Cornwall III

[Kriton]

Hmmm...you know what, I listen for the same things. The vocals

need to sound natural and the snares need to pop. I really listen

for these above everything else...all fo the following is to my ears of

course...

The CW3 drum pop was crisp as hell, and separated from the rest of the

music, as it should be since the percussion isn't coming from the

guitars or the voices. I could literally hear the stage delay I

think from the placement fo the different instruments on stage. I

found the transitions and dynamics to be incredible, with James Taylor

playing, you have a lot of loud and soft, and many transitions - and I

think all were superb.

The killer thing about my CW2's, IMO, is the way they are almost too

real. The strong suit for these things is the vocal midrange, you

can hear everything, and it can be really very ugly if the voice

singing isn;t very good...my CW's will show up a mediocre singer or

more likely a highly synthesized voice in a heartbeat. The CW3

was no different, you could hear every change of timbre, every slightly

flat entrance, every nuance - making the passages seem to me to be

"ultra real", taking the music from smoothed pap to actual live

performance. I felt (with Hotel California and James Taylor) like

I was there...close your eyes and you are in the fifth row center,

getting a contact buzz from the guy in front of you with the dube,

holding onto your beer, and living the moment.

The only thing better was actually being on stage mopping the brow of the drummer, and that was jubilee.

Do I think these are better than my 2's? Man, I have to say

yes...the CW3 sounded better to me, new crossovers and all...maybe the

new damping material I intend to put in them will help, but for now...I

<will> get a pair, just a matter of time, the stars, adn some

damned marketing on Klipsch part.

K(

[colterphoto1]

Dean,

Don't have a photo of it up yet, but one Jubilee bin had a horn similar to this mounted on it. It has a massive driver that I think was built in Hope 3" voice coil, etc. I think Roy said the number was 510 or 501. This photo is from a 325 unit, but the shape and size seem similar.

Michael

[Gilbert]

Dean,

Don't have a photo of it up yet, but one Jubilee bin had a horn similar to this mounted on it. It has a massive driver that I think was built in Hope 3" voice coil, etc. I think Roy said the number was 510 or 501. This photo is from a 325 unit, but the shape and size seem similar.

Michael

That is Fugly, phewwww!

I would not want to look at something like that in my house. I'll take Khorns, Belle's and Cornwalls any day over that Frankinstein.

[johnyholiday]

were you in a sitting position, for all the listening tests

[colterphoto1]

Most guys sat in the sofas shown in the thread General/Heritage Gathering. I did my usual 'pa guy' thing by walking in semi-circle during the CW and LS tests to check dispersion.

Michael

[Seadog]

I thought the CWIII sounded very good, and since I currently have CWs and CWIIs, I think I can say it is worthy of being called a Cornwall.

FWIW, The CWIII (and CWII for that matter) does not need a tweeter with the sensitivity of a K77. The LS and the Khorn LF sensitivity is so high that a K77 is required. The tweeter used in the CWIII and the HIII may be less expensive, but that does not mean they won't sound as good (or better) for those lower sensitivity speakers. I think the K79 in my CWII sounds just as good as the K77, but the K79 could never be used in a LS or Khorn.

During the demo in Hope, I personally preferred the CWIII to the LS, but that is probably because my ears do and the K401 do not match up too well, especially with SS amplification. I think the CWIII is a winner, and much improved from what we heard in Indy, and even that was pretty good.

[busterfree]

What kind of equipment was used in the test? Does it matter? When

designing new speakers, is there a standard process or certain types of

professional equipment to evaluate them? Or, would you use a variety of

ss and tube components readily available to average consumer?

[Deang]

They voice with QSC, Aragon, and Crown. EV stuff too I think.

[Deang]

Good input from you guys on the sound of CIII.

Michael, I'm pretty sure you nailed the horn on that one Jubilee (KPT-904-HF). The driver should be a B&C DE-750-8, or KDE-75-8P -- at least, it was at one time.

[Deang]

You guys also heard the Pro version. Actually, you heard Roy's version of the Pro version. Look carefully -- which horn was it?

[colterphoto1]

It's always interesting to me how different people not only have different taste in how they like their sound -- but how they tunnel into different parts of the sound when they listen. With me, it's cymbals, snare, and voice. If those aren't somewhat close I shutdown -- nothing else about the sound impresses me no matter how "good" it is.

These comments about the sound of the new Cornwall and Heresy are being watched very closely by Klipsch I'm sure. The new models may be "III's", but they really have nothing in common with the I's or II's except the size of the cabinets. It is very possible that these units might be the beginning of what constitutes the New Heritage Series. What you basically have here are implements from the Pro/Cinema Series dressed up in veneer. So, the questions everyone who heard these speakers should be asking are these: Did it sound "better"? Was the response smoother? Was there a loss is dynamics? Would I prefer what I heard to what I have? Improvement? Wash? Same but different? You know, those kinds of questions!

The Jubilee: In its present configuration, it's too obtrusive for most homes -- the HF horn is a monstrosity. What everyone really wants is a polymer resin composite version of The Jubilee Horn.

The H3 shares the same mid unit as its predecessor. The CW3 shares this same mid horn/driver combo which is not significantly different from it's prior unit in operation, given the 800 Hz crossover point. The acoustical 'signature' of the cabinets, being the volume, port size, driver complement, and crossover design/points is substantially unchanged- so the Heritage Voice, Paul Klipsch's design, lives on in these models. It is clear from talking to Roy Delgado that this was very much in the designer's mind during the engineering phases.

Sorry Dean, but it is impossible to answer the questions you ask, given that we were only given the privlege of hearing the new units side by side. There was no A/B comparison with the out of prodution models. That is what would have been necessary to answer your questions accurately. I thought the sound of all three was awesome and had I not a considerable stockpile of existing Heritage models, would buy these over any other available speaker design in a heartbeat. That is the most praise I can personally give them. Superior to my 64 CW's- most probably so, but I didn't hear them side by side.

The point being is that these old models have been given new life. From Klipsch's standpoint, they must be trying to appease the audience for that 'Heritage' sound, given the interest in it expressed on this very Forum. There is a finite supply of Heresies and Cornwalls avaiable used, and the LS has never had a quality hardwood veneer finish from the factory. It's probably a huge leap of faith that this step has been taken at all, we should consider ourselves fortunate that life has been breathed back into these old beauties. I hope the marketing arm of the company fully supports this decision.

I might suggest placing your order for a pair and comparing them yourself. How are these lines to survive if we do not show an immediate interest?

Michael

[LarryC]

You guys also heard the Pro version. Actually, you heard Roy's version of the Pro version. Look carefully -- which horn was it?

This one. I thought, and I think everyone thought, it was the best-sounding speaker there.

[formica]

The CWII's to me sounded very up front and live, and the Scala were more laid back, heavier bass, but just not as bright IMHO.

I'm a little surprised several people's comparisons between the LaScala II calling it "laid back" vs the Cornwall III... referring to it as more "in your face". Are these adjectives really comparing them to each other, or is it being compared to the previous editions. I didn't attend the pilgrimages so I didn't hear either one, but i'm quite curious.

To call the LaScala laid back would imply dropping its efficiency quite a bit to balance the bass horn with the MF section. Was the voicing of the LaScala changed that much?

Rob

[colterphoto1]

Roy set up the A/B test very well. He said the levels were balanced between all the speakers, so efficiency was taken out of the comparison. We listened to the same portion of the same music selection, a James Taylor piece with full band orchestration, which I thought was a nice sample, although I was not familiar with it. It started as simple voice and guitar (possibly piano), building with full rock ensemble later on. The same amp was used for each, being a pro model QSC. We listened to H3, CW3, LS2, and Jubilee with smaller and larger horn, in that order. Then Roy swapped the H3, CW3 and LS2 several times for our group.

For me, I listen to the bass regions more critically, being an ex-bass player and fan of the lower frequencies in music. The improved LS (lets call it LS2) still seemed to lack the transient attack of the CW3 and the upper bass region was a little muffled or distant sounding. I did still prefer the LS2 mid over the CW3 mid, but that is not my primary listening focus.

Although I cannot compare these newer models directly to the originals, I currently have both LS and CW set up side by side in my hearth room, so I am extraordinarily familiar with the differences. Being a fan of my existing CW over LS, I'm not surprised to prefer the new CW3 over the LS2. The H3 was very very close to the CW3, but exhibited more roll off of bass frequencies.

Hope this helps, it's very difficult to write about sound in such detail. But the listening tests were conducted very fairly imho.

Michael

[Daddy Dee]

You guys also heard the Pro version. Actually, you

heard Roy's version of the Pro version. Look carefully -- which horn

was it?

Dean,

It was the horn pictured in the top left of your post. The HF drivers

in the Jubilees we listened to are built in the Hope plant.

[Deang]

Thanks Dee.

I might suggest placing your order for a pair and comparing them yourself. How are these lines to survive if we do not show an immediate interest?

Michael -- You sir, are a wiener. I spent $6K on new Klipschorns less than two years ago. I'm done!

[TBrennan]

One thing I don't understand about you Klipschies; instead of worrying about new Cornwalls why not just get a pair of these?

[IndyKlipschFan]

Tom I always wondered what that sounded like myself.. Serious here too. If this is the pefect 2 way low bass close to a K horn .. and a much better horn driver from the pro line..maybe your on to something here???

Did anyone hear this unit?

[sunnysal]

how about this...

KPT-904-HF, is mated to the KDE-75-8P titanium compression driver, then we use the Jubilee bass bin...?

[colterphoto1]

I'm seriously thinking about getting one of them BIG OL HORNS and mounting it to a CW bass bin like Tom B suggested. That would be an awesome 2-way! Chris said he saw a CW where they had actually tried that with a large Tractrix horn.

I'm just guessing, but it's possible that this combo didn't work because of the need to enclose the horn in the cabinet didn't allow the woofer reposition, or perhaps it wasn't economically feasible in the price point they were shooting for. Doens't mean I can't do it at home! wwwoooohhhooo

Michael