Cornwall IV's in a Great Room

[ODS123]

On 6/5/2021 at 7:26 AM, Audible Nectar said:

I think it's proper and accurate to say that there are a lot of aspects of brand new, latest engineered Cornwall IV's that are very much desirable. But the statement/idea that refreshed Cornwall I or II aren't "In the same area code" is WAYYYYYYYYYYY over the top, and is an engagement of sales puffery that belies evidence. 

 

Agreed.  Overblown statements like that are sadly too common in this hobby.  One of my favorites is "My ears bleed when I hear klipsch Heresy's with a Pioneer receiver."   Sigh...

 

On 6/5/2021 at 3:02 PM, Shakeydeal said:

The earlier Cornwalls had a boxy resonance that once you heard it, you couldn’t unhear it. That is completely absent in the latest version. And as much fun as a pair of Cornwall IIs are, they don’t have the resolution and inner detail f the CW IV.

 

I can't speak to the II's, but the III's do NOT have any audible resonances that I or anyone who has heard my system has heard.  .Just like the IV's, the III's are braced with 2 2x4's drilled into place through the baffle and backboard right into the end-grain of the 2x4' - which is a rather crude, though effective, form of bracing.  Both the III and IV's sound rather hollow when you knock on them when compared with just about EVERY other speaker in their price range. ..So if you subscribe to the "knuckle rap" test as a meaningful way of assessing speaker cabinet integrity, then you should avoid ALL Klipsch speakers b/c they all suck in this regard.  They sound like shoe boxes when you knock on them.   But what matters is that resonances aren't audible when playing music.  

 

You do realize that the III's were engineered by many of the same people using the same Klipsch anechoic chamber and same design principals.  I realize "huge" advancements are claimed for the IV's, but that's to be expected.  ..It happens EVERY time a new edition of a product is introduced.  But having heard them - they sound pretty much the same.  ..Which is to be expected.  It's not like Klipsch was stupid then, but brilliant now.

[Shakeydeal]

1 hour ago, ODS123 said:

 

Agreed.  Overblown statements like that are sadly too common in this hobby.  One of my favorites is "My ears bleed when I hear klipsch Heresy's with a Pioneer receiver."   Sigh...

 

 

I can't speak to the II's, but the III's do NOT have any audible resonances that I or anyone who has heard my system has heard.  .Just like the IV's, the III's are braced with 2 2x4's drilled into place through the baffle and backboard right into the end-grain of the 2x4' - which is a rather crude, though effective, form of bracing.  Both the III and IV's sound rather hollow when you knock on them when compared with just about EVERY other speaker in their price range. ..So if you subscribe to the "knuckle rap" test as a meaningful way of assessing speaker cabinet integrity, then you should avoid ALL Klipsch speakers b/c they all suck in this regard.  They sound like shoe boxes when you knock on them.   But what matters is that resonances aren't audible when playing music.  

 

You do realize that the III's were engineered by many of the same people using the same Klipsch anechoic chamber and same design principals.  I realize "huge" advancements are claimed for the IV's, but that's to be expected.  ..It happens EVERY time a new edition of a product is introduced.  But having heard them - they sound pretty much the same.  ..Which is to be expected.  It's not like Klipsch was stupid then, but brilliant now.

 

I have not heard the IIIs, only the Is and IIs. So don't put words in my mouth. I was only talking about versions before the III. That said, I suspect the bigger midrange horn and cabinet bracing make a substantial improvement in the IVs vs the IIIs. Hard to imagine this not being true.

 

 

[ODS123]

18 minutes ago, Shakeydeal said:

I have not heard the IIIs, only the Is and IIs. So don't put words in my mouth. I was only talking about versions before the III. That said, I suspect the bigger midrange horn and cabinet bracing make a substantial improvement in the IVs vs the IIIs. Hard to imagine this not being true.

 

I've heard both.  ..No, the difference is NOT substantial - despite the larger horn.  I wouldn't be surprised if people struggled to tell them apart in a blinded comparison.  

 

And as I said, the bracing is essentially the same as the III's.

[mikebse2a3]

2 hours ago, ODS123 said:

I've heard both.  ..No, the difference is NOT substantial - despite the larger horn.  I wouldn't be surprised if people struggled to tell them apart in a blinded comparison.  

 

And as I said, the bracing is essentially the same as the III's.

 

The resonance/masking effect observed in the Cornwall III has been significantly reduced in the Cornwall IV design and has nothing to do with the mechanical cabinet bracing/panel resonances. The resonance observed in the Cornwall III is cabinet modal resonances (think room modes) and Roy has greatly reduced this in the Cornwall IV design.

 

 

My observations along with others during well controlled comparisons during the Chief Bonehead Class are here for anyone interested.

miketn

 

 

[Deang]

8 hours ago, ODS123 said:

I wouldn't be surprised if people struggled to tell them apart in a blinded comparison.

Lol. Okay. 

[Shakeydeal]

8 minutes ago, Deang said:

Lol. Okay. 

Keep in mind, that was spoken by a guy who thinks all amps sound the same.

[Deang]

Unless they need an amp recommendation, then it’s McIntosh or Accuphase.