Jubilee v.s. Palladium

[ClaudeJ1]

The did have Palladium in the room with Khorns in 2010. You could imagine the difference in sound, two completely different designs. In that room the khorns sounded the best I have heard them sound but you can see from the pic it's size works great for them, imo.

The Palladium sounded much better than I had hoped for, I was really impressed with the Palladium's sound. With their sound and looks I would think they should do very well in there price range and well above.

These two were a completely different sound, the Khorn bass sounded like it was from the whole back wall and down the side walls and wrapped around the room. I would guess it's the way it should sound in a room setup like this because it sounded like I have never heard them sound before.

Both were great and I couldn't really pick one over another it was that different and both were that good, glad I don't have to decide on one it would be tough.

I think the price alone would make my decision for the Khorns.

[garyrc]

Who has heard the top of the line Palladium vs. the best
configuration of the Jubilee? Knowing that you probably gain something
and lose something as you go from one to the other, which did you like
best, and most importantly, why?

Are you in the market for a pair or one or the other?

I've also noticed that there is an affinity for "direct radiator bass sound" mentioned here. PWK wrote a couple of articles on bass distortion that you might want to read before proclaiming that direct-radiator bass "sounds better": you are likely listening to higher frequency non-harmonic AM distortion of the Palladium bass bins which will sound more directional than the cleaner Khorn bass in-room.

Chris

At the moment, I'm not in the market for anything -- not enough cash. BUT I'm very interested in hearing the Jubilee eventually, in case more money comes in one fine day. One thing I'm wondering about is whether the model with the Cinema tweeter (making it three way) has better highs. I know that it has been said that it is there just to increase power handling for movie houses, but I still wonder.

When you say, "There is an affinity for 'direct radiator bass sound' mentioned here," do you mean in this thread, or on the forum in general? I just want to make it clear that I don't think direct radiators sound better, and I did not notice that anyone on the thread said that per se []. One individual said the opposite, "a direct radiator could never do that." I just wondered how, with all the voicing, etc. how the Palladium stood up against the Jub. While there was no same room/same electronics comparison of those two, I was very interested to see that two individuals thought that the Palladium and the conventional Khorn were in "a dead heat," as one person put it. I read all of the distortion articles PWK put out in Audio Papers (at least up to the version of Audio Papers available in the early '80s), and when those concepts seemed to be confirmed by my ears, I bought Klipschorns (c1982). Since then we put in the AK4 upgrade (some difference that shows up appreciably on some recordings only), and added a RSW 15 subwoofer for movies. Even though we have the RSW cutting in low (40 Hz) it (a direct radiator with a passive radiator) still muddies up the sound on some music listening, so when that seems to be happening, we disable it. I'm a little surprised that it seems to affect the upper bass and the lower midrange, since it is coming in way below that, and there is not the opportunity for upper bass and lower midrange to ride on a flapping cone, causing the Doppler distortion PWK talked about. Maybe it is just the psychological contrast between the clean bass of the Khorn and the muddier bass of the sub.

I think you have Jubs and a Belle, right? Do you have a sub in your system? What kind, and how does it sound?

[dtel]

I think the price alone would make my decision for the Khorns.

Well yes I agree, but I was trying to leave out prices, I couldn't afford either one. []

Kind of like the bikini models on Tv, couldn't afford them either but I sure like to look, I have a great imagination. []

[ClaudeJ1]

I think the price alone would make my decision for the Khorns.

Well yes I agree, but I was trying to leave out prices, I couldn't afford either one.

Kind of like the bikini models on Tv, couldn't afford them either but I sure like to look, I have a great imagination.

Well I guess I'm lucky I get to photograph bikini models, and they will pose any way I tell them.

[Islander]

Well I guess I'm lucky I get to photograph bikini models, and they will pose any way I tell them.

I once met the famous glamour shooter Peter Gowland, and I'll always remember what he said to me about posing: "There's only so many ways to bend a woman."

He should know, since he and his wife wrote at least twenty-five books on the subject.

[Coytee]

Kind of like the bikini models on Tv,

You could compromise and put the bikini on yourself?

[:|]

[Coytee]

One thing I'm wondering about is whether the model with the Cinema tweeter (making it three way) has better highs. I know that it has been said that it is there just to increase power handling for movie houses, but I still wonder.

I don't think I've ever heard it as a 3-way.

That said, keep in mind that for residential use we are dropping the tweeter horn (K510) and the midrange driver (K1132 or K1133 I keep forgetting). The tweeter driver (K69) is then being mounted onto the midrange horn (K402).

I don't know if the K69 on the tweeter horn (K510) would give for any higher extension or just different sound dispersion. Having heard the Jubilee in a 2-way format with both setups (K402/69 and K510/69) I'm personally thinking that it's close enough to call it a draw but I'll let some of these others who know more technical stuff than me point out my flawed logic.

I wonder if maybe the more interesting question might be if the two setups have more of a difference in the lower midrange rather than the HF extension??

I don't feel as though I've got anything lacking in my place. Well....other than maybe bikini models.... [] with Dtel's face.... [:S]

[garyrc]

That said, keep in mind that for residential use we are dropping the tweeter horn (K510) and the midrange driver (K1132 or K1133 I keep forgetting). The tweeter driver (K69) is then being mounted onto the midrange horn (K402).

I did not know that ... still processing it. Is there a technical paper available to the public describing the drivers and the horns, with frequency response, distortion, dispersion, etc. in the various configurations? I have seen the graph depicting the response of the unfiltered bass bins of the Jub and the Khorn (from a paper by Klipsch and Delgado), but it doesn't look at midrange or treble, and it may have been for an early prototype of the Jub.

I wonder if maybe the more interesting question might be if the two setups have more of a difference in the lower midrange rather than the HF extension??

Indeed.

[dtel]

You could compromise and put the bikini on yourself?

I can guarantee that would not improve anything, except maby any bug or mice problems you may have, and we would both go blind, or wish we were.

[ClaudeJ1]

I've also noticed that there is an affinity for "direct radiator bass sound" mentioned here. PWK wrote a couple of articles on bass distortion that you might want to read before proclaiming that direct-radiator bass "sounds better":

There was a shootout a few years ago on one of the pro sound websites comparing sound reinforcement subs. At high power some of the subs tested put out in excess of 25% harmonic distortion. A sub that many preferred had 30% distortion. The harmonics gave it a "fuller" sound according to some of the listeners at the test.

That is funny, says the man who had Khorns for over 30 years (still do, but not plugged in currently). Reminds of a PWK story about a double blind test performed at a show. It was a live orchestra vs. many different speakers setups........the live orchestra came in THIRD!!

I had twin VMPS large subs with lotsa watts, until my daugther's cat decided to kill them with urine. two 12's two 15's with two passive radiators in ports, IOW, lotsa cone area. The went low enough but not as low as my Tapped Horn sub with a single 12. The tapped horn has more "speed" and incredibly low distortion in comparitons for about the same cubic feet of lumber.

[ClaudeJ1]

i thought the jubs were the best of the three, but it was later, in a different room, different electronics, etc. they were all very very good

That's what i thought, I thought the big difference for me was the 402.

That room in the lab is not the best sounding for sure and they have had a bunch of different electronics on them at different times also. We were told the room was kind of treated to not sound great, they wanted it to sound like the average room people have to have a better idea of how different speakers sound in a average room.

To us although with different bottoms, we don't have Jube bass bins, they sound better in our room than what we heard in that room, although our room (24' wide) it's wider so that probably helps alot ?

Was just wondering what you thought. Thanks

The JBL 2360a comes close, but I have never heard a better mid horn than the K-402. Although they are optimized for different frequency ranges, so it's still apples and oranges, except when it comes to size, they are both BIG (square vs. rectangular).........the 402 about 30x40 vs. 31x31" for the JBL, so the 402 is a TAD bigger, which sounds great with TAD drivers. LOL.