Pure Corn Posted January 1, 2005 Share Posted January 1, 2005 Hello All, and Happy New Year, Can anyone explain the audible differences between the Cornwall and Cornwall II speaker? I understand the technical differences. I've heard that the Cornwall II is smoother on the high-side, or at least more forgiving. I am happy with the Cornwalls I have, but could pick up a set of birch IIs locally, in my same zip code even! The IIs are not pretty as my COOs, but would do. Thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Budman Posted January 1, 2005 Share Posted January 1, 2005 ---------------- On 1/1/2005 2:54:06 PM Pure Corn wrote: Hello All, and Happy New Year, Can anyone explain the audible differences between the Cornwall and Cornwall II speaker? I understand the technical differences. I've heard that the Cornwall II is smoother on the high-side, or at least more forgiving. I am happy with the Cornwalls I have, but could pick up a set of birch IIs locally, in my same zip code even! The IIs are not pretty as my COOs, but would do. Thanks. ---------------- what year are they. if the price is right and they are in your own town. can't get any better than that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boom3 Posted January 1, 2005 Share Posted January 1, 2005 I have 86 CW IIs. I have heard the CW Is over the years, but not done a side by side test. My opinion is that the K-79 used in the CW II is simply a better tweeter than the K-77, smoother and more extended. It also seems to have a slightly broader pattern than the K-77 as used in the CWI, and it doesn't spear the ear as much. It's much harder to compare the midrange. Not much is known about the K-52 mid driver of the CW II, except that it was orginally a Heppner design, not part of the Atlas or EV lines in the family tree of the K-55s. The K-55s have been scrutinized every which-a-way since they are much more numerous. The K-52 seems to have been used in a smaller range of models so less is known. Another thing, and I am not positive on this, I think the CW IIs used a steeper cutoff between drivers, doing a better job of keeping the bass out of the midrange and the mid out of the treble. My bottom line is that I love my CW IIs and want another pair for the back channels of my 5.1 set-up. 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.