Cornwall 3 vs Cornwall 4 impression

[Shakeydeal]

I’m surprised to hear that the Chorus had better bass. Maybe the Chorus II. My son had a pair of original Chorus and he always commented that the bass was lacking in comparison with his Forte III. Very interesting.

[Flevoman]

The same for me, I didn't expect it either 

[mikebse2a3]

3 hours ago, Shakeydeal said:

I’m surprised to hear that the Chorus had better bass. Maybe the Chorus II. My son had a pair of original Chorus and he always commented that the bass was lacking in comparison with his Forte III. Very interesting.

 

I’m surprised as well.  I had owned the original Chorus and always experienced that the original Forte was more extended in the low end and I also perceived the Forte as better balanced. 

 

miketn

[billybob]

Guess it still comes back to break-in of the 4s.

Chorus with the k-48 does have good bass. ☕

[mikebse2a3]

7 hours ago, mustang_flht said:

You have seen what many CWIV users say: lacks a bit of bass and very good mids.

 

I wouldn’t state it as the CWlV lacks bass since there appear to be many more reports of plenty of bass from the CWlV.  Maybe it would be more accurate to say in some listening rooms some users report the CWlV lacks a bit of bass.

 

When it comes to typical sized listening/living rooms perceived frequencies below ~300Hz can be heavily altered by the room’s acoustics and it often swamps the smooth and balanced response of an otherwise excellent loudspeaker.

 

miketn

[mikebse2a3]

18 hours ago, Flevoman said:

Sure... But it was a short comparison, Not done in an audiophile perfect  correct way. I played 8 different songs in total. After the song was complete I switched from speakers, then the first speaker set is completely pushed aside and the other set placed in exactly the same place. 

Reconnect the cables to the new speakerset, and listen. 

 

On the picture you can see where the CW4 is placed. This was the position for both speakersets. 

But it was just a message, not a question for help 

 

 

Thanks for the picture and certainly we would have a more complete understanding of your room/setup conditions if you included pictures of the rest of the room. I also understand if you would rather not share for privacy reasons.

 

I do see from your first post that your room/setup is probably much larger than the typical listening room many have. 12m x 5.5m (39.37ft x 18ft) and I didn’t see stated the ceiling height/details but I assume it has a volume of over 5669 cubic feet (estimated by using a ceiling height of 8ft) or more if the ceiling is taller or vaulted. Also if large openings to other rooms or open concept style then even more volume would be involved acoustically speaking.

 

Basically I guess it just reaffirms what should be well understood that the perceived response/balance of any loudspeaker will be influenced by the size, shape, construction material and furnishing in the room as well as the loudspeakers placement in the room and its good to have your experience based on the context of your unique room/setup with the CWlV added to the many others we have seen.

 

miketn

[OO1]

@FlevomanYou want punchy bass in any speaker ,you must  have a powerful amp  ,  and the same for a  CW IV .

[Idontknow]

18 hours ago, Flevoman said:

This was a quick and first impression.

If someone is bathed in a serious comparison, let me know. It's going to take me some time but I'll do that in a weekend. 

 

They are more similar to each other than different. 

If I ask my girlfriend blindfolded to pick the latest speaker (CW4) she would have no idea. 

What I did hear was that the Chorus had slightly more bass (I was surprised) but also a more pleasing bass. More punch/tight. Difference was slightly but noticeable. With the mids the CW4 was more neutral. More easy to listen. Chorus was slightly sounding like a horn (again, slightly..) and could be with some songs a bit sharp with the midhorn. With a dull sounding song this could give the song some more bite, what was more pleasing for me. But other songs could sound a bit to sharp. I can understand that some like the mids from the CW4 better with these songs . I had the feeling that the CW4 was better with creating a soundstage, more was happening between the speakers (would have to check this better to be sure) For me the Chorus won with the bass, the CW4 with his midhorn... But again, They were very similar as speakers, certainly no day and night difference, and surtenly not " the CW4 smokes the Cornwall", etc 

 

 

You did a constructive short review and I really respect and appreciated the comments you provided, particularly because you also explained how it depended on the kind of music being played which is often what creates much of the confusion and differences in opinions. I often prefer to know what people are listening to first before I even bother asking their opinion on a speaker. The comments you made regarding the bass and mid horn are spot on with my impressions as well which I commented on in my Forte 1 video that was nearly 30 minutes long, particularly with regard to the midrange horn as well.  

 

In my case, I was actually not surprised regarding your comments on the bass because I recently spent an afternoon with the Cornwall 1 which used the vertical horn and grills that can not be removed.  I did tons of research on this mid range design but there were noticeable differences with the Cornwall's bass compared to the Forte 1. The way the bass projects itself would also be dependant on how or where the speaker was placed IMO so comments regarding others having a different experience regarding bass may have something to do with how their speaker was placed at the time of their listening experiences. 

 

I'm guessing that the newer CW IV midrange being neutral has something to do with the new, shallow shape of the mid horn. I had this same experience with the Forte 3's new midrange horn design which I didn't care for as much because it just seemed like the sound of the horns with jazz music were getting lost out in space more and less coherent. Perhaps the newer horn is better for more genres of music, however, for jazz which is most of what I listen to, I tend to struggle with the newer midrange designs on all the newer IV series. Imagine if the horn of a trumpet was opened up more. If it were opened more without proportionately making it deeper like the LaScala's horn for example, then the coherency would get lost and dispersed outward more. It certainly makes the horn look much nicer, but there has to be trade-offs that listeners ultimately have to decide on. 

 

I believe that this same effect is why you find the mid horn on the CW IV to be more neutral and maybe that's better as a general purpose speaker for some. Obviously many others seem to like the new IV but the issue I have with most reviews is the lack of information at describing what those differences are that led them to that conclusion. You didn't do that in your review but isn't it amazing how much the new IV series cost compared to the older speakers which are a half to a third the cost and even you are surprised at how little their differences were. 

 

When I compared my Heresy II to the newer Heresy IV, I was shocked at how much lower the volume sounded with the Heresy IV. I mostly use single ended tube amps with just a few watts, so I want every bit of efficiency I can get. At this point, I'm wondering if the more shallow shape of the Heresy IV's vs II mid horn is what caused that difference. Think about it more a minute. If a person was trying to yell at someone in the distance and didn't cup their hands around their mouth, then their voice wouldn't project out as easily. 

 

Put on a pair of earbuds or headsets and listen to the way the voices project out on the Heresy IV vs the Forte IV which has an even more spread out mid horn than the Heresy IV. If you listen carefully, you will notice that the Forte IV has beautiful detail BUT sounds more recessed or in the background more. This is most likely happening because the horn is spreading the sound out more and losing coherency. Steve Huff later admitted in a follow up video the exact same thing. He even said this himself. He described the Forte IV as a jack of all trades speaker. For jazz, I struggled with the newer Heritage lines which is precisely why I went with the Forte 1 over any of the other Forte's. It has the deepest bass of them all at low volume plus it has the traditional horn shaped midrange I prefer for jazz. 

 

I'm okay with a bigger horn, but IMO, the depth of the horn needs to be proportionate to the width which is why I think the LaScala and K-horn project so beautifully by comparison to anything.  I'm cool with a bigger horn, but I think it needs to remain deeper. I think klipch is doing a good job on the newer IV for general purpose. Softer top end and in theory less of a horn sound by opening up the midrange mouth more. Maybe that's better for most. 

 

Klipsch Forte IV, Heresy IV, LaScala AL5 - Sound Demos #1

 

Klipsch Forte IV, Heresy IV, LaScala AL5 - Sound Demos #1

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Flevoman]

@billybob I don't know.. 120+ hours of playtime now, I will be surprised if the speaker will change that much with more break in time. But who knows, more punchy/tighter bass would be welcome.

 

@mikebse2a3and no, no problem with sharing a picture of the room. Nothing special to see and this can give an idea of the room and acoustic perhaps 

 

Behind me is the kitchen, but I don't think this will effect the acoustic in any way 

[billybob]

Well, I have nothing but time for you to decide on the bass in the near future. Member's like *Shakeydeal don't make flippant comments about Klipsch Cornwall 4s... 

Enjoy...I would!

[Flevoman]

1 hour ago, Idontknow said:

 

 

You did a constructive short review and I really respect and appreciated the comments you provided, particularly because you also explained how it depended on the kind of music being played which is often what creates much of the confusion and differences in opinions. I often prefer to know what people are listening to first before I even bother asking their opinion on a speaker. The comments you made regarding the bass and mid horn are spot on with my impressions as well which I commented on in my Forte 1 video that was nearly 30 minutes long, particularly with regard to the midrange horn as well.  

 

In my case, I was actually not surprised regarding your comments on the bass because I recently spent an afternoon with the Cornwall 1 which used the vertical horn and grills that can not be removed.  I did tons of research on this mid range design but there were noticeable differences with the Cornwall's bass compared to the Forte 1. The way the bass projects itself would also be dependant on how or where the speaker was placed IMO so comments regarding others having a different experience regarding bass may have something to do with how their speaker was placed at the time of their listening experiences. 

 

I'm guessing that the newer CW IV midrange being neutral has something to do with the new, shallow shape of the mid horn. I had this same experience with the Forte 3's new midrange horn design which I didn't care for as much because it just seemed like the sound of the horns with jazz music were getting lost out in space more and less coherent. Perhaps the newer horn is better for more genres of music, however, for jazz which is most of what I listen to, I tend to struggle with the newer midrange designs on all the newer IV series. Imagine if the horn of a trumpet was opened up more. If it were opened more without proportionately making it deeper like the LaScala's horn for example, then the coherency would get lost and dispersed outward more. It certainly makes the horn look much nicer, but there has to be trade-offs that listeners ultimately have to decide on. 

 

I believe that this same effect is why you find the mid horn on the CW IV to be more neutral and maybe that's better as a general purpose speaker for some. Obviously many others seem to like the new IV but the issue I have with most reviews is the lack of information at describing what those differences are that led them to that conclusion. You didn't do that in your review but isn't it amazing how much the new IV series cost compared to the older speakers which are a half to a third the cost and even you are surprised at how little their differences were. 

 

When I compared my Heresy II to the newer Heresy IV, I was shocked at how much lower the volume sounded with the Heresy IV. I mostly use single ended tube amps with just a few watts, so I want every bit of efficiency I can get. At this point, I'm wondering if the more shallow shape of the Heresy IV's vs II mid horn is what caused that difference. Think about it more a minute. If a person was trying to yell at someone in the distance and didn't cup their hands around their mouth, then their voice wouldn't project out as easily. 

 

Put on a pair of earbuds or headsets and listen to the way the voices project out on the Heresy IV vs the Forte IV which has an even more spread out mid horn than the Heresy IV. If you listen carefully, you will notice that the Forte IV has beautiful detail BUT sounds more recessed or in the background more. This is most likely happening because the horn is spreading the sound out more and losing coherency. Steve Huff later admitted in a follow up video the exact same thing. He even said this himself. He described the Forte IV as a jack of all trades speaker. For jazz, I struggled with the newer Heritage lines which is precisely why I went with the Forte 1 over any of the other Forte's. It has the deepest bass of them all at low volume plus it has the traditional horn shaped midrange I prefer for jazz. 

 

I'm okay with a bigger horn, but IMO, the depth of the horn needs to be proportionate to the width which is why I think the LaScala and K-horn project so beautifully my comparison to anything.  I'm cool with a bigger horn, but I think it needs to remain deeper. I think klipch is doing a good job on the newer IV for general purpose. Softer top end and in theory less of a horn sound by opening up the midrange mouth more. Maybe that's better for most. 

 

Klipsch Forte IV, Heresy IV, LaScala AL5 - Sound Demos #1

 

Klipsch Forte IV, Heresy IV, LaScala AL5 - Sound Demos #1

 

 

 

 

 

 

Interesting thoughts about the horns. 

What I still don't really hear in the CW4 and what I did hear in the CW3 is a certain lightness around certain sounds. For example, brushes over the fleece of a drum. That sound came with the CW3 very airy, loose and detailed from the midhorn. That gave me a very realistic experience. CW4 does this great too, nothing wrong with it, but I miss that airy feeling around the brushes. To make sure, I'm not saying the CW4 ain't good. I really like this speaker. It's just doing some things a bit different. 

[Flevoman]

8 minutes ago, billybob said:

Well, I have nothing but time for you to decide on the bass in the near future. Member's like *Shakeydeal don't make flippant comments about Klipsch Cornwall 4s... 

Enjoy...I would!

Sorry.. I don't know who Shakeydeal is, and I don't understand what "flippant comments" mean..can you perhaps say it in a different way? 

Because I have a more nuanced opinion about the CW4 doesn't mean I'm not enjoying them 😉

[billybob]

Understood and understand. He is the member that said approximate break-in time 200 hours on your speakers.He posted earlier on this topic/thread.

It's all cool man. Like your setup/room man!

Like your Chorus also.

[Flevoman]

Chorus is a very cool speaker. I wish it was the Chorus 2,but still these are very nice speakers indead.

Thank you for the explenation, OK...lets see after 80 more hours. Would be awesome if the bass will improve a bit 

[mikebse2a3]

15 minutes ago, Flevoman said:

Behind me is the kitchen, but I don't think this will effect the acoustic in any way 

 

Perhaps but I can tell you in my dedicated listening room I can hear the difference in leaving the entry door open because it affects the rooms modal response so I’ve optimized my system with the door in the closed position.

 

Your room/setup is very beautiful and since it is an open concept multi purpose room/listening room your setup options are necessarily limited so I wish you good fortune in finding the loudspeakers that work best in that beautiful space.

 

miketn🙂

[mikebse2a3]

1 hour ago, Flevoman said:

But who knows, more punchy/tighter bass would be welcome.

 

Just a thought but have you or do you have other amplifiers you can use or borrow to see if that might help you achieve the sound you are looking for..?

 

miketn

[Flevoman]

8 minutes ago, mikebse2a3 said:

 

Just a thought but have you or do you have other amplifiers you can use or borrow to see if that might help you achieve the sound you are looking for..?

 

miketn

Not really.. Just an old Onkyo Integra 105w.

If I connect the CW4 to the SS amp the bass is tighter, more energy. 

But this is always the case with a tubeamp vs *** amp. 

[JDJohnson]

Thank you for sharing your findings Flevoman. 

[Flevoman]

You're welcome 😉

[mustang_flht]

Hi @Flevoman

 

You can follow some tips here to get more bass on your CW4

 

1 - For me the first advice you can add 2 or 3 db around 30Hz with an equalizer (ideal McIntosh, Accuphase ... preamplifier or new DSP digital)

 

 

 

 

2 - Second, if you want a slightly lower Hz setting for your bass-reflex: temporarily plug one of the 3 tubes with felt

 

3 - Try to bring your CW4s even closer to the wall almost glued to it, you will still gain a little bass

 

4 - Make 1, 2 and 3 and you'll have a ton of bass just the way you like it

 

 

Good tests and good listening

 

 

 

Read the tips here