Klipsch Crossover on Valerie LB

[WMcD]

There is a discussion going on using a less sensitive tweeter in a CW and what if anything can be done.

 

For the sake of technical info, I point out one of the patents on the Valerie - LB speaker.

 

By way of background.  It appears that Klipsch submitted a single patent application on the structure of the system and the crossover.  But the USPTO considered these to be two distinct subjects and required a "division."  In a case like this the inventor does not lose rights by putting too much in one application, he just has to pursue two distinct inventions. 

 

However, the patent issued in the "specification" is based on the application, we get two patent documents which are similar except for the title and the claim structure.

 

Here, we have a patent on the crossover as a division of the application.  There is another on the horn structure.

 

We see that the midrange circuit is such that there is some peaking of the output at the edges of the bandpass.  Yeah, this is possible.

 

More to the point is that an autotransformer (step up configuration) is used to increase the drive to the tweeter (probably a K-77) which is less sensitive than the other horns.  This is the opposite way of what we typically see that an autotransformer is used to step down voltage.

 

Edit:  It appears to me the midrange horn is a K-500 as in the Belle.  We also see that the optimal throat for the K-33 is 78 square inches,  There is no 3" x 13" restrictor plate used as is used on the K-Horn, LS, and Belle.

 

WMcD

 

 

 

 

USP ' 340.pdf

[IB Slammin]

1 hour ago, WMcD said:

There is a discussion going on using a less sensitive tweeter in a CW and what if anything can be done.

 

For the sake of technical info, I point out one of the patents on the Valerie - LB speaker.

 

By way of background.  It appears that Klipsch submitted a single patent application on the structure of the system and the crossover.  But the USPTO considered these to be two distinct subjects and required a "division."  In a case like this the inventor does not lose rights by putting too much in one application, he just has to pursue two distinct inventions. 

 

However, the patent issued in the "specification" is based on the application, we get two patent documents which are similar except for the title and the claim structure.

 

Here, we have a patent on the crossover as a division of the application.  There is another on the horn structure.

 

We see that the midrange circuit is such that there is some peaking of the output at the edges of the bandpass.  Yeah, this is possible.

 

More to the point is that an autotransformer (step up configuration) is used to increase the drive to the tweeter (probably a K-77) which is less sensitive than the other horns.  This is the opposite way of what we typically see that an autotransformer is used to step down voltage.

 

WMcD

 

 

 

 

USP ' 340.pdf

 

Good stuff.