Pyschoacoustics and the LAS vs. Khorn debate

[NOSValves]

mh said: "If it tests good and sounds bad, you might be an audiophile." "If it tests bad and sounds good, you might be an audiophile." IF YOU BELIEVE EITHER OF THE ABOVE YOU MIGHT BE DEAF Lordy, this seems to make no sense as worded. I know the original quote you are playing off of but.... Craig, I am still trying to make out what you are attempting to say here. Help the old man with the caffeine and boat beer addled mind try to understand. It's a head scratcher to be sure. kh" I think ole Craig is saying that I might be Deaf, Deaf. Bob Crites

No Craig is saying some people are hung up on test results and they don't mean everything. If test results are the absolute final word we would all listen to the same amp, preamp, speakers, source, wire and this hobby would be over.

Craig

[IndyKlipschFan]

As one of the lucky ones on this board I can speak on my own personal use of K horns and La Scalas in two different Home Theater applications.

First the K horn set up: 7.1

Upstairs with K horns I use a older 1967 on its side vertical Cornwall (so horizontal spread of sound) and " I Love" the results. The bass in the center is almost as low as the K Horns, very fast, and dialog wise the sound is HUGE! I have been suggesting this set up to others on the board since I did it myself.

Does a K horn need a sub? Most of the time for music, no.. Yes, if you use the K horns in a HT setup for sure. I use the RSW 15", and again a great match. (4 ) RS7 surround speakers for the rears.

Now to the La Scalas: 7.1

Downstairs I have a dedicated HT room and longed for a perfect match "Timbre" wise, to seek my own vision of audio Nirvana. I now have 7 perfectly matched La Scalas and it is awesome. For music, La Scalas do need a sub more than a K Horn, IMO.. But NOT always. For movies... You will have to have the sub(s) to give you the lower punch you need for sure. (no need to lie and say it is there when it is not.. ) After successfully hearing the new sub system (amp and 2 subs) in the THX setup used during the big conference room at Klipsch during the Indy Pilgrimage Heritage setup, I chose to go that route. OMG, it is the perfect sub(s) for the La Scalas.

Colterphoto1 can say what he wants about the room, he was just here for a visit with a movie and some music videos recently. I think he was impressed as well. Remember bottom line is were talking about going from say a 9.5 to a 9.9 out of 10 speakers, and in tiny, tiny, increments to total happiness. You may or may not hear the nuances. if you don't.... good for you.. If you do.. your whole life you may continue to evolve back n forth. Bottom line, it is what YOU like... And no one else's opinions really count because they do not live with you 24/7. But your speakers will be with you 24/7. So do it right... for you!

Best of luck, hope this helps.

[Marvel]

If you want to know about subs, go to that section and ask. The EAR has a bunch, and I think he really likes the Sunfire.

I sometimes have an old, small, Velodyne (8 inch) connected to my

Heresys. At the volumes I listen at, it keeps up very well (it WAS free

after all). Would like to have two subs to connect up. My son uses two

JBLs with his Heresys and it is very nice indeed.

Bruce

[J M O N]

I currently own both Khorns and La Scalas. In fact, I currently own or have owned every single Heritage model. They are all great, but there is no doubt that the Khorns are at the top. There is a reason they are the most expensive. Of course room situation is more important with Khorns than the others, but even imperfect corners can still sound quite good. I think it would be tough to find someone who owns both models to declare the La Scala equal to or better than the Klipschorn. Those that own only one model or the other may naturally be biased.

I do know that my next house will have proper Klipschorn corners even though it may be several years before I purchase it. How do I know that -- because my current house that I purchased 16 months ago has them, and I specifically had that in mine while house shopping. That's how much I like Klipschorns. My house is the most expensive part of my audio system.

By the way, even the little Heresies are wonderful speakers. It's hard to believe how good those little things sound!

[J M O N]

...Lost in a sea of foam,

kh

Good to see you back. Hope you stick around.

[Duke Spinner]

To make La Scalas sound more like Klipschorns, try something along these lines:

looking for the " Brown Note "...????

[edwinr]

You can't compare the La Scala with the Klipschorn. They're two different animals. The La Scala CAN sound close to a K'horn in certain (smaller) rooms. The La Scala is great speaker. I love it. But, in a big room with high ceilings, good corners, and driven by good amplifiers, the Klipschorn will wipe the floor of any competitors - bar none. If you're going to add a subwoofer to a Klipschorn, it needs to be a true sub bass system. Otherwise the output from the sub will muddy the perceived bass response of the K'horn.

[NOSValves]

You can't compare the La Scala with the Klipschorn. They're two different animals. The La Scala CAN sound close to a K'horn in certain (smaller) rooms. The La Scala is great speaker. I love it. But, in a big room with high ceilings, good corners, and driven by good amplifiers, the Klipschorn will wipe the floor of any competitors - bar none. If you're going to add a subwoofer to a Klipschorn, it needs to be a true sub bass system. Otherwise the output from the sub will muddy the perceived bass response of the K'horn.

Now this statement I have no problem with at all!

[Erik Mandaville]

"Craig is saying some people are hung up on test results and they don't mean everything."

Who was it who claimed that test results DO mean everything? I'm asking because I don't remember recently reading where anyone made that rather all-encompassing assertion. Using certain types of measurement in order to obtain a general or sort of 'ball park' idea of performance or problem area -- yes -- but I don't think anyone stated in a recent post that test results are the only reliable way of assessing the performance of an amplifier. Please correct me if I'm wrong about this, because maybe I am. I just haven't seen what you're referring to.

Erik

[Deang]

You have to read between the lines.

There are still plenty who believe if two things measure the same in all parameters that are measureable -- they will sound the same. I guess the real question will always be: do we really have the means to measure everything that effects the signal.

[Erik Mandaville]

"You have to read between the lines."

I'm sure you're right. I looked again but didn't see anything. What am I missing?

Erik

[edwinr]

I guess the real question will always be: do we really have the means to measure everything that effects the signal?

A quotable quote, Dean. Similarly, chemists believe they have isolated the compounds that explain why some things smell as they do. But have you smelt the synthetic results of some of these attempts to recreate natural fragrences? Yuck!

[NOSValves]

"Craig is saying some people are hung up on test results and they don't mean everything."

Who was it who claimed that test results DO mean everything? I'm asking because I don't remember recently reading where anyone made that rather all-encompassing assertion. Using certain types of measurement in order to obtain a general or sort of 'ball park' idea of performance or problem area -- yes -- but I don't think anyone stated in a recent post that test results are the only reliable way of assessing the performance of an amplifier. Please correct me if I'm wrong about this, because maybe I am. I just haven't seen what you're referring to.

Erik

Erik,

Your baiting me once again. When are you going to realize I could careless what you think, What you do or your opinion. JUST LEAVE ME ALONE. Bother me again and I'll just take it up with the Moderators. GOT IT ?

Craig

[DrWho]

I'm surprised it hasn't been mentioned yet, but a pair of khorns can

always be implemented with false corners when the room isn't naturally

geared towards their use. In fact, I might even argue that khorns with

false corners should sound better than khorns using the room's natural corners

(as long as you build the false ones correctly). And a khorn with false corners

doesn't really take up that much more usable floor space than a lascala

either.

It is a FACT that the khorn has more bass than the lascala. If one were

to argue that either has "enough" low frequency extension, then he must

do so in reference to specific pieces of music and the format of the

medium. For what I LISTEN TO, neither the khorn or lascala have enough

LF extension and a subwoofer MUST be used. Especially with

lascalas.....bust out any track from Nightwish and the entire bass

guitar line just dissapears. It is interesting to note that most of the

bass guitar line resides in the 40-50Hz region (as can be shown with

waterfall plots), which also corresponds to the measured cutoff of the

speaker (hmmm...go figure). So if you listen to music that doesn't

extend below the cutoff of the speaker, then by all means enjoy your

speaker. Do not however assume that your experiences disprove the

audibility of measurements, or that low enough for you is low enough

for everyone.

Now for khorns.....it might surprise many that the response of the

khorn is most jagged. It's got a huge slow peak centered around 200Hz

and then a lot less output in the 50-80Hz region. It then spikes a bit

to achieve the 30Hz cutoff. I know I know, measurements aren't

everything....but I just find it ironic that this "EQ curve," if you

will, totally corresponds to what one might consider a tubby sound.

Sure, khorns have a great solid foundation (30Hz-ish), but they lack

the oompf (80Hz) and they have too much cardboard/tub (200Hz). Btw,

these opinions of the sound were made far before I ever knew what the

khorn measured as. If you disagree with my correlation of frequencies

to 'sound', then I challenge you to go into a studio with a pair of

nice monitors, play some music and play with the EQ. The lascala on the

other hand has a very linear response. The only problem I have with it

is it lacks a little oompf (and this is probably due to a slight dip in

the 80Hz region).

And since we're also talking about stock comparisons between speakers,

it should also be pointed out that the khorn has a much larger

time-delay issue than the lascala does. The end result is a difference

in the percieved midrange of the speaker. I haven't been able to do a

side by side comparison with a corrected lascala and a corrected khorn,

but I think it would be lots of fun. Anyways, the point here is that

the lascala has less of the problem. And though it's hard to sit down

and say "hey, this difference here is due to the time delay" - it will

affect how one percieves the overall speaker.

So what approach would I take? Well I wouldn't want either speaker

unless I had two capable subwoofers mated with them, which I would

without a doubt crossover at 80Hz. And since such a crossover point

negates the khorn's advantage in the low end which is achieved by

compromising the midrange, then I would without a doubt choose the

lascala.

If no subwoofer was available then I'd want a pair of cornwalls...but

if it were between the lascala and the khorn I think I would have to go

with the khorn. But in doing so, I would do everything I could to biamp

the system and compensate for the time-delay.

One other thing which I haven't seen mentioned yet is the option to

port the lascala. When done correctly the woofer sees no change in the

air pressure behind the woofer, which means no changes in the normal

range of the speaker, but then you get the added benefit of extension

down to 40Hz. It's an easy mod to do and raises the speaker like 9" off

the floor, which would help get the tweeter up to ear height too...well

my ear height anyway. I have not had the opportunity yet to hear such a

mod, but I can imagine it would make the lascala competitive with the

cornwall.

So....the majority of the psychoacoustics involved really have to do

with the music we're listening to. Different people listen to different

music and therefore the tool sometimes works and sometimes doesn't

(tool being the speaker). There is also the factor that as we listen to

the same setup for a long time we start to become immune to the flaws

in our system...it can be so damaging to the point where if one hears a

better system, he will percieve it as "wrong" sounding because his

reference frame is to that of his own system (and not that of the real

live acoustical sound). In other words, there are those who have become

accustomed to no bass and so when they actually hear it, they percieve

it as a flaw. Likewise, there are those who have become accustomed to

too much bass and they percieve a linear response to be lacking in the

bass department.

So if you're going to claim something is unnatural sounding, then you

better be comparing directly against a live acoustical sound. I

remember reading in Heyser's writeup about the khorn that he felt the

khorn was the most accurate reproduction of a car door slam than any

speaker/subwoofer he has ever heard before. That was a while ago and

subwoofer technology has gotten far superior so I would very much like

to hear his opinion conducting the same test with the Ultra2 subs. They

are very very fine sounding low distortion speakers.

So give me a pair of ported lascalas and Ultra2 subs... [H]

[psg]

Interesting read Dr Who. I have read your description of tubby

bass on the KHorn before and I simply don't hear that myself.

I lived a long time with a pair of La Scala and hesitated to buy KHorns

since I didn't believe the same drivers could sound much

different. I was very surprised that, for me, only only did the

bass get deeper and better, but the overall intergration of mids

sounded much smoother to me. I much prefer the KHorn to the La

Scala (which doesn't make the La Scala a bad speaker at all).

[DrWho]

Interesting read Dr Who. I have read your description of tubby

bass on the KHorn before and I simply don't hear that myself.

Well it definetly is music specific (and I know it's not a fault of the

source material either because it never shows the slightest hint of it

on any other system, be it in the studio, headphones, or any of the

dozens of other home audio systems). I have no doubt that a lot of

music probably just doesn't excite those particular problem frequencies

and therefore won't bring out that flaw in the speaker....so what kind

of music do you listen to? []

[Loudisbeautiful]

THANK YOU Dr. WHO!!!!!

Great post........very well written.......Very much what I hear myself........

Do you use digital time delay for your woofer horn?.......

As the original poster ....I am trying to find out why we hear things we do.......I want to say both are great speaker.......no doubt khorn do sound better in some rooms.....

but just because it is less money, does not mean LAS and subwoofers will kick not the khorns ***.....lol

[NOSValves]

I'm surprised it hasn't been mentioned yet, but a pair of khorns can always be implemented with false corners when the room isn't naturally geared towards their use. In fact, I might even argue that khorns with false corners should sound better than khorns using the room's natural corners (as long as you build the false ones correctly). And a khorn with false corners doesn't really take up that much more usable floor space than a lascala either.

It is a FACT that the khorn has more bass than the lascala. If one were to argue that either has "enough" low frequency extension, then he must do so in reference to specific pieces of music and the format of the medium. For what I LISTEN TO, neither the khorn or lascala have enough LF extension and a subwoofer MUST be used. Especially with lascalas.....bust out any track from Nightwish and the entire bass guitar line just dissapears. It is interesting to note that most of the bass guitar line resides in the 40-50Hz region (as can be shown with waterfall plots), which also corresponds to the measured cutoff of the speaker (hmmm...go figure). So if you listen to music that doesn't extend below the cutoff of the speaker, then by all means enjoy your speaker. Do not however assume that your experiences disprove the audibility of measurements, or that low enough for you is low enough for everyone.

Now for khorns.....it might surprise many that the response of the khorn is most jagged. It's got a huge slow peak centered around 200Hz and then a lot less output in the 50-80Hz region. It then spikes a bit to achieve the 30Hz cutoff. I know I know, measurements aren't everything....but I just find it ironic that this "EQ curve," if you will, totally corresponds to what one might consider a tubby sound. Sure, khorns have a great solid foundation (30Hz-ish), but they lack the oompf (80Hz) and they have too much cardboard/tub (200Hz). Btw, these opinions of the sound were made far before I ever knew what the khorn measured as. If you disagree with my correlation of frequencies to 'sound', then I challenge you to go into a studio with a pair of nice monitors, play some music and play with the EQ. The lascala on the other hand has a very linear response. The only problem I have with it is it lacks a little oompf (and this is probably due to a slight dip in the 80Hz region).

And since we're also talking about stock comparisons between speakers, it should also be pointed out that the khorn has a much larger time-delay issue than the lascala does. The end result is a difference in the percieved midrange of the speaker. I haven't been able to do a side by side comparison with a corrected lascala and a corrected khorn, but I think it would be lots of fun. Anyways, the point here is that the lascala has less of the problem. And though it's hard to sit down and say "hey, this difference here is due to the time delay" - it will affect how one percieves the overall speaker.

So what approach would I take? Well I wouldn't want either speaker unless I had two capable subwoofers mated with them, which I would without a doubt crossover at 80Hz. And since such a crossover point negates the khorn's advantage in the low end which is achieved by compromising the midrange, then I would without a doubt choose the lascala.

If no subwoofer was available then I'd want a pair of cornwalls...but if it were between the lascala and the khorn I think I would have to go with the khorn. But in doing so, I would do everything I could to biamp the system and compensate for the time-delay.

One other thing which I haven't seen mentioned yet is the option to port the lascala. When done correctly the woofer sees no change in the air pressure behind the woofer, which means no changes in the normal range of the speaker, but then you get the added benefit of extension down to 40Hz. It's an easy mod to do and raises the speaker like 9" off the floor, which would help get the tweeter up to ear height too...well my ear height anyway. I have not had the opportunity yet to hear such a mod, but I can imagine it would make the lascala competitive with the cornwall.

So....the majority of the psychoacoustics involved really have to do with the music we're listening to. Different people listen to different music and therefore the tool sometimes works and sometimes doesn't (tool being the speaker). There is also the factor that as we listen to the same setup for a long time we start to become immune to the flaws in our system...it can be so damaging to the point where if one hears a better system, he will percieve it as "wrong" sounding because his reference frame is to that of his own system (and not that of the real live acoustical sound). In other words, there are those who have become accustomed to no bass and so when they actually hear it, they percieve it as a flaw. Likewise, there are those who have become accustomed to too much bass and they percieve a linear response to be lacking in the bass department.

So if you're going to claim something is unnatural sounding, then you better be comparing directly against a live acoustical sound. I remember reading in Heyser's writeup about the khorn that he felt the khorn was the most accurate reproduction of a car door slam than any speaker/subwoofer he has ever heard before. That was a while ago and subwoofer technology has gotten far superior so I would very much like to hear his opinion conducting the same test with the Ultra2 subs. They are very very fine sounding low distortion speakers.

So give me a pair of ported lascalas and Ultra2 subs... [H]

I believe your correct that false corners would be the best of all worlds with one draw back... the rooms that give the Lascala's the edge would be hard pressed to fit these huge false corners! I couldn't use them in either one of my listening area's. Only Dean is crazy enough to use them on the 10" wall [] But I bet they sound great!

Craig

[psg]

Interesting read Dr Who. I have read your description of tubby

bass on the KHorn before and I simply don't hear that myself.

Well it definetly is music specific (and I know it's not a fault of the

source material either because it never shows the slightest hint of it

on any other system, be it in the studio, headphones, or any of the

dozens of other home audio systems). I have no doubt that a lot of

music probably just doesn't excite those particular problem frequencies

and therefore won't bring out that flaw in the speaker....so what kind

of music do you listen to? []

Mostly trio jazz and variations on that genre (Diana Krall, Holly Cole,

Patricia Barber) and the occasional drums (Circle of Drums and

japaneese big drums).

[DrWho]

Mostly trio jazz and variations on that genre (Diana Krall, Holly Cole,

Patricia Barber) and the occasional drums (Circle of Drums and

japaneese big drums).

That explains it [] Try playing some oldschool rock, like three dog

nite, or even the beatles. I don't hear it with Queen though.

Btw, here's a scale drawing (1"=1 ft) of the relative footprints of the khorn with false corners and the lascala:

(man that looks ugly until you open it up)