tillmbil Posted April 11, 2004 Share Posted April 11, 2004 OK Dean let me have it. I have 1979 CW'a and I am interested in possibly changing the crosovers. What would be your recomendation and do you sell them? I sold my 95 Forte to a neighbor along with a 65WPC HK SS reciever. I was over to listen to them the other night and I would sware they sounded clearer than my set up. So there has to be something worong with my rig. Couls it be the MX110? Or is it the CW's need new parts? Any opinions? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guy Landau Posted April 11, 2004 Share Posted April 11, 2004 It's probably the MX110 that sounds too dark. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deang Posted April 11, 2004 Share Posted April 11, 2004 It's hard telling, and Guy might actually be dead on. OTOH, my impressions based on the many emails I get from Forte owners -- I would venture a guess that the Forte might be a bit more forward than Cornwall to begin with. There are probably a combination of factors that account for the differences you heard: The speakers, gear, and room acoustics come immediately to mind. According to Bob Crites, the Cornwall crossovers he has tested seem to remain relatively stable over time compared to LaScalas and Klipschorns. His theory is that since the Cornwall crossovers are inside the speaker, the parts are not exposed to the environmental changes the parts in the LaScala and Klipschorns are -- since they sit on the outside, and typically pushed up against an outside wall. I think his point is valid, especially when I see pictures of 20 year crossover boards off of LaScalas and Klipschorns that look like they came out of a junkyard -- and all the Cornwall crossovers look like they were built yesterday. Anything is possible, but if you had a faulty part in one of the crossovers, then the two speakers would sound different. This of course applies to a faulty driver as well. Speaking of drivers -- Bob did mention to me that the diaphragms tend to "wear out". over time. Even though the drivers still work, the diaphragms lose some of their integrity after the years of continual stretching. I am going to start building a nice Cornwall Type B, and will probably build two sets -- one using films, and the other using Jensen PIOs. Bob will certainly continue to build his using the metallized polypropylene in oils. I see nothing wrong with giving people choices -- as I have a feeling each different way of building will bring with it a slightly different flavor. In the meantime, considering the age of many of these vintage Klipsch speakers -- owners commited to long term enjoyment should consider eventually replacing diaphragms, and at least replacing the capacitors in their crossovers. As far as the Cornwall goes, I'm beginning to think that if you have the Type B -- leave well enough alone. OTOH, those running Type B2s might consider stepping back to the Type B. As time goes by, and I get a chance to hear the Type A's I just built, and can compare them to the Type AA -- I will begin to solidify my thoughts regarding simple vs. more complex. Zapper3 (Rick) mentioned something last week that I think may be true: Those listening to softer music, or at lower volume levels seem to prefer the simple circuits (Type B, Type A) -- and those who listen to the harder stuff, or louder, seem to prefer the AAs, ALs, and AKs. I don't know how this applies to the Cornwall exactly, since I'm under the impression that almost no one likes the sound of the B2. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guy Landau Posted April 11, 2004 Share Posted April 11, 2004 Can you borrow that HK receiver and try it with your CW's? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jorjen Posted April 11, 2004 Share Posted April 11, 2004 Tillmbil, Would these work?. I built these(ALK's)and installed them lastnight in the Cornwalls I am restoring. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deang Posted April 11, 2004 Share Posted April 11, 2004 It sure will work, he would have to build it himself, or have someone else do it for him for no charge. Jordan, if that big Solen in the front is feeding the high HF circuit like it is in the other ALK -- then you need to tear it out and replace it as soon as you can afford to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tillmbil Posted April 11, 2004 Author Share Posted April 11, 2004 Well I just got home and decided I had to try something different. I have brought my Scott299D (Nosvalves rebuild) into the den and I found my problem. The detail is there and Bass is way deeper. Great highs too. I will demo some other and then might have to either rebuild or replace the MX110. I will post after some different genre is played. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garymd Posted April 11, 2004 Share Posted April 11, 2004 Bill, It may be time to replace the 110. It's a great vintage piece but lacks the high end detail you'll hear with the scott. I would try the blueberry with the 240 and see what that sounds like. I'll bet it would be a great combo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jorjen Posted April 11, 2004 Share Posted April 11, 2004 Dean, The Solen is in the woofer circuit, that is why I did not change it. The squawker and tweeter circuits cost a pretty penny as I am running AudioCap Thetas. No room to replace the Solen with AudioCap, even with stacking. Next time I will start with a bigger board from the outset. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deang Posted April 11, 2004 Share Posted April 11, 2004 If it's on the woofer, there is no need to ever replace it. They are fine for that applicaton. If you didn't condition the Thetas, you may find the Cornwalls a little on the bright side for about the first 40 hours or so -- at which time they will begin to shift to a richer sound with wonderful clarity -- and zero grain or harshness. Are you going to Dynamat or caulk the squawker? If not, you will probably get some distortion from the lens throat at higher SPLs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jorjen Posted April 11, 2004 Share Posted April 11, 2004 Exactly. But, on my next set I am using AudioCap Thetas throughout. Just for the heck of it. These will be stunning looking, no compromise networks for my Khorns. Pics soon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allan Songer Posted April 11, 2004 Share Posted April 11, 2004 High End Detail = Excessive Brightness. Dark = Exquisitely balanced and lifelike. Just my opinion. A lost of folks around here seem to prefer the former. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deang Posted April 11, 2004 Share Posted April 11, 2004 Well Allan, that is definitely the case with the lesser metallized types in place. "Bright" brings thoughts of excessive forwardness and earbleeding. The Theta doesn't do that. What you get is clarity, and real detail without the edge. They just sound "right". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garymd Posted April 11, 2004 Share Posted April 11, 2004 ---------------- On 4/11/2004 9:27:58 PM Allan Songer wrote: High End Detail = Excessive Brightness. Just my opinion. ---------------- I agree to some extent Allan. When I owned the 240/110(or 7C), jazz recordings sounded wonderful. They can at times sound too bright (not earbleeding bright though) with my 299. That's when I take advantage of the tone controls. I listen to all types of music however and prefer the detail for most recordings. I hear things in the recordings I never heard on the other equipment (even on many jazz recordings). It must have been put there for a reason. That's when personal preference along with musical preferences come into play. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allan Songer Posted April 11, 2004 Share Posted April 11, 2004 Was talking about the difference between a HEALTHY MX-110 when compared with a nice 299. I haven't owned a MX-110 in about 10 years but had one in my office starting in the mid-1980s for many years. I found that the McIntosh offered a far more realistic and BALANCED sound when compared with a 299. Some would call it "dark" I suppose, it just sounds RIGHT to me. The Scott is a bit shrill at the top--"goosed" if you will. But maybe if you're listening to rock or pop it sounds better, I dunno . . . Most of you guys love that "loudness compensation" for the same reasons I guess. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colterphoto1 Posted April 16, 2004 Share Posted April 16, 2004 Hey gang, I'm moving to a new home and thinking of doing a complete remodel of my Corns- double rear panel, stiff baffle board, new veneer, x-overs, the whole deal. Question- I know a little about electronic circuitry and which end of the soldering iron to hold. Is is possible to build/rebuild my Corn crossovers to make up for aging components or just to improve the sound? How do I discover which networks I currently have and are there recommended steps towards improvement? What do these parts cost and how do I locate the approved or recommended replacement parts? Thanks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deang Posted April 17, 2004 Share Posted April 17, 2004 Question- I know a little about electronic circuitry and which end of the soldering iron to hold. Is is possible to build/rebuild my Corn crossovers to make up for aging components or just to improve the sound? Once you figure out what soldering iron to hold, you will need but a little practice to get the hang of it. There are several good turtorials on the net, and as soon as I find one -- I'll post the link for you. If you remove one of the back panels, you will find that the crossover is clearly labeled. I'm sure that you will find you have the Type B crossover, which is actually preferred over any other by most. It's a very simple circuit, using an autoformer (which does not need replacement), an inductor for the woofer (which also does not need replacement), and two capacitors (2uF and 4uF). The old Klipsch speakers used some very fine paper in oil motor run capacitors. Probably not my first choice in a cap, but many actually prefer them over most any other, and in all liklihood -- yours are probably fine. However, it is fun to experiment, and you might find a good film cap more to your liking. My personal preferences are AudioCap PPT Thetas, Hovland Musicaps, and Auricaps (in that order). There are also some motor run types using metallized polypropylene in oil -- and of course the very expensive Jensen paper in oils. All of these capacitors have there own "flavor". I suppose an argument could be built on the fact that Paul Klipsch originally voiced his horns with paper in oils -- and I myself have been giving this serious consideration. Good caps can be found at www.partsexpress.com, www.percyaudio.com, and www.welbornelabs.com, The Cornwall could use some extra stability, and you might consider adding some bracing inside the cabinet. Also, don't forget to caulk the squawker lens. 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.