Al Klappenberger Posted July 10, 2010 Share Posted July 10, 2010 Here's another set of curves for woofer inductors. This time I kept the data and know what the coils were. It compares a 2.7 Mhy #14 soild wire, a 1.3 mHy #12 soild wire, a 3.7 mHy #16 iron core and a #12 foil inductor. Again, the foil inductor has its best Q FAR beyond the frequency range of the woofer! At 400 - 500 Hz the best Q is the Iron core. The foil inductor comes in dead LAST! Iron core coils have a nasty habit of changing their inductance with the amount of current through them. This makes a slight bit of distortion, so the air core is best if you have the physical room and can stand the high DCR they stick you with. Al K. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kg4guy Posted July 10, 2010 Author Share Posted July 10, 2010 I will let you know as soon as the Litz wires get here so I will do listening test with the A's the litz wires and the solid wires. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark1101 Posted July 10, 2010 Share Posted July 10, 2010 Al that's interesting. The ALK JRs. I have been bragging about for the last few years have giant copper foil inductors in the woofer filter. I never heard my lascalas or any others make such BIG tight bass before I had those put in. Did lots of comparisons. I'll just stop right there...........LOL. OK I'll start up again.........The measurements of the inductors are great. But did you ever try listening to them all to see if the perceived sound correlated with the measurements? In other words did you ever put "weight" to the measurements? Maybe the ones that sound best don't measure the best. What then?????? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Al Klappenberger Posted July 10, 2010 Share Posted July 10, 2010 Mark, On the bass thing, the tightest bass you can get is NO INDUCTOR AT ALL! That is what the AB network in the Belle used. I have never heard anyone rave about the bass with that network! Again, I am only one set of ears. I limit myself to instrument measurements. The only time I will say how something sounds is if it knocks my socks off, like getting rid of the K400 / K500 midrange horns did. Changes more subtle than that requires A/B comparison in real time to satisfy me. That is not easy to do. Even then, just because I might hear a difference it just brings up the next question, which is actually better? Since I seldom have a chance to listen to live music, I am no judge of what is better or worse. Al K. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
66hr Posted July 11, 2010 Share Posted July 11, 2010 "Turn it up a little louder and then tell us what you hear. The more extreme the slopes the more volume that's required to get them to "open up". I like the sound of my ES networks at all volumes, but I must say they are in a league of there own at higher volumes. The bottom line is that the ES concept is not for everybody, just techno-dweebs like me!. And also non techno-dweebs, like me.[] This is my first post, so I’m not sure how it's going to look as I can't find a preview button. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Al Klappenberger Posted July 11, 2010 Share Posted July 11, 2010 66hr, The post looks good to me to spite all the gibborish on the top! How did you manage that? Al K. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deang Posted July 11, 2010 Share Posted July 11, 2010 It doesn't look like you floated the common connection for squawker - if not, those networks are built incorrectly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest David H Posted July 11, 2010 Share Posted July 11, 2010 It doesn't look like you floated the common connection for squawker - if not, those networks are built incorrectly. Dean, I was under the impression that the only change floating the squalker connection would do is allow for additional attenuation settings. The current configuration shoud still allow connectios 0-1 thru 0-4. Correct? Dave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Al Klappenberger Posted July 11, 2010 Share Posted July 11, 2010 Dean, It's hard to tell for sure since the pictures are out of focus, but it looks like the transformer is a T2A. The output is taken from taps 4 - 0. In that case there really isn't any need to float the squawker driver. If you wanted to attenuate the squawker to setting 2 - 5 (0.8 dB more). I personally think 4 - 0 is to hot . Al K. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deang Posted July 11, 2010 Share Posted July 11, 2010 Well, he said it was an ALKJr, so I assumed that's what it was. If the taps are fixed, then it's really a modified DHA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Al Klappenberger Posted July 11, 2010 Share Posted July 11, 2010 I just talked to Dean on the phone. He thought taps 0 and 2 were both connected to ground. That would be a huge no-no! We agree that everything is ok for a 4 - 0 setting. It's just stuck at that setting as it's wired. Al k. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
66hr Posted July 11, 2010 Share Posted July 11, 2010 The post looks good to me to spite all the gibborish on the top! How did you manage that? I don't really know Al. I did type it in word and then I copied and pasted it, maybe that has something to do with it.I've tried to edit it, bit the gibberish doesn't show up. I have now discovered the preview tab and this one seem OK. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Al Klappenberger Posted July 11, 2010 Share Posted July 11, 2010 66hr, I wouldn't worry about that junk. Weird stuff like that happens once in a while. Just blame it on Bill Gates and move on to the next disaster! Al k. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kg4guy Posted July 13, 2010 Author Share Posted July 13, 2010 Turn it up a little louder and then tell us what you hear. The more extreme the slopes the more volume that's required to get them to "open up". The ALKs will have less dynamics at lower volumes than the stock Klipsch networks. It's when you turn them up you notice the benefits which are improved clarity. The dynamics come out at the mid and high volumes where the stock networks break up. I agree that for some reason the choice of caps in the Jrs. makes a big difference. I can remember the frustration initially until I spent some bucks on really good caps. I abandoned the idea of putting a Solen in the woofer filter because "you can get away with it there". That's baloney. Half the vocals are down there and you forego clarity when you have $100 Auricaps in the HF filters and $10 Solen caps in the woofer filter. I learned this time and again as I built different networks. You will hear everywhere you compromise............eventually. That is why we upgrade, for better sound. Anyhow, the network design even with Solens is a huge improvement. But that is why I finally went digital and found an active processor / crossover I could live with. My last ALK networks I built for my MWM setup cost me over $1500.00 my cost to build them......and I could only afford the Solens for the woofer filter because I put all Auricaps in the rest. Just getting to cost me too much. I will be selling those masterpieces for a song on the Garage sale soon for the MWM and Cornscala guys to eat up cheap. You are correct about the cap choices on this network I have been doing some switching around and have noticed there is a big difference in sound depending on the cap. . Thanks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kg4guy Posted August 4, 2010 Author Share Posted August 4, 2010 Second pair done I have tap 3-4-5 on a terminal strip so they can be switched without unsoldering.Used solid inductors as I had purchased parts for 4 pr. however I did order a pr. of Solen Litz's to compare but still waiting for them takes forever to get out to the west coast. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kg4guy Posted August 4, 2010 Author Share Posted August 4, 2010 Top Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jambandfan Posted August 30, 2010 Share Posted August 30, 2010 I am wondering where is the schematic for these? also, what is the approximate parts costs. I know caps make a large difference in price, so any example people have done. thanks -marc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blvdre Posted August 31, 2010 Share Posted August 31, 2010 I am wondering where is the schematic for these? also, what is the approximate parts costs. I know caps make a large difference in price, so any example people have done. thanks -marc Al's nice enought to post them on his Website. Navigate to "Klipsch", "Downloads", and "Universal Upgrade". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Al Klappenberger Posted August 31, 2010 Share Posted August 31, 2010 Blvdre, The "Jr" is not one of the designs included in that group. I'll post it here. It's the computer drawn schematic. It's similar to the Universal but the cap connected across the transformer is not there. The part values are also different. Al k. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blvdre Posted August 31, 2010 Share Posted August 31, 2010 Oops, got my terminology wrong. I stand corrected. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.