MICA Posted June 12, 2004 Share Posted June 12, 2004 Found Chorus one and second version for sale.Any opinion which one is better,please? thx Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MICA Posted June 12, 2004 Author Share Posted June 12, 2004 "great forum " here...a lot of answers and "help" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ben. Posted June 12, 2004 Share Posted June 12, 2004 Glad you like here!! Would you like some cheese, Marius? Funny emails, BTW! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Number 9 Posted June 12, 2004 Share Posted June 12, 2004 I suggest using the search function ... has been discussed a few times before. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MICA Posted June 12, 2004 Author Share Posted June 12, 2004 ---------------- On 6/12/2004 10:22:24 AM bclarke421 wrote: Glad you like here!! Would you like some cheese, Marius? Funny emails, BTW! ---------------- I guess you are wrong here.....My username is not Marius..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dougdrake Posted June 12, 2004 Share Posted June 12, 2004 Are they close by to you where you could listen to both? That's really the only way to know. I've heard opinions on both sides. Either are great! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ben. Posted June 12, 2004 Share Posted June 12, 2004 Sorry, Mario. My bad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
klipschster Posted June 12, 2004 Share Posted June 12, 2004 Chorus I has exponential midrange horn. Chorus II has the newer tractrix midrange horn. I imagine there must be a difference in sound (see my post concerning my question on exponential VS tractrix horns). Furthermore, Chorus I is ported and goes to 45hz. Chorus II uses a rear mounted passive radiator and goes down to 39hz for better bass response. Sensitivity for both models is the same at 101db with 1 watt at 1 meter. I guess it comes down to whether or not you would like the deeper bass response of the Chorus IIs (and who wouldn't?) and whether or not you would like the difference in sound (if any) from the tractrix midrange horn in the Chorus IIs. The deeper bass is a no brainer. The questionable differences between exponential and tractrix horns should probably be answered by you in person with your own ears via a Chrous I / Chorus II side by side comparison, if at all possible. I for one would love to do a side by side comparison of exponential VS tractrix horns. Anybody in southern california have both models of a speaker (Forte I & Forte II or Chorus I and Chorus II for instance)? I probably wouldn't imagine many that many people do but why not ask, right? If anybody wants to help me out here by sharing their observations and impressions on a side by side comparison that they've done check out my post and let me know. KLIPSCHSTER Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Number 9 Posted June 12, 2004 Share Posted June 12, 2004 As you say ... the key differences are the midrange and bass loading. The pros of using a tractrix midrange horn are best explained by the man who has been their biggest advocate, Dr. Bruce Edgar. Here is a PF interview where he discusses the tractrix. http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue4/edgarinterview.htm I once had read somewhere, that the reason Klipsch adopted the Tractrix midrange horn was because they were so impressed with it (sound-wise). It also enabled building a shallower cabinet, comparatively to one required for an exponential horn. The drone/passive radiator aslowed Klipsch to eke out a lower bass cutoff point without increasing the size of the cabinet significantly. A passive radiator loading, otherwise behaves much like a bass-reflex cabinet, whereby the bass response falls off very rapidly below the cutoof point. So, technically, the use of "newer technology" should make the Choruss II a better speaker, though some prefer the sound of the Chorus I for various reasons. All things being equal, technically, the bass should go a little deeper and midrange s/b bit smoother with the II vs. the I. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
klipschster Posted June 13, 2004 Share Posted June 13, 2004 Good article! Thanks! I didn't realize Paul Klipsch had trouble getting his mighty khorns to image properly and that he had to throw a Belle Klipsch in the middle in order to fix it. I always thought that Khorns would image wonderfully, which is what I've generally read in articles. True, you need to step back a bit in order to get them to image right, but you need a big room also. My Heresys sound best in a larger room and when I'm about 15 to 20 feet back from them. I've read that the bigger the horn speaker, the more room you need to give them to breath in order to get them to sound good to your ears. I would imagine that Cornwalls would need more room then my Heresys and the La Scalas more then the Cornwalls and so forth and so forth. I would venture to say that putting Khorns in a small room would make them sound pretty bad with little to no imaging at all. What I got from the article was that the tractrix is good for the midrange but not for the bass. I guess the tractrix gives the midrange a more neutral, or colorless sound. I know some people complain about horns coloring the sound but i like the way my heresys sound. They sound very different then a cone speaker. I wouldn't want my Heresys to sound more neutral, or cone-like if you will. Then it wouldn't have that "klipsch" sound that i love. Klipsch speakers always sounded different then others due to their horns. I've read that Paul was always proud of how his speakers sounded unlike all the others out there. I don't know why Klipsch would want to backtrack and tone down the horn sound which has helped define their product and is probably the reason why many of us are here and like Klipsch so much. If a tractrix horn makes a speaker sound less like a horn and more like a convential driver then I guess I wouldn't like it. I also wonder that if Paul Klipsch needed to place a Belle in the middle of his Khorns to get them to image right with stereo sound, why didn't he sell a three-speaker setup? He must have thought that the Khorns sounded okay by themselves, right? Klipsch probably uses tractrix horns on their new products like the RF and Synergy lines because it gives them the high sensitivity of horns without sounding much like horns in order to attract and sway buyers from the conventional driver crowd. I wonder if Paul Klipsch, if given the choice, would have choosen a tractrix version of his klipschorn (should he have built one) over his traditonal exponential version? Now THAT'S a good question, don't you think? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Number 9 Posted June 13, 2004 Share Posted June 13, 2004 Very hard to speculate and guess what PWK would have done, though, he was alive when the Chrorus/Forte were created, and supposedly had a hand in their design. So, my guess is he approved. The tractrix flare has been around for a long time, but it was basically obscure and not well understood until Dr. Bruce Edgar started writing about it in the '80s. It seems that most horn speakers today now pick tractrix designs over exponential. As the ariticle mentions, tractrix loading when done right, is smoother because there is less interacion going on in the throat area. A shrter horn help too when dealing with speaker sizes. You must also remember, that there are two types, the circular and the squared versions (as in the Chorus/Forte) of the tractrix horn. Dr. Edgar prefers the circular designs if mated to a 1st order crossover and when the cutoff point is not too low. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin Posted June 13, 2004 Share Posted June 13, 2004 PWK and Klipsch did announce and demonstrate a Jubilee model for the public, but never built it. They did build a professional cinema versions, which does have a huge Tractrix middle horn and a double 15 bass bin (only 45Hz): http://www.klipsch.com/product/product.aspx?cid=502 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T2K Posted June 13, 2004 Share Posted June 13, 2004 Your speculation of the Tractrix sounding more 'neutral' has more to do with the prevalence of sound rather than the 'coloring' of sound, methinks. Keith Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NOSValves Posted June 13, 2004 Share Posted June 13, 2004 The best imaging I personally have ever heard was a pair of Khorns spread out 26' playing without a center channel. The only catch is the cieling was also 26' tall. Craig Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
klipschster Posted June 13, 2004 Share Posted June 13, 2004 Would it have made a difference if the ceiling was 10-12 feet in height? 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.