Moderators Travis In Austin Posted May 2, 2018 Moderators Share Posted May 2, 2018 14 hours ago, richieb said: -- I'm not so sure a 1502 is yet available - ? It was rumor a year ago -- . And don't kid yourself it will be Big as the 1802 is Huge. Standing next to the 1802 tells the tale -- --- and did I mention Heavy - 330 lbs. Don't forget 31" wide, measure every door. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
richieb Posted May 2, 2018 Share Posted May 2, 2018 8 minutes ago, dwilawyer said: Don't forget 31" wide, measure every door. --- yep- that is one Big Boy --! What would be in a sweet spot is a 1202 but I'm guessing with little need in the cinema market its highly unlikely. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Travis In Austin Posted May 2, 2018 Moderators Share Posted May 2, 2018 18 minutes ago, Chris A said: It seems that corporations always move in mysterious ways. Perhaps a DIY version is needed in the mean time from someone with a little time on their hands? And I believe that a little more form factor squeezing of the 1502 might also be worthwhile. They are still very large. I'm not personally interested in a 1502-sized subwoofer since I have no room for cabinets of that size and/or form factor because I simply have no where to put them. I also don't need any more projects than I've already got presently. But I assume that there are a few people that frequent this forum that might like to own one (or two). @CECAA850? @jwc? Just a little Hornresp work would be needed to verify the fine dimensions/expansion pathways. That would likely be minimal in terms of time spent (@Edgar?) Chris It's patented. @CECAA850 or @jwc or @Edgar don't want to be getting a letter and having to respond to the firm of Indiano and McConnell. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
babadono Posted May 2, 2018 Author Share Posted May 2, 2018 14 hours ago, Chris A said: I run two TH subs on the bottom end of my Jubs, so the settings you have are really set up to let the subs carry the load below ~40 Hz. Until you have a PC to run REW, you can add a 4-6 dB boost at 31 Hz with 0.33 octave bandwidth. This PEQ will likely be very close. Chris Thanks Chris. I did not want to bother you until I get the laptop. I have just been turning all the bass up with a low shelf filter on my mixer. i have control of the freq and amplitude of the shelf. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris A Posted May 2, 2018 Share Posted May 2, 2018 Yes, but DIY? That's legal thinking only (as I would expect a lawyer to reply--no offense, Travis) The objective is to get Klipsch to produce them, not to make money. One way to do that within a corporate environment is to prove that there's a market for them in DIY quantities. Tom Danley permits DIY to one's heart's delight on everything that he's patented (which is a lot of stuff). I think that Klipsch isn't in the business of punishing its customers, is it? I actually don't believe that there are any issues with trying your hand at a home project, even though the standard legal answer is "you can't do that"... Chris 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
babadono Posted May 2, 2018 Author Share Posted May 2, 2018 Oh and BTW I will gladly try out an 1802 or 1502 if anyone wants to send me one. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
richieb Posted May 2, 2018 Share Posted May 2, 2018 9 minutes ago, dwilawyer said: It's patented. @CECAA850 or @jwc or @Edgar don't want to be getting a letter and having to respond to the firm of Indiano and McConnell. -- I put my trust in the firm of Dowey, Cheatum and Howe -- . An out of court settlement is recommended -- 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CECAA850 Posted May 2, 2018 Share Posted May 2, 2018 If plans were available and it WASN'T illegal, I'd certainly build one. I still don't understand why Roy used a cluster of small ports as opposed to one big one even after he explained it. I'm assuming they act differently than a single port of the same volume. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Travis In Austin Posted May 2, 2018 Moderators Share Posted May 2, 2018 I don't speak for KGI. They have a Communication Department headed by a very nice person, Jill. They have a General Counsel and a lead-pipe wielding patent litigation firm. It is illegal to copy something that is patented. You do not need to intend to sell it. You do not have to show lost profits. The very act of copying a patented product is infringement. A patent holder can lose a patent if they have knowledge it is being infringed and they don't seek to protect it. Tom Danley is a 12 man, maybe $5 million company. He is accountable only to himself. KGI is a 400 employee approximately $250 million company that is a wholly owned subsidiary of a publicly traded company that is owned by stockholders. KGI is accountable to the Board of Directors of Voxx, and ultimately to its stockholders. As a practical matter, if you built something, didn't post pictures of it all over the internet, no one is going to know, including the patent holder. Edit (hit send to soon): Now how this would probably work in the real world with JC and Carl is, like others have done in the past, is they would do the right thing and ask Roy "hey, I cannot put a 1802 in my house, would you mind if I made a scaled down version of it." They would do this, and JC has actually done this, because they are decent, well raised, and respectful people. Roy would tell them what he could or couldn't do to help them. They want to keep the people in Hope busy, they want the plant to flourish wherever they can and they buy from the factory if it is available. JC could make a pair of Jubilee bass bins with his eyes closed, he has always said that he buys them from the factory because they are a product currently for sale by KGI. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris A Posted May 2, 2018 Share Posted May 2, 2018 18 minutes ago, CECAA850 said: I still don't understand why Roy used a cluster of small ports as opposed to one big one even after he explained it. I'm assuming they act differently than a single port of the same volume. You're trying to kill off those harmonic and other distortions in the pressurized horn area of the design. The ratio of the port area to its length may be a factor--it's a collection of tuned ports in parallel and they must act as a resonator with tuned properties vis-a-vis the back chamber of the woofer (a Helmholtz resonator, in fact, like blowing across a coke bottle to make it resonate). The smaller ports can also cut down on higher order modes (HOMs) of the tube ports, leading to much higher frequencies before beginning HOM turn-on and exiting the tubes into the horn's throat and thereby be amplified by that physical process (something that's undesirable). It also might perform better in terms of the back pressure into the ports going in the wrong direction-breaking up the pressure returning reflections from the throat of the horn back into the ports, then into the back chamber of the woofer. That's called "impedance bounces". It also might be cheaper to use multiple smaller tubes than one larger one... Chris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark1101 Posted May 2, 2018 Share Posted May 2, 2018 Those are some sweet looking Jubs. Congrats. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris A Posted May 2, 2018 Share Posted May 2, 2018 I might point out that Danley's Synergy and Unity horns have been using reflex ports along the horn's aperture for about 20 years now. That's the same thing physically. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Travis In Austin Posted May 2, 2018 Moderators Share Posted May 2, 2018 21 minutes ago, CECAA850 said: If plans were available and it WASN'T illegal, I'd certainly build one. I still don't understand why Roy used a cluster of small ports as opposed to one big one even after he explained it. I'm assuming they act differently than a single port of the same volume. It is illegal. It's unethical. It's immoral, and by gosh, it's downright un-American. People can rationalize doing it any way they want to. Putting all of that aside, simply ask Roy in a couple of weeks when you have him cornered if he can share whether/when a 1502 will be available and you know he will tell you if he can. If it a long ways off ask him if he can help you build something scaled down. If he can, he will (if he likes you and you are not too big a bonehead), if he can't, he can't and he will say so. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CECAA850 Posted May 2, 2018 Share Posted May 2, 2018 4 minutes ago, dwilawyer said: (if he likes you and you are not too big a bonehead I'm doomed 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CECAA850 Posted May 2, 2018 Share Posted May 2, 2018 6 minutes ago, dwilawyer said: ask him if he can help you build something scaled down A 1202 would be cool. I have just the place for it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Travis In Austin Posted May 2, 2018 Moderators Share Posted May 2, 2018 4 minutes ago, Chris A said: I might point out that Danley's Synergy and Unity horns have been using reflex ports along the horn's aperture for about 20 years now. That's the same thing physically. Well great, so you are offering to pay for a patent attorney (at $700 an hour) for anyone who followed your "advice" to explain to McConnell how it's not really infringement because of this guy Chris on the Forum says they really the "same thing." You would probably be named as a defendant anyway for suggesting it in the first place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Travis In Austin Posted May 2, 2018 Moderators Share Posted May 2, 2018 4 minutes ago, CECAA850 said: I'm doomed LOL Well, a wig might help. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris A Posted May 2, 2018 Share Posted May 2, 2018 By the way, this patent has run out, according to the priority date. In any case, it's over next year: https://patents.google.com/patent/US5898138 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CECAA850 Posted May 2, 2018 Share Posted May 2, 2018 Just now, dwilawyer said: Well, a wig might help. Maybe a couple martinis. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris A Posted May 2, 2018 Share Posted May 2, 2018 You could also just use another woofer and be done with it. The added cost is ~$80-$120. Next year, you could take out the woofer and put in ports without legal interference. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.