Jump to content

Chorus II Upgrades


BMWM5

Recommended Posts

25 minutes ago, pzannucci said:

When you fall in love with some thing then want to drastically change it without knowing what the outcome is seems like a non-starter and get many in trouble.  Too many people upgrade just to upgrade, good or bad they stand by it - as Bob explains there is no guaranty.

Stay with phenolic on the mids.  Too many crossover changes and compensation to get around Ti nasties.  Refresh the caps and solder the connections along with the basic things you should always do as @moray james suggests.

 

Excellent advise/wisdom above. Klipsch just went to a polyimide diaphragm on the new cornwall and hersey IV model mid range driver (squawker), abandoning Ti or metal diaphragms, for the time being. Still Ti on the tweeter tho. Go figure. Polyimide is close to phenolic (synthetic polymer-plastics-hydrocarbon based). 

 

Many peeps get upgrade-itis. Rarely satisfied, looking for the next level, the next rush. Just might be a fundamental human character trait :)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, jaz3842 said:

New to the forum but have owned many Klipsch speakers since the 1970s. I have a pair of Chorus II speakers I bought new 30 years ago. They have been safely stored in the original boxes for about 15 years. Physically they are in excellent condition with no apparent cabinet or speaker degradation. Crossover component replacement seems to be one of the more common repairs done to these and was wondering how you know when it is needed? Is it an audible symptom, a deterioration of components or some combination that determines it is neccessary? Any feedback would be most appreciated.

I have gone through a number of Chorus speakers. I measure capacitors with a B&K 885 inductance and capacitance meter and what the meter tells me is that every single cap I have ever pulled from crossovers that old have high ESR. Every cap. I can also tell you every Chorus speaker I have recapped sounds better and you don't have to stick high dollar caps in there to get this. Daytons and Audyns have worked just fine for me. I do stick a 68uf poly Audyn in there and not that dinky electrolytic though as they are not expensive and do make a difference to me in bass quality.

 

 What happens with these old caps is your sound quality degrades and over time you don't realize how much this can be. I have had some sour sounding Chorus sets brought to life again with nothing more than a recap. All have shown improvement by recapping.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, polizzio said:

 

 

Many peeps get upgrade-itis. Rarely satisfied, looking for the next level, the next rush. Just might be a fundamental human character trait :)

 

Sadly, I know that trait well.  Currently going to Upgrades Anonymous and fighting it all the way.

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, pzannucci said:

Sadly, I know that trait well.  Currently going to Upgrades Anonymous and fighting it all the way.

 

I understand. But the first step in recovery is recognizing and acknowledging the problem :)

 

"Hello, my name is Tom and I'm a upgrade aholic......."

 

"hi Tom"

 

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Randyh said:

Titanium is a very expensive material to manufacture  , the costs are also rising   , the manufacturing requires very high tech ,  and higher end  equipment  than  Polyimide or phenolic  being of  higher quality , titanium is also a much more durable material than all the rest  , titanium takes time to break in but as it sets in , it becomes even greater sounding as time goes on , it's high resistance allows it to reach very high temperatures without splitting or fracturing -

 titanium is still the best overall for higher frequencies - -

titanium is popular for one reason and that is it does not work harden like aluminum. If you slap an aluminum comp driver diaphragm onto the phase plug it will either crack and shatter right away or depending upon how hard you slap it it will crack and shatter later but crack and shatter it will. Aluminum is a better sounding material than titanium and it has a structural resonance quite a bit higher than titanium does (almost 50% higher). The stiffer the diaphragm material the better because you push the first structural resonance up into the higher registrar of the pass band of the driver.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Randyh said:

Titanium is a very expensive material to manufacture  , the costs are also rising   , the manufacturing requires very high tech ,  and higher end  equipment  than  Polyimide or phenolic  being of  higher quality , titanium is also a much more durable material than all the rest  , titanium takes time to break in but as it sets in , it becomes even greater sounding as time goes on , it's high resistance allows it to reach very high temperatures without splitting or fracturing -

 titanium is still the best overall for higher frequencies - -

 

I think Ti manufacturing costs are going down. You see way more Ti in products/components today than you did 25 years ago. Watches, loudspeakers, handgun parts. Smith and Wesson started producing revolver cylinders made of Ti in the last 5-10 years, offering greater strength and lighter weight, and 7 or 8 round capacity in some models instead of the traditional 6 (in their Performance Center line). Replacement Klipsch Ti diaphragms can be had for $25  each @ simplyspeakers.

 

I think the move to polyimide in the Hersey and CW4 squawker is because Klipsch believes it performs better or sounds better, least for the mid range. They kept Ti in the tweeter. Surely they have a factual reason for the switch, most likely sound reproduction characteristics.

 

Simply Speakers Ti replacement example: https://www.simplyspeakers.com/klipsch-k-68-a-replacement-speaker-diaphragm-127124.html

 

These articles state manufacturing costs are down, but the demand for supply has driven up Ti raw material prices:

https://www.argusmedia.com/en/news/1975606-chinese-titanium-imports-rise-with-higher-prices

 

https://www.smartechanalysis.com/news/production-methods-am-titanium/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You both said pretty much the same thing, just from different angles.  Economy of scale plus better tech is bringing the cost of manipulating it down but cost of material going up.

 

Poly may or may not be considered "better" by Klipsch for the mid, but we can be fairly certain it's at least "good enough" and is certainly better in terms of cost.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, glens said:

 

Poly may or may not be considered "better" by Klipsch for the mid, but we can be fairly certain it's at least "good enough" and is certainly better in terms of cost.

 

So are you stating you really believe cost was the main driver for Klipsch to go to polyimide versus Ti in the IV series squawker diaphragm?

 

In a $6000 per pair of Heritage cornwall IV (retail price) , Klipsch is worried about reducing maybe $50-75 in squawker diaphragm costs?

 

You have to be kidding right?

  • Haha 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

B&C DE120 = mylar diaphragm and DE10 = polyester diaphragm. Both are very highly regarded for sound quality. The very best 1" tweeter drivers I have heard are not Titanium and it has nothing to do with cost.

 

  The idea that Ti costs are relevant here is silly. How many can come out of one pound of Ti? Current price of Ti bar stock is $26.35 and while sheet metal is more I think it would be safe to say less than $100 per pound for thick foil which is what these diaphragms basically are. As little as they weigh I figure at least 500 can probably come out of a pound so $.20 each plus the machinery to stamp them out and plastics have mold equipment to form them so both have expenses that are probably close to a wash in production equipment. If only 100 came out it is a dollar each so do the math and plug in how many you think come out of a pound.

 

  Bean counters do stupid things like MDF and they don't care what the diaphragm material is just as long as the complete driver is as cheap as possible.

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Dave A said:

B&C DE120 = mylar diaphragm and DE10 = polyester diaphragm. Both are very highly regarded for sound quality. The very best 1" tweeter drivers I have heard are not Titanium and it has nothing to do with cost.

 

  The idea that Ti costs are relevant here is silly. How many can come out of one pound of Ti? Current price of Ti bar stock is $26.35 and while sheet metal is more I think it would be safe to say less than $100 per pound for thick foil which is what these diaphragms basically are. As little as they weigh I figure at least 500 can probably come out of a pound so $.20 each plus the machinery to stamp them out and plastics have mold equipment to form them so both have expenses that are probably close to a wash in production equipment. If only 100 came out it is a dollar each so do the math and plug in how many you think come out of a pound.

 

  Bean counters do stupid things like MDF and they don't care what the diaphragm material is just as long as the complete driver is as cheap as possible.

 

 

Well Ti has it's requirements on crossover overbuilds due to typical resonance and response issues along with many people not liking the sound of Ti in the mids.

So costs may not be with the diaphragm but in association to it.  I myself like the phenolic though the poly in the mids is likely fine if designed correctly. I think the poly in the tweeter sometimes leads to something I refer to as a spitty type sound (non-technical description).  Could be just me though. 

 

MDF has it's place depending on the driver frequency and you would have to rate the cost of veneering it vs plywood - focusing on the bean counters of course.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, pzannucci said:

Well Ti has it's requirements on crossover overbuilds due to typical resonance and response issues along with many people not liking the sound of Ti in the mids. So costs may not be with the diaphragm but in association to it

I think that may be right. I have never gone down that route before because there are great sounding diaphragms that require no alteration to your system.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Titanium diaphrams are harsh and shrill they always have been even since the early car audio days with MB Quarts components.  If they sound good to you you must obviously have some degree of high frequency hearing loss.  I prefer phenolic, textile, silk, poly or other more pliable material.

  • Confused 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Frzninvt said:

Titanium diaphrams are harsh and shrill they always have been even since the early car audio days with MB Quarts components.  If they sound good to you you must obviously have some degree of high frequency hearing loss.  I prefer phenolic, textile, silk, poly or other more pliable material.

 

So why did Klipsch keep Ti diaphragms in the tweeter in both the cornwall and heresy 4? But went to polyimide in the squawker?

 

Harsh perhaps to you, but that is purely subjective. Every listener has an opinion, or what they personally prefer. Just like the music itself, we all do not like the same thing.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Frzninvt said:

Titanium diaphrams are harsh and shrill they always have been even since the early car audio days with MB Quarts components.  If they sound good to you you must obviously have some degree of high frequency hearing loss.  I prefer phenolic, textile, silk, poly or other more pliable material.

 

Not to mention both the Heresy 3 and CW 3s have employed Ti diaphragms in both the tweeter and squawker since 2006 and I have read a LOT of on line reviews of them and never read adjectives like "harsh" and "shrill" used to describe their musical reproduction. Reviews @ crutchfield (purchasers), reviews in other audio forums, reviews on the Klipsch product website, and reviews here on this forum. Hard to find a bad word on Heresy III period, other than the occasional limited low end extension comment.

I own a pair of CW 3s and did a lot of research before purchasing a pair.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, polizzio said:

 

Not to mention both the Heresy 3 and CW 3s have employed Ti diaphragms in both the tweeter and squawker since 2006 and I have read a LOT of on line reviews of them and never read adjectives like "harsh" and "shrill" used to describe their musical reproduction. Reviews @ crutchfield (purchasers), reviews in other audio forums, reviews on the Klipsch product website, and reviews here on this forum. Hard to find a bad word on Heresy III period, other than the occasional limited low end extension comment.

I own a pair of CW 3s and did a lot of research before purchasing a pair.

Search these forums.  Several have brought it up.  If you like the sound, enjoy it.  Everyone has their likes and dislikes.

  • Confused 1
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...