OO1 Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 17 hours ago, rmlowz said: run off 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OO1 Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 1 hour ago, mboxler said: drama, 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
avguytx Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 ID10T 5 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OO1 Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deang Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 16 hours ago, OO1 said: In that plot, the single port phase plug version is in red. It’s “hotter” than the K-55-M, which is in blue. This is the opposite of what you claimed. Do you have an explanation? 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deang Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 18 hours ago, OO1 said: the specs of the 70's -80's K-55V with the original Atlas diaphragm indicated that it extended to 6KHz whether single or dual phase plug and so does the K-55M , but the K-55M was hotter , and we all know that the newer 2001 K-55X , PD5VH including the newer D-20GB diaphragms only extend to 4100Hz . The old K-55-V reached 6kHz because of the collapsing verticals of the K-400 horn. Like Mike pointed out, it’s doing it, but it’s not happy about it. This is the primary reason Roy lowered the crossover point. The driver is beaming, and not providing a smooth power response (polars aren’t lining up). On the Atlas spec sheet for the PD5-VH, they tell you that the frequency response was taken using a plane wave tube, not on a horn - and that if you want to know what the driver is doing, you need to put it on the horn of your choice and measure it. 3 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deang Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 “K-55-M hotter”. That was addressed in a very long thread that eventually got moved into the historical section. That myth was busted by John Allen, and I confirmed it with Jim Hunter. Only the engineering samples were hotter, when the production samples arrived, they were the same sensitivity as the K-55-V. That doesn’t mean the frequency response was identical. People get confused by this. You can have variations in frequency response, but still have the same sensitivity. This is why it is important to use the right driver with the right network. This was also confirmed with Jim Hunter and Roy. Mike Boxler was kind enough to confirm all of this with measurements because he was tired of watching me agonize over it. 3 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
avguytx Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 ... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JEM Performance Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 23 minutes ago, Deang said: The old K-55-V reached 6kHz because of the collapsing verticals of the K-400 horn. Like Mike pointed out, it’s doing it, but it’s not happy about it. This is the primary reason Roy lowered the crossover point. The driver is beaming, and not providing a smooth power response (polars aren’t lining up). On the Atlas spec sheet for the PD5-VH, they tell you that the frequency response was taken using a plane wave tube, not on a horn - and that if you want to know what the driver is doing, you need to put it on the horn of your choice and measure it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OO1 Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 27 minutes ago, avguytx said: How you are viewed as... you're projecting a subconscious image of yourself 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deang Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 @OO1 Please explain this set up. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JEM Performance Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 The K-55V driver is beaming? Really? And PWK didn't realize that all the way from 1963 up till 1980 when the nested phase plug was put into production? Come on. Collapsing verticals of the K-400 are not the reason the K-55V goes to 6K. If that were true, the current PD5VH would go to 6K on the K-400 and it doesn't. Don't believe? Here's a simple test that requires sophisticated test equipment - your ears. Oh, you also need a pair of Klipschorns or LaScalas. Place a good original K-55V in one speaker and place a K-55-X (PD5VH) in the other. Disconnect the tweeters. Feed a mono source to the speakers and compare what you hear. If you can't hear that the K-55V is obviously playing higher frequencies than the current version of the PD5VH, you shouldn't be nessing around with loudspeakers. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JEM Performance Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 That's messing around with speakers. Sorry for the typo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
richieb Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 13 minutes ago, Deang said: @OO1 Please explain this set up. — “give me a minute. Checking Google”. 1 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woofers and Tweeters Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 18 minutes ago, Deang said: @OO1 Please explain this set up. happy to see that you still have your sense of humor. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmlowz Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deang Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 Hi Jim, Sounds like you are just saying the current version of the PD5-VH can’t play as high as the older single phase plug versions. However, their current data sheet is exactly the same as the one that they’ve been using for as long as I can remember. At any rate, I have no reason to doubt your word. It’s interesting. As for the collapsing verticals - if that’s not true, then Klipsch misinformed me. Person shall remain anonymous unless they prefer to reveal themselves and clarify. There is always the possibility I misunderstood. 4 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woofers and Tweeters Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 I could be wrong, but it seems that a lot of this could be avoided. Someone with 73,455 posts has created an undeserving reluctance to use a certain service, similar to guilty by association. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geoff. Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 @Deang In the decade or so I’ve been following this forum you have always been the catalyst for progress and knowledge. Sometimes at the expense of a few battle scars, but always emerging as a rational voice. I would just like to take this opportunity to thank you for your DECADES of positive contributions. None of these forums would be the same without you. 4 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marvel Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 I can only imagine what Dennis would be saying... tomorrow is the anniversary of his passing. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.