Jump to content
The Klipsch Audio Community

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, mikebse2a3 said:

 

Instead of assumptions, speculations and declarations why didn’t some of you just ask Roy to share information about the design changes...? 

 

Wouldn’t this have been a much better thread if instead some would have asked.......

 

   “Hey Roy would you tell us please what the many changes in the Cornwall IV have achieved by your Measurements Data and how does that correlate to what we may expect to experience when we have a chance to actually listen to the new design.”

 

miketn 

He can't, @Chief bonehead is under exclusive contract to the Museum and is strictly forbidden from answering such a well formed question until AFTER the Bonehead gives his class. Kind of like baseball players only signing one brand of card.

 

First we have to know why Paul did what he did; and then we get to learn how that leads Roy to do what he does.  At least that what the Playbill says.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/9/2019 at 3:49 AM, mustang_flht said:

Here are the first images of the presentation of the Cornwall IV at the Rocky Mountain Audio Fest of Denver, but also Heresy with the new tweeter...

 

dyjr.jpg

 

 

 

 

 

 

I have not heard these yet, but logic leads me to think that the upgrades are worthwhile improvements, and if Chief bonehead says they sound better, then I believe that they sound better.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, moray james said:

The resonance of the box does not have to escape through the vent it radiates at very many time the active surface area of the woofer via the un braced cabinet walls. The boom/distortion you hear is the box panels resonating and all that radiation is distortion. A woofer cabinet can radiate more noise than the woofer in that cabinet outputs itself. Box talk is a serious problem and the solution is to stiffen the box so that its first structural resonant mode is placed above the pass band of the woofer in the box. How you stiffen the box is up to the designer to choose but brace work is generally the least expensive method.

   You are correct in that port size (in a vented design) and brace work will together go a long way to improving matters. Without brace work a box can only resonate, the only exception being very small cabinets using rigid wall materials.

Agreed, my assumption (maybe wrong) is that the structural issues of the CW IV should have been mitigated.  A large paneled box with limited bracing will sound just like that, a box.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, dwilawyer said:

He can't, @Chief bonehead is under exclusive contract to the Museum and is strictly forbidden from answering such a well formed question until AFTER the Bonehead gives his class. Kind of like baseball players only signing one brand of card.

 

First we have to know why Paul did what he did; and then we get to learn how that leads Roy to do what he does.  At least that what the Playbill says.

If we got answers, there wouldn't be a thread.   What fun is that.

 

What was that commercial with "Anticipation" :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Marvel said:

I totally disliked the box boominess in the older models...

I totally agree. I had CWIII for a few months. The hump/coloration/resonance it had interfered with the midrange resolution.  Things became blurred and wooly compared to either my Forte I or Forte II, or even my Heresy III speakers.   I do not trust the CWIV will be much better in this area if it is not braced to address this issue. It probably will not be as I think there are far more Cornwall lovers than detractors.   I think some people like that resonance because it gives the illusion of a BIG sound.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, kink56 said:

I totally agree. I had CWIII for a few months. The hump/coloration/resonance it had interfered with the midrange resolution.  Things became blurred and wooly compared to either my Forte I or Forte II, or even my Heresy III speakers.   I do not trust the CWIV will be much better in this area if it is not braced to address this issue. It probably will not be as I think there are far more Cornwall lovers than detractors.   I think some people like that resonance because it gives the illusion of a BIG sound.

Bingo!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, kink56 said:

I totally agree. I had CWIII for a few months. The hump/coloration/resonance it had interfered with the midrange resolution.  Things became blurred and wooly compared to either my Forte I or Forte II, or even my Heresy III speakers.   I do not trust the CWIV will be much better in this area if it is not braced to address this issue. It probably will not be as I think there are far more Cornwall lovers than detractors.   I think some people like that resonance because it gives the illusion of a BIG sound.

I agree with this statement so much it is worth repeating a third time. This is why I am a proponent for developing a Chorus III. Now I would like to hear thoughts on baffle diffraction and edge diffraction in a large box. My 30 year old JBL 250Ti solve those cabinet diffraction issues, are internaly braced and filled, and look good all at the same time. The only thing getting in the way of utilizing these well known solutions to well know issues, that I can come up with, is cost and profit margin. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/10/2019 at 4:28 PM, HDBRbuilder said:

ABSOLUTELY NOBODY IN HISTORY can beat the Brit cal .303 Lee-Enfield rifles model designations in confusing anybody...I think they INVENTED confusing designations, even to the point of RE-DESIGNATING specific models more than once!!  The Brits even have Harley-Davidson's "alphabet soup" model designations beat hands-down!! 

 

Actually I never said they were "confusing," you did. I used the Canon example for the Mark XX system because once a basic product family name has been established, the Roman Numerals are a simple and easy way to differentiate the evolutionary nature of the product, whatever it may be.

 

Even without hearing them, and knowing the Chief well enough, the new Cornwall and Heresy models, I'm sure, sound better than the prior generations. I just wanted the credit to go the the horns, drivers, and Xovers, much more than the darn flared ports, and I'm pretty sure I'm right about their relatively small contribution to the sound of a new Cornwall, base on MY experience.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/10/2019 at 3:15 PM, HDBRbuilder said:

I look forward to hearing both the new Cornwall IV along with the Heresy IV, myself!  But for some others, it seems they have already decided upon things without ever even hearing them, yet.  As usual, the modifications freaks are already planning their mods, it seems.  So far, though, nobody has mentioned liberal application of dynamat to all of the box panel interior surfaces...but I'm sure that is coming soon! 😉

Ah yes, another statement, dripping with sarcasm, are we?

 

I'm sure the new speakers sound better than the older models, even without hearing them, I'm confident in the Chief's abilities as you all should be. That was never a question.

 

My only point, which had been blown out of proportion was about the flared ports being more "pretty" than functional. There may have been some other box mods that improved the sound that I'm not aware of, but that was beyond the scope of my original text. The new Cornwalls also LOOK cooler with all the upgrades including the ports, but then again, I repeat myself, I repeat myself.....................so I'm not misquoted by the incomplete readers out there.

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Khornukopia said:

 

I have not heard these yet, but logic leads me to think that the upgrades are worthwhile improvements, and if Chief bonehead says they sound better, then I believe that they sound better.

Amen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/9/2019 at 7:19 PM, geoff. said:

The Cornwall is the Corvette of speakers.

 

An American classic that has stood the test of time and just keeps getting better.

 

Way to go!

I thought the Khorn was the Corvette, and the Cornwall was the Camaro!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, 314carpenter said:

I agree with this statement so much it is worth repeating a third time. This is why I am a proponent for developing a Chorus III. Now I would like to hear thoughts on baffle diffraction and edge diffraction in a large box. My 30 year old JBL 250Ti solve those cabinet diffraction issues, are internaly braced and filled, and look good all at the same time. The only thing getting in the way of utilizing these well known solutions to well know issues, that I can come up with, is cost and profit margin. 

Actually it is the box not the diffraction.  Box needs to be massively braced due to the large panel sizes.  In actuality, width of the board the woofer is on needs to be as big as possible to reduce baffle step issues.  One thing that is somewhat compensated for by putting the woofer closer to the floor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, ClaudeJ1 said:

Actually I never said they were "confusing," you did. I used the Canon example for the Mark XX system because once a basic product family name has been established, the Roman Numerals are a simple and easy way to differentiate the evolutionary nature of the product, whatever it may be.

 

Even without hearing them, and knowing the Chief well enough, the new Cornwall and Heresy models, I'm sure, sound better than the prior generations. I just wanted the credit to go the the horns, drivers, and Xovers, much more than the darn flared ports, and I'm pretty sure I'm right about their relatively small contribution to the sound of a new Cornwall, base on MY experience.

What I wrote was never directed at YOU...just a general statement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, ClaudeJ1 said:

Ah yes, another statement, dripping with sarcasm, are we?

 

I'm sure the new speakers sound better than the older models, even without hearing them, I'm confident in the Chief's abilities as you all should be. That was never a question.

 

My only point, which had been blown out of proportion was about the flared ports being more "pretty" than functional. There may have been some other box mods that improved the sound that I'm not aware of, but that was beyond the scope of my original text. The new Cornwalls also LOOK cooler with all the upgrades including the ports, but then again, I repeat myself, I repeat myself.....................so I'm not misquoted by the incomplete readers out there.

 

 

You're on a real roll today, aren't you?  Again, you misunderstand and feel statements of a general nature are directed at YOU??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, HDBRbuilder said:

You're on a real roll today, aren't you?  Again, you misunderstand and feel statements of a general nature are directed at YOU??

Nah, just being sarcastic myself. No offense meant if one taken.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/12/2019 at 12:32 PM, Khornukopia said:

Just looking at pictures of the new Cornwall IV makes me happy.

Yes, me too that mid horn was long overdue maybe patience will have paid off with all the other advancements that seem fairly new?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It looks and sounds as if the new Cornwall IV is a major improvement. A couple of thoughts come to mind:

 

First, given the relatively high distortion generated by tuned port vs. horn loaded bass in the lower end, it’s curious that the cross to midrange is still kept relatively high in the new Cornwall IV. As an owner of Cornwall I’s with solder lug K-55’s and B2 crossover design, it would be interesting first and foremost to see a distortion comparison between the two from say 30hz to 800hz. 

 

Second,  does the introduction of the new mumps tractrix midrange on the Cornwall IV in addition to the Forte III, implicitly confirm the obsolescence of the k-400 to k-700 series of exponential horns?

 

Lastly, given the new bass porting and midrange horn, is the new Cornwall IV now getting close to, or better than, the Lascala and Klipschorn in midrange clarity, and significantly closer to their bass distortion performance? Paul Klipsch used to market the smaller Heritage speakers as 2/3 Klipschorn. Are we now being offered, say, 8/10th’s at half the price?

 

Looks like another great job by Roy and the Klipsch organization.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BeFuddledinMn said:

"Second,  does the introduction of the new mumps tractrix midrange on the Cornwall IV in addition to the Forte III, implicitly confirm the obsolescence of the k-400 to k-700 series of exponential horns?"

 

The K400/401 was sized to fit in the existing top hat of K-horn (sized to fit the original K-5 series). Everyone agrees that the K401 is too small. To change it to a larger horn would require making the top hat significantly bigger, which would change the proportions of the Klipschorn. It seems that Klipsch was not willing to do that. As far as "obsolescence" goes, Klipsch has been moving to tractrix for a while in other products. So, yeah the rest of the exponential horns are being slowly obsoleted, but the proportions of the Klipschorn seem to restrict that system to the K-401 for the foreseeable future. I don't know what kind of crossover design Roy used to tame the K55/401, but from Stereophile's review, which of course was botched, it looks less jagged than the response Heyser measured in 1982. Of course, it is risky to compare measurements between two different set-ups seperated by 37 years of time. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/10/2019 at 3:28 PM, HDBRbuilder said:

ABSOLUTELY NOBODY IN HISTORY can beat the Brit cal .303 Lee-Enfield rifles model designations in confusing anybody...I think they INVENTED confusing designations, even to the point of RE-DESIGNATING specific models more than once!!  The Brits even have Harley-Davidson's "alphabet soup" model designations beat hands-down!! 

 

My favorite is the Lee Enfield No. 4 MK1 which I shoot in the CMP matches.  But back to the CW4, I would love to hear an A-B with the CW1 (and with the Forte III).  I was never too keen on the CW3 mid horn.  I suspect the CW4 will be considerably smoother than the predicate models as you crank 'em up loud.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...