Lascala AL5(possible with sub) or the Khorn AK6 (against a long wall)

[Flevoman]

I started with the Heresy 2, and step by step, I'm climbing up the Heritage ladder.
Jubilee is excluded, but the Khorn seemed like a great end goal to me.
However, I don't have any corners where these speakers can be placed. So maybe the La Scala was what I had in mind as the end goal.
Until I spoke to someone who owns the Khorn AK6 and claims that this generation of speakers can be placed fine against a long wall, corners are not needed. 

 

Now I'm wondering, in my situation where I only have one long wall for the speakers,
La Scalas (with a possible subwoofer), or the Khorn AK6 (false walls are not an option), where only one side can be placed against the wall.

Which one is the best option? 

[Islander]

It can sometimes be hard to find rooms with "Khorn corners", for a variety of reasons.  In my room, there are baseboard heaters near two corners, a fireplace in another corner, and the fourth corner opens out.  There may also be a window with broad windowsills, near at least one corner.  Some Khorn fans look for rooms with those ideal corners when they choose their homes, and some build false corners, using the design provided by PWK so many years ago.  The newer Khorns, with their enclosed backs, don't need to be jammed tightly into their corners, but they still need to be placed in corners, to get the effect of lengthening their bass horns that produces that "Khorn bass" that Khorn fans love.  And they still sound their best when fitted tightly into their corners.

 

Others, like me, go for La Scalas, with one or two powerful subwoofers (or four subs, in the case of some extremists).  Two subs give the advantage of more power, of course, but more than that, they produce a more even soundfield, with much more even bass response throughout the room.  I haven't heard a properly-setup Khorn arrangement, so I can't give a precise comparison, but other members have heard both arrangements, and the Scala + Sub combo is said to give away nothing to a pair of Khorns in ideal corners.  Hopefully, members who have heard both arrangements will check in with their impressions, which can give you more detail.

[ClaudeJ1]

3 hours ago, Flevoman said:

I started with the Heresy 2, and step by step, I'm climbing up the Heritage ladder.
Jubilee is excluded, but the Khorn seemed like a great end goal to me.
However, I don't have any corners where these speakers can be placed. So maybe the La Scala was what I had in mind as the end goal.
Until I spoke to someone who owns the Khorn AK6 and claims that this generation of speakers can be placed fine against a long wall, corners are not needed. 

 

Now I'm wondering, in my situation where I only have one long wall for the speakers,
La Scalas (with a possible subwoofer), or the Khorn AK6 (false walls are not an option), where only one side can be placed against the wall.

Which one is the best option? 

Just do what Paul Klipsch did (I did too). Build false corners out of drywall and 2x4's. Easy and cheap. It's in the Dope From Hope.

[ClaudeJ1]

15 minutes ago, Islander said:

Two subs give the advantage of more power, of course, but more than that, they produce a more even soundfield, with much more even bass response throughout the room.  I haven't heard a properly-setup Khorn arrangement, so I can't give a precise comparison, but other members have heard both arrangements, and the Scala + Sub combo is said to give away nothing to a pair of Khorns in ideal corners.  Hopefully, members who have heard both arrangements will check in with their impressions, which can give you more detail.

I had two pairs of Khorns (Raw Birch and Lacquered Walnut). Also several pairs of LaScalas, with and without Horn Subs (THTLP's by Bill Fitzmaurice). By far, the LaScalas with Subs are better than Khorns without. Islander is right.

[Shakeydeal]

18 minutes ago, ClaudeJ1 said:

I had two pairs of Khorns (Raw Birch and Lacquered Walnut). Also several pairs of LaScalas, with and without Horn Subs (THTLP's by Bill Fitzmaurice). By far, the LaScalas with Subs are better than Khorns without. Islander is right.

 

This has been my experience too.

[Islander]

25 minutes ago, ClaudeJ1 said:

Just do what Paul Klipsch did (I did too). Build false corners out of drywall and 2x4's. Easy and cheap. It's in the Dope From Hope.

 

Flevoman does mention that false corners are not an option for him.  I don't think that cost or difficulty of construction are the limiting factors in regard to them.

[henry4841]

My thoughts are you really need corners for K-horns as PWK designed them for. Closing the backs is not an improvement but a compromise for more sales is my thought. In a proper room with corners and a Cornwall for center channel as PWK suggest I believe the sound would be outstanding but unfortunately most do not have a proper room to bring out the best of the K-horn. But being the price difference of K-horn vs LaScala is not the great I would most likely go for the new K-horn even with closed backs if looking for my first Heritage speaker. K-horns are cool looking so why not go for them and get a good sub with them as well if a bass head. Personally owning LaScala's for decades I do not feel I am missing much if anything using my LaScala's without turning on my excellent sub. Plenty of bass at this stage in my life. When I bought my speakers LP's ruled and not much on an LP below 50hz at that time. That and the price difference was almost twice with the K-horn. Not the case anymore with the dressed up LaScala presently made. Both are excellent speakers so we are really nit picking when comparing the two but that is what we do on forums.  🙂 

[Flevoman]

2 hours ago, Islander said:

It can sometimes be hard to find rooms with "Khorn corners", for a variety of reasons.  In my room, there are baseboard heaters near two corners, a fireplace in another corner, and the fourth corner opens out.  There may also be a window with broad windowsills, near at least one corner.  Some Khorn fans look for rooms with those ideal corners when they choose their homes, and some build false corners, using the design provided by PWK so many years ago.  The newer Khorns, with their enclosed backs, don't need to be jammed tightly into their corners, but they still need to be placed in corners, to get the effect of lengthening their bass horns that produces that "Khorn bass" that Khorn fans love.  And they still sound their best when fitted tightly into their corners.

 

Others, like me, go for La Scalas, with one or two powerful subwoofers (or four subs, in the case of some extremists).  Two subs give the advantage of more power, of course, but more than that, they produce a more even soundfield, with much more even bass response throughout the room.  I haven't heard a properly-setup Khorn arrangement, so I can't give a precise comparison, but other members have heard both arrangements, and the Scala + Sub combo is said to give away nothing to a pair of Khorns in ideal corners.  Hopefully, members who have heard both arrangements will check in with their impressions, which can give you more detail.

 

Thank you for your input. 
This is what makes it confusing for me. 
My audio dealer (who mainly deals with high-end equipment) claims that corners are not necessary. 
And I assume they know what they're talking about. 
Their employee (whose La Scalas I have now purchased) has Klipschorn AK6 at his own home, placed against a single long wall without corners. 
He also believes that this setup is perfectly fine and that the difference between placing them in corners or not was hardly audible (they tested this at the store). 
I take him seriously too, as he has been involved with audio his whole life, and from what I know, he doesn't settle for compromises. 
However, opinions on the internet are divided. I hear different claims here. 

But are the La Scala and the Klipschorn sonically similar, with the Klipschorn having a bit more and deeper bass? 
Isn't the Klipschorn overall a step up from the La Scala?

[Flevoman]

1 hour ago, Islander said:

 

Flevoman does mention that false corners are not an option for him.  I don't think that cost or difficulty of construction are the limiting factors in regard to them.

 

What I previously mentioned, false corners are not an option. 
Although I have no idea how this will look, the idea of having to build walls around my speakers is not feasible for aesthetic reasons. 
But you say that the LaScala with a sub sounds better than the Klipschorn? Can you also explain why it sounds better? 
Logically, I would place the Klipschorn above the LaScala, just like I place the Jubilee above the Klipschorn.

 

@henry4841 Klipschorn cool looking?

Tbh I prefer the looks of the lascala above the Khorn. 

Way more stylish in my humble opinion 😇

[henry4841]

12 minutes ago, Flevoman said:

Isn't the Klipschorn overall a step up from the La Scala?

Depends on who you ask. 🙂

[Bubo]

10 minutes ago, Flevoman said:

But are the La Scala and the Klipschorn sonically similar, with the Klipschorn having a bit more and deeper bass? 
Isn't the Klipschorn overall a step up from the La Scala?

 Exactly, KH goes a little deeper is very placement sensitive and the mids are above ear level when sitting.

 

LS CAN BE PLACED ANYWHERE, MIDS AT EAR LEVEL WITH 4 IN CASTERS,  AND BASS CAN BE AUGMENTED WITH 1-2 SUBS IN THE CENTER BETWEEN THE LS

 

[Islander]

One other item to consider is that with Khorns the room's ceiling height should be at least 8.5 feet/2.6 metres, while La Scalas work fine with rooms that are 8 ft/2.4 metres high, or even a bit less.  This is because Klipschorns are quite tall, at 52 inches/1.3 metres, so the HF section could be closer to the ceiling than to the floor.  That means that your listening room needs not only two adjacent "Khorn corners", it also needs a "Khorn ceiling".

 

As for the nature of the two types of bass response with these two speakers, I've read that the La Scala + Sub bass can be harder hitting, more punchy, while Khorn bass is softer.  However, someone who has actually heard both speakers in similar rooms will have more accurate impressions.

 

While ranking the top Heritage speakers, maybe it should be pointed out that Jubilees, the older models in particular, have sometimes been described as "Super-Scalas", having a sound more like a very improved La Scala than an upgraded Klipschorn.

 

Are you confused yet?

[henry4841]

These days we have excellent subs to choose from to fill in where the LaScala starts dropping off. So the difference between the two is minimal at best. Both probably will benefit from a decent sub added in the mix even the K-horn. Some modern music is bass heavy. 

[Bubo]

2 minutes ago, henry4841 said:

Depends on who you ask. 🙂

KH was designed for one speaker in mono, with a low watt tube amp in 1942.

 

LS is superior in every way for 2 speaker listening, corners, no corners, sub no sub, sitting not standing, movable,

 

I could have purchased either, and thought the LS was the clear choice for many reasons ,the first being sound quality and flexibility

[Coytee]

2 hours ago, Flevoman said:

is not feasible for aesthetic reasons

I suppose that (unfortunately) rules out setting a K402 atop a LaScala (?)

[Flevoman]

Ok, I'm really surprised that there are so many differing opinions here regarding the La Scala and Khorn sounding exactly the same in the midrange and highs. Perhaps I remembered it incorrectly, but wasn't the horn of the Khorn slightly larger than that of the La Scala? And as a result, wasn't the midrange of the Khorn slightly better than the La Scala? I've never heard them side by side, and I only had the chance to listen to the Khorn playing for an hour once. But from everything I've read, the Khorn should really be a step above the La Scala. Not just in terms of more and deeper bass, but simply a speaker that performs even better. If the LS and the KH are truly equivalent speakers apart from the low end, then I can cross the Khorn off my bucket list 😏

[Coytee]

Unless changed recently, they both use the same K400/K401 midrange and K77/? tweeter.  The only difference is the bass horn.  

 

The Khorn 'requires' a corner (and will pressurize a room like no other speaker out there IMHO) and the LaScala (with a smaller horn) is more free standing.

 

I went with LaScala decades ago to get the flexible placement.  Later acquired Khorns as those were my dream speaker.  Today, still have the LaScalas (among others) and sold the Khorns.

[Coytee]

To add a bit....

 

With the LaScala, you are "standing in front of the horn"

 

With the Khorn, you are to a degree, standing "IN" the (bass) horn since it uses the walls of the room to create the final flair of the bass horn.

[Flevoman]

Did I understand you correctly that therefore the lascala is more punchy? 

[KT88]

The khorn has a very good impressive bass. As Coytee says, you are "in" the bass horn. But the LaScala has the better punch. The nice thing about the Khorn is that about 32 Hz is all I would need for my kind of music. But everything has to be right with the room regarding the Khorn. I would never spend the money for a Khorn and then have to handle with false tinkered corners. If the Khorn is not in the corner from my point of view the LS is the better choice what this aspect is concerned even if the low bass is gone.

The determination of the placement re the Khorn is an issue even if you want to finetune the mids and treble. The LS can be aligned so that the stage cam be calibrated exactly. When the Khorn was developed PWK wanted to get a nice roomfilling sound even as a mono speaker. Therefor it radiates 45 degrees from the corner.