Heresy H-700 the "sound"

[wheelman]

Hello, does anyone notice a low mid hole or dip in the sound of these older speakers? Say compared to the Heresy II's I've been going back and forth between the sets. I love them both for different reasons.

Do these older early 70's have the same tweeters and midrange horns as the Klipschorns?

[Budman]

same K-77 tweets and K-55V mids

just to be clear. k-horns use the K-400 and the heresy the K-700

Edited March 23, 2014 by Budman

[wheelman]

Thanks Budman.

Anyone hear both versions and hear this low mid dip I'm hearing on the old ones?

[garyrc]

Hello, does anyone notice a low mid hole or dip in the sound of these older speakers? Say compared to the Heresy II's I've been going back and forth between the sets. I love them both for different reasons.

Do these older early 70's have the same tweeters and midrange horns as the Klipschorns? ;

The very early Heresy did seem to have a hole in the mid, IMO, at least the ones I heard and borrowed in about 1973 did (they were not new at the time). I next heard Heresies in about 1979, and they sounded fine, clear, a bit bright, and a bit shallow in the bass. This impression held up in showrooms, at Odyssey records (about 8 Heresies on columns above the customers) and at a concert (Heresies used as sound reinforcement). I don't know if this has anything to do with what I heard, but the original Heresy -- I think -- was intended to serve as a center channel between Klipschorns, to just fill in a little, in Paul Klipsch's Wide Stage Stereo, with his derived center channel circuit (which he later changed). Later still, he said he preferred the center channel to be horn loaded throughout its range, as are the Belle Klipsch and the La Scala.

I haven't compared the Heresy I (H-700?) to Heresy IIs (even though I have Heresy IIs as surrounds; I haven't had an old Heresy in the house for 39 years -- time flies.

[wheelman]

Thanks Gary for your opinion. These are H-700 ( 1970-72) I think the same as Heresy I's. Not the early original center channel model. They don't have the original crossovers I think they been "upgraded" to Crites E crossovers. So from what I think I read that may add more bass even. Not sure I'm new to all the crossover stuff. I had my Heresy II's for quite some time ( stock). I noticed they have less highs some might say smoother. Also bigger bass sound that seems a hair slower than the older ones. The older ones are tighter in bass super precise on the top end love that about them.

When I go back to the Heresy II's they seem dull like I am missing something. Then I get used to them which isn't hard I been listening to them for years. Then I go back to the old ones and I miss that low mid punch. I appreciate all the input I'm thinking on trading my II's for these not sure yet. I was thinking down the road I maybe able to tweak the originals for more low midrange. I would not want to compromise the highs though. Where I don't think I can change the character of the highs on the II's to be like the originals. I think those alnico magnets add some unique character I like. Low bass isn't a concern I use a sub woofer. Right now they are dead even to me in performance just different strengths.

[garyrc]

... I had my Heresy II's for quite some time ( stock). I noticed they have less highs some might say smoother. Also bigger bass sound that seems a hair slower than the older ones. The older ones are tighter in bass super precise on the top end love that about them.

When I go back to the Heresy II's they seem dull like I am missing something. Then I get used to them which isn't hard I been listening to them for years. Then I go back to the old ones and I miss that low mid punch. I appreciate all the input I'm thinking on trading my II's for these not sure yet. I was thinking down the road I maybe able to tweak the originals for more low midrange. I would not want to compromise the highs though. Where I don't think I can change the character of the highs on the II's to be like the originals. I think those alnico magnets add some unique character I like. Low bass isn't a concern I use a sub woofer. Right now they are dead even to me in performance just different strengths.

As you may know, the Heresy I (H-700) probably used a K-77 tweeter (the same as in Klipschorns and very closely related to the K-77 M, K-77 F, and K-77 D of later years, also used in K-horns, but not in Heresy IIs). My understanding is the diaphram, voice coil and the little built-in horn are almost the same in most K-77s, but some of the magnets are different. They all are based on the ElectroVoice T 35.

Do your tweeters have a round magnet or a square magnet?

The older T 35s and K -77s may have had a peak around 8K, which may have made them sound different. Paul Klipsch talks about this in Speaker Builder magazine, but I don't know the date.

EDIT: Found the article. T 35 was used by Klipsch starting in 1958. The peak I was referring was at 7.5 K. Later versions used a Avedon loading plug, and extended to 16K. I also remember that Klipsch had a deal with ElectrroVoice, and selected the T 35s that tested the best, and re-labeled them K-77. At first they selected matched pairs (by testing them). I think the square magnet came in around 1980.

A few people on the forum like the K-77 a lot. I'm one of them. Many others replace it with another tweeter. I currently have square magnet K77-Fs in Khorns, and round magnet T-35s in a home brew system. They sound a lot alike.

https://community.klipsch.com/forums/storage/3/485610/Edgar%20Interview%20of%20PWK.pdf

Edited March 23, 2014 by Garyrc

[wheelman]

Great info thanks. The tweeters and all the drivers are like this. Front has non removable grill with the pie badge.

[Frzninvt]

The newer K-53K and K-76K tweeter used in the HII's extend further into their perspective ranges than the original K-55 & alnico magnet K-77 do. I think the biggest difference though is in the woofer that old early 70's K-22 (red woofer surround) has a tiny magnet structure (motor) as compared to the newer K24 woofer in the HII. It is just a much beefier woofer, swap one from the HII into it and see if the performance improves in the bass response. That square structure is not the whole magnet it is actually a very small one hidden behind the metal panels on the side. I think the overall performance of the HII is better than the older H-700's. Flush mounted drivers, composite horn throats, extended HF range, different crossover design.

[wheelman]

The newer K-53K and K-76K tweeter used in the HII's extend further into their perspective ranges than the original K-55 & alnico magnet K-77 do. I think the biggest difference though is in the woofer that old early 70's K-22 (red woofer surround) has a tiny magnet structure (motor) as compared to the newer K24 woofer in the HII. It is just a much beefier woofer, swap one from the HII into it and see if the performance improves in the bass response. That square structure is not the whole magnet it is actually a very small one hidden behind the metal panels on the side. I think the overall performance of the HII is better than the older H-700's. Flush mounted drivers, composite horn throats, extended HF range, different crossover design.

Thanks for the suggestion that's a good idea. That could be the reason its leaner in the low mids. I do like the open highs of the older ones though. Funny how they seem like they have more extended range because of the crossover, or speaker design. They actually opened up my ears now I feel like I'm missing some highs, and upper mid presence in the II's. I don't think I would be able to swap out the speakers unless I did the trade. Might be a risk unless I am for certain I want them. Probably the hardest descision I ever had to make audio related. I like them both so much.

I tried to compensate using tone knobs on my receiver, but that didn't come close to the H-700 sound. I also hear a certain character from the old midrange driver on clean electric blues guitar I just don't hear on the II's. Hard to explain that one but I do like it. Something I actually listen for in real old guitar amps, and vintage guitar speakers. I'm considering fiddling with my subwoofer settings. The last thing I want to do it's been set a certain way for years because once I start it doesn't end any time soon.

[garyrc]

I do like the open highs of the older ones though. Funny how they seem like they have more extended range because of the crossover, or speaker design. They actually opened up my ears now I feel like I'm missing some highs, and upper mid presence in the II's

Hey, you may have discovered what some of us like about the K-77 series tweeter. It does sound "open" and "unveiled" to my ears. It may be a preference that is counter to orthodoxy, it may be because of a peaky high end, but I like it. One guy tried a tweeter that was better by reputation, and went back to the K-77s. I think the thread was called "Back to the K-77s."

As to the absolute upper limit of the K-77s, I haven't had the problem that some have had. Mine are O.K. to about - 4 dB at 16K. They do respond to 17K, and on one old very low SPL (for safety) sweep with an audio occilator, they went to 22 K, but were very, very attenuated.

The point is, though, the upper limit -- admittedly higher in the IIs by measurement -- isn't what impresses some of us. Your word "open" hits the nail on the head!

[wheelman]

Could I just slap a pair of Heresy II woofers in the 700's and have what I thing would be the best of both worlds?

Or is there a better crossover to get more low mid punch without altering the highs?

Edited March 25, 2014 by wheelman

[Bill W.]

Heresy H-700 speakers of this vintage had woofers that produced somewhat less mid-bass output than later versions. Examples include the cast frame EV model and the one found in your speakers. The original crossover would have been the type C network, used until the early 1970s IIRC. A Dope from Hope memo published around that time indicated improvements in mid-bass response which required a revision to the crossover network, raising the autoformer settings on the midrange and tweeter by 3db each, along with corresponding changes to cap values. This was the type D network, used for a short time until the type E network replaced it. The only difference between the D and E versions is the reversal of polarity in the treble section of the E relative to the woofer.

Based on this, I believe you are hearing the difference between the older and newer woofers in the mid and upper range of output. This,as well as the changes in the crossover networks has a distinct effect on the overall sound.

P.S. If you are using an aftermarket network with the type E configuration, the reversed polarity centered at 700Hz will produce an octave-wide dip in response between the woofer and midrange.Keep in mind this crossover design was intended for use with the later woofers. If you have the earlier (lower output) version, there may be too much loss in this region with both things happening.

Simple suggestion: Try reversing the polarity of the midrange and tweeter wires on the terminal strip inside the box and have a listen. You may be suprised at the result.

Let us know what you think

Bill

[wheelman]

Thanks Bill. I will look into this it seems almost like a scooped sound but dipped in the low midrange maybe mid upper bass. So reverse polarity on both midrange and tweeter to be clear on the crossover board? Just making sure because from your description it almost sounds like its just the midrange that needs reversed to be like the D.

Edited March 27, 2014 by wheelman

[Bill W.]

Yes, reverse the polarity on both the tweeter and midrange relative to the woofer otherwise you would be creating a polarity reversal between the midrange and tweeter as well.

[wheelman]

Thanks Bill I'll have to try this out.

[wheelman]

I did it I do hear a difference in sound now. Seems slightly more forward in the midrange now. Less zing in the highs which I used to like ( still do). Not sure how I feel about it yet. I will give it listen for awhile see how I adjust. Midrange seems slightly wider but the highs kind of lost their presence more tamed maybe.

Edit:

More listening thinking more harsher forward mids. II's sound lush compared to this maybe there was reasoning behind the other wiring tame the midrange a bit. Seems like it added more detail to bass lines which I was hopping for just not the excessive midrange push. Almost wish I never heard them Ignorance is bliss in my case contentment. I'll give it more time.

Edited April 6, 2014 by wheelman

[Bill W.]

Please remember if you have type E crossovers (factory or aftermarket) both the midrange and tweeter are set to +3db on the autotransformer as compared with the original type C crossover. It will definately sound more forward than it did from the factory. If you want to hear what the H-700's were like when new, you can try the type C setup.

[wheelman]

Please remember if you have type E crossovers (factory or aftermarket) both the midrange and tweeter are set to +3db on the autotransformer as compared with the original type C crossover. It will definately sound more forward than it did from the factory. If you want to hear what the H-700's were like when new, you can try the type C setup.

Thanks Bill that might do the trick. I was thinking D was original with these from the earlier post, but even if it were that C is a tempting solution. I love these tweeters , but that squawker about take your head off at times. Some recordings are great. The other way I thought it was a bit picky with recordings now it's even more so. Also had a more scooped sound less midrange, but real nice highs. Appreciate the input.

Don't see much info on the C crossover in the search field or the internet.

Edited April 7, 2014 by wheelman

[Bill W.]

There are two threads on type C and type D networks going on in the technical/modifications section right now. If you look at the schematics posted there, you will see how to convert a type E or D network to a type C. Very simple with one change in cap value and changing the midrange and tweeter taps one step lower.

[wheelman]

Thanks for the heads up. I'm a total newb on this just jumping right in. I see the two schematics. So switch the C2 to 1.0uf? I can't see after the 1.0 looks scribbly. Then taps I see mid 6 goes to T2A 1, and Tweeter 8 goes to T2A 2. Now because this an E crossover would I still keep the mid and tweeter reversed polarity?

After comparing the E with the D looks like it wouldn't be reversed. I think I get that part. Looks likes tweeter8 Runs through a cap first then run the cap to T2A 2 tap. Also judging from the caps Crites is selling 200VDC is a safe bet.

Edited April 7, 2014 by wheelman