cornscala vs klipschorn

[twistedcrankcammer]

Sorry artto,

I don't give two shites about what the curve says on this one.

I've owned and been arround ALOT of Klipschorns. I presently own 9 TSCM Bass Bins / Pro K-Horns, not to mention the bigger Klipsch Stuff I own. Kevin Harmon owns two sets of K-Horns, a pair of TSCMs, a pair of Jubilees, not to mention the bigger Klipsch stuff he owns. From where I sit, the Jubilee has the Klipschorn and the better TSCM both beat, and I've owned the K-Horns and TSCMs at the same time. I wish I owned a set of Jubilees, but will probably end up buying some 402s for my some of my MWM bins.

Been there, owned that, lived it in real life, don't need no stinkin chart to tell me what my ears and guts have lived in person.

Roger

[artto]

Sorry for you too Roger. As far as I'm concerned, in real life, neither of you have listening environments that are equal to or exceed mine. Until that happens I don't give two shites about what the curves in free space show either. It was just to point out that in fact the Jub does not have "more bass" than a Khorn regardless of what your subjective preference indicate.

And furthermore, as far as I'm concerned, until one has the whole chain under their belt (ie: from recording, electronics, speakers, AND acoustics) ( and I guess I could throw in playing the bass professionally), all a person has is their own subjective preferences with little or no point of reference except other equipment.

For me, this is not about quantity, or exaggerated in-your-face, pounding your chest bass. I know my system is perfectly capable of that, when its there on the recording. All high fidelity speakers are supposed to have flat frequency response, not "more bass". If more bass is your criteria, fine, go for it, but please, don't tell me about how accurate or how real it is. My reference is live unrecorded sound. I've recorded voice and instruments in this room for comparison with the same live. I've recorded everything from rustling leaves and crickets chirping on a hot humid night to lightening strikes, aerial bombs and fireworks, as well as live orchestral and chorale concerts. Pardon me if I have a point of referrence that few people on this Forum have.

I have ears and guts too. And they tell me not much if any difference in bass between the Jub's I heard and the way Khorns are performing in my room. And they tell me that the 402 is a better bet and more cost effective solution for improving any performance in my system.

Below is a frequency response spectrum analysis of my system. Please tell me where there needs to be "more bass"

[artto]

And besides all that, this thread is (was?) about "cornscala vs klipschorn", not Jubilee or TSCM or whatever.

Sorry about the hi-jack [:S]

[GWSmith]

Hello Artto...

I for one, don't mind the thread 'hi jack' at all, the discussion after all DOES pretain to K'horns and with that, I have a couple questions drawn from some observations...

With all your recording knowedge, experience and musicianship, I
would hope your classical recordings use as few mics as possible so the
instruments and the venue sound as ONE and just the way it sounded
LIVE when you get home and listen to playback. (NO close mics on orchestral instrument sections - a BIG
pet peave of mine!)

Also, I see your frequency response pictoral... I don't see a
subwoofer in your equipment line up. So, I am wondering where that 'so
flat' response down to 15Hz. is coming from?

Explain please, THIS K'horn owner would like to know [:^)]

.......Gary

[jwc]

artto,

Can you tell me more about that measurement you posted? The x axis has such a large range of dB that it is hard to tell where the system may rolloff. Also...why is the bar graph so wide as the frequencies get lower. The last bar to the left covers several frequencies. Is that an "average" of all those frequencies of the low end?

Also.......where was the mic for that measurement? Was this a listening position with more than one bass bin or from one.....

jc

[artto]

Hello Artto...

I for one, don't mind the thread 'hi jack' at all, the discussion after all DOES pretain to K'horns and with that, I have a couple questions drawn from some observations...

With all your recording knowedge, experience and musicianship, I
would hope your classical recordings use as few mics as possible so the
instruments and the venue sound as ONE and just the way it sounded
LIVE when you get home and listen to playback. (NO close mics on orchestral instrument sections - a BIG
pet peave of mine!)

Also, I see your frequency response pictoral... I don't see a
subwoofer in your equipment line up. So, I am wondering where that 'so
flat' response down to 15Hz. is coming from?

Explain please, THIS K'horn owner would like to know

.......Gary

Regarding my recordings ~ absolutely as few mics as possible. I usually use a setup similar to the old Mercury Living Presence or the Telarc recordings, Two main L&R mics, usually spaced about 20' (stage space & arrangement often limit exactly where I can place them - this is live-in-concert). Sometimes I'll also use a center mic for "phantom" center imaging. The last recording was just the L+R. Sometimes I need to blend in a mic for soloists. But for the most part its done in "purist" form.

In the spectrum analysis pictoral the software has an overlap from slice to slice. The test signal only goes down to 20Hz. But the room does have a fundamental resonance at 19Hz, and the room modes seem to be helping reinforce the area between 20Hz and 40Hz. The bass trapping helps attenuate anomolies at higher multiples of those frequencies (but have no effect on the lowest frequencies because the traps are not large enough to affect the longer wavelengths). And thats why I don't have a subwoofer in there, I don't feel I need one.

[twistedcrankcammer]

Sorry for you too Roger. As far as I'm concerned, in real life, neither of you have listening environments that are equal to or exceed mine. Until that happens I don't give two shites about what the curves in free space show either. It was just to point out that in fact the Jub does not have "more bass" than a Khorn regardless of what your subjective preference indicate.

And furthermore, as far as I'm concerned, until one has the whole chain under their belt (ie: from recording, electronics, speakers, AND acoustics) ( and I guess I could throw in playing the bass professionally), all a person has is their own subjective preferences with little or no point of reference except other equipment.

For me, this is not about quantity, or exaggerated in-your-face, pounding your chest bass. I know my system is perfectly capable of that, when its there on the recording. All high fidelity speakers are supposed to have flat frequency response, not "more bass". If more bass is your criteria, fine, go for it, but please, don't tell me about how accurate or how real it is. My reference is live unrecorded sound. I've recorded voice and instruments in this room for comparison with the same live. I've recorded everything from rustling leaves and crickets chirping on a hot humid night to lightening strikes, aerial bombs and fireworks, as well as live orchestral and chorale concerts. Pardon me if I have a point of referrence that few people on this Forum have.

I have ears and guts too. And they tell me not much if any difference in bass between the Jub's I heard and the way Khorns are performing in my room. And they tell me that the 402 is a better bet and more cost effective solution for improving any performance in my system.

Below is a frequency response spectrum analysis of my system. Please tell me where there needs to be "more bass"

arrto,

You should be sorry, you did not explain the parameters of your argument were some [bs] you cooked up yourself, and we were limiting comparisons to inside your room, where a pair of Jubilees has NEVER resided!

Are these the same imaginary graphs that show the K-Horn falling off a whole octave lower then we all know it does. I'm glad you have a beutiful room, but put on a profolaxis the next time your strokin your walls. Paul designed the Jubilee to replace the K-Horn, and I'll put my faith in his and Roys opinion, and the graphs in the antiechoic chamber first.

Let's see the graphs you were quoting to Bill Hendrix, I'm callin [bs] on that one as well.

Roger

[artto]

artto,

Can you tell me more about that measurement you posted? The x axis has such a large range of dB that it is hard to tell where the system may rolloff. Also...why is the bar graph so wide as the frequencies get lower. The last bar to the left covers several frequencies. Is that an "average" of all those frequencies of the low end?

Also.......where was the mic for that measurement? Was this a listening position with more than one bass bin or from one.....

jc

JC, Im not sure I understand what you mean by "The x axis has such a large range of dB that it is hard to tell where the system may rolloff." Do you mean the high end or low end? Or are you talking about the width of the bars?

The width of the bars get wider as the frequency goes lower because even though the sample size is the same, the wavelengths are longer. This is common on frequency response graphs. I guess I could have plotted it using a line instead of vertical bars. This is simply the sotware default setting. If I fool around with it enough I'm sure I could make it look as good or as bad as I want. The overall system response was intended to have a high frequency roll-off in between what one would get in a concert hall with classical music verses that of say a jazz, or even rock performance. These measurements were taken well after the acoustics were complete. In other words, I didn't use the measurements to tune or fine tune the acoustics. They were performed to see how close I came to my ideal by using my ears, more like a confirmation.

Under the graph is some info listed by the software as well as the notes section. The mic was placed at the usual listening position.

[artto]

Sorry for you too Roger. As far as I'm concerned, in real life, neither of you have listening environments that are equal to or exceed mine. Until that happens I don't give two shites about what the curves in free space show either. It was just to point out that in fact the Jub does not have "more bass" than a Khorn regardless of what your subjective preference indicate.

And furthermore, as far as I'm concerned, until one has the whole chain under their belt (ie: from recording, electronics, speakers, AND acoustics) ( and I guess I could throw in playing the bass professionally), all a person has is their own subjective preferences with little or no point of reference except other equipment.

For me, this is not about quantity, or exaggerated in-your-face, pounding your chest bass. I know my system is perfectly capable of that, when its there on the recording. All high fidelity speakers are supposed to have flat frequency response, not "more bass". If more bass is your criteria, fine, go for it, but please, don't tell me about how accurate or how real it is. My reference is live unrecorded sound. I've recorded voice and instruments in this room for comparison with the same live. I've recorded everything from rustling leaves and crickets chirping on a hot humid night to lightening strikes, aerial bombs and fireworks, as well as live orchestral and chorale concerts. Pardon me if I have a point of referrence that few people on this Forum have.

I have ears and guts too. And they tell me not much if any difference in bass between the Jub's I heard and the way Khorns are performing in my room. And they tell me that the 402 is a better bet and more cost effective solution for improving any performance in my system.

Below is a frequency response spectrum analysis of my system. Please tell me where there needs to be "more bass"

arrto,

You should be sorry, you did not explain the parameters of your argument were some you cooked up yourself, and we were limiting comparisons to inside your room, where a pair of Jubilees has NEVER resided!

Are these the same imaginary graphs that show the K-Horn falling off a whole octave lower then we all know it does. I'm glad you have a beutiful room, but put on a profolaxis the next time your strokin your walls. Paul designed the Jubilee to replace the K-Horn, and I'll put my faith in his and Roys opinion, and the graphs in the antiechoic chamber first.

Let's see the graphs you were quoting to Bill Hendrix, I'm callin on that one as well.

Roger

OK smart @$$. I'm calling on YOU on YOUR BS. Can you read a graph? Hmmm? Here it comes.........

[artto]

ding

AES-Jubilee2.pdf

AES-Jubilee2.pdf

[artto]

Yes, you're absolutely correct, PWK did intend to replace the Khorn with the Jubilee and that obviously never happened. The Jubilee also was originally a "domestic" project, not a pro-commercial one. And one of the reasons PWK wanted an enclosed back type of Khorn was because of the problems with wall rigidity and getting a tight seal (which affects the higher frequencies more than the lower ones), the very reasons why I did what I did with my Khorns (as per my correspondence with Roy). So be careful who you're calling a liar buster. And before you get too bent out of shape you might consider brushing up on your manners, your grammar, and your spelling!!!!

[mikebse2a3]

Hey twistedcrankcammer

Artto is correct in the region between 250Hz to 400hz the Jub does exhibit a higher level of distortion than the Khorn (refer to the AES paper for details). The Jubilee does exhibit over (-10db) less distortion than the Khorn over other areas and overall does have less distortion.

On another point anyone who knows me on this forum also knows that I very much believe in valid testing as well as controled listening test to learn as much as possible about what and why we perceive the listening experience as we do.

The simple and basic test that we have been given such as frequency response and distortion test tell us some of what we perceive but they do have there limitations were they are valid.

As an example, the common and often seen amplitude/frequency response test alone is just a basic beginning. It only shows the loudspeaker and/or room response for just a brief moment in time and what is also very important is how the frequency response and distortion of drivers/horns and loudspeaker system and rooms themselves vary over time as the transient impluse (or music signal itself) excitation is over and the loudspeaker system and it's individual componets and even the room's acoustics must settle down. ETF waterfall plots can expose audible colorations that can be hard if not impossible to discern from a simple Amplitude/frequency response plot. Distortion can also vary over time as well and how we might perceive all this isn't always obvious.

Most all the comparisons I'm reading about so far are like apple to oranges...different rooms.....different HFsections...etc, so anything as far as I can see so far from what has been posted can't really be very valid comparison of the LF sections because of to many important variables.

The Khorn LF and Jub LF both came from PWK so it's kind of weird to me why so much emotion comes out when these two designs are discussed. I don't believe it would be unreasonable to believe that PWK being a logical thinker who obviousely believed in testing and listening believed the Jub LF to be an advance on the Khorn LF.

Just to clarify something also,,,,Roy said in the past that PWK did not design the Jubilee to replace the Klipschorn and wanted to keep both. The AES paper does indicate the Jubilee was designed to make improvements on the Khorn design with the goal of returning the Klipschorn to a 2 way design.

The Klipschorn LF is not nor ever will be obsolete because it is still an excellent reproducer and few have probably ever heard it installed as well as artto has to maximize it's performance.

I personnelly think coytee(ie: trouble) should volunteer to drive his Jubilees to arrto's place for some real comparisons and fun...[]

mike tn

[CIGARBUM]

I still think the Cornscala and the Khorn are great speakers, I own both. There are just to many variables to say one is really better that the other.

CB

[twistedcrankcammer]

ding

artto,

Yeah, I can read a graph! I read the whole thing, and I did not see anything that upheld your statement to Bill H. that the K-Horn has less distortion, quite to the contrary actually. The question is can you read? Stop sniffin that white powder, and those sasquatch monsters will go away and leave you alone!

Roger[]

[twistedcrankcammer]

Yes, you're absolutely correct, PWK did intend to replace the Khorn with the Jubilee and that obviously never happened. The Jubilee also was originally a "domestic" project, not a pro-commercial one. And one of the reasons PWK wanted an enclosed back type of Khorn was because of the problems with wall rigidity and getting a tight seal (which affects the higher frequencies more than the lower ones), the very reasons why I did what I did with my Khorns (as per my correspondence with Roy). So be careful who you're calling a liar buster. And before you get too bent out of shape you might consider brushing up on your manners, your grammar, and your spelling!!!!

artto,

You are the one that said "LIAR"!! I simply stated the fact that you became condescending about your room treatments towards others first, which has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with the argument at hand as you are providing a non-repeatable graph from YOUR ROOM, which has never had a Jubilee in it. It is very obvious that you are full of it, and yourself... Hey, you called me a Sart *** first, I'm just statin the facts mam!

My manners are fine, sorry for the spelling and the grammar (like to pick on the retards your style huh?) well, that is due to my dyslexia, that I have had all my life, but I'll put my raw Intelligence Quotient of 148 up against yours, especially since standardized testing does not allow extra time for my input, output problem as it were, so the actual number is probably a little bit north of what actual timed testing shows.

Roger

[twistedcrankcammer]

Hey twistedcrankcammer

Artto is correct in the region between 250Hz to 400hz the Jub does exhibit a higher level of distortion than the Khorn (refer to the AES paper for details). The Jubilee does exhibit over (-10db) less distortion than the Khorn over other areas and overall does have less distortion.

On another point anyone who knows me on this forum also knows that I very much believe in valid testing as well as controled listening test to learn as much as possible about what and why we perceive the listening experience as we do.

The simple and basic test that we have been given such as frequency response and distortion test tell us some of what we perceive but they do have there limitations were they are valid.

As an example, the common and often seen amplitude/frequency response test alone is just a basic beginning. It only shows the loudspeaker and/or room response for just a brief moment in time and what is also very important is how the frequency response and distortion of drivers/horns and loudspeaker system and rooms themselves vary over time as the transient impluse (or music signal itself) excitation is over and the loudspeaker system and it's individual componets and even the room's acoustics must settle down. ETF waterfall plots can expose audible colorations that can be hard if not impossible to discern from a simple Amplitude/frequency response plot. Distortion can also vary over time as well and how we might perceive all this isn't always obvious.

Most all the comparisons I'm reading about so far are like apple to oranges...different rooms.....different HFsections...etc, so anything as far as I can see so far from what has been posted can't really be very valid comparison of the LF sections because of to many important variables.

The Khorn LF and Jub LF both came from PWK so it's kind of weird to me why so much emotion comes out when these two designs are discussed. I don't believe it would be unreasonable to believe that PWK being a logical thinker who obviousely believed in testing and listening believed the Jub LF to be an advance on the Khorn LF.

Just to clarify something also,,,,Roy said in the past that PWK did not design the Jubilee to replace the Klipschorn and wanted to keep both. The AES paper does indicate the Jubilee was designed to make improvements on the Khorn design with the goal of returning the Klipschorn to a 2 way design.

The Klipschorn LF is not nor ever will be obsolete because it is still an excellent reproducer and few have probably ever heard it installed as well as artto has to maximize it's performance.

I personnelly think coytee(ie: trouble) should volunteer to drive his Jubilees to arrto's place for some real comparisons and fun...

mike tn

Mike,

I like your idea to rope Richard into toting his Jubilees. It would be especially insightful if about 20 guys would show up and we did it blind, but we would have to unbolt those K-Horns. If Richard would do it, I could probably bring a pair of TSCMs and about 5 different orriginal K-Horn 15 inch drivers to swap out for everyone to listen too. K-33E round magnet, K-33E square magnet, K-43E Pro La Scala, K-44E TSCM, Electro Voice EV 15W-K, and someone could bring one of Bob Crites Cast Frame Woofers.

Roger

[twistedcrankcammer]

I still think the Cornscala and the Khorn are great speakers, I own both. There are just to many variables to say one is really better that the other.

CB

CB,

I agree that both are great. I do not know of your listening area, but I will say that K-Horns need at least 20 feet between them without any windows, drapes, stereo racks and other stuff cluttering up the walls to be truely experienced, but that is JMO.

It looks like you have a cabin, My parent recently bought a cabin. Any pictures to share? Please send as many as you will to rgordon@watchtv.net always looking for ideas.

Roger

[Coytee]

I personnelly think coytee(ie: trouble) should volunteer to drive his Jubilees to arrto's place for some real comparisons and fun...

Well Mike, to keep that test fair he'd have to bolt them down to his foundation.

Now, how am I gonna 'splain them drill holes in the bottom of those speakers to my wife?

[]

[Coytee]

Roy said in the past that PWK did not design the Jubilee to replace the Klipschorn

Hmm... not arguing but I thought that was specifically what he started out to do.

and wanted to keep both

Yes, after he heard them both and discovered the actual performance improvement, he (PWK) felt the Jubilee deserved its own place in the lineup.

At least, that has always been my understanding. I thought that is why in part, the Jubilee is/was called the Klipschorn Jubilee??

I'm now searching for my pneumatic impact wrench so I can bolt my Jubilees to my wooden floor [] Think the wife will mind the holes when I move them?

[CapZark]

K-Horns = Classic Looking

Cornscala - Odd Looking

Jubilee - Goofy Looking

They all sound great and let's face it, beauty is in the eye of the beholder.