The return of the Klipsch minibox

[Erik Mandaville]

My little minibox has been put back into play, now that the Lexicon has been shipped back to Shawn. The Lexicon provided, and by a very fair margin, the single most important and obvious improvement we have ever experienced. The Horus parafeed amplifier was a similarly important step up over the Moondogs, but the Lexicon was a true eye-opener for me in terms of what is now both possible and obtainable -- at a real-world cost.

I didn't think I was going to miss the sides and rear channels as much as I do.

The amount of criticism and defending associated with all of this was as amazing as it was unfortunate, but was helpful to me in the sense that it reinforced an extremely important concept: That what matters and sounds best to one person, may not to someone else. There is no a set standard for what consitutes the single best way of listening to music, nor for the type of machine used to provide it. I would be completely out-of-place if I was so bold as to say that multi-channel surround is now, based on my recent experience with it, the only way EVERYONE should start listening to music. I liked it, and intend on seriously working toward finding the means to having it here again in the hopefully not too distant future. It was incredible.

...in my opinion

[edwinr]

Good post, Eric. You are right. Ultimately discrete multi channel music will usurp stereo. Of that I have no doubt. I believe SACD is/was heading down the right path. The only thing to debate is the format. I really don't know whether SACD or less likely, DVD Audio have the answer at this time.

In the meantime, to enjoy original stereo recordings, we are left with several varieties of DSP programs including Dolby Pro Logic II, and some clever matrix tricks promulagated by the likes of Dynavector with their SuperStereo. This is no bad thing, I guess. It gives us a taste of what we can expect in the future.

Frankly, I get more satisfaction at the moment, from my home built, Hafler decoder, and two rear speakers, than many current multi channel discs. This setup just gives you that 'fuller' sound, enhancing live CD's and movies, without detracting from the stereo soundstage.

[Erik Mandaville]

Hi, Edwin:

You know, it may not necessarily replace stereo, because I know there are some that will still prefer two-channel over more. That's fine, as well. I'm not saying multi-channel is the 'BEST' in a very large use of the word, just simply that I wanted to be open-minded enough about it, hopefully without a sort of negative, self-fulfilling prophecy lurking beneath, to try it for myself. There have been times in the past where I think I embarked on an experiment or tried something for myself -- and did so with an already well-established or pre-conceived notion that the result of the experience was going to be negative. In my opinion, that is a very non-objective, unscientific, and inaccurate way of obtaining information -- not just about audio, but anything! That this has to do with audio is coincidental.

I like it very much -- others haven't, may not, won't, etc. That one way is 'right' and the other 'wrong' can only be applied on an individual basis. It's when that individually-arrived-upon conclusion is applied in general, or imposed on the potentially differing opinions of others that I think we run into problems.

[Daddy Dee]

Erik,

Thanks for your post, here, as well as describing your experience with the Lexicon. Writing in depth on a piece of gear in a meaningful way takes some considerable energy and I appreciate that, too. It allows others to have more understanding about what is actually happening.

That's one thing that's really cool about the Klipsch forum. For one thing, Klipsch afficiondos are a small subset of an already small part of the audio appreciating population. Further, folks who actually experiment with and enjoy something like the Lexicon represent a minute part of a small subset. For example, if I were to run across a webpage on Lexicon, I might think, "interesting... I wonder if this is really true or just hype to take my money?" Having the opportunity to follow threads written by people who I know and trust, now that is pretty cool. It is great to draw on a base of knowledge to validate or invalidate a particular piece of gear. That is actually priceless. Otherwise, I might be getting worn down by some salesman talking about the amazing detail and imaging of some ridiculously expensive boutique interconnects.

[sunnysal]

and how do you like the mini-box, three channel solution? can you live with it happily? or will you eventually have to buy a lexicon to reach your audio nirvana?

I would love to try it myself someday. regards, tony

[Erik Mandaville]

Dee: Our thinking is very similar. Thanks for your response.

Tony: Three channel is still much better than two for me. The Klipsch minibox, like the Klipschorns themselves, do very well given that they are both truly antiques. Actually, some of the nicest and well-built we own are antiques, so I use that word in a positive sense.

The minibox combines the L/R channels for the derived channel, as well as gives control over its output relative to the other two speakers. That gets me most of the way there, I think. It does not produce the eerily real sense of an acoustic space and air that I was, with some adjustment and fine tuning, able to get with the Lexicon -- but it does very well, and I much prefer it to two channels by themselves.

Working on this new 2A3 amplifier, I am building the minibox into the design, as well as installing a volume control on the amp (Moondog) I'm using for the center channel. I thus won't have a minibox per se,' but the necessary resistors and potentiometer will be included.

Come to think of it, maybe I won't do that -- I don't know. It just depends on when I can get something like the Lexicon for myself (which may be several months from now). It would also replace the 6SN7 grounded-grid preamp I'm using right now, which is fine, because I don't at all mind the combination of tube amplifier and solid state preamp. The Lexicon was a really great linestage, as well.

Erik

[Deang]

Didn't the Lexicon have features that weren't being used? Doesn't someone make something similiar, yet simpler, with less features -- the ones necessary to create the illusion?

In Technical Questions, there is a thread about time alignment between the drivers. http://forums.klipsch.com/idealbb/view.asp?mode=viewtopic&topicID=58775 Later in the thread, DJK alludes to a cost effective solution -- so I sent him an email. Here's his response.

What's better and costs less?

Bi-amping and a hi-fi time delay.

The pro stuff is just not hi--fi. being built with surface mount parts limits quality parts availability and most peoples' ability to work on them too.

I found some NEC PLD910 for reasonable. This was an expensive Dolby pro-logic piece with a very nice stereo delay (most Dolby pieces the delay is mono and low quality).

The high pass outputs on your crossover feed the delay, the delay feeds your HF amplifier. The tweeter is moved into the corner about a foot above the cabinet top, waffle-foam the cabinet top and side walls as needed.

The delay is easy to set, reverse polarity and maximize the null, re-connect in correct polarity. The tweeter is best positioned with an impulse analyzer, although I can hear it 'pop into focus' when its right. Re-working the crossover and a tweeter level control gives the best results. I don't use the stock Klipsch parts so I can't give a firm recommend here.

[Erik Mandaville]

This is interesting.

However I don't agree with the statement, "The pro stuff is just not hi--fi. being built with surface mount parts limits quality parts availability and most peoples' ability to work on them too."

Mark's Peach and Blueberry uses good parts used by many high-end companies, and the entire preamp is constructed on PCBs.

I think what you have written is curious, Dean. It's worth looking into. The Lexicon is remarkable, and in my opinion sounded absolutely 'hi-end,' although I'm not sure I know what that term (hi-end) means! I know what I like, and I liked what I heard.

Erik

[sfogg]

Dean,

"Doesn't someone make something similiar, yet simpler, with less features -- the ones necessary to create the illusion? "

Not really. I bought that Lexicon for $425. The music mode Erik was using is Lexicon's design and the only place to get the full version (with all the adjustments) of it is on a Lexicon.

Shawn

[sfogg]

Erik,

"I didn't think I was going to miss the sides and rear channels as much as I do."

What they put out is subtle compared to the front but very important for the illusion of the acoustic space in the recording.

"and intend on seriously working toward finding the means to having it here again in the hopefully not too distant future.  It was incredible."

I'll keep my eye open for any good deals on them for you. They tend to go quickly at the really good prices.

Shawn

[Allan Songer]

I have always found "surround" to be very distracting when listening to music. But then, I tend to prefer mono to MANY stereo recordings as well.

I have a good friend with a very high-end 7 channel system--I have no idea as to brand (with 60 plasma TV) and I have to admit it's pretty cool for watching movies and concert videos.

Perhaps I just haven't heard the right system.

[Tom Mobley]

Erik,

Mark's amp is PCB-based, but not surface mount. PCB construction doesn't necessarily imply surface mount. Surface mount stuff is usually produced by highly automated processes like Intel building motherboards. I'll be willing to bet that Marks stuff is through-hole type PCB.

[scott0527]

Surface mount technology or SMT is when the components literally sit on the surface of the printed circuit board. Usually a solder paste holds each lead in place until an oven heats and cures the paste thus soldering the component to the board. Through hole is what a lot of us audio tweakers are used to seeing. Big old resistors and capacitors with wire leads comining off the ends. These leads go through holes in the printed circuit boards and are soldered to the boards and the excess leads clipped.

I simple through hole board like the driver board on an ST70 could be shrunk by about 5 times using SMT parts and design. You'd still have to leave room for the tubes though!

I guess we haven't seen the boutique(Hovland, Auricap, Haddock etc.) resistors and capacitors available in SMT yet.

[Deang]

I'm not sure Erik, but I think "high-end" just means freaking expensive and unreliable.

A couple of MC-1's on Audiogon right now, and the only way I could play with one would be to unload The Peach, and that sure isn't going to happen.

I'm not sure about Dennis' criticism about the surface mount parts either. I think he's alluding to the fact that there is a heck of a lot of stuff crammed into those boxes, and to get it all in there -- they have to use parts that fit, as opposed to the best parts which are often bigger. The Peach OTOH, was built with the best parts in mind from the start, and the PCB was designed to accomodate them.

Some, like me -- have invested a lot of time and money into serious two-channel. My main problem with the multichannel route isn't the solution itself, but the money it would take to do it right. I don't know about anyone else here, but for me it would mean having to dismantle and sell what I have in order to try this interesting new thing. What I have now is better than anything I've heard before, and it would mean having to give it all up. Much too painful for me I think.

I think I'm just going to leave my Klipschorn based system alone, and maybe slowly start building a multichannel system using Heresy's and a subwoofer. Don't know, it's all about money now, and since I don't have as much to play with as I used to -- the choices are more critical.

[Deang]

Just saw the posts explaining what SMT is -- thanks guys.

Shawn -- I haven't seen an MC-1 anywhere for less than $1200. I have been looking. Just because I'm skeptical doesn't mean I'm close minded.

[sunnysal]

they seem to go for above $1,000 on ebay. tony

[dodger]

In my sig, I state that I am only a two channel person. I have openings in thought for someting different.

As with Allan, I probably have not heard a pleasing or correct set-up.

But Erik, your post shows an open mind, experimenting - or as I sometimes say - playful side.

There will still be a niche for two cannel stereo. But I believe prices of quality Components for two cannel will rise. We have a few "inexpensive" Turn-tables that show that. Not knocking them at all.

But as we look at the ages of the majority of two channel owners, 45 - 60 + seems to be an audience with a little more disposable income. It also represents a shrinking market.

Technology changes because it is available and it can put other forms away. Thus, financial incentive. Get rid of your LPs, get rid of VHS, go to HDTV/HT, more channels. Today it's better to have things change quickly.

The age bracket I mentioned is used to models being available for a couple of years at least.

So we embrace the change. We adapt and adopt. But some of the changes , do we really want or need?

It all goes to the eventual point of being open. Though for sentimental and age, reasons we may not really want to change.

dodger

[3dzapper]

I have an Audio Pulse Model 1 in my closet. All this discussion by Erik has me thinking.

It will provide an enhanced stereo signal with variable delay to up to eight channels. I have plenty of tube amps and Heritage to do five channels and a set of KG-1.1s I could use for sides. Hmmmmm.

After my wife's classes start up again. She goes nuts when I tear the room apart! Although I could ......

Rick

[Deang]

Don't do it Rick, Noooooooooooooooooooo

[sfogg]

Tom,

" Surface mount stuff is usually produced by highly automated processes like Intel building motherboards"

Surface mount is also *better* for any sort of digital circuit. Shorter traces minimize capacitance which can cause problems in high speed circuits.

Except for the power supply the Lexicon Erik borrowed is completely SMT.

Dean,

"Shawn -- I haven't seen an MC-1 anywhere for less than $1200."

Erik had a DC-1. Depending upon the software in a DC-1 it can have identical processing to a MC-1. The DC-1 had v4 software which was the last version for the DC-1, DC-2 and MC-1.

A DC-2 has the exact same audio stage as a MC-1 just different chassis, faceplate and input setup. A fully loaded one had a BIN on ebay for $875 a week or two ago, that would be a pretty sweet deal.

Like I've mentioned before if anyone is looking into buying one and has any questions on it let me know. There were a lot of versions of DC-1s and anything pre-v3 isn't as good of a setup for use with K'Horns as the bass management options would be all wrong for them. The v3/4 units also had a lot of other improvements in them.

Rick,

"I have an Audio Pulse Model 1 in my closet. All this discussion by Erik has me thinking. "

I have no problem whatsoever lending you the Lexicon if you wanted to try it. I'd set it up for you as well unless you want to do that yourself.

Shawn