Vintage Klipsch LaScalas are amazing

[Kent T]

Just because they have degrees, does not mean they know music. PWK knows audio and music and proper loudspeaker design. Klipsch Heritage improved over the years, Bose 901 past Series II, lost the few decent things about them in the name of efficiency. Out comes the yellow button again. 

[Fjd]

Just because they have degrees, does not mean they know music. PWK knows audio and music and proper loudspeaker design. Klipsch Heritage improved over the years, Bose 901 past Series II, lost the few decent things about them in the name of efficiency. Out comes the yellow button again. 

 

 

Since your post is after mine and the BS seems to be in response to my research and experience, I implore you to please take the time to read and comprehend the entire post, do some specific research on your own into a person's background and buy a few of the Audio Engineering Society white papers and provide a well-thought-out response with some tangible support before calling BS on my post. 

 

http://www.aes.org/e-lib/browse.cfm?elib=1390

 

 

Please note that you have not even outlined any anecdotal evidence and went straight to ‘bash.’ Of course, maybe your experience with the 901 is greater than mine as I only helped a friend set them up and have not lived with them myself for a long period of time.

 

Given the 'two-minute hate' that crept into this thread, I believe that Eric and I tried to provide a little perspective to the discussion rather than just pile on the hate.  There are two or three threads dedicated to the hate already.

 

In addition, I specifically referenced the work and testing by Hirsch-Hauk Labs that went into Series 1 and Series II, outlined the intended strengths along with the actual weaknesses, especially the weakness in achieving a flat response, the roll-off at the high frequencies, the high THD, and agree that different compromises were made for the sake of efficiency in the later models.

 

Even though amplification power is very cheap these days, as the 901 is primarily an internet type of sale these days, they are not marketed to the main-stream consumer, and will probably never end up in a music show room, even a Best Buy, as I suspect that there probably is no incentive and not much of a market to release a version capturing the strengths in versions 1 & II because the market is extremely small.

 

In addition, this isn't a pissing contest between PWK and Amar (both are dead and neither can defend themselves  ) and my post was not meant for anyone to draw that conclusion in that regard and even if it was, my "joke" (although I acknowledge that most of my humor is not understood, including the joke in my earlier post  ) should give it away where my dollars have been spent where I currently own a pair of Klipschorns, a pair of Jubilees, a pair of Cornwall IIs, a pair of CF-4s, two pair of KPT-100s, a single Belle, a pair of split La Scalas and 8 pair of Heresys that span from the early 1960s to the early 1980s. In fact, after buying a pair of Mach Ones in 1975, I bought my first pair of Heresys in 1978 and have owned something from Klipsch continuously since then.

 

Please note that if you actualy take the time to comprehend the above, then you may be able to add something worthwhile to the discussion rather than just jump in and try to flame it with no support. 

Edited January 15, 2015 by Fjd

[Guest Steven1963]

We have apparently hi-jacked  mherzog26's thread and turned it into a Bose v. Klispch thread.  I think I might have started that and I am sorry.  It wasn't my intention. So let me attempt to return to course and agree with the OP that yes, the Lascala's are a very nice speaker.  Interestingly enough, I purchased my Khorns while I still had the scalas and installed new networks into the Khorns from DeanG.  Prior to that network upgrade they both had original networks and sounded 'similar,' with the Khorns obviously producing more bass. 

 

After the upgrade there was no comparison anymore.  The difference was stark and startling! The Khorns were full of sound; rich beautiful tones and depth. When I switched over to the lascalas they were lackluster. Flat. I thought, man, that sounds like Bose.

 

Oops. Did I do it again?

[Mallette]

A larger number of smaller cones is not at all necessarily more prone distortion (I would think both Bose himself and current Bose engineers would be rather aware of the distortion characteristics of this loudspeaker -- don't you think?)

 

No, I don't think.  If they are "engineers," they know both by science and intuitively that minimum cone excursion is critical to clean, transparent sound.  They knew precisely what they were doing, and they still do.  So does Coca-Cola, Apple, the big music concerns, the "News" networks, and all the other companies out there who make billions duping people who have no ability to discern quality or truth.

 

Dave

[derrickdj1]

What is a 140X2 tube hybird amp?

[twistedcrankcammer]

Ah, yes....Bose comparisons...

We have tossed that company name around quite a bit since I joined this forum in 2002. I have owned Klipschorns, two pair of La Scalas, multiple pairs of Heresies, and am presently using split industrial La Scalas and back loaded wide-band horns with Lowther PM5A drivers that alone are in the price range of $2,500/pair for the driver alone. Both the a Klipsch and Lowther systems are driven by a number of single-ended and push-pull tube amps which I built or or completely rebuilt. Primary vinyl based systems with, respectively, a Clearaudio Performance SE and VPI Scout decks. Like most horn systems, we enjoy that very immediate, hair trigger sensitivty that provides such instantaneous transient ability and laser-precision imaging.

To this, I unhesitatingly add that we also have a Bose 901 series VI system, driven by a large transistor amp and valve preamp. The turntable is a Technics SL-1210 MKIV.

I am someone who listens almost exclusively to both modern and classical jazz and classical genres, though I do enjoy a dose of King Crimson, Audio Slave, Tool, Dream Theatre, Genesis (particulalrly Peter Gabriel era), and so forth. I am on my 50s; have played drums and percussion in both rock/fusion and small jazz ensembles, and recently had my hearing tested. I am still able to hear out to the mid to upper teens K-Hertz.

Based on sound quality potential alone, and when properly setup, the Bose 901s with good ancillary equipment can produce an astonishingly realastic presentation, with imaging that is every bit as good as the much larger horn based systems above. They are also capable of low-end response that easily betters both our La Scalas (which I like equally well but for other reasons) and Lowther horns (which have a sensitivity of about 106 dBs/watt). Their high end response is capable of extremely clear and open sound, particularly with plucked guitar, bell work on cymbal, snare drum transients, and so on.

The convenient though rather disparaging rhyme "No highs, no lows, must be Bose" is arguably inaccurate.

 

 

An absolutely inaccurate belief... The fact that the Bose 901s sound like crap, unless you have the factory equalizer that boosts both the highs and the lows is exactly where that saying comes from. You cannot ADD fidelity to a given driver, it either has it or it does not! If you have to boost certain frequencies to get it to sound right, you are definitely NOT enhancing fidelity!

 

Roger

[BiggieSmalls]

Im  a klipsch fanatic everyone in the family has to have a heritage set of speakers lol working on relatives now, I was the dj at our family restaurant we had k- horns on the dance floor perfect corners run  with Crown powerline 4 series amp soundcraftsman sp4002 preamp, 4 lascalas run by phaselinear 700 series 2 amplifier I have never heard those lascalas sing like that ever every once in a while get the urge to put it all back together and do it again Those 4 Lascalas were the talk of the town people would come from every where to hear them and there was no subwoofer just La Scalas,    building is still there you could never hear the sound outside of the building it was built for those Lascalas .   

[mdross1]

I always get a kick when people excitingly speak of how they feel like the speakers are compressing their chest. Our LaScalla's sitting on top of BFM Tuba's where they really shine crossed to do what they do best.

[mustang guy]

I always get a kick when people excitingly speak of how they feel like the speakers are compressing their chest. Our LaScalla's sitting on top of BFM Tuba's where they really shine crossed to do what they do best.

That is a marriage made in heaven. Kinda like a 4 way LaScala that can go from 22Hz-17KHz.

 

I am speaking of the Tuba Home Theater (THT) and LaScalas with a proper crossover. I understand tapped horn subs get along with LS very well also.

[Marvel]

FJD,

Very well said. Amar Bose wasn't stupid, by a long shot. Nor was PWK! As you have clearly pointed out, they took different approaches for sound reproduction.

 

Bruce

[Mallette]

Very well said. Amar Bose wasn't stupid, by a long shot

 

I should have said that in my piece. 

 

I am certain Bose was familiar with and would have fully agreed with the 8 Cardinal Points.  In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if he studied them in search of a way to build something for a larger market.  PWK made it clear that the Klipschorn wasn't for everybody...only those who could appreciate and expected the last drop of goodness from source material in the most transparent way possible.  At the time Bose designed the 901, audio systems were status symbols in the average home.  Most of these were in the form of big console systems, but many sought component systems and the overall market for audio was MUCH larger than today.  Bose saw a way to tap a much larger market segment within that group, one that was willing to spend more than average but not as much as for a Klipschorn.  So, he violated several of the basic rules PWK developed, the main one being cone excursion.  Using MUCH more power and then the active EQ to force an unnatural response from this array of speakers led to specifications that looked good.  Then, adding the really great sounding, but largely voodoo, "direct/reflected" business he had a product with very high WAF, that COULD sound impressive in the perfect space, and that sold for a lot less than a Klipschorn.  It wasn't engineering, but marketing genius.  In fact, the 8 Cardinal Points TELL you that such a system is possible if you read them closely. 

 

I read all the reviews and auditioned 901s at a number of stores back at the time.  Granted, I'd already spent my time with PWK and was pretty well inoculated against BS.  Further, my own system was a pair of Frazier Super Monte Carlos driven by a Dynaco SCa-35.  Source was a Garrard Zero 100  TT with a Shure M15 and an Akai 4000D tape deck...so I was used to quite excellent audio that was in PWKs tradition.  In fact, I bought them because PWK recommended Jack Frazier for those who couldn't afford Heresy, which was his lowest price product at the time.  Several of the 901 demos were awful.  Only one sounded acceptable and even that simply did not have the transparency, imaging, and detail I was used to and valued.  Here's what J. Gordon Holt had to say at the time, and I am inclined to realize that JGH was very understated here in that he was in a business where it wasn't a good idea to flip a BS button at a major manufacturer...but I'll bet if he'd been a competitor like PWK he'd have flipped a BS button at Bose in a heartbeat:

 

"If we were to judge the 901 in terms of the best sound available, then, we would say that it produces a more realistic semblance of natural ambience than any other speaker system, but we would characterize it as unexceptional in all other respects. It is ideal for rock enthusiasts to whom sheer sonic impact is of paramount importance, and for classical listeners who want the next best thing to ambient stereo without the cost and the bother of rear-channel add-ons. However, we doubt that the 901 will appeal to perfectionists who have developed a taste for subtleties of detail and timbre."

 

Ouch.  I my case, I solved the "ambient" issue with a pair of Super Monte Carlos in the rear fed by Hafler's DynaQuad which remains an essential part of my system today.  I think 901s can sound acceptable, even nice, in the PERFECT space.  However, the odds of having that perfect space are remote and the cost of building one for these things far exceeds that of simply getting K'horns in the first place and adding DynaQuad, something that will work in any room. 

 

PWK said it, I've heard it, that settles it.

 

Dave 

[moray james]

many years ago Amar Bose and Paul Wilbur Klipsch were walking along the same street on opposite sides. Amar looked across the street and saw Paul some distance away, he called out and said " Hey Paul how are you doing?" Paul looked over and seeing Amar Paul immediately turns to face the wall of the building next to him and calls out "Amar I am just fine how are you?". Amar looks confused and cupping both his hands to his mouth calls back "Paul I can't hear a word you are saying" Paul still facing the wall replies " I know, have a nice day". Best regards Moray James.

Sorry for the duplication. Funny never the less, I could imagine Paul doing just this though.

Edited January 16, 2015 by moray james

[scalawag]

OP: congrats on your recent acquisition of the LS's - they should provide you with countless hours of fabulous audio enjoyment and invigorating conversation with visitors to your listening room.

 

I've always been enamored with my LS's since I first purchased them in '76, mostly for their sound but partly for their unique appearance. Over the years I've had to replace one mid-horn diaghram and, as previous posters have also done, a couple of years ago the x-overs with a set of Bob Crites AA units. While I'm not qualified to get into a discussion of "this versus that", I will say these Klipschs have provided me much more audio delight than I ever imagined, and I am confident you will receive same. Enjoy!

[erik2A3]

Dave

"...people who have no ability to discern quality or truth." I have known you a long time on this forum (which I joined in 2002, I think it was) and don't recall many statements like that from you. As a (quite satisfied and happy) owner of a pair Bose 901s, then I suspect I am guilty as charged. Argument can be fascinating and a thoroughly rewarding means of sharing differing opinions about.....anything: philosophy, art, food, genres of music, personal preferences in audio equipment, and in my view is so much more, how shall I say...effective, I suppose, when done in the absence of overtly informing participants of their inadequacies.

Our primary system, essentially two separate systems, consists of a pair of split La Scalas and a tall pair of back-loaded horn cabinets with single, wide-band drivers -- Lowther PM5As to be specific. Our sources are predominantly vinyl, by way of VPI and Clearaudio turntables with, respectively, cartridges from Audio Technica and Dynavector. Amplification and preamplification consists of pieces I have built myself or completely taken apart comprehensively restored to factory specs using factory schematics. The Lowthers are 100% crossover free, and the type AL network that came with the LSs was replaced by me with a more common lower order Klipsch network -- despite the fact the midrange horn drivers are the K55Ms. I like a hot midrange.

The La Scalas are, generally speaking, in the corners of the room, though not tightly, and are about 15' apart. The Lowther horn cabinets are to the inner sides of the La Scalas. The long wall of the room is roughly 21 feet. As you know, the La Scalas, as most klipsch speakers, present a very fast and open sound with often startling clarity. Dynamic contrasts are equally engrossing. We call this area of the house the "listening room." It is upstairs on an (unfortunately) suspended floor, with damping materials beneath the cabinets to minimize energizing the floor as much as possible. Regardless of these profilactic measures, the system is not totally immune from said vibrations, and there remains a small amount of I sometimes refer to as a "music box effect." We use an SVS subwoofer for everything below about 80 CPS.

But we also spend tons of times downstairs...cooking, talking, listening to the news, listening to music. I once broke the above system down in order to have one or the other loudspeaker systems in this downstairs living area and....both the a Lowthers and La Scalas, despite my (alleged) inability to discern quality, just sounded BAD. Regardless of much experimentation with positioning and repositioning (and these are NOT small or light-weight cabinets), I could not get them to load the room the way they did so much better upstairs. Our living room is a very unfriendly room for conventional, two channel music listening. When I say conventional, I am referring to forward (only) radiation from speakers.

Pondering some possible solutions, I remembered the 901s I auditioned once just for fun -- to see what all the fuss (both negative and positive) was about. So, I thought to myself, instead of fighting room modes and awkward interior spaces, maybe I should try using the surrounding walls ACTIVELY instead of fighting them. I also remembered the many band and orchestra performances I've been to where huge sound reflectors were used BEHIND the musicians, and how stunningly good it sounded in those venues. One of Dr. Bose's premises, and the one upon which the 901 was conceived and built, was that the majority of acoustic energy produced by a large collection of musical instruments is radiated not to the front, but to the rear. Thus the use of the giant reflectors I mentioned, and thus the installation of a number of smaller drivers in the BACK of the 901 vs the single forward front-facing driver.

The 901 is NOT, by the way, intended to be used without it's requisite equalizer; which, I should add, is a line level component. They do not use passive resistors, capacitors, and inductors for frequency division between the drivers, nor do they use Zobel equalization networks, resonant peak filters, notch filters, and so forth (which I don't care for) Does the need for an equalizer necessarily invalidate the 901s as potentially great transducers? I don't know, what would be the result of removing the crossover and required corner placement of the Klipschorn? The Klipschorn is capable of pin-point imaging and focus, as well as what was arguably the most palpable, tangible, and realistic reproduction of music I have heard. However, nothing is settled. The Klipschorn, as I learned from first-hand experience when I owned them, has certain rather specific requirements to sound their best. To simply recommend them out-of-hand as the be-all, end all (which for some might very well be the case), is advice worthy of consideration in terms of weighing not only the pros but also the cons. Our upstairs long wall, wich as I said is roughly 21 feet long, also fortunately has two ideal corners for K-horns. On that wall, they were able to plant a singer, saxophone, or solo guitar center stage with really uncanny precision. Although stereo imaging is not necessarily a primary concern for me, the Klipschorn was extraordinary in this respect. Put the same speakers too close together or in a room not well suited to their idiosyncrasies, and it becomes much more difficult to describe them in the same glowing and positive light. The success or lack thereof of an audio system, which is essentially a machine of sorts, is arguably very context dependent. In fact, I consider the listener to be very much one of the 'components' of the system as a whole; and the human inconsistencies and variabilities we all experience from time to time in terms of overall health (which may impact hearing acuity), changes in mood, and so on, can all come into play with our perceptions of reproduced music. I clearly recall cases where a forum member one day had expressed great satisfaction with the sound at which he or she had arrive, only to make an about-face the following day and say something such as, "I came home from work today, turned on the system, flopped down a record.....and everything just sounded WRONG." Without something to power them, the most expensive and best speakers in the world are useless. The system without a listener simply does not exist.

One solution to the lack-of-corners-for-Klipschorns syndrome, as we know, has been the construction of false corners. But again, like the Equalizer to the 901, does the possible need for such a construction project in order to make the best use of what might have been a financially difficult investment make the otherwise steller Klipschorn a lousy speaker?

My wife and I talked about this for awhile, and, based on some of the reasons mentioned above, decided to try the 901s. With the choices we have at our disposal, the 901s have been the single best sounding system we have used in this particular area of the house in the fifteen years we have been here. However, they sounded horrible with ALL of the valve amps I tried. The best combination has been with the Prima Luna Prologue III preamp I bought used and repaired and 110 solid state watts per side in front of them.

And to the original OP: I extend a sincere apology for even mentioning the Bose 901s. I agree with you that vintage La Scalas (or Klispchorns under the right conditions) can be just killer speakers. I love ours and won't make the mistake of selling them as I did the first pair we had. Enjoy!

Edited January 18, 2015 by erik2A3

[mdross1]

 

I always get a kick when people excitingly speak of how they feel like the speakers are compressing their chest. Our LaScalla's sitting on top of BFM Tuba's where they really shine crossed to do what they do best.

That is a marriage made in heaven. Kinda like a 4 way LaScala that can go from 22Hz-17KHz.

 

I am speaking of the Tuba Home Theater (THT) and LaScalas with a proper crossover. I understand tapped horn subs get along with LS very well also.

 

We think so the bored K400's at face height with new PRV drivers really tops them off.

[JiminSTL]

Fjd and Mallette and erik2A3,

 

Thank you for the tenor and the information of your posts.  I enjoyed reading them, and (re)considering the thoughts and experiences expressed.  I learned some things, and, accordingly, continue the refinement of my various understandings.

 

As a NON-expert, and not possessing the long-time experience with the wonderful (various) speakers and amplifiers you have, I can only take in intellectually what you write about and describe.  And it is interesting.  And it is fun to think about, write about and discuss, and to experience--even for a NON-expert, as I am.  That all said, I absolutely love what the equipment I do have gives me.  Though, would I be pulling my hair out and wearing sackcloth if I had Epic CF-4s instead of my KLF-30s?  No--am sure this NON-expert would be thrilled and delighted with them.

 

This is not said to downplay or discourage the other comments and posts, but simply to say "Thank you" to you for the enjoyable and (specifically) informing comments that you made.

 

Jim

[Marvel]

That all said, I absolutely love what the equipment I do have gives me.

The most important statement! All should understand this.

 

Though, would I be pulling my hair out and wearing sackcloth if I had Epic CF-4s instead of my KLF-30s? No--am sure this NON-expert would be thrilled and delighted with them.

This is the correct attitude for sure. Just because we've been around the block a few times doesn't mean we've necessarily learned anything. We are often very quick to recommend this or that upgrade or mod to speakers someone just bought, speakers someone is delighted to have in their home. One should, most of all, enjoy listening to music!

 

Bruce

[erik2A3]

Jim

Thank YOU for your comments! Some of the most astute listeners I know are people who, first and foremost, are serious music connoisseurs. I have a friend who is not just a good classical pianist, but an exceedingly talented one. He knows virtually nothing about audio electronics and the science of acoustics, but is someone in whom I have great trust in terms of critical listening. I will say here, too, that he does NOT care for horn speakers, describing them as far too harsh and forward-sounding. His speakers are vintage Quads and a pair of small, very high quality two-way monitors.

I know a bit about audio electronics -- enough to know that I have a huge amount still to learn. I know what brands of capacitors and resistors encourage the quality of reproduced sound I generally prefer, and I can read both crossover schematics, as well as those of rather more complex amplifiers and radios. But I would be the very last person to say that the possession of such knowledge automatically also gives me the qualification or right to inform others about what they should or shouldn't like or do.

I enjoyed your post this morning!

Edited January 17, 2015 by erik2A3