Jump to content

Cornwall 4 vs Lascala AL-5


Flevoman

Recommended Posts

 

My local hi-fi dealer is offering a demo pair of Lascala LA-5 speakers for sale. Although the price is not yet determined, I expect a favorable price given the fact that one speaker has a blemish on the veneer. It's something I don't mind, by the way. Next week, I will be testing some amplifiers, and I also want to listen to the Lascala as I'm really interested in it. Maybe I'll even trade in my CW4 for the Lascala AL-5.

 

Arethere people who have been able to directly compare the CW4 with the Lascala AL-5? What are your findings? Where did the Lascala excel compared to the CW4, and what might the CW4 be better at than the Lascala?

 

I listen to tube amplifiers and have a living room that is 12 meters deep and 5.5 meters wide. The speakers are positioned in the middle of the long wall. I mainly listen to organic music, jazz, blues, vocals, acoustic music, and light pop. I know that the Lascala produces less bass, and my intention is not to add a subwoofer to the system. One question I have is, even though I'm not a bass-head, whether the lack of low-end will be a problem for the type of music I listen to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This isn’t the comparison you’re looking for, but close.

 

I owned a pair of CW IVs and sold them for a pair of LaScala IIs. As good as the Cornwalls are, the LS IIs excel at midrange openness  and texture. Slightly more dynamic sounding too. So that said, I’m sure the AL5 will be even better.

 

As you already know, subs will be necessary to equal the performance of the Cornwall in that area. But the bass of the LaScala is world class in definition and impact. Just doesn’t go very low.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you for your response.

The funny thing is that I actually owned the orrigonal Lascala  myself. This was many years ago, and it had been a long time since I last listened to them. I had them connected to a modified Dynaco ST70 II amplifier, which made the sound unpleasant for me. If I remember correctly, there was a very annoying resonance in the midrange. I remember that this caused my audiophile passion to fade away, and the Lascala speakers ended up sitting in the garage for about 15 years while I used a Sonos system as speakers.

 

But then, when I bought the Heresy 2 speakers, my passion reignited, and soon after, I got the Chorus speakers. Shortly after that, I upgraded to the Cornwall 3, and two months later, I got the Cornwall 4. And voila, my passion for Klipsch and music is back in full swing!

 

It's a long story, but the main point is that, based on my very old memories, the Lascala didn't sound nearly as good as the Cornwall 4. However, this may not be fair at all because back then I had a Dynaco amplifier that I didn't like.

 

Are you using a sub by the way? 

 

Edit: changed lascala 2 to original lascala 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My thoughts...

 

I went Forte, Heresy- CW4.  Huge difference along the way.  I thought La Scala would be the end game speaker.  They are dang good for sure.  I did not hear one at home though so hard to tell.  I run mid mono tube amps and the CWs sound exceptional. I went to cardas interconnects and kept my Kimber speaker cable (for now).  The combination of overall sound and bass is top notch in my book.  Also I love the way they sound at low volume which I do a lot as I wake up early.

 

Based on your initial post and what you listen to, you would probably be very happy with either. Especially as you do not feel the need for a sub.  Personally I can't imagine a system without a sub but that's just me.  I listen to a lot of acoustic and jazz but also rock. Everyone is different.  

 

So after a listen and speaking with some experts would I trade my CW4s for La Scala- No.  The law of diminishing returns is alive and well in audio but imho, particularly so in this scenario.  Big jump $ wise for what is essentially a trade off (bass vs some mids).  Unfortunately  I think the only appreciable path on Heritage line is Jubilee.  And that ain't happening any time soon...lol..

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Shakeydeal said:

Are you sure they were LS II? The resonance sounds like original lascalas. What year were they produced?

You're so right. 

It was the original lascala. 

The audiocompany who bought them from me have them still for sale. 

 

Klipsch La Scala
€ 4.000,00
https://link.marktplaats.nl/m1953250813?utm_source=android_social&utm_content=vip&utm_medium=android_social&utm_campaign=socialbuttons

 

This is the original lascala, correct? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Flevoman said:

You're so right. 

It was the original lascala. 

They audiocompany who bought them from me have them still for sale. 

Klipsch La Scala
€ 4.000,00
https://link.marktplaats.nl/m1953250813?utm_source=android_social&utm_content=vip&utm_medium=android_social&utm_campaign=socialbuttons

 

This is the original lascala, correct? 

 
Yes, and I suspected as much. The LS II is much closer to the AL5 than to what you had.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, roninklipsch said:

My thoughts...

 

I went Forte, Heresy- CW4.  Huge difference along the way.  I thought La Scala would be the end game speaker.  They are dang good for sure.  I did not hear one at home though so hard to tell.  I run mid mono tube amps and the CWs sound exceptional. I went to cardas interconnects and kept my Kimber speaker cable (for now).  The combination of overall sound and bass is top notch in my book.  Also I love the way they sound at low volume which I do a lot as I wake up early.

 

Based on your initial post and what you listen to, you would probably be very happy with either. Especially as you do not feel the need for a sub.  Personally I can't imagine a system without a sub but that's just me.  I listen to a lot of acoustic and jazz but also rock. Everyone is different.  

 

So after a listen and speaking with some experts would I trade my CW4s for La Scala- No.  The law of diminishing returns is alive and well in audio but imho, particularly so in this scenario.  Big jump $ wise for what is essentially a trade off (bass vs some mids).  Unfortunately  I think the only appreciable path on Heritage line is Jubilee.  And that ain't happening any time soon...lol..

So you own the CW4 and you have heard the AL-5.

Beside the difference in bass, what difference did you hear between these speakers? . 

Is the mid that much better on the AL-5 compared to the CW4? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think what you need to do if possible is find somewhere to do a A/B test.  

 

It's really hard to judge a speaker vs another on different electronics and in a different room.

 

They sounded excellent but the same songs at home sound great to.  I could not pinpoint any significant differences.

 

And as I mentioned, if this was my speakers plus 2k maybe I'd do a long drive and A/B. However it's probably more like my CWs and 8 or 9k.  For that $ there better be a appreciable  difference.  Not the case in my personal experience. I would somehow get in a room with both if you are seriously considering the switch.  Maybe your ears, genre etc are different enough the change is worth it.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly, I'm surprised that you couldn't really hear a direct difference (apart from the bass). Intuitively, I would expect a noticeable difference in the midrange. Doing a direct A/B comparison is difficult. They do have the CW4 and the La Scala, but they are in different listening rooms. And then, as you already mentioned, you're also comparing different acoustics and equipment. By the way, I don't expect to have to add an extra 8k. They are demo speakers with a large ugly spot on the veneer. If the asking price is not below 10k, then I'm definitely not interested. From what I could see in the price history on hifishark.com, they sell for under 10k as used items, and in perfect condition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have not seen them that low price wise but under 10k would be fair I think. Especially if shipping included.

 

I think if you find some folks who made the switch, they will tell you the difference is noticeable and they are very happy.  

 

Also in audio we all have bias to one degree or another.  Past experience,  something we just bought etc.  My bias may play a part here to.

 

For example I got my CWs one year old, perfect shape in black ash which is the wood and grill color I wanted for a bit over 4k. Freaking wonderful deal and sound for the money. Love these speakers at low or high volume, rock or jazz. I'm a huge Klipsch fan.  I'm gonna get the shirt and a bag of chips.

 

Also having a CW let me experiment with tube amps. I tried Ayon, Fezz, Lab12 and now Quicksilver. I would not be here in my journey with a typical 88db box speaker or panels which I had prior to CWs.

 

I have the La Scala at about 11 to 14k price point. At 11 to 14k I have multiple other speakers I would buy before a LS. Two in particular.  To me, the Klipsch line ends at Cornwall. That is the sweet spot.

 

Have fun and enjoy the music. There are no bad choices here.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would take the AL5 in a heartbeat over the Cornwall. To me, the horn loaded bass wins hands down. As an aside, I adjust the mids on my original LS, pulling the level down a few db. Night and day difference. Whether low level listening, jazz, acoustic music or loud rock, they didn't have the chainsaw to the forehead sound. Plus, I love the aesthetic of the La Scala cabinet. The Cornwall just looks like a big box.

 

The AL5 is much improved.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Marvel said:

I would take the AL5 in a heartbeat over the Cornwall. To me, the horn loaded bass wins hands down. As an aside, I adjust the mids on my original LS, pulling the level down a few db. Night and day difference. Whether low level listening, jazz, acoustic music or loud rock, they didn't have the chainsaw to the forehead sound. Plus, I love the aesthetic of the La Scala cabinet. The Cornwall just looks like a big box.

 

The AL5 is much improved.

You say that you would choose the La Scala over the Cornwall in a heartbeat. But have you ever been able to compare them to each other to say this so confidently?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course it would be best to hear both speakers in the same room with the same system. But I don’t think it’s absolutely necessary. I think once you hear the  AL5 you will know pretty quickly if they are for you or not.

 

And to answer your earlier question to me, yes I use subs (2) with the LS II.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do indeed think that I will hear fairly soon how different (or not) the La Scala sounds compared to the Cornwall.
I have been listening to the CW4 almost daily for a year now, and I have a good idea of how this speaker can sound.
Although it always takes some getting used to when you hear the same speakers in a different room/setup.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/4/2023 at 2:30 PM, Flevoman said:

You say that you would choose the La Scala over the Cornwall in a heartbeat. But have you ever been able to compare them to each other to say this so confidently?

Not the newest of each, and not in the same room. I had a pair of the original LS ('89s)  when I heard the then current Cornwalls at Klipsch HQ in Indianapolis. I used a pair of 2A3 monoblocks on my LS. I sold those to Deang. I later found a pair of beater LS with all the wrong parts, but finally got them filled up. I gave those to my older son, who is enjoying them. For me, all horn systems rule, especially in dynamics and sensitivity. The Corns, at the time, just didn't do it for me.

 

However, lots of folks love them. Of course, that's fine if they are enjoying the music.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With a LaScala the bass is as quick and clear as the horn tweeter. You can only experience this with a bass horn system. Years ago I heard, read, of a Japanese guy that built a 32ft bass horn with concrete and steel for is house. What I would call a serious audiophile. PWK just folded the horn into 3 folds with the walls of the room being the extension of the horn. With the walls needed to create the last part of the horn I fail to see how a closed back K-horn can equal what PWK originally designed. But what do I know. I am sure the closed back K-horn will appeal to many more customers that do not have the proper room for the old K-horns. A marketing decision to create more sales? Do not get me wrong, I am sure the engineers at Klipsch have made an excellent sounding new K-horn but I fail to see how it would be better than what PWK originally made with improvements in components in driver and X-over. All things being equal. Just saying. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
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...