any LaScalla lovers?

[colterphoto1]

Forgive me for double dipping, but the responses of Cornwall v LS are starting to sound pretty similar. We may actually have a quorom of opinion on something fairly subjective here!

Michael

[Coytee]

I'll add my meaningless thoughts

I've had my LaScalas for 25 years. They will thump you in the chest but will not "shake the foundation" (lack of real bottom end)

That said, they DO sound fabulous outside at parties & such where they can really sing.

I've had more than one person come to me later on simply drop jawed at "what kind of speakers were you using, they sounded soooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo good"

[NOSValves]

----------------

On 5/11/2005 1:40:30 AM LonestarBlues wrote:

I own 2 pair of Cornwalls-1977 with Deang Auricap crossovers, 1983 Cornwalls & 1989 Industrial

La Scalas in unfinished birch.

Both the Cornwall & La Scala are great sounding speakers in my opinion. They both make this South Texas Bubba go hubba hubba when I listen to either the Cornwalls or La Scalas. Both speakers will git-

r-done sonically for me.

The Cornwalls have more bass slam.

The La Scalas bass is not lacking

to my ears and I like the sonics of the horn loaded woofer. The La Scalas have the advantage in the midrange over the Cornwalls. It all boils down to subjective personal preferences in sonics. I like them both-me mucho gusto Klipsch Heritage speakers.

Regards, Mike

----------------

Very reasonable post! I agree 100%. The thing with a Lascala in the bass region is placement. Get them in those corners. The Cornwalls don't need a corner.

In my situation I have my work bench in between my lascalas. The bench is built out of kitchen cabinets and they are placed 8" off the back wall but the bench top extends all the way back to the wall. This acts like a port or something. The Lascalas have walls on 3 sides . I have measured my Lascalas dead flat to 45Hz and down 2dB at 40Hz lower then that they start dropping like a rock down 5 dB at 35Hz. Mileage varies depending on setup. I get serious bass with this setup and I'm sure many members that have been here will confirm it.

Craig

[NOSValves]

Well come on over to my basement and feel the concrete vibrate under your feet setup, setup, setup it means everything.

[Coytee]

----------------

On 5/11/2005 11:38:01 AM NOSValves wrote:

Well come on over to my basement and feel the concrete vibrate under your feet

setup, setup, setup it means everything.

---------------

With today's subs, the following will seem sort of stupid, but I ALSO have a pair of Electro Voice Interface D speakers.

Their -3 db point is 28 hz at 106 db

I bought these in 1978 or 1979 and they were my first purchase in anything to do with serious audio.

I'm afriad over the years I've had my LaScalas in various configurations (though always powered with SS).

Bottom line, no matter what the configuration I ever had them in, the EV's will simply TOAST Klipsch when it comes to shaking the floor. There simply is no comparison. I say (admit) that as a 25 year owner of Klipsch. I'm STILL amazed today at the kind of sound they can put out... I'm also somewhat saddened that the research/gains they did those years ago seems all for nothing in favor of breadboxed sized speakers. The LaScalas will simply not go where these will. I've TOTALLY missed out on the "revolution" of subs quite frankly, because I've never felt the need for one with the EV's.

Stats: 97 db sensativity, 50 watts continuous & 500 watts peak. I belive they use the EV T350? It's the "babycheeks" Radial horn tweeter as I belive they call it.

[D-MAN]

This has nothing to do with CW's but as far as comparing the LS to its older brother, here goes...

The mechanics of the LS are that they differ very much from the Khorn. Bear with me, I'm just saying that they are different as per its intended use, not better or worse.

However, anyone expecting the same degree of bass output from the LS as the Khorn is going to be somewhat disappointed. But that's physics.

First, the LS back chamber is smaller in overall volume, effectively raising the fc of the same woofer used in the Khorn, the K33E which features a niominal fc of 34Hz.

Second the horn is shorter, 21" overall for the LS and 63" for the Khorn (1:3 ratio of difference). The LS uses a "rubber throat" in that the horn changes its expansion rate from 60 Hz at the throat (a 12" cross-sectional area doubling length) compared to its mouth or terminal horn section expansion. It also is notable that the Khorn maintains a consistant 21.7" area doubling length (40Hz) thoughout its length.

Third the LS exponential throat feeds a column at the fold which displays no expansion for about 6". The Khorn maintains a consistant expansion rate through the folds.

Fourth, the LS horn mouth terminal section is hyperbolic in expansion, not exponential, as is the Khorn. The hyperbolic expansion is well above 100Hz, giving an overall "mix" or nominal fc for the LS as approximately 70Hz, according to PWK in his AES pre-presentation paper on the LS. The effective cutoff of the LS is considered to be around 60 Hz, depending on the relative drop in SPL that one finds acceptable.

Both the Khorn and the LS have virtually the same size throat area (78 sq. inches), the same throat opening size (39 sq. inches) and the same size mouth area of approx. 4 sq. feet. The expansion rates and respective lengths are very different, of course.

The KHorn by design is intended to benefit by corner placement, where virtually any speaker can have its bass output reinforced to a degree, the Khorn really is restricted to exclusive corner use, and the LS can be used in a stand-alone manner, however, it requires at least one adjacient surface to its mouth in order to achieve its respective fc.

The overall effect of the LS having only one fold and such a short length is that the upper-and-mid-bass frequencies remain relatively intact, and the Khorn, by the nature of its folds and having more than the LS, tends to muffle or otherwise color the upper band pass quite a bit, comparatively.

Therefore, the LS is capable of crossing over at a much higher frequency, even as high as 800Hz vs. the 400Hz (approx) that the Khorn is "recommended" to use.

Comparing one to the other can be summed up this way, the LS has much more punch than the Khorn due to the upper-and-mid-bass it is capable of reproducing without much coloration. To prevent coloration, the Khorn crosses over lower. The Khorn, however can go an octave lower than the LS, but exhibits less upper-bass punch in doing so.

The Khorn also tends to benefit from having the upper-frequency drivers at what PWK considered to be the optimal height (somewhere around 40+ inches) and the LS, of course is closer to the floor. The Khorn also uses a different, and wider dispersion midrange horn than the LS, again contributing to a wider and possibly more open soundstage.

The LS was originally intended to be used in a PA application especially concerned with reproducing vocal frequencies rather than a home hi-fi situation, however, due to its relatively small size and big sound and efficiency, it has been "pressed" into domestic service.

The LS is a spendid example of a small footprint front-loaded folded horn using a bifurcated pathway. The only one smaller of the same performance capability is the "Little Bastard", I believe, but it has a unitary horn path.

DM

[joessportster]

i sold 2 pair of cornwalls in order to keep my la scalas, and upgrade my system, and the cabinets on both pair of cornwalls were much nicer than the la scalas, but i chose to keep the scalas! DOES THIS TELL YOU SOMETHING?, the la scala blows the corns away, and the bass goes plenty low enough for most listening, and i dont know what anyone can mean by muddied mids these things just put out awsome sound JMHO. Joe

[triceratops]

Coyotee wrote in part:

...I ALSO have a pair of Electro Voice Interface D speakers.

Their -3 db point is 28 hz at 106 db...

Coyotee,

Thanks for your post. I assume the EV Interface D's have a active equalization like the Interface A's to enable them to get that low with a small box. Do the Interfaces have more audible distortion than the LaScalas? What would happen if you used an active equalizer on the LaScala to boost the lows? Would it increase distortion? I'm wondering what the trade-off is since it is often said "there is no replacement for displacement."

Best in horns,

triceratops

[EDR]

My ls may not shake the foundation but they do shake the walls and pictures of my parents home and that is a good 5 acers from my shop where I keep my lascalas. Must be the mid range.

[Timmikid]

And then when networks are upgraded/rebuilt, placement is checked and still you don't have enough bass. You can always 'press the loudness button' with these.

quote from other thread (favorite 6L6, etc.); Audible Nectar wrote in his first Valve Art KT66 review:

Let's start with the obvious: Bass. Lots of Bass. Initially, I was thinking "OK, I like this" on the first few tracks, but it got tiring in pretty short order. The best way to describe it was the way Steve Hoffman described his KT66 tubes with MC30's on his website: "like someone pushed the loudness button".

I guess the tubes are part of the setup, setup, setup!

[Coytee]

----------------

On 5/11/2005 11:31:49 PM triceratops wrote:

Coyotee wrote in part:

...I ALSO have a pair of Electro Voice Interface D speakers.

Their -3 db point is 28 hz at 106 db...

Coyotee,

Thanks for your post. I assume the EV Interface D's have a active equalization like the Interface A's to enable them to get that low with a small box. Do the Interfaces have more audible distortion than the LaScalas? What would happen if you used an active equalizer on the LaScala to boost the lows? Would it increase distortion? I'm wondering what the trade-off is since it is often said "there is no replacement for displacement."

Best in horns,

triceratops

----------------

Ironically, I KNEW someone would ask about that and the moment I posted that I started looking for something I'd read but can't find it.

Yes, the "D's" also have the eq like the A's. The C & D shared the same eq. When I had the 4 speakers plumbed together (which was most of their lives except for the last say, 5 years) it was with the eq in the system. The eq affected ALL the speakers because I had it in the tape loop and was unable to segregate it out to just the ev's. (I ran all with my 120x2 Yamaha)

Have you ever been inside a good running Oldsmobile 442, Chevelle SS 396, GTO or other classic muscle car?

If so, then you know that compared to today's cars, they seem to just have unlimited power... want more? just push the pedal further. More again? push just a bit more.

That is what these speakers (both) seem to be like to me. They always just seemed to deliver what ever I wanted out of them. With all 4 of them playing, the LaScalas would just POUND you in the chest and the EV's would shake the walls. It was quite violent and I say that in the best of ways.

Might also be worth noting that I had some dbx gear plumbed inside that loop also, an expander, subharmonic synthesizer and eq.

Now, this next comment is going to rile some folks perhaps but if you compare it to a LIVE concert, I'll still stand behind it.

When you had the 3bx, sub harmonic synth loop "ON" verses off, the difference was like night & day.

It would literally be like listening to (today) a LaScala verses a transister radio. It put you IN that live concert. No, you did not get that spaciousness that a 2A3 tube will give you, but it gave you a solid kick in the a&& experience and literally put you in the live concert (which was more of my preferred stuff)

Back to the EV eq. As I recall, it wasn't like a bass boost kind of eq. I seem to recall what I read as concluding it would not hurt the LaScalas. I never noticed any difference in the sound quite frankly unless I switched the slope on it. I usually kept the slope at the 0 level instead of heading in to the minus area.

I don't know if it rolled things off, or just did what it did below the LaScalas abilities. I'll try again to find that. I still have an original EV brochure on the speakers and a 1978 or 1979 hi fi review of them (though the review is a copy)

I simply can NOT get myself to part with them yet, even after getting the Khorns and quite probably, having no where to put the EV's. Just what I need, 2 Khorns (over 100 lbs each) 2 LaScalas (over 100 lbs each) and 2 EV's (over 100 lbs each)

The Ev's actually weigh more than the Lascalas if I remember correctly.

[Duke Spinner]

Sub-Harmonic Synth ....! ! !

C'mon, Mr. Disco .....

say, .... I have one, too ....

kills the transient attack, tho ....

[Duke Spinner]

Sub-Harmonic Synth ....! ! !

C'mon, Mr. Disco .....

say, .... I have one, too ....

kills the transient attack, tho ....

[colterphoto1]

Coyotee,

I used to OWN a 1968 Olds 442! Couldn't afford gas for that beast today!

Michael

The LaScala is a very musical speaker. Heck, I listened to so much live music in the 70's and 80's (was that music) through 'concert' speakers, that the PA sound of the LaScala puts my ears right at home. But at normal listening levels, I prefer my Corns.

[Frzninvt]

To restore the transient attacks, add a DBX 3BX-DS to work in conjunction with the 120X-DS and violah! The Impact Restoration circuit will knock your socks off!

[Coytee]

----------------

On 5/12/2005 8:38:40 AM colterphoto1 wrote:

Coyotee,

I used to OWN a 1968 Olds 442! Couldn't afford gas for that beast today!

Michael

The LaScala is a very musical speaker. Heck, I listened to so much live music in the 70's and 80's (was that music) through 'concert' speakers, that the PA sound of the LaScala puts my ears right at home. But at normal listening levels, I prefer my Corns.

----------------

Eeeee haaaaaa

I had a 71 4-4-4 convertable at that! As I recall, they only made like 1,700 convertables that year. I liked to tell people that for STRICT highway driving I might get 13 mpg, but for FUN driving, I got about 8

Interestingly enough, I obtained the car used while in college. Had it for maybe 2 years? Decided one day to rebuild the carb. Took it inside took it all apart in my apartment kitchet. Put it all back and hmm... found this interesting screw on the top. Seems said screw was connected to the secondary butterflies. further hmmmm... seems as I tighten that loose screw up, it raised/tightened the butterflies to their "holder". veryyyyyyy interesting.

The car was a 3 speed Hurst (I have never seen a 3 speed). Second gear would top out at about 60 mph before car started blubbering which is why I did the carb thing. Well, seems that loose screw was allowing the secondaries to choke out a bit. That simple tightening of the screw allowed me to go to 80 mph in second gear. Talk about cool.. I could start at stoplight in second (or third if I wanted) and just simply scoooooooooooooooot until I hit 80 mph and then shift. Gads, that was a bad a$$ car & I loved it. It wasn't the W-30 version though.

I use to live in Indy and somewhere up/down Michigan st (avenue?...been years) anyway, some IDIOT t-boned me and wiped the car out.

I'm not sure if that happening would have hurt more, or my Klipsch being taken away....

Now, back to my polyester suit & my disco music...

(singing in background"...)

Ha ha ha ha staying alive...staying alive....

[Coytee]

----------------

I had a 71 4-4-4 convertable at that!

----------------

Stupid fingers, I had a 1971 442 not a 444 nor a 820 (?)

[Coytee]

Just another aside mixing 442's and LaScalas

When I was in college (Miami University, Oxford Ohio), I had most of my same rig.

While in the dorms, everyone was BLOWN away by what we had stuffed in our room

Couple stories

1. I'm early to bed, early to rise kind of person, always have been, always will be. Well, in college, freshman year, my hall mates were ALWAYS up all night with their stereos just BLARING away and quite frankly, rather rude given that I was trying to sleep.

That said, I once decided to get a little bit even. I had a mechanical timer. I hooked everything up to it and set it up to come on about 4:45 AM. I then turned the volume to about 7 on my 120 wpc Yamaha (and this was connected to my LasCalas with the 3bx/sub harmonic synth/eq in loop). I then put album on player & cued it up to those ANNOYING bells/clocks/chimes on TIME / DSOTM. I had the timer set for somethign like 5 minutes as memory serves, then to go off.

I then left for the weekend (friday night)

There was HECKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKK to pay when I got back sunday night. It was soooooooo funny. In the middle of the night, those bells/chimes/clocks just lit off and absolutely ruined EVERYONES sleep.

Needless to say, I think they finally caught my meaning

Item #2 With the convertable 442, I was able to put my LaScalas in the back seat (top down) and they would just perfectly fit side/side. I then put what ever electronics I needed in the trunk/front seat and wa-la, I had instant Mobile Jam. I put on the music for many parties/frat parties (at $20/hour) and just packed it up in the car to take it home.

Yes I needed a person to help carry the LaScalas out/in, but I always had someone who was DYING to be a part of the show and enjoyed helping at no cost. I guess there was a cool factor to be part of helping bring the walls down.

I carried my EV's once in my previous (to the 442) car (station wagon) and actually hooked them up to the car radio. That was the first time in my life I'd ever seen a rear view mirror BLIND with vibration from the sound coming out.

Oh, the memories

[Deang]

"Dean----Yes indeed, one can extend the bass with EQ, Edgar does so with his Seismic basshorn. But note that below the horn's cutoff frequency it's no longer acting as a horn but simply as a direct-radiator in a small sealed box. Thus the advantages of horn-loading are lost in that range; more power will be needed of course, and the EQ will force long excursions below cutoff and so distortion will rise."

I guess I should have been more specific in my thinking. I was thinking more along the lines of properly balancing the output of the speaker. Heresys, Belles, and LaScalas (IMO), need some help here. I don't have a plot for the LaScala bass bin, but I have posted one for the K-horn below. Looking at the plot, we can see that the sensitivity rating of the bass bin is derived primarily from the area of its strongest output. If looking at frequency response plots (real ones, not the brochure crap) of the entire covered range of the speaker, we see the same thing. On the whole, the response is a bit ragged. Obviously high sensitivity and the lower distortion that comes with it takes precedance over a smooth frequency response.

With the Klipschorn, its easy to get away with. You have a tweeter running at 105db/w, a 110db/w squawker attenuated by 3db, and a bass section cranking away at 105db+/w -- and things come away sounding pretty balanced. Using a RTA, its easy to see what the thing is doing in the room, and what I did was pull that middle down a little, and then lifted the sagging response below a 100Hz -- which resulted in a bottom section that sounds almost identical to what the LF section sounded like when it was being driven with the AK-4 network. Since I'm running 300 wpc right now, I decided to take advantage of the extra clean power, and bumped things up below 50 as well. The auto-EQ function of the Behringer took care of the top, and now I have the best sounding speakers I've ever heard. 80% of the EQ'ing was pulling things down, not lifting them up. So, I figure overall I lost 3-4db of sensitivity -- ask me if I care.

Back to the Heresy, Belle, and LaScala: We can really skip the Heresy, just about everyone agrees the top is so bright you can't tell the thing has a woofer half the time. So, concentrating on the Belle and LaScala, we know those are 100Hz LF horns as opposed to the 50Hz LF horn of the Klipschorn. I know the LaScala has a nice bump around a 100 or so, even though I've never seen a plot. So, does anyone here really believe the LaScala and Belle have LF sections that produce 104db/w or more? I'm not so sure. In typical setups, the top section is clearly overpowering the LF section. One could argue that this is caused by the fact that there is no real LF extension below 50Hz, but I don't think that's the reason. If there is strong output in the 40 - 50Hz range, the top would actually sound very much like the K-horn -- but it doesn't. I personally think users of these speakers without corner placement would have a much better experience with them if they attenuated the tweeter and squawker a bit. High sensitivity is good, but better sound is gooder, uh, I mean better.

[Duke Spinner]

Saayy , Mr. Freezin' in VT.

have you done that w/ the 120 Digital Synth ..???

i dunno ...

120 delays the transient, to synth the bass

then, the BX gonna bring it back ..?? Sounds like too much signal processin'

'less of course, your at the Disco .....