature. One way to determine how much absorption you need about the midrange horn mouth area on the front and side walls is to draw a plan view of your room (i.e., looking down on the floor plan), and draw circles from your listening position in increments of 12, 14, 16, 18, and 20 feet (4.9, 5.5, 6.1 meters). Then draw circles of 2, 4, 6, 8, etc. feet (0.6, 1.2, 1.8, etc. meters) from your midrange horn mouth locations in-room. Where the circles intersect along the walls with total path length of less than 11-22 feet (3.4-6.8 meters), mark those areas with a highlighter, then go open a bottle of wine with your spouse. Wait until the wine takes effect, then start the negotiations on how much absorbent tiles/panels are acceptable (...hopefully, the answer isn't "zero"...). I use about 2 feet (0.6 meters) of absorption at the side-wall exit area of my corner-horn midrange horns: YMMV. Depending on your room geometry and listening position in relation to the corner horn placement (i.e., the included angle of the speakers relative to the listener--typically 90+ degrees included angle), the width of the midrange horn acoustic coverage laterally (~60-100 degrees included angle), and assuming that your corner horn midrange horn controls its polar response down to its lower crossover frequency*, the area that you should cover with absorption panels could be on the order of 2-10 feet along the front and side walls. I find that 2 feet of absorption along side walls works very well for Klipsch K-402 horns (i.e. Jubilee), and ~7 feet across the front wall, measured from the exit of each midrange horn's mouth. Another approach is to place diffuser panels along the same areas, but note that the use of diffusers in the "Hass effect areas" will likely not achieve the same level of corner-horn imaging as the use of absorbers. More on the reasons why later. If your listening position is more than 11 to 22 feet (3.4-6.8 meters) away, you probably have little work to do. If you are like me, and sit within 10 feet (3 meters) of your corner horns, you will find that the effect of using absorbent panels along the walls is spectacular in increasing your stereo imaging performance. * More on the subject of horn polar control and imaging performance later. "But What About the Equipment/Racks, Architectural Details, and Speaker(s) Between by Corner Horns?" Again, the most straightforward way to deal with this is to simply remove all objects between the speakers, leaving smooth wall. If this is not achievable, the alternatives are the same as above. I use absorption tiles on the side and top of my center Belle, on the masonry on each side of my fireplace, and a quilt-based cloth fabric on the mantlepiece to control these early reflections. "But What About the Television Between My Speakers?" This one is easy: place a temporary quilt, comforter, or acoustic absorption tiles in front of the screen when you listen in stereo music-only (i.e., no video) mode. "But What About the Floor Next to My Speakers?" Something as simple as a thin area carpet around each corner horn or even wall-to-wall carpet will suffice. This carpet does not need to be very thick or "fuzzy". "But What About the Ceiling?" If your ceiling is relatively high, you probably don't have a problem. If it is lower than about 9 feet, and especially if you have Khorns, you should think about either putting absorbent material around the top/bottom mouth of the K-400 midrange horn or place diffusers/absorbers on the ceiling around your speaker's midrange horn mouth (especially if you sit relatively close to your corner horns). More on the reason for this later. "What If the Amount of Absorption Recommended Above Just About Covers My (Small) Listening Room?" Then you are probably one of those unfortunate corner-horn owners that would greatly benefit by placing your speakers in the corners of a larger room: this is a large portion of the argument, "...Khorns require a large room...". If you are using Klipschorn Jubilees, then you can use them in a smaller room than Khorns. More on the reason why this is--later. "Is All This Really Necessary?" If you are trying to increase your corner-horn imaging performance: the answer is "yes" if you sit within 15 feet (4.5 meters) or so of your speakers. If you sit further back, then you probably don't have many imaging issues. Next up: discussion about amplifiers and corner horns...
  8. garyrc

    Denon 4400H...Not loud enough??

    Yes, it's annoying. Thanks to some audiophiles gathering some data, the 2 channel spec may not be completely useless. For 5.1 they found that 5 channels were each powered at about 70% to 80% of the 2 channel rating. I haven't seen any results for 7.1 or 9.1. In the old, old days (the late '50s and early '60s) the Federal Trade Commission forced manufacturers to be more fully disclosing. I remember photographs of them weighting down turntable platters, and running amplifier tests. Then the regs changed and the manufacturers went wild with exaggerated specs. Gradually it got better, perhaps because audio critics shamed them, as did a few honest companies like McIntosh. THEN, car audio became popular, and car audio standards were much lower.
  9. garyrc

    klipschorn on castors

    IMO, that's the way to do it and not lose bass.
  10. garyrc

    Denon 4400H...Not loud enough??

    Something is definitely wrong. Check your Denon manual. There are two ways to set up your Main Volume Control. You want it set up to film industry standards so a very high volume is about 0 dB and a low volume is a negative number, like about - 70 dB. Under those circumstances, Audyssey would set the Sound Pressure Level (the correct term for "volume" or "loudness") to Reference Level when the Main Volume Control is at 0 dB. This is outrageously loud on loud passages. It, after running Audyssey, will give you the same SPL in dB at the Main Listening Position (which should be at microphone position #1), with your speakers, in your room, as the mixers heard when doing the sound for the movie. This is possible because movies, unlike music, are mastered to be at a known and standard SPL level. This should provide instantaneous peaks (milliseconds long) up to full scale for main channels of 105 dB, and 115 dB for the subwoofer channel. THX has looked into perceptual or psychological loudness (and "loudness" is a perceptual/psychological term, rather than a physical one), and determined that someone with a Large home theater or listening room will perceive - 5 dB MV, rather than 0 dB, as the same level as Reference level in the center of a THX commercial movie theater, due to the smaller room's earlier reflections (perceived as the original sound rather than reverb) and pressure waves. In your smallish room at 5 feet, I'd think, maybe, -8 dB would "sound like" Reference level. Many people listen at -10 to -15 dB. I've never heard of Audyssey setting the volume too low, when the Main Volume Control is set up as above. Many of us do add a subwoofer boost of 3 to 8, or so, dB, because, we became used to a few anomalous bass peaks before Audyssey. Several researchers (Harmon inc. and several others) found that most people prefer low bass being elevated as much as 9 dB over the highest treble. So, Audyssey smooths out the kinks and zigzags and you set the overall, smoothed, bass to taste. Don't turn the bass up with the AVR's subwoofer trim control. The cheap line drivers in many AVRs' subwoofer output circuits clip easily. Keep that trim level below about -5. Use the gain control on the subwoofer itself to turn up the bass. Once you get your SPL problem solved, put your feet up and read both of the following -- they are leagues better than almost any manual, and unlike most manuals, they have been scrutinized and revised. "Audyssey FAQ Linked Here" Guide to Subwoofer Calibration and Bass Preferences I tried to confirm that the Denon AVRX4400H is powerful enough (which it almost certainly is) but the website won't let me see the specs. When you get past all the advertising blather, the power figure that counts is "Continuous Power per channel in watts, 2 channels operating, 20 to 20,000 Hz. at 8 Ohms at a low level of Total Harmonic Distortion (below about 0.09%). This information should be in your manual, probably in the last few pages. If the figure is 100 watts per channel, or more, for two channels, the amp is probably powerful enough for your speakers. A much more realistic spec would be "with all channels operating," to put a proper strain on the power supply, but AVR manufacturers haven't revealed that for the last few years. A "bench test" by a reviewer would probably cover that. P.S. Audyssey makes my system sound much better, really sing.
  11. I'd hire a staff to gather information on worthy charities, emphasizing social change for the "better," ecological reclamation, empowerment of the poor, etc. I like the MacArthur foundation's goals of "a more just, verdant, and peaceful world," except I suspect that justice is not in the skill set of our species. I'd put a few million into a family fund, and use the rest as outlined above. Oh, and an all Jube HT/musicc room.
  12. garyrc

    The last Blu-ray you watched.

    Thanks. So does it follow that an increased pixel count is needed as the resolution of the original being considered gets higher, but, as you say, a higher pixel count won't help if the original itself is lower resolution? So, RAH had to move to 8K to copy the 70 mm Lawrence of Arabia, but he could have copied my old home movies (Super 8mm) with a much lower K without losing resolution.
  13. This is why two rivals, with diametrically opposite views on speaker design, Klipsch and Villchur, both were against equalizers, back in the day. But, times have changed. Audyssey has 8 microphone positions, and a proprietary "fuzzy logic" way of handling the results. If a similar degree of EQ is needed from several positions, there is a high probability it will get some correction; if there is an idiosyncratic anomaly picked up by just one microphone, there is a low probability of correction. Audyssey claims this is better than an average. You can take a close-in sample of room acoustics if you listen alone, or opt for a medium size field for 3 or 4 listeners, or a big field.
  14. The problem is that we don't know when a speaker is reproducing sound as it was live, because we don't know what it sounded like live; it's high fidelity to the imagined original that counts. Obviously, the recording equipment itself changes the sound. There is microphone diaphragm crashing, resonance, poor mic placement, etc. If the recording is bad, a good speaker will let you know it's bad. Or not. Some gild the lily, veil the sound, and, IMO, don't sound as detailed when the recording is great. I carry no brief for the 7's. I've never heard them. I'm a Heritage kind of guy. I have been around live music a lot, playing in orchestras and bands (mostly in school) and I've very occasionally heard live, unamplified, unreinforced music that sounds like it has "horn resonance" (often in a poor acoustical environment, but once a friend demonstrated his "fat sounding" flute to me in the great outdoors, and I felt like reaching for damping material, but there was no horn to damp!) Since we often have only the imagined original to compare reproduced sound to, perhaps technical measurements become more important. But, how do we prioritize them? I think Paul Kiipsch put low distortion (especially modulation distortion) first in importance and smoothness of frequency response last -- but I may remember incorrectly. I assume you have run a sweep to see if there are any big peaks in the horn range. I would compare low SPL to high SPL by ear, to see if there is a big difference. I know some people like room correction, and some don't, but Audyssey smooths out my response nicely (used after moderate room treatment). If you can try Audyssey, read this: "Audyssey FAQ Linked Here" It takes patience, and a few tries.
  15. garyrc

    The last Blu-ray you watched.

    Do you mean acutance, contrast, saturation, size, brightness, etc.?
×