Comparison of the sounds of the LaScalas and the Belles?

[bomckenzie]

I know these are very different speakers. I seem to recall that the Belles had the same drivers that the cornerhorns have. My listening will be largely guitar/synth/drum and horn oriented rock stuff. I do not need a bass response flat down to 20 hz as I find most things under about 40 hz to rumble more than actually sound.

I would appreciate any advice you can give on the comparisons of listening to the Belles and the LaScalas.

Thanks

[Coytee]

I've never heard Belle's so I can't answer the specific question. That said, I'd speculate that if you are interested in either of them, the LaScalas would be easier and cheaper to find/obtain. It's not as pretty though.

[TBrennan]

The Belle and LaScala are VERY similar speakers and in comparisons (many years ago) I could tell no audible difference between them.

[Coytee]

The Belle and LaScala are VERY similar speakers and in comparisons (many years ago) I could tell no audible difference between them.

Husqvarna or Stihl? (or was it Skilsaws....) []

[TBrennan]

Husqvarna or Stihl? (or was it Skilsaws....)

Nah, I ain't goin' there, not on this forum. Now AA, that's a different story.

[seti]

I was told once that the Belle bass bin went a little bit higher than the La Scala.

[garyrc]

They were meant to sound as much alike as possible, and the Belles, La Scalas, and Klipschorns all have the same drivers, but:

1) The new La Scalas (La Scala II) have different crossovers and thicker wood, and rumor is that they have less noticeable wood resonance (a good thing), and a bit less treble. Be sure to see the rave review in Stereophile by Sam Tellig (about a year ago ... there is a brief quote in "Recommended Components").

2) Both the old and new La Scalas have a longer midrange horn, but the same driver (longer could be better but someone on the forum said PWK said that the longer horn turned out to be not necessary). I believe the frequency at which the mid horn cuts in was raised to a higher frequency at some point.

3) There is a rumor that PWK "toned down" the later Belles at some point ... perhaps in the late '70s. When I compared the La Scala and the Belle about that time I slightly preferred the Belle, because it seemed "less harsh" on bad (harsh) recordings. Both sounded great on good recordings and some master tapes we had access to.

4) I have a 2005 Belle between my Klipschorns. In my room and position, it has a nice little peak at about 60Hz, which gives it a bit more punch and the illusion of deep bass than it would have had without it, because the bass falls rapidly below that point, with hardly anything at 40Hz. The Klipschorns have no peak in that area (once again, in my room), and they go to 35 smoothly, 31.5 with considerable attenuation, and still produce a faint, but clean, sound at 25 Hz. In my old room the K-horns exhibited a a rise in bass at 31.5 Hz (!), which shows the big difference a room can make.

5) The Belle seems a good match for the Klipschorns, and I'm sure the La Scalas would be, also.

6) For some spoken word recordings with too much sibilance, I disconnect the K-horns, and use just the Belle, because it delivers a little less sibilance.

[BLSamuel]

Husqvarna or Stihl? (or was it Skilsaws....)

If you're talking chainsaws, more like a Jonsered

[Coytee]

1) The new La Scalas (La Scala II) have different crossovers and thicker wood, and rumor is that they have less noticeable wood resonance (a good thing),

Just to be clear... it's not a rumor!! They sound like they have a whole octave more bass than my (1979) pair do. I've been told they DON"T and that my pair actually goes as deep. The older versions just resonate on the sides and that masks it.

The new version looks and sounds killer!

[jdm56]

I had a belle between a pair of k-horns that was very smooth but had little bass. To be fair, it was postioned in about the worst way possible for bass, though. I now use a pair of la scala II's for two-channel music, again with little deep bass but I love that bigger mid horn. It might not be any better per se, but I prefer it. It just sounds fuller, less restricted, if you know what I mean. It seems to breathe better. The bass with these la scala's is acceptable down to 50Hz, if you put the speakers in the corners or have your listening spot along a wall. Right now, I have them in from the corners about 2-3 feet, with the listening position well out from the walls, and there the bass is thin enough that I consider subs essential. Unless, that is, if you are willing to use tone controls, EQ or bi-amping to juice it up a bit. I prefer running them flat most of the time and letting my two subs take care of the sub 80Hz content.