2 way LaScala with 510 horn

[babadono]

I hope some of the people that know this are still around or check in from time to time. I want to put together a 2 way LaScala as a center between my Jubilees. What driver should I use on the 510 horn? It has to handle 500Hz on up. K 691 good enough? Anything better? Any speculation on how line up the 510 to get it close to time align with the 'Scala bass horn?

I could run it active with separate amps but I wanted to start with just a passive.

[Invidiosulus]

Keep in mind that there was a lot of EQ going on with the K69/K510/LS combo.

 

These were Roy’s settings for use with the EV DX38 DSP.

 

The time delay used was 1916 microseconds. 
I’m assuming this was with the K510 mounted at the front of the cab.

you could do some math and figure out what sort of offset you are looking at to get them mechanically aligned but they are probably going to be hanging off the back of the cab.

 

[babadono]

Where did you dig that up? So looks like a better way to go is active. How un good is just a regular passive LaScala if a 2 way needs all that?

[henry4841]

-

[Invidiosulus]

2 hours ago, babadono said:

Where did you dig that up? So looks like a better way to go is active. How un good is just a regular passive LaScala if a 2 way needs all that?

@Coytee had posted it a while back as he had a set of jubescalas with the K510 on top and the Chief was sharing the correct settings and crossover designs back then.

I’m using the settings on my bass bin for my active 3-way LS set up and it really sounds a lot clearer than with a simple low pass at 400Hz.

 

in some ways a 3-way with a passive crossover would probably take less than a 2-way since the drivers can be used in the flatter parts of their frequency range.

I think for a two way they were just asking a LOT of the K69.

That said, I haven’t looked for a response plot of the K69 on the K510 without the PEQ settings applied so don’t know how how far off it would be.

 

 

[MMurg]

The Celestion Axi2050 is what I used on my 2-way modified Belle Klipsch center.  I selected that since I wanted to match the HF driver in my Heritage Jubilee.  It is certainly a better driver than the K-691.  However, what drivers are you using on your UG Jubilee?  The stock K-691?  If so, the perhaps you should stick to that to match.  Either way, I'd go active. 

[babadono]

4 hours ago, MMurg said:

The Celestion Axi2050 is what I used on my 2-way modified Belle Klipsch center.  I selected that since I wanted to match the HF driver in my Heritage Jubilee.  It is certainly a better driver than the K-691.  However, what drivers are you using on your UG Jubilee?  The stock K-691?  If so, the perhaps you should stick to that to match.  Either way, I'd go active. 

I have TAD 4002s on my UG Jubes. So the k691 is just laying around saying put me to work. The 510 is a CD horn is that why it needs so much EQ?

[Marvel]

The k510 will be farther out of alignment than the k400.  The whole horn and driver would probably be off the back.

 

You want to stick with Roy's approved parts?

[henry4841]

13 hours ago, henry4841 said:

-

I was thinking the 510 was a horn from another vendor and not a Klipsch horn.  Is the 510 a 1" horn?  A 1" driver that will go from 500hz to say 18kz is few and very expensive to be able to make a two way speaker. 

[KT88]

As far as I know, the advantage of these modern horns like K402 and K510 is constant coverage and constant directivity. The price is that there is no linear sound pressure anymore as it is more or less the case with older exponential horns in their main band. Hence the complex settings plus fine tuning at certain frequencies. But it might be worthwhile to go active. I also love fully analogue speakers, it's just that the effort of the tweeter crossover for the K510 is considerable and tied to a single driver, no matter which one.
BTW in Hope in 2009 I had heard the TAD 4002 on the K510 and I was blown away how good the high frequencies sounded. If I'm not mistaken, the TAD4002 was connected to the K510 without the adapter which is needed to go with the K402?

[Coytee]

20 hours ago, babadono said:

I hope some of the people that know this are still around or check in from time to time. I want to put together a 2 way LaScala as a center between my Jubilees. What driver should I use on the 510 horn? It has to handle 500Hz on up. K 691 good enough? Anything better? Any speculation on how line up the 510 to get it close to time align with the 'Scala bass horn?

I could run it active with separate amps but I wanted to start with just a passive.

I don't know if the site will still allow an Excel spreadsheet.  If so, here it is with all the variations that I knew of at the time.  It's predicated on the EV-DX38 and yes, the K69 driver and a couple using the TAD 4002 driver.  The LaScala/K510/K69 is on there.  Also in that recipe for the LaScala, is a PEQ that helps to electronically remove the sidewalls from resonating so much.

 

 

 

1 hour ago, henry4841 said:

I was thinking the 510 was a horn from another vendor and not a Klipsch horn.  Is the 510 a 1" horn?  A 1" driver that will go from 500hz to say 18kz is few and very expensive to be able to make a two way speaker. 

 

I'm guessing you know by now but the 510 is a Klipsch horn.  It is/was actually the tweeter horn on the Jubilee sitting above the K402.  It is a 2" horn, like the 402.  I got my 510 personally from Roy (bought it from him when he offered it up for sale) and I was going to use it for a center channel.....but.....  the wife had other thoughts so it's never been used.

 

 

 

Jubilee settings for all variations using Dx38.xlsJubilee settings for all variations using Dx38.xlsJubilee settings for all variations using Dx38.xlsJubilee settings for all variations using Dx38.xlsJubilee settings for all variations using Dx38.xls

[Coytee]

1 hour ago, KT88 said:

If I'm not mistaken, the TAD4002 was connected to the K510 without the adapter which is needed to go with the K402?

 

I've never connected mine but I think the TAD is 1 1/2" exit at the mouth and the adapter takes it up to 2".  I don't recall how things were then but I'd expect the adapter would have been used.

 

I also recall some mention that the adapter would cause a little bit of beaming because of having to transition to 2".  I wondered out loud "Well gee....  can't you just shorten the length of the adapter, moving the driver closer to the horn mouth and let that broaden the dispersion??

 

Rigma, the ever clever engineer, then went and designed one.  My understanding is he had at least one made, installed it....  and said he didn't like it.  If I recall, he said the HF was attenuated too much for him.

 

(you are now outside of my technical skills)

 

So, that got me thinking....  well yeah it's attenuated.  Why?  I'm guessing because of the driver being closer, it's now dispersing MORE which means less focused sound at a given spot....  the HF probably needs tweaked to restore the integrity of the HF.

 

As best I know, nobody has ever sent one to Roy for Roy to.....drop whatever it is that he's doing....  mount things and recurve things using the adapter.  So in the end, I don't know if it's a viable idea or not.

 

Here's the schematic for it.  Also...  when I mount my TAD on the 402, if you look at the speaker from behind "TAD" is rotated to an angle.  Not a big deal since who looks at a corner speaker from the rear?  I will admit that I "notice" that.  Not saying it BUGS me, but yeah....maybe I'm a bit OCD.  If I recall correctly, Rigma rotated things a bit such that the "TAD" on the driver would be parallel to the ground, not sloped up or down.  Not sure of this but....well.....he's an engineer....and we all know how they have attention to detail.

 

TAD+402+rev7.pdfTAD+402+rev7.pdf

[KT88]

59 minutes ago, Coytee said:

 

I've never connected mine but I think the TAD is 1 1/2" exit at the mouth and the adapter takes it up to 2".  I don't recall how things were then but I'd expect the adapter would have been used.

 

I also recall some mention that the adapter would cause a little bit of beaming because of having to transition to 2".  I wondered out loud "Well gee....  can't you just shorten the length of the adapter, moving the driver closer to the horn mouth and let that broaden the dispersion??

 

Rigma, the ever clever engineer, then went and designed one.  My understanding is he had at least one made, installed it....  and said he didn't like it.  If I recall, he said the HF was attenuated too much for him.

 

(you are now outside of my technical skills)

 

So, that got me thinking....  well yeah it's attenuated.  Why?  I'm guessing because of the driver being closer, it's now dispersing MORE which means less focused sound at a given spot....  the HF probably needs tweaked to restore the integrity of the HF.

 

As best I know, nobody has ever sent one to Roy for Roy to.....drop whatever it is that he's doing....  mount things and recurve things using the adapter.  So in the end, I don't know if it's a viable idea or not.

 

Here's the schematic for it.  Also...  when I mount my TAD on the 402, if you look at the speaker from behind "TAD" is rotated to an angle.  Not a big deal since who looks at a corner speaker from the rear?  I will admit that I "notice" that.  Not saying it BUGS me, but yeah....maybe I'm a bit OCD.  If I recall correctly, Rigma rotated things a bit such that the "TAD" on the driver would be parallel to the ground, not sloped up or down.  Not sure of this but....well.....he's an engineer....and we all know how they have attention to detail.

 

TAD+402+rev7.pdfTAD+402+rev7.pdf 23.8 kB · 3 downloads

The only way to prevent the high frequency beam is for Roy to design a second phase plug for the TAD 4002 as he did for the Celestion driver. I remember that Rigma's attempt at a shorter adapter was not successful, despite all the mechanical efforts. And yes Coytee, you are absolutely correct, the K510 is designed for the K69 so the TAD4002 needs the same adapter for the K510 as for the K402.

[mikebse2a3]

On 7/21/2023 at 12:35 PM, babadono said:

I hope some of the people that know this are still around or check in from time to time. I want to put together a 2 way LaScala as a center between my Jubilees. What driver should I use on the 510 horn? It has to handle 500Hz on up. K 691 good enough? Anything better? Any speculation on how line up the 510 to get it close to time align with the 'Scala bass horn?

I could run it active with separate amps but I wanted to start with just a passive.

 

@babadono is the reason you want a dedicated center channel for surround channel purposes or are you wanting to run a PWK 2PH3 type system?

 

 

The reason I ask is based on when I ran PWK 2PH3 systems using Klipschorns with Klipsch Belle Center Channel there are drawbacks and benefits. 

 

The benefit of filling in a perceived recessed hole in center imaging due to widespread L/R Klipschorns versus listener position was the most notable. In these situations I really liked the overall improvement in sound and imaging reproduction.

 

The drawback was in setups where the spread between L/R Klipschorns were typical relative to listener location and not suffering from the hole in the middle imaging effect. I actually feel the negative compromises due to the the perceived sound differences between the Klipschorn versus Klipsch Belle which was most notable due to the lower physical height of the Klipsch Belle which creates distortion of the imaging reproduction in height. Obviously I could have raised the height of the Klipsch Belle with a stand but I wouldn’t have liked the looks and IMHO unless someone perceives a recessed hole in the middle image effect there wasn’t IMHO a worthwhile benefit in sound reproduction speaking from my experiences.

 

Basically unless the center speaker is the same as the flanking speakers in a L+C+R array you already have some compromise and then the question becomes does the compromises versus benefits make a worth while perceived improvement. 

 

miketn

 

 

[mikebse2a3]

14 hours ago, babadono said:

The 510 is a CD horn is that why it needs so much EQ?

 

I like to see it as the CD horns are much less colored due to even polars and as a result of following the compression drivers natural response requires electrical balancing for flat response on axis and off axis.

 

Horns with collapsing polars maintain on axis balance at the cost of off-axis balance by the beaming as frequencies increase. They becoming more colored as the listener moves off axis. There is no way to have a flat balanced response both on and off axis because either the vertical and/or horizontal polars are collapsing with frequency.

 

miketn

 

 

[KT88]

I suspect that the PWK arrangement with a centre speaker comes from a necessity that has something to do with the nature of the Klipschorn. The KH need the corners to function properly. A mono KH was the perfect solution in the beginning. Stereo meant that the cabinets were very far apart. Especially when the long wall of a room formed the two corners. Now the very early stereo recordings were pretty pink ponk which enhanced the KH placement. It sounded odd when you had the trumpets on the left and the piano and bass on the far right. I suppose that's what the centre speaker was for. The sound should not fall apart into islands. This was a historically early presentation of stereo. Today's recordings, at least since the mid-sixties to seventies, present a stage where not only left and right play a role but also the impression of the depth of the instruments has gained importance. To achieve this effect, a corner placement with a mono centre speaker is not as optimal as a left-right placement that is away from the side walls and allows the room to breathe. So Mike's question is important, babadono. Do you want to improve the stereo sound of your UJ or do you want to build a 7.1 system? My UJs are comfortable in my room when they are not completely in the corners like a KH should be. I give up some deep bass, but I gain a sense of space and eliminate additional bass rumble.