Klipsch's Law and Corollaries

[Coytee]

I fell for that sub satellites , it did make sense at the time

I'm sure you wore leisure suits & polyester shirts & disco shoes at one time too.... I don't know how/why it made sense at the time but it did.

Thankfully, that was before my time. In fact, now that I think of it... I view most of you guys on the forum in a different light as I picture you disco dancing

[:|]

[garyrc]

In fact, now that I think of it... I view most of you guys on the forum in a different light as I picture you disco dancing

Disco came, went and returned, as is expected of King Arthur. It briefly appeared in the early '60s, and was pushed by Command records. Jackie Kennedy and other celebs went to the discos. Then, it evaporated. When it finally came back, there was graffiti all over SFSU, "Down with Disco!" This reaction may have been because of what came inbetween: overwhelmingly releasing Acid Rock with light shows at the Fillmore auditorium, with people dancing their asses off to live music .... or the Jefferson Airplane, The Grateful Dead (who experimented with Don Helmholtz's Klipschorns early on), Country Joe and the Fish, etc. playing for FREE in Golden Gate Park, while being watched by mounted poilce waiting for people to take off their clothes ... or bands setting up at the end of Haight street with big speakers stacked three high, with sound so loud that the dirt bounced off of the sidewalks in time with the music. After all that, disco was tame.

[Mallette]

compare headphones to horns and you would get the same mis interpretation of the laws as you would comparing horns to direct radiators.

Makes no sense to me SF. How would you go about sticking a couple of K'horns in your ears and what does it have to do with the stated issues?

There may be something profound in your statement but I am completely missing it. I understand the efficiencies of headphones at a couple of inches from the ear and that of 'horns from a few feet and the inverse square law, but simply can't make sense of what you are saying.

Dave

[Mallette]

I'm actually going to disagree with the Klipsch's law you derived here as there are plenty of examples of lower distortion than the Jubilee acheived with smaller enclosures (albeit a lot more power).

Don't get your point, Mike. Of course there are such examples as you stated. PWK's law was you couldn't do it at lower cost and without requiring more power. The law stands until those factors are exceeded, and even then is simply further established.

Suggestions?

Dave

[DrWho]

I'm actually going to disagree with the Klipsch's law you derived here as there are plenty of examples of lower distortion than the Jubilee achieved with smaller enclosures (albeit a lot more power).

"In God we Trust...everyone else bring data..."

Not that I'm disagreeing with your statement...I simply don't have the data that you refer to--to say the PWK was wrong in his original observation of "the higher the efficiency, the lower the distortion", who you are clearly stating was wrong with your statement.

Do you have a URL to that data?

Chris

Haha, fair enough...been crazy busy lately so haven't been able to post any data, but it is definitely on its way.

[DrWho]

PWK's law was you couldn't do it at lower cost and without requiring more power.

I don't believe I have ever seen those caveats when PWK made those statements, and Chris's corollary certain didn't have any caveats either.

Does it matter if something requires more power if it has lower distortion?

As far as issues of cost, I feel that quickly clouds understanding acoustics since most of the cost is related to the amount of quantity being made, moreso than actual build complexity.

I think the biggest advantage to horns is the ability to control polar response moreso than any changes in distortion...

[Islander]

Or people think that the speakers have to be loud just because they are big. They don't understand dynamic range...

You can even hear that from people who should know better. I was once discussing Heritage and KPT speakers with a Klipsch distributor, who had apparently not heard any of the big Klipsch systems. He felt that the MCM systems couldn't be used in a home setting because they were "too powerful".

As for the corollaries derived from the Iron Law, they are logical, but logic works best when discussing philosophy. When it comes to engineering, actual testing often shows counter-intuitive results that seem to defy obvious logic, due to assumptions that can sometimes, but not always, be relied on.

In other words, generalizations may make perfect sense, only to prove inaccurate when tested in certain specific cases. I'm not saying you're wrong, just that those statements will not always be correct.

[DizRotus]

"When it comes to engineering, actual testing often shows counter-intuitive results that seem to defy obvious logic, due to assumptions that can sometimes, but not always, be relied on.

In other words, generalizations may make perfect sense, only to prove inaccurate when tested in certain specific cases."

Yes, but will the plane on the conveyor belt takeoff?[]

[Islander]

Yes, but will the plane on the conveyor belt takeoff?

Sure, as long as the wings have enough wind blowing on them.

And the wings have to be flapping fast enough:

[russ69]

Yes, but will the plane on the conveyor belt takeoff?

I can't believe anyone gets confused on this one. It's wind over the wings that makes lift.

[Mallette]

Does it matter if something requires more power if it has lower distortion?

No. However, it was PWK's belief (as explained to me about 40 years ago) that no technology existed better than the folded horn to achieve this. I cannot recall if he said it wasn't possible at all or if one could achieve it but with increased cost.

In other words:

1. Cost

2. Efficiency

3. Distortion

Pick any two. That's my impression of what I understood from PWK. I suppose one might add size and power, but to this non-technical type those things appear to be included in the mix already.

Dave

[DrWho]

However, it was PWK's belief (as explained to me about 40 years ago) that no technology existed better than the folded horn to achieve this.

Driver design has improved quite a bit since PWK made those statements...I can provide a smaller, lower cost, less efficient solution, that has less distortion and even digs lower than a Jubilee:

http://www.data-bass.com/data?category=system&id=1&type=0

(keep in mind those are 1/2 space measurements too, it only gets 6dB better ina true 1/8 space)

[Mallette]

I understand.

However, would efficiency increase and distortion decrease with the same system in a horn or horn variant enclosure? Size would increase, but that was only one of PWK's points.

Dave

PS-Should have added that price/performance on that thing appears outstanding.

[michael hurd]

Driver design has indeed improved by leaps and bounds, over previously available units. For a reality check, take a look at the Data-Bass website, where Josh Ricci swapped out the pair of Eminence sourced 3" coil 12's in his DTS-10 for a pair of TC Sounds LMS-R 12" drivers.

These drivers have a better suspension system ( mirror opposed spiders, 10" diameter ), low inductance modulation with the shorting rings in the motor and a FEA optimized coil winding shape. ( linear Bl product )

Despite contrary belief that a wide gap is bad ( it's over.200 inch wide ) it also has a coil that's 3" ID.... yet it will handle many times the power and still have lower distortion.

The drivers are less efficient than the stock drivers, but provide lower distortion and MORE output, with appropriate power.

http://www.data-bass.com/data?category=review&id=1

http://www.data-bass.com/data?category=systems&type=0

Stock DTS 10 - Max distortion limited output

http://www.data-bass.com/data?category=system&id=4&type=2

DTS-10 w/ TC Sounds LMS-12 drivers - Max distortion limited output

http://www.data-bass.com/data?category=system&id=2&type=2

These drivers were not desinged for this horn, but were a close enough fit ( when modeled ) that Josh decided to "what if".The last trace on the DTS-10 w/ LMS-R12 drivers, the amp was clipping, With caution, you might even use a slightly more powerful amplifier.

[michael hurd]

Maybe someday I should sit down and learn Hornresponse so that I can design and build a horn for the TC 3000 15" I have. You would assume the driver isn't a good fit because of it's stupid heavy Mms,( 373 grams )

However, the TC3HP motor can generate a Bl^/Re of 160, the driver has a very stiff titanium cone, ( will withstand high compression ratios ) and a 3" coil that will handle transients from a 3.6kw rated amp, about 1kw long term power handling.

Oh, and it will also travel 30 mm in one direction ( geometrical xmax, based on 30% down Bl point ) with a mechanically limited xmech ( as in the coil former hitting the backplate ) at 46 mm one way, or roughly 90 mm P-P.

I have been told by a few people that this driver models well in a horn, however I have not used Hornresp.

[michael hurd]

"I understand.

However, would efficiency increase and distortion
decrease with the same system in a horn or horn variant enclosure?
Size would increase, but that was only one of PWK's points."

There was a few people that though similarly, and lots of ~700 liter + bass horn subs were dreamed up on the AVS forum, but to my knowledge, no one has built one.

As you get lower and lower in frequency, the horn would be not cost effective or size effiicient.

If you have liquid money to throw at a solution, ( iron fist approach ) you can get low distortion and high output, while still maintaining a small size.

Lab Gruppen 14Kw clones here: http://www.china-sanway.com/Product.asp?BigClassName=FP-new%20series%20Switching%20Power%20Amplifier

Needs a 30 amp line. There is one individual on the AVS forum with 4 of these amps, and ( 8 ) 18's each with 38 mm excursion. Needless to say, one amp can easily drive a pair of these 18" subs to the stops, with headroom to spare.

I know with the old amps he had ( 5kw advertised Marathon MA-5050's ) he managed over 123 db @ the LP @ 10 hz with a few percent distortion. ( 3.8 % )

[DrWho]

However, would efficiency increase and distortion decrease with the same system in a horn or horn variant enclosure?

Absolutely. But you also start to run into limitations on cone stiffness and/or throat distortion.

Keele has also shown that direct radiators (given the right constraints) may better optimize the efficiency for a given system volume:
http://www.xlrtechs.com/dbkeele.com/PDF/Keele%20%281976-05%20AES%20Preprint%29%20-%20Efficiency,%20Horns%20vs%20DR.pdf

Another thing ignored in that article, however, is the effects of polar response...

[Chris A]

In honor of PWK's upcoming 112th birthday on March 9, reviving a topic that ruled his professional career: bass distortion, and its avoidance through better design.

 

With so many "small loudspeakers" being marketed by Klipsch and others nowadays...and with so many people on this forum beginning to realize that something of value is being left behind, i.e., the designs that PWK created, namely Klipsch Heritage and the Jubilee, 

 

it seems useful to remind our ADD culture of these very useful principles that built a company, and that still ring true.

 

Chris

Edited February 25, 2016 by Chris A

[Grizzog]

I don't think Klipsch has abandoned their routes, as evidenced by the Heritage line still alive and kicking.  However, they must face the environment that they are in - consumers want small speakers that blend in with the background or those that are portable.  I think the "Reference Premiere" line strikes a pretty good balance between those of us that understand the merits of large speakers, and those that must have small format speakers. (I haven't heard those speakers, but talking about the actual design.)  Those floor standers are still considered "big" by today's standards, have pretty good efficiency (98db), and dig pretty deep, with what is probably significantly less distortion than many other companies.

 

Along with a lot of others here, I would hope that Klipsch comes out with a properly large, low distortion design, but the market just isn't there anymore.  Those that buy refrigerator-size speakers these days feel that "Klipsch" isn't a high-end name and will disregard it, which baffles me.  This is probably due to a lot of the audiophile mumbo jumbo and their general distaste for horns because they were told they were "honky."  Anyone who I have played my systems for have been absolutely blown away by the sound.  Unfortunately, there is no exposure to these types of things anymore.  People want their houses bigger and bigger, but want their TVs paper thin and their speakers invisible.

[Chris A]

...but the market just isn't there anymore

 

My data says that it does exist: just look at the continued sales to "prosumers" from the cinema/professional line (in "basic black") including two-way home Jubilees.  That's an indication that there is a market--just not being addressed by home/consumer products. 

 

The last "Heritage" loudspeaker (i.e., one that PWK was directly involved in its design) is the Jubilee.  It continues to sell.  That says to me that new models will also sell if they provide new niche capabilities that are not currently being addressed by the current product line, this despite Klipsch having no showrooms for prospective buyers to hear them except in current owner's homes.  All the older Heritage models (Khorn, La Scala, Cornwall, Heresy) also continue to sell--apparently without any showrooms.  Just think what might happen if Klipsch took new horn-loaded models on the road for consumer products and provided listening rooms for them--with a little more emphasis on "fit and finish".  

 

Those that buy refrigerator-size speakers these days feel that "Klipsch" isn't a high-end name and will disregard it

 

Palladiums have done quite well, IMO.  I'm sure that if Klipsch decided to move into the "high end" again, they could do it very easily. 

 

Very few large audio companies now pay much attention to what the "audiophile magazines" say since those don't turn into sizable sales.  The data that I have says that the "audiophile loudspeaker" market is very small and very overpriced that has never represented more than perhaps 30-100 pairs sold by model type.  Profit margins in this marketplace are usually bordering on obscene (i.e., much greater than 400% on direct materials and labor). I don't believe that Klipsch is in that business, and rightfully so.  Even JBL has largely given up on that market (only offering the DD6600 Everest at $42K/pair).  

 

But Klipsch could do quite well in that particular market...since they really are currently identified by buyers as "the horn-loaded loudspeaker company".  The only issue seems to be the willingness of the company to invest in new drivers, either with their driver suppliers or in-house, like they did with the Palladium line.

 

Chris

Edited February 25, 2016 by Chris A