Couple of basic LaScala Questions

[Marvel]

Don't compare LaScalas to

other speakers - compare them to live music. PWK invented the LaScalas

not to be a PA speaker, not to be the PA for the AR gov's race

(contrary to popular opinion), but after listening to a live concert of

music. That's right, PWK invented the LS to do what he heard in a live

concert. That's what they deliver.

What is the source of your information?

And what the heck is your fixation with frequencies below 70Hz are

completely invalid and never musical? It's such a load of crap and you

keep bringing it up over and over and over and over...using that logic

you might as well get rid of all frequencies above 12kHz too. Heck,

let's just randomly throw out 853.52Hz because I don't like that

frequency - and no performance is musical if that frequency exists or

is required by the song.

Another common misconception is that you are associating low frequency

extension with the shaking of the room...It has nothing to do with the

sound being lower in pitch - it has everything to do with loud volumes

and exciting resonant frequencies. A correctly calibrated system

doesn't do the things you describe. But you can't wrap that around your

head because you would prefer to lump everything into the crap category.

I think Ben addressed this already. The big problem is that most systems/speakers are NOT calibrated. I would still gladly take a pair of LS. I don't do HT, so the "lack of bass extension" doesn't really bother me. Does the low end drop off. Sure. I've heard LaScalas with and without a sub. The sub adds quite a bit to the mix (in a good way), but I could just as easily live without one.

Where did he say that freq. below 70 Hz are invalid? Did I miss something here.

Yes, those LS certainly are junk. If you have some, you should notify me so I can come and pick them up. You will never be happy with them. They simply do not sound good. They probably look bad in your room too.

[DizRotus]

Support for Pauln's assertion regarding the history of the La Scala as designed by PWK to reproduce music can be found at page 6 of the Bruce Edgar interview of PWK attached here and previously posted by BEC.

The pejorative designation of PA Speaker is misplaced. If La Scalas are PA speakers, so are Altec VOT and every other speaker used to provide large amounts of high db low distortion sound in large spaces such as theaters, auditoriums and nightclubs.<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

For every truly high fidelity speaker, audio or PA, there are many more that merely make noise. Audiophools, who have a knee-jerk dislike of horns, love to refer to all Klipsch speakers as PA speakers. It would be nice if that urban myth were not perpetuated here.

Edgar%20Interview%20of%20PWK[1].pdf

[DrWho]

It is important, however, to be careful to note the

disinction between the amount and quality of bass reproduction.

Horn loaded bass can seem lacking due to the reduced intermodulation

and harmonic distortion, which adds apparent volume and is something

that is really the norm these days. Lower extension of bandwidth

is another issue entirely, and I think the LS/Khorn tradeoff is one

that is dependent on program material to some extent, but also very

dependent on the room and electronics involved.

I agree completely, but wanted to touch on two things...

First, the intermodulation and harmonic distortion is only a function

of cone movement. In other words, the hornloading gains about 6dB more

SPL for the same distortion level. To make a rough analogy...if I like

how the cornwall sounds at 90dB, then I'd have to crank the khorn up to

96 to get the same fattening of sound. Or you can think of the

distortion for the hornloaded system as 6dB less than the direct

radiator; so the khorn has 6dB less distortion at 90dB (assuming of

course that the driver is linear all the way down to zero excursion

which is also not the case). It's interesting to think of it this way

because you also start getting into the masking effect where anything

20dB below the signal isn't heard (not to be confused with the noise

floor which needs to be much lower...). But I don't think you can

always claim a hornloaded system on the same driver is lower distortion

at all volumes. I would love to see some comparison measurements around

70dB between the cornwall and khorn - I bet it would be lower

distortion []

Second, I also agree that distortion has become the norm...so much so

that just about every recording ever made is taking it into account.

The recording engineers would be foolish not to. I have heard a few

recordings that were monitored with a pair of khorns....and of course

it sounded amazing on khorns too. But this gets right back into the

music and listening preferences that are different between everyone.

But the diehard lascala lovers are trying to claim superiority with

"low distortion quailty" when in fact the claim is very much exagerated

- especially in light of the recording scene in general. It's one thing

for someone to say they prefer a speaker and describe the sonic

reasons, but it's another for someone to claim any other approach is

invalid...

I think it would be fun to do a blind shootoff between all the new

heritage speakers. Maybe that's something we could do at the pilgrimage

this summer...heck, even throw in the jubilee just for fun []

[DrWho]

Support

for Pauln's assertion regarding the history of the La Scala as designed

by PWK to reproduce music can be found at page 6 of the Bruce Edgar

interview of PWK attached here and previously posted by BEC.

The pejorative designation of PA Speaker is misplaced. If

La Scalas are PA speakers, so are Altec VOT and every other speaker

used to provide large amounts of high db low distortion sound in large

spaces such as theaters, auditoriums and nightclubs.

For every truly high fidelity speaker, audio or PA, there are many more that merely make noise. Audiophools, who have a knee-jerk dislike of horns, love to refer to all Klipsch speakers as PA speakers. It would be nice if that urban myth were not perpetuated here.

Let's see here....PWK was listening to a bad PA system and came up with

the lascala to replace that bad PA system. He also wanted to

Rockefeller to use them for the PA during his campaign.

Can someone enlighten me as to where he's talking about home use? The

way I understand it, home use was an afterthought. The reason people

claim PA speakers in general don't sound good in the home is due to the

projection factor. Believe it or not, there is a distance just in front

of the speaker where no sound exists and this distance is dependant on

the design of the speaker. The next time you're at a concert go stand

in front of the huge bass bins and stand like 1 foot away - you will

hear absolutely nothing. And this is because the speakers are

"throwing" the sound. Throwing this kind of speaker into the corner of

a room further increases this distance. Just something to think about...

(but for the record, I don't find this to be a big concern with the

lascala - but I do find it an issue with the VOT's). It's fun to point

out that the extra distance you have to sit from the speakers also

decreases their lower distortion advantages as well...which is the

whole reason the small nearfield monitor crowd is so big.

[Jeff Matthews]

Can someone enlighten me as to where he's talking about home use? The way I understand it, home use was an afterthought.

Well, he took it home and had to make it prettier and name it after his wife for use in his home. He did not say "I made it for use in a home." But the fact that he took it home to use it there suggests something made him design it for home use - especially having essentially taken the same speaker and given it a prettier, furniture-like appearance to it. Why would he do that? Had he had no purpose for in-home use for the speaker, I can't possibly fathom why the Belle was ever made. To suggest that the public took his speaker for design in outdoor PA and put it to an unintended use appears, at this point, to be untrue. He modified it specifically to be pretty in a home.

[meagain]

Even on this very site, Klipsch claims it was designed for use as a PA speaker.

Do they lie?

[Frzninvt]

They sure make fabulous center channels though!

No one ever said PA speakers could not sound good though, think about it.

Don't get caught up on what "other" people think make your own judgements when you listen to a pair. Period.

I guess I need to sell my Belle PA speakers and replace them with some $3K Cornwall III's then. Any takers?

[meagain]

[] If you have grown up thinking that HIFI means real loud extra low bass, well you aren't really going to be wowed by a speaker that is designed to properly play music. Whenever someone writes that the LS don't have bass, consider the source. Is this someone that knows what music sound like, the kind of music you listen to, or is it someone who thinks that speakers are supposed to be able to shake the walls and make drinks on the coffee table move around?

Just thinking out loud...

Pauln

Pauln - If the speaker's specs say it's only capable of going down to 54Hz or so, that's a scientific fact/certainty/limit. Given that there is music/sounds that go below this - how am I not missing something? Further, there's been many postings from folks here who's ear goes far beyond 3-4 chord cheezy, low-level head-bangy stuff. And loudness was never an issue here. The speaker has a hz limit. Period. I would think the goal is to eliminate limits where possible.

[Jeff Matthews]

Even on this very site, Klipsch claims it was designed for use as a PA speaker.

Do they lie?

The Klipsch website describing the LaScala under "Products/Heritage:"

"When the La Scala first launched in 1963, audio pioneer Paul W. Klipsch made it for Arkansas gubernatorial candidate Winthrop Rockefeller to use as a public address speaker."

The DFH interview:

Interviewer: "I heard you designed the LaScala for use at Winthrop Rockefeller's gubernatorial campaign."

PWK: "No, it wasn't." He then goes on to say how the LaScala was offered for use to Rockefeller, who declined. He continues by saying the idea for the LS design came to him when hearing crappy speakers at an outdoor concert.

I don't know about "lie," but one thing that would make both of these statements accurate would be if he came up with a design for a better PA speaker, took the speaker home, and re-designed its aesthetics for home use. So, maybe he intended a PA speaker could be desirable for home use. Hmmmm.... Legend PWK thinking a PA speaker would be good for home use..... What do you think?

[Jeff Matthews]

The speaker has a hz limit. Period. I would think the goal is to eliminate limits where possible.

Except where the point of diminishing returns makes it not desirable to worry about. Doesn't sound like PWK was all too worried about it and thought it good enough to command a higher price than the Cornwall, which "scientifically," is less limited.

[Ray Garrison]

[] It's

really pretty simple; if you like exagerated boomy bass you may not

like the LaScalas. If you tend to a more mature perspective on

music (rather than noise), you may appreciate the LaScalas for what

they do. A lot of current "music" and current listeners have gotten

used to the super bass sound. This is a misfortunate development in

music. Don't compare LaScalas to other speakers - compare them to live

music. PWK invented the LaScalas not to be a PA speaker, not to be the

PA for the AR gov's race (contrary to popular opinion), but after

listening to a live concert of music. That's right, PWK invented the LS

to do what he heard in a live concert. That's what they deliver. If you

have grown up thinking that HIFI means real loud extra low bass, well

you aren't really going to be wowed by a speaker that is designed to

properly play music. Whenever someone writes that the LS don't have

bass, consider the source. Is this someone that knows what music sound

like, the kind of music you listen to, or is it someone who thinks that

speakers are supposed to be able to shake the walls and make drinks on

the coffee table move around?

Just thinking out loud...

Pauln

Hey! I resemble that remark!

Ok, once again, for the record...

La Scalas are *WONDERFUL* speakers. I had a pair of 74's for

several years, running ALK's crossovers. They make *BEAUTIFUL*

music.

La Scalas have *NO BASS*.

None. Nada. Zip. Ziltch. Not There. The

Bass Is no More. It's Shuffled Off its Mortal Coil and Joined the

Bloomin' Choir Invisible!

Do I know what music sounds like?

I live a short distance from Woolsey Hall in New Haven (insert pretty image...)

I go to concerts there several times a year. They have a

*WONDERFUL* pipe organ. I've heard the Organ Symphony, various

works by Bach, some Strauss, a bit of Bruckner and a lot of other

beautiful performances. Listen to any of these live, then go home

and play the same work on the La Scalas, and while the woodwinds /

brass / strings / percussion (most of it, anyway [6] ) might transport

you back to the performance, you will find yourself thinking "Where's

the bass? Half of this performance is missing. Rats."

I've also gone to a *LOT* of concerts, starting with Yes at Colt Park

back in, uh, '72 (?) and progressing through ELP, Queen, Pink Floyd,

the Eagles, Don Henley, Brian Wilson, a bunch of Dead, 3 Dog Night,

Steppenwolf, The Guess Who, the Moody Blues, Neil Young, Robert Palmer

(RIP), the Eurthymics, Peter Gabriel, N*Sync ([:$] ) and a host of

others. If you think you can re-create the original performance

of *ANY* of these shows at home using La Scalas without a (very good)

subwoofer, you are sadly mistaken.

La Scalas are GREAT speakers that have NO BASS.

Look at it this way. Can you name *ANY OTHER HIGH END SPEAKER*

that specs a bass roll off as high in frequency as the La Scala /

Belle? Even the little Acoustic Energy AE-1 had more bass.

[3dzapper]

"Look at it this way. Can you name *ANY OTHER HIGH END SPEAKER* that specs a bass roll off as high in frequency as the La Scala / Belle? Even the little Acoustic Energy AE-1 had more bass."

Yup! PWK had a button for that.

From Stereophile.com:

"Fig.3 Acoustic Energy AE1, spatially averaged, 1/3-octave, free-field response in JA's later Santa Fe listening room. "

This is not an anecoic measurement it includes the room boost. The question is "Which other speaker marketer is as brutally honest as Klipsch?"

Rick

[DrWho]

Btw, the reason the cornwall sold for cheaper was because it was much easier to build. The folded bass bin of the lascala takes more man hours and more parts to build. Also, the depth of the cornwall cabinet doesn't allow for a bigger midhorn, so there is a compromise there too...which just happens to make it cheaper in the process.

The industrial pa cabinet lascalas are identical to the home versions...the only real difference being the K48/K33 woofer. (The K33 sacrificing output for a flatter responnse - and it moves the F3 down like 5Hz or something like that too). You would be hard pressed to hear a difference in a side by side comparison.

The one concept that you will always see with klipsch is that they use the same part in as many ways as possible. The K33 is used in 3 very different designs. All of the new heritage speakers are borrowing parts from the cinema lineup. The K48 is used in many different pro speaker applications. etc etc....that is the whole reason they can make things so inexpensive. Even the compression drivers being used on the squakers and tweeters are sharing parts and horns.

To think that the old heritage is an all out attempt for perfect home audio reproduction is a far cry from reality...

[jpm]

Why does this argument persist ad nauseum? The La Scalla bass, while not non-existent, isn't much to write home about.

Who cares? Buy a nice sub and quit worrying about it. That's what I did and now I have bass coming out my keister.

Gawd, some of you guys are anal. Don't you have jobs?

[Jeff Matthews]

Why does this argument persist ad nauseum? The La Scalla bass, while not non-existent, isn't much to write home about. Who cares? Buy a nice sub and quit worrying about it. That's what I did and now I have bass coming out my keister. Gawd, some of you guys are anal. Don't you have jobs?

JPM!!!!! Stop reading this and get back to work!!! []

[cjgeraci]

I agree with JPM. It also puzzles me how this issue has bloomed into a thread nearly twenty pages long (and the related Belle/LaScala threads).

The stock LaScalas and Belles that I have heard sounded like they had no bass because those speakers were out of balance. In other words, the bass is there but the K-77s and K-55s drown out the bass in stock form.

Install some aftermarket crossovers (like ALKs) to balance the speaker out some, and you hear the bass better. Not great but liveable - especially if you biamp your Belles where you can adjust the bass volume to your liking.

That being said, a great subwoofer really helps my Belles, and the sub is usually on - even in two-channel.

Carl.

P.S. It also does not hurt to have Altecs running in the room. Nice bass support from those.

[Ray Garrison]

Why does this argument persist ad nauseum? The La Scalla bass, while not non-existent, isn't much to write home about. Who cares? Buy a nice sub and quit worrying about it. That's what I did and now I have bass coming out my keister. Gawd, some of you guys are anal. Don't you have jobs?

Because it's Fun, that's why.

I originally started talking about the La Scala bass a long time ago because some folks were considering purchasing them, and I was pointing out that people with no experience listening to or opportunity to hear La Scalas and Belles frequently expect great big quivering gobs of thunderously overstated bass because the damn things are so big and heavy, particularly in today's market where smaller, thinner, more spousally acceptable speakers are all the rage. If you expect Cerwin Vega type bass out of a La Scala because years of marketing have conditioned you to expect the bigger the speaker the bigger the bass, you will be disappointed. That was pretty much it.

In the ensuing years, several of us (Where Are You Tom?) have had a running argument about this, in a sort of Yankees - Red Sox, Celtics - Knicks - Beat LA sort of way.

When someone like meagain asks about La Scalas, I feel sort of obligated to pipe in with a (hopefully somewhat humerous and obviously over-the-top) warning that the bass may not be quite what you expect, if you've never heard them.

I expect this debate (well, okay, hissy fit of an argument) will continue, much the same way as the CD vs Vinyl, Tubes vs Sand Amp, 2 Channel vs Surround, Flea Watt vs Mega Watt and Hillary vs Anybody Else (PLEASE!!!) arguments will continue. We jab at each other because we're having fun, and hopefully new comers and people not directly familiar with the topic being debated will at least come away with an awareness that there are honest differences of opinion, and perhaps one should listen for oneself and decide who, if anyone, is closer to the truth.

[pauln]

Way to go Meagain, you've got it wrong and backwards, that's hard to do.

1. What a speaker's specs say may be true, false, or meaningless -but they do NOT dictate fact/certainty/limit. Its the other way around - the fact/certainty/limit if measurable is what may dictate the specs (if they are true and meaningful). Keep in mind that the LaScala is measured in open space (not a corner), but the Khorn IS measured in a corner. So when you put the LS in a corner you get bass down to the low 40's. Part of this may be from the LS woofer being closer to the apex of the corner (closer to the floor and walls) than the KHorn. The KHorn plays another 1/3 octave lower (that's about three notes lower). When you use the words "fact" and "certainty" as you have you reveal ignorance about science, math, logic, philosophy, engineering, and rational arguement. This hurts your argument in a somewhat technical peer review like this forum.

2. Given that... "this" - (you assume incorrectly "this" is 54Hz from above misunderstanding). So now we are talking about sound below 40Hz - is it music that needs to be included in the output of the speaker? Because of the rolloff curve, a lot of it does get output at less level, but more to the point, for MUSIC in the traditional musical sense, the answer is no. For modern low bass, maybe yes. By the way, when you set up an arguement with "Given that..." be sure the given has been accepted, not challenged.

3. The speaker has a Hz limit? Is it digital, like 54Hz plays but you can't hear 53Hz? No, the whole speaker-room system might have a high pass characteristic. Again, your mistake above contaminates the rest of your thinking. You don't know what "limit" means (verb or noun).

4. There is no "period", period. Those that say "x, period" are admitting they can't construct a logical argument.

Saying so is not proof. QED

5. Eliminate limits? Again with he limits... look at the actual words... "ELIMINATE, LIMIT", do you think they have a common origin? But I digress,... You have not thought this through. Engineerers do think these things through. You know, you are not an engineer...

Paul

[Jeff Matthews]

Why does this argument persist ad nauseum? The La Scalla bass, while not non-existent, isn't much to write home about. Who cares? Buy a nice sub and quit worrying about it. That's what I did and now I have bass coming out my keister. Gawd, some of you guys are anal. Don't you have jobs?

Because it's Fun, that's why.

Amen, Bro! Nuff said. This forum is all about the fun. Too bad people get mad as opposed to keeping it in jest.

I'll still defend LS owners. They get beat on so much. The LS is how I learned about Klipsch.

[jpm]

Well, I'm happy with my LaScalas. I've decided to bail off this site, as all the second guessing, the tinkering, the mods, the bitching et al just bring me down and make me question my whole system. Last night I listened to a lot of stuff and my rig w/sub sounds sensational. So anyway, have fun boys. jpm out.