La Scala II vs older La Scala. Big Differences or Not?

[tcb]

About 15 years ago I had a La Scala pair with AK3 crossover,sold them to get Klipschorn,sold the klipschorns when lost my big basement room. Looking around for HE speakers I jump on ZU's Soul Superfly pair and still use them for last 5 years.Recently listen to a 45 type amp with older La Scala (AA crossover) and memories come back strong. I consider buying the newer La Scala.My question is if are improvements other than thicker separate cabinets? The older La Scala I had were driven by a Decware 1.5 watts apm but don't remember model.Sorry

Anyway back then I did not complain much about bass but I was not happy with image. A strong cantered voice and airy instruments.Maybe because my amp,not sure.

Appreciate any inputs from owners to help me decide if is worth a back in time trip?

[WMcD]

I'm not an owner.

 

But let me point out that the LS II, like the recent K-Horns, has a very sophisticated crossover.  I wish I had to time to do a simulation.

 

One starting point is that PWK had a very strong conviction that simple, first order, crossovers were best.  This must have been based on listening tests in part.  One old article makes me think this was brought to his attention in the early '50's by others.

 

He also put flat frequency response somewhat down on the priority list.

 

He was, of course very enamored by his K-400 horn.  It allowed the midrange driver and horn to be used up to 6000 Hz because the K-400 would get some on axis gain because of a narrowing pattern.

 

This allowed him to keep the crossover point to the tweeter up there.  Apparently he did not like the idea of a crossover to the tweeter down at 3500 Hz because the ear is most sensitive there.  There is room for debate.  I've seen some reports that the mid driver is perceived as best if it covers 700 to 7000 Hz.  So maybe he was correct.  (My counter argument is that 3500 Hz is where the ear is least sensitive to changes of level, but I dunno.)

 

I also suspect that this "gain" in the K-400 caused problems because the mid driver is breaking up above 4000 Hz.  There are reports of the K-Horn (and LS) having something wrong up there.

 

Anyway.  It seems that after PWK passed away, some engineer(s) at Klipsch revampted the crossover.  In the mid, it certainly has higher order (steeper) rolloffs and it cuts off at about 4000 Hz.  There may be some other effects to flatten out the response.

 

The new crossover might well address a bass issue.  It seems to me that the bass horns have a bit of a peak in the mid bass, where they are really happy.  If this hump can be cut down then overall bass response is smoother.  IThe lower bass is not lacking relative to the mid bass, which has been cut down. And I suspect that is accomplished with the LS II and recent K-Horn. 

 

The bottom line here is that the modern crossovers do a lot to even out response and maybe interference among the three horns.  This is at the cost of some of PWK's design theories.

 

You may have seen the review of the LSII which was very favorable.  I believe this was the crossover improvement and not just the thicker walls.

 

WMcD

[BobK]

I would get the newer La Scala IIs,  newer crossovers, new drivers, new everything.   Why not get the IIs?  

[WMcD]

I think same drivers.

 

WMcD

[Schu]

LSii

HF xo @ 4500Hz

MF xo @ 400 Hz

2" k55x

MDF and Birch

Edited January 29, 2016 by Schu

[tcb]

Thanks a lot for input.

Just curious about a price range for a used La Scala pair in US,please?

[The Dude]

I am not to concerned about the crossover as I will be using my active.  But that is some good info for anybody contemplating a purchase over one or the other.

[IB Slammin]

I would get the newer La Scala IIs,  newer crossovers, new drivers, new everything.   Why not get the IIs?

Price point?

[WMcD]

LS review:

 

https://community.klipsch.com/index.php?/topic/137732-lascala-k-447-1971-high-fidelity-magazine-review/?hl=%2Blascala+%2Breview

 

LSII review

 

https://community.klipsch.com/index.php?/topic/76063-excellent-stereophile-review-of-la-scalas/?hl= lascala review

 

WMcD

[moray james]

I have not heard the new LaScala11's but with a different crossover combination you can achieve excellent sound with your LaScala's. Crossovers do make all the difference. There has not been a lot of changes with the horns and drivers and all of them are excellent anyway. I have tried many combinations of many different crossovers but went back to a simple 1st order as sounding best. I am crossing my LaScala's around 625hz and 4000hz with an aftermarket tweeter. There are many that still think like PWK, 1st order crossovers with horns sound best. No crossover is perfect, there will be trade offs with all of them.

I am curious I went looking for the bass bin response of the LaScala have on but of course I cannot find it (anybody got it?). The crossover that Klipsch chose was as low as they could (and it is still not low enough) make it. The bass bin goes higher than a Khorn but still not a lot higher in its upper end response. So that being the case I wondered if you are not getting into the soup with a crossover point of 625 Hz. The is no way the LaScala bass bin is making smooth response up that high.I will keep looking for the graph on the LaScala. I do have a real and accurate response graph of a G.E.Beck bass bin called the California which is the best and highest extending bin for a single 15" woofer that I have ever found and that only makes it to just over 500Hz.

This photo will do as you can see you are looking at a big hole in the response. The light grey curve is the K33 in a La Scala bass bin.

Edited January 30, 2016 by moray james

[WMcD]

I think MJ is looking for the response of just the bass bin.

 

I have not seen that.

 

But since this thread is accumulating info on the LS, let me point out

 

https://community.klipsch.com/index.php?/topic/53241-article-aes-preprint-re-lascala-by-pwk/?hl=%2Blascala+%2Baes+%2Barticle

 

WMcD

[djk]

Vented LaScala with quad PPSL 8's and some room EQ.

 

Note the 7dB cut around 140hz (horn), about 7dB cut around 60hz or so (room), about 5dB boost around 28hz.

Edited January 30, 2016 by djk

[moray james]

I have not heard the new LaScala11's but with a different crossover combination you can achieve excellent sound with your LaScala's. Crossovers do make all the difference. There has not been a lot of changes with the horns and drivers and all of them are excellent anyway. I have tried many combinations of many different crossovers but went back to a simple 1st order as sounding best. I am crossing my LaScala's around 625hz and 4000hz with an aftermarket tweeter. There are many that still think like PWK, 1st order crossovers with horns sound best. No crossover is perfect, there will be trade offs with all of them.

I am curious I went looking for the bass bin response of the LaScala have on but of course I cannot find it (anybody got it?). The crossover that Klipsch chose was as low as they could (and it is still not low enough) make it. The bass bin goes higher than a Khorn but still not a lot higher in its upper end response. So that being the case I wondered if you are not getting into the soup with a crossover point of 625 Hz. The is no way the LaScala bass bin is making smooth response up that high.I will keep looking for the graph on the LaScala. I do have a real and accurate response graph of a G.E.Beck bass bin called the California which is the best and highest extending bin for a single 15" woofer that I have ever found and that only makes it to just over 500Hz.

This photo will do as you can see you are looking at a big hole in the response. The light grey curve is the K33 in a La Scala bass bin.

I have seen the curves on a LaScala but I do not remember where but from memory it does extend up to 700hz unlike the K-horn. From listening I will say it sounds great and better crossed higher to me in my environment. I can and have crossed my speakers lower but the reason I chose 625 is I am using a Altec 511B horn that is rated for 500hz response and also I am using a simple 1st order crossover that I feel is better crossed a little higher. I really have not experimented crossing at a lower point as much as the crossover point at the high frequency. I have tried the high crossover points from 6000hz to 4000hz and have settled on around 4200hz or thereabouts with my environment as sounding best. I have tried many crossovers designs using the autotransformer and to me my speakers in my room make better and quicker bass without the autotransfomer using a 1mh inductor and 20uh cap. There is less phase shifts using a 1st order without the autotransformer and this may be a big part of what I like better. ALK's website is where I first heard about the LaScala low point reaching to 700hz and I decided to experiment some and liked what I heard. I know Al is a controversial figure around here but some of his advice about Klipsch is sound. He prefers a 6000hz crossover point as sounding best of which I disagree with my speakers in my room. The K400 horn was designed around the Khorn bass response of 400hz which I feel is compromised somewhat for the LaScala. Maybe this is the reason others like some of the aftermarket horn offers.

Perhaps one of the readers here who has the raw response curve of the LaScala bass bin will post it here. I simply cannot find mine. I do however believe that the simulation posted is a good estimation of reality. So far as I am aware there is no way the LaScala bass horn is good to anywhere near 700Hz. The Khorn does not make it well to 350Hz that was the impetus behind the Jubilee horn design because Paul always intended for the Khorn to be a two way design and that could not happen with out a wider response from the bass horn. Being able to crossover lower is a benefit not a detriment the trade of is you need a larger mid horn to play low enough to match up to the bass bin. Klipsch were not willing to use a larger mid horn than the K400, that was and is still their call.

Perhaps Bob Crites or DJK have a copy of the LaScala bass bin raw response and will post. I spent a long time looking for a horn of about (LaScala) this size that had better extension than the LaScala does and the Beck California is the very best that I ever found the next best horn is the University Classic. If you can stretch your mid horn response out close to 6K then the tweeter only has to reproduce harmonics and the mid horn then stands alone as the real primary transducer of the most important mid range which as Paul said "is where we live".

[Groomlakearea51]

Had several pairs; still have one pair of LS-I's; for my ears, room configuration and use, I still believe that the A-4500 (Crites design for older K-Horn's) still works the best (for me...). Then again, I use McIntosh amps. I also have an old pair of Belles with the same setup. In both cases, the old bass drivers were replaced with Crites' CW's and the tweeters are CT-125's. Mids are still the K-55's, albeit, new.

[ClaudeJ1]

Note the 7dB cut around 140hz (horn), about 7dB cut around 60hz or so (room), about 5dB boost around 28hz.

 

The 7 db cut is what Roy had set up with the LS II cabinet in the chamber down in Hope. It's still only a horn for  2 1/2 feet or so compared to 5 1/2 or 6 for Quarter Pie and MWM respctively. The Khorn is about 8 feet when it's tight in a corner, which is why it makes down to almost 35 Hz. The Jubilee is about 5.5 feet so it's better than a LaScala out of a corner and better than a Khorn in a corner where is counts.

 

Progressively below 104 Hz., a LaScala is not a horn but a direct radiator in a sealed cabinet. It still puts out sound, but is far below the peak output at 140 hz. LaScalas need a Tuba or F-20 sub to get real bass, unless you follow the lead of DJK with bass reflex, but I prefer all horns. 

[ClaudeJ1]

I reached out to ClaudeJ1 to get his opinion. I am curious what his findings are. It is certainly not a problem for me to cross my lows lower if they would sound better. I am using a 1st order cross which is almost as much acoustical as electronic. Using a steeper crossover network would matter much more on where the crossover point should be. 

I'm assuming you are using a K-55 driver, which is a very rugged small driver that responds even below 200 Hz. The driver rolls off steeply at 6 Khz. and the horn acts like an acoustical high pass filter below 400 Hz. The LaScala begins to roll off at 400 Hz. with the 2.5 mH choke. The slopes are gentle, so there is an acceptable blend. However, I have found the K-43 and the Eminence Kappa 15C to have a much more detailed midrange response near 400 Hz while thinning out the bass below 100 Hz, as shown in my old screen shot using Hornresp and posted by Moray James a few posts back,  since those drivers do not resonate as much as a K-33 down there. I still recommend Bill Fitzmaurice's Tuba subs or Lil Mike's f-20 with a LaScala to get any impactful LOW bass.

 

Otherwise, I think a LaScala has better phase response at 400 Hz. with a AA network than a Khorn since the back of the mid driver is a lot closer to the woofer, which helps the frequency response also. IOW, it ALL adds up!

Edited January 31, 2016 by ClaudeJ1