Jump to content

Lascala vs Belle


M.H

Recommended Posts

Hello,

I had a little discussion with a friend lately about the differends between the Lascala and Belle.

So far i always thought that there are no differends at all in the sound.

But that friend of my told me that the Belle doesnt sound so good as the Lascala.

And that whas because of the shorter midhorn.

When hearing that i whas thinking about how few things i read about the Belle on this forum.

Is the Belle not so popular?

And what are the differends in the sound between the Lascala and the Belle???

I hope someone know exactly how both of them sound and can give me the answer.

Greatings M.

(p.s. i own a pair of Lascala's)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The mid horn is shorter in the Belle. These speakers sound slightly different, (very slightly to my ear) but it's hard to describe. I think the LaScala has more of a following, possibly because there seems to be more of them out there. The Belle just may be the most attractive speaker I've ever seen.

Tony

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tony between my Klipschorn and Belle I have been reading Paul Wilber Klipsch, The Life... The Legend and find it better than I expected it would be.

Few people realize that PWK was enshrined in the Hall of Fame for his contributions to acoustics, ballistics and geophysics... an honor reserved for the elite of engineering and science such as Thomas Edison, Jonas Salk, M.D., Orville & Wilber Wright, and Enrico Fermi, Ph.D.

Fewer still know that Mr. Paul graduated from Stanford with a Masters in Electrical Engineering. The old photos, notes and hand made patent drawings are a treasure. And certainly the five signatures make it something to treasure for generations to come.

Thanks for your noble efforts on behalf of my son and I, your friendly gesture and that of Trey Cannon were most appreciated. -HornEd

PS: The book has a sketch of the "three-channel stereo" schematic for those who wanted to know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

M.H.,

There cannot be too much difference between the La Scala and Belle. The Belle squawker crosses over 100 Hz higher than the La Scala's 400 Hz. In many years both used the same crossover and they have always used the same drivers in the same year. I lack proof, but I believe the Belle's bass horn is capable of going higher because the effective bend radius is longer than the La Scala's (it is bent more gently). That should make up for the shorter squawker horn. That shorter horn should also be less prone to ringing since it shorter length makes it effectively stiffer.

John

with 4 La Scalas

Link to comment
Share on other sites

M.H.

One important point to keep in mind is that, while the Belle and La Scala may sound subtly different from each other in some ways to some folks, they, and the Klipschorn, are going to sound more like each other than either is going to sound remotely like anything else.

Hummm, as I read that, I'm not sure I worded that correctly, but I don't know how else to say it... I'd've hated to've had to diagram that sentence in 6th grade English class...

------------------

Music is art

Audio is engineering

Ray's Music System

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A while back, somebody here posted response curves for the Khorns, the La Scalas and the Belles. If memory serves me, the K-horn was the smoothest by far, then the Belle, then the La Scalas. The various responses of the folded horn portions of the curves looked pretty different. I'll have to do a search to try and find the thread - kinda curious myself.

From a practical standpoint, I agree with Ray. Belles and La Scalas are going sound much more like each other than they do to anything else.

Regards,

Andy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thx for the reply's

Ok..so if i get it right there aint that much differend between both.

Thats what my Klipsch dealer told me also some while ago.

But i became curious when i heard another story from that guy who owned both of them for some time.

He found the Lascala more musical then the Belle.

He owns now a pair khorn's.

Maybe we meet each other some day.

I'm really curious how the Khorn will sound =).

Anyway..thx again for making it a bit more clear for me.

Greetings M.H

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Belle does seem to be less popular than the LaScala and I have also never understood why. Maybe the shape of the LaScala is easier to live with - or fits into more people's homes better.

I have only heard the Belle once as against hearing the Scala and the Horn many times. I have very fond memories of that speaker and have always regarded it as my dream Klipsch to replace my lowly Heresy's.

One day my Heresy's will travel to the rear channel and be replaced up front by either Scala's or Belles depending on what I can find at the time.

One thing - here (Greece) at least the Scala is a fair bit less epxensive than the Belle. Maybe that explains the extra popularity.

------------------

My System: http://aca.gr/pop_maxg.htm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The facts on the stats....Hope this helps.

BELLE KLIPSCH

FREQUENCY RESPONSE: 54Hz-17kHz± 3dB

SENSITIVITY: 103dB @ 1watt/1meter

POWER HANDLING: 100 watts maximum continuous (400 watts peak)

MAXIMUM ACOUSTIC OUTPUT: 120dB SPL

NOMINAL IMPEDANCE: 8 ohms

ENCLOSURE TYPE: Fully horn-loaded

DRIVE COMPONENTS: Three-way fully horn loaded system using one 1 (2.5cm) phenolic diaphragm compression driver and one 2 (5.08cm) phenolic diaphragm compression driver with an exponential horn and one 15 (38.1cm) fiber-composite cone woofer with an exponential folded horn.

TWEETER: K-77-F 1" (2.54cm) Phenolic diaphragm compression driver

HIGH FREQUENCY CROSSOVER: 4500Hz

MIDRANGE: K-55-X 2" (5.08cm) Phenolic diaphragm compression driver

MID-FREQUENCY HORN: Exponential Horn

MID-FREQUENCY CROSSOVER: 450Hz

WOOFER: K-33-E 15" Fiber-composite cone / folded horn-loaded

DIMENSIONS (H x W x D): 35.625" (90.5cm) x 30.125" (76.5cm) x 18.75" (47.6cm)

WEIGHT: 125 lbs. (56.75kg)

ENCLOSURE MATERIAL: Plywood & Medium density fiberboard construction (MDF)

FINISHES: Walnut Lacquer, Mahogany Lacquer, Medium Oak lacquer, Unfinished Oak, Black Lacquer

YEARS BUILT: 1971 -

==================================================

LA SCALA

FREQUENCY RESPONSE: 53Hz-17kHz± 3dB

SENSITIVITY: 104dB @ 1watt/1meter

POWER HANDLING: 100 watts maximum continuous (400 watts peak)

MAXIMUM ACOUSTIC OUTPUT: 121dB SPL

NOMINAL IMPEDANCE: 8 ohms

ENCLOSURE TYPE: Fully horn-loaded

DRIVE COMPONENTS: Three-way fully horn loaded system using one 1 (2.5cm) phenolic diaphragm compression driver and one 2 (5.08cm) phenolic diaphragm compression driver with an exponential horn and one 15 (38.1cm) fiber-composite cone woofer with an exponential folded horn.

TWEETER: K-77-F 1" (2.54cm) Phenolic diaphragm compression driver

HIGH FREQUENCY CROSSOVER: 4500Hz

MIDRANGE: K-55-X 2" (5.08cm) Phenolic diaphragm compression driver

MID-FREQUENCY HORN: Exponential Horn

MID-FREQUENCY CROSSOVER: 400Hz

WOOFER: K-33-E 15" (38.1cm) Fiber-composite cone / folded horn-loaded

DIMENSIONS (H x W x D): 35.5" (90.17cm) x 23.75" (60.33cm) x 24.5" (62.23cm)

WEIGHT: 123 lbs. (55.84kg)

ENCLOSURE MATERIAL: Plywood & Medium density fiberboard construction (MDF)

FINISHES: Unfinished Birch, Birch Lacquer, Black Lacquer

YEARS BUILT: 1963 -

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maxg, the price vs performance ratio is certainly an advantage to the Lascala. I do prefer the look of the Belles though - but I'm not sure that a potential purchaser would agree that the Belle is worth that much more at list vs. the Lascala - given similar performance characteristics. IIRC, the Belles were priced at 40-50% more than the Lascalas.

------------------

First we Rock, then we Roll!

A Beast is Lurking.........To be unleashed May 2002

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As for performance of the LaScala vs. the Belle Klipsch, they are almost identical...as for looks, I believe the BK to be absolutely gorgeous compared to the LaScala....as for cost difference, that is obvious, since the Belle is finely veneered, had lots of grille cloth, etc...leading to its higher price....as for the reason for popularity of the LaScala over the BK...it is obvious that cost is a major factor, but a LaScala also just looks meaner, and is more utilitarian...can you imagine setting up a pair of BKs outside for a patio party if you could use LaScalas instead?....BKs are more "fine furniture, and not as utilitarian...that and their cost gives the LaScalas the thumbs-up among many purchasers

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMHO

I also think the Belle is a nicer looking speaker.

The La Scalla has always been a less expensive speaker - Most likely why there are more out there.

I did consider both for use as a Center channel between my Khorns. In talking to "experts" here and elsewhere, I was guided to stay with the K400 horn (La Scalla)instead of the K500 (Belle). This sounds to me that there is a slight diference in the performance of both horns.

I have heard Belles and IMHO - I do not hear any diferance between them and the Scalla..

JM

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...