D-MAN Posted March 30, 2004 Share Posted March 30, 2004 Hi Dave, Sorry didn't mean to sound like an appologist for Speakerlab, but I live in Seattle and have dealt with them way back when. Just tryin to put the story straight from somebody who was around at the time... it was basically a bunch of hippies building speakers in the late 70's. The line was NEVER known for anything but playing LOUD. That they could do in spades and they used alot of horns and a lot of woofers (as was the trend at the time) to do it. Speakerlab today is still around, and is much more upscale than the early days. Horns are "out". I am only telling MY experiences that I know firsthand. I cannot account for "bad fit", etc. That was not my experience, nor would I regard the bass results as anything less than phenomonal as I heard it myself playing the Doobie's "Takin' it to the Streets" album. I would probably wince today, but to 19 year-old ears, it was the cat's meow, dishes rattled out of the kitchen cabinets, and my pant legs literally flapped in the "breeze". The plans are still good, regardless, for the DIY, especially for the first-timer. Also there are far more 'lab K's around here than Klipschorns from that time because the company was/is local and alot cheaper for a flat kit. For us teenage Klipsch wannabes, the K's were our ticket to some good tunes. Ain't sayin that they're the best. Couldn't afford the best back then. Now the best only comes in laquer; what's up with that? DM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drewb Posted March 30, 2004 Share Posted March 30, 2004 Others more familar with Klipsch patents can correct me if need be but as far as I know the original bass bin patent had expired. Later patents were on other systems and crossovers. Speakerlab never infringed on Klipsch crossover's, not even close. Reverse engineering is legally protected practice. A recent rewrite of the intellectual property laws had specific language protecting it. PWK enjoyed full patent rights, licensing to others during the patent life and founding a very succesful business based on the patent. Any thoughts that Speakerlab "owed" anything to PWK are just fantasy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sheltie dave Posted March 30, 2004 Share Posted March 30, 2004 Drew, my horns come out on this for a couple reasons. Although the bass bin patent had expired, other applicable patents had not, hence PWK's eagle eyed oversight on where Speakerlab was going with his ideas and patents, expired and active. One of the marks of a person (and companies) is whether they tip a hat to those who preceeded them, and whose efforts have greatly advanced their cause. This was not the case with Speakerlab as seen from the midwest. My displeasure with them dates back to 1975, when they were happy to take my money without value returned It sounds like you have home built Khorns built to Speakerlab(Klipsch) schematics from the early '80s. What we had were full blown Speakerlab K-horns - 100%, so we probably are comparing apples to Bartlett or Anjou pears. Back in Peoria, the four friends who also picked up Speakerlabs during our high school days now ALL own Klipsch Khorns. Make one pause and think on matters... Working in scientific fields, I have seen many Nobel winners who receive their award twenty or thirty years AFTER their major research, as other professionals begin to cite and advance seminal discoveries/theories. The same holds true in business, re "A Beautiful Mind" and game theory. Speakerlab certainly hit the ground running when Paul's patents began to expire. BTW, there are numerous court cases wher patent infringement was successfully litigated after a patent expired. Paul did mention that he felt Speakerlab had clones in the pipeline before the critical patent expired - and he gloated they still could not properly execute his design. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnnyp Posted March 30, 2004 Share Posted March 30, 2004 Gil, Here are the T/S parameters of the 15" Speakerlab woofer as published in their catalogue: Model: W1508S Maker: Speakerlab Date: 10/01/1979 Sd: .086 Re: 6.8 ohms Fs: 23.9 Hz Fs/Qts: 78.0 Hz Vas: 21.6 cubic ft Mms: 76.6 Cms: .58 Rms: 5.06 Bl: 14.9 T-m Qms: 2.27 Qes: .354 Qts: .306 Ref SPL 98.8 dB Miles apart different from the K33. I never owned a pair but the worst thing about the Speaklerlab knockoff was the crossover. What was the difference between the Speakerlab K and the SK? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sheltie dave Posted March 30, 2004 Share Posted March 30, 2004 John, I'm still a babe in the woods re design specs. Are these predicated by the enclosure design, or are they set in concrete, unchanging no matter what box they are dropped in? I've been told their specs fall short of the K33 no matter what you do. Thanks for any help! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drewb Posted March 30, 2004 Share Posted March 30, 2004 I took the time to create a Hornresp model (software for modeling horn loading) for the two woofers. They are more similar when put into the bass bin than the numbers suggest. I did this to try to convince myself to invest in k33's, the results were a surprise. Here is the K33e woofer. Here is the 1508S: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-MAN Posted March 30, 2004 Share Posted March 30, 2004 ---------------- On 3/30/2004 6:56:59 PM johnnyp wrote: What was the difference between the Speakerlab K and the SK? ---------------- Hi, Johnnyp! I think that the difference is that the SK had the separate top cabinet on a riser (ala Klipsch) whereas the standard K had the flush mount top cabinet. DM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WMcD Posted March 30, 2004 Share Posted March 30, 2004 I thought the Qts on the SpeakerLab was much higher. I don't recall where I read that. Bruce Edgar indicated that was causing problems with high end response. I was using SpeakerLab K and SK to indicate the same thing. It may be that PWK registered "K-Horn" at or about the same time SpeakerLab started using the "K" reference. Contrary to popular belief, it is not necessary to register a trademark for it to be recognized as such by a court. Also, it is not necessary that the infringing mark be identical. This all falls under the notion of Unfair Competition. The test is "likelyhood of confusion". One famous case is the picture of the alligator on Izod shirts. The use of the word Alligator was an infringement. Then there was Cyclone fence and Tornado fence. The point is that the near copy of the horn, with patents expired, should not be a problem. However, you put a K on it, and there is possible or likely confusion as to it originating from Klipsch. The folks in Seatle probably got a strong letter from Klipsch lawyers and decided to fold. There is a line of cases where patent holders, seeing their patents expire, contend that some functional aspect of the design is now a trademark. Trademarks have potentially infinite life. You may have seen "Best" locks. They have a mechanism allowing change out of the cylinder from the front, by use of a different key. There is a distinctive mechanism which looks like a figure 8 which was necessary to the design and functional. My recall is that there was no patent or the patent lapsed. People started making the same mechanism with the figure 8; again part of the functionality. Best claimed that the figure 8 was a trademark. The court did not agree. Note that PWK was not trying to extend the patents, to my knowledge. Rather is was an objection to the use of K. Incidently, PWK had a design patent (you'll see "Patent D- ########) on the appearance of cabinet. But that has a finite lifetime too. Best, Gil Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-MAN Posted March 30, 2004 Share Posted March 30, 2004 Hi Gil, More food for thought... Yes, the model "K" was plainly a rippoff of the Klipsch name alright, sort of hoping to "ride the coat tails" of the big name. But it was completely legal. As a matter of fact, if Klipsch took notice and responded at all, it meant that Speakerlab was causing some competition in the market place... I doubt that that ever happened (either the competition or any particular notice by PWK). There is nothing but unsubstanciated rumor on this, and I have talked with Speakerlab personnel who presumedly would know. They all are adament about NO LETTERS, NO LAWSUITS and NO LITIGATION. So let's put it to bed... It is not allowed to trademark a single LETTER or NUMBER. It has to be a specific expression or at least a word. You CAN however trademark 2 character or more combinations thereof or phases that is actively marketed by your business entity. The word MUSTANG for instance, is not trademarked, as the meaning of the word itself can be made to but not always refer to a specific product. The PHRASE "Ford Mustang" can, however be trademarked due to its specificity. Even so, trademarks also have a finite lifespan. There are a variety of trademark types that one can apply for, however, the TM specifier has to be visable on the advertisement or product containing or representing the trademarked product in question. I don't see any of that on the Klipschorn or documentation or advertising as "the letter 'K' is a registered trademark of Klispch and Associates...", etc. which would be required by trademark law. Also if what you said was absolutely true, if "we" made a new khorn knockoff and called it the model "C" who would be first-in-line to sue "us"? Coca-cola or Canada Dry? how about numbering it instead, who's the litigator? KEF? BMW? B&W? Please... Ok, I'm done. Thanks! DM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WMcD Posted March 30, 2004 Share Posted March 30, 2004 D-Man, I can't quite agree with you in everything. This is all good natured, you know. Let's not get into a two-channel thing and Trey shuts us down. Smile. If you have reports from inside SpeakerLab that there were no letters received. Well maybe so. And do you have info from the top people who whould have received a letter (question). I don't either. I read that PWK "took them to task." It makes me think some action was taken on his end. The general public may never know with any certainty. The USPTO has some restrictions on what they will register as a trademark. This includes identification of classes of goods to which the trademark is attached. That is not the whole story. Naturally, "likelyhood of confusion" anticipates that there are some like goods involved. There may well be a thousand uses of the mark "Ivory" or "Mustang" or "Zenith" out there. But the goods are not in competition with each other. Generally speaking, the law of Unfair Competition is part of "equity". This is to say, fairness. There are few "black letter" rules established. Rather, every case is considered on its merits. The opinions of the reviewing courts which I've read show that the courts (judges or panels of judges) do not like the arguments of lawyers that there are bright lines. Though there are some. Two years ago I was reading one by the Supreme Court of California where it flatly rejected arguments that it should establish an exact calculus (my words) for doing justice in equity. That was a case of insurance coverage for asbestos suits. A bit far afield, granted. Now that seems somewhat unfair in a way because we'd like to have a system of laws which are clear. But the other side of the problem is that some joker will come around and find a new, clever, way of suggesting that their product is endorced or associated with those of another, when it is not. So, judges get really annoyed when they see something which looks like a swindle, and then are told by lawyers that they can't do anything about it. Now as much as I've stated to the contrary on general principles, there are some fast rules. Patents expire. Copying is permitted when there is no IP protection. Folks with IP protection can run afoul of anti-trust laws. Overall, us lawyers can only predict what would happen if things went into litigation and appeals. I'd say that PWK had a good case to stop SpeakerLab from using the term K. OTOH, SpeakerLab could have kept making their version, otherwise. That is what I think. Best, Gil Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-MAN Posted March 31, 2004 Share Posted March 31, 2004 Gil, of course it is in fun...did you take it any other way? It is difficult to add inflection into typing... I just am trying to make a point. And we all want to "correct" what we see as a "wrong". But alas, again, it's all opinion, anyway. The whole Speakerlab thing is that they were a part of my earlier life, where Klipsch was not (but now is). As a matter of fact, I would not be into Klipsch at all if it wasn't for Speakerlab... I therefore have a feeling of nostalgia for SK's and the like. I guess that I resent people bad-mouthing institutions (however deserved) that were part of my youth and whose opinions I disagree with. It ain't right to let it go without sayin something about it... Granted, I am biased, but possibly more well informed on the subject than some others... BUT I MAKE THIS VOW: I WILL NEVER TALK ABOUT SPEAKERLAB AGAIN ON THIS FORUM...no matter what and how bored I get. DM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lshannon Posted April 21, 2004 Share Posted April 21, 2004 I saw the cross reference website for bauplane to the Klipsch Eckhorn for plans above. Has anyone heard of the Eckhorn by the: Art Of Sound Company in Germany, I believe. Has anyone compared them to the klipschorns? http://www.eckhorn.com/eckhorn.php Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lshannon Posted April 21, 2004 Share Posted April 21, 2004 I saw the cross reference website for bauplane to the Klipsch Eckhorn for plans above. Has anyone heard of the Eckhorn by the: Art Of Sound Company in Germany, I believe. Has anyone compared them to the klipschorns? http://www.eckhorn.com/eckhorn.php Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ka7niq Posted October 26, 2007 Share Posted October 26, 2007 What does everyone think of Speakerlab K-Horns. A rip-off, an improvement or a company playing of the Klipsch name. Thanks Rich I know this is an old thread, but some SpeakerLab SK's still survive, and are being used and liked by their owners. I have owned 3 pairs of Klipschorns over the years, as well as Corns, Belle's, Forte;s, and CF 3's and CF 4's. I think the Klipschorn is better constructed, but that is about all. To my ears, the SpeakerLab SK's sound better. The Klipschorn, the SpeakerLab SK's, and even the Bell's have that "folded horn warmth" or coloration. I think it is part of the folded horn breed. The mid and tweeter are adjustable via L Pads on the SK's. Once I cleaned em, they work fine. The tweter is vertically oriented, and seems to image much better in my room then the Klipschorns. Bass is almost overwhelming at times, and I am still playing with stuffing in the rear chamber. I think there are improvements to be made in the crossover, but the SK's I find to be very enjoyable. For stuff like Black Sabbath, STYX, B 52's and Metallica and Judas Priest, they are almost untouchable by anything I have had. They have a warm, full, almost thick tonal balance that lends itself well to Rock. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMCMAN Posted October 26, 2007 Share Posted October 26, 2007 Here is a pair that I built using only the bass bin speakerlabs plans. They sound great. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ka7niq Posted October 26, 2007 Share Posted October 26, 2007 Here is a pair that I built using only the bass bin speakerlabs plans. They sound great. Nice Horns! WTH are those mid and tweeter horns and drivers ? Crossover ? On your plans, did you use the speakerlab driver for bass ? Did your plans call for any dacron stuffing in the rear chamber of the woofer ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMCMAN Posted October 26, 2007 Share Posted October 26, 2007 JMCMAN:Here is a pair that I built using only the bass bin speakerlabs plans. They sound great. Nice Horns! WTH are those mid and tweeter horns and drivers ? Crossover ? On your plans, did you use the speakerlab driver for bass ? Did your plans call for any dacron stuffing in the rear chamber of the woofer ? Okay, to answer your questions about my horns. The mid horn I built and modeled after the Fostex H200 with the Klipsch K55 driver, the tweeter is the standard K77. For crossover the ALK universal network. The bass driver is the Bob Crites standard replacement for the K33. With a sound testing CD I am able to go down lower than the Klipsch Khorn according to Klipsch's specs. I am very pleased. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ka7niq Posted October 26, 2007 Share Posted October 26, 2007 JMCMAN: Here is a pair that I built using only the bass bin speakerlabs plans. They sound great. Nice Horns! WTH are those mid and tweeter horns and drivers ? Crossover ? On your plans, did you use the speakerlab driver for bass ? Did your plans call for any dacron stuffing in the rear chamber of the woofer ? Okay, to answer your questions about my horns. The mid horn I built and modeled after the Fostex H200 with the Klipsch K55 driver, the tweeter is the standard K77. For crossover the ALK universal network. The bass driver is the Bob Crites standard replacement for the K33. With a sound testing CD I am able to go down lower than the Klipsch Khorn according to Klipsch's specs. I am very pleased. Nice! Did your Speakerlab folded horn plans call for any stuffing in the rear woofer chamber, or did you use any ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMCMAN Posted October 26, 2007 Share Posted October 26, 2007 Did your Speakerlab folded horn plans call for any stuffing in the rear woofer chamber, or did you use any ? Yes the plans called for 18sq ft of 1" thick damping material, but after read some posts about stuffing I decided not to use any. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mungkiman Posted October 26, 2007 Share Posted October 26, 2007 I have Speakerlab bass bins of unknown vintage, with Klipsch AA Networks, University SA-HF mid drivers on Altec 511B lenses, and University HF-206 tweeters. I'm a big fan. 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.