Schu Posted February 19, 2012 Share Posted February 19, 2012 I find myself in the position to, maybe, buy another set of speakers... I am considering La Scala II's. my question is, why do these not deliver the performance down low like my Cornwalls do? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djk Posted February 19, 2012 Share Posted February 19, 2012 Because they are horn-loaded in the bass, and the horn is way too small. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
artto Posted February 19, 2012 Share Posted February 19, 2012 AND, while the Cornwall may subjectively dig deeper than the LaScalla, keep in mind that because of the Cornwall's direct radiator bass reflex design in concert with its size and lower efficiency, it also has considerably higher low frequency distortion. It's a trade-off. The choice is yours. [] On the other hand you'll be glad to know that the Cornwall is one of the most highly optimized bass reflex systems ever designed, and this was done long before computer-aided design, Thiel parameters and such were available/known. All done manually, long hand math and silde rulers, paper and pencil. Thnx PWK [] BTW, just for the record, Cornwalls were my first Klipsch speakers, way back around ~ 1972 or 3? YIKES [] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quiet_Hollow Posted February 20, 2012 Share Posted February 20, 2012 my question is, why do these not deliver the performance down low like my Cornwalls do? But they do. Take a look at the response charts. 40 Hz at 2.8V both designs are putting out the same dB SPL. The difference between the two is that the La Scala II response jumps from that point on up, making the bass response sound remarkably quieter in comparison for a given voltage. But down low they are actually neck-in-neck for specific output. [8] If you EQ the La Scala II bass up a few dB to match it's top end, you'll find that it can tango with the Cornwall III. The La Scala will actually mop the floor with the Cornwall in the upper-bass and midrange when setup this way. The guys at Simply Stereo were a little puzzled when I brought my gear with me to their store to prove this point to myself, but the charts, meters, and my ears confirmed. La Scala II = Win To listen to them side-by-side, with no signal processing and / or measurement tools, will not reveal the true performance capability of the La Scala II, if only to highlight it's incredibly detailed character. The Cornwall III's flatter response will sound beefier and will be taking more power by ~5 dBW all around. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schu Posted February 20, 2012 Author Share Posted February 20, 2012 thanks for the responses. My only experience with LS is in reading the spec's... I know I do love my CW now. would folks recomend the vintage belle over the current LSII's for two channel? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quiet_Hollow Posted February 20, 2012 Share Posted February 20, 2012 would folks recomend the vintage belle over the current LSII's for two channel? That's quite a polarizing question. I haven't had enough good 1-on-1 time with a pair of Belle's to develop an opinion either way. The only time I've personally auditioned Belle's, they were modified from stock and the room acoustics were less than desirable for any 2-channel system. There was no margin left for me to make that kind of subjective comparison. [:$] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike 585 Posted February 20, 2012 Share Posted February 20, 2012 I had and enjoyed Cornwalls for 30 years before getting a pair of Belles a few years ago. I also have a LaScala center channel. IMO the Belle is a little better sounding but either way is a huge improvement over Cornwalls. I haven't heard LS IIs so can speak into their performance vs LS and Belles but cost must surely be a consideration. You can likely find a nice pair of vintage for 1/2 the price of one new LS II. And, to me, the Belle is better looking than the LS II too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schu Posted February 20, 2012 Author Share Posted February 20, 2012 I'm a 2nd hand shopper, so I'd be buying used for sure. I just can not seem to find any II's out there right now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Groomlakearea51 Posted February 22, 2012 Share Posted February 22, 2012 When a Belle or LS is set up right (crossovers, and/or amp tweaking) they can do in a Cornwall. I've played with (and own) all three types, and I will say that for HT use, the Cornwall is a good, easy, out of the box way to go. The LS and the Belle are better for classical stereo. Alot depends on the type of music one listes to and whether they want the "enhanced" bass for which the Cornwall is so noted in it's stock mode. Room size, if small, also loves Cornwalls; but larger rooms take advantage of the horn loading inherent in the other two. Just some observations from over the years. 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.