kg5.5 Posted May 28, 2006 Share Posted May 28, 2006 looking at the specs of the new Cornwall, it appears it uses identical horns as the Heresy III. However, it is priced $2000 higher. Does this seem out of line to anyone else? $2000 seems a lot for a bigger box and a larger woofer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay481985 Posted May 28, 2006 Share Posted May 28, 2006 different horn but same compresser drive. It is longer, Also the cornwall is like 4 times the volume of the heresy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chops Posted May 28, 2006 Share Posted May 28, 2006 different horn but same compresser drive. It is longer, Also the cornwall is like 4 times the volume of the heresy No, it's the same horn AND driver as in the Heresy III. I believe it's the K-700, hence the "woofer cutout" in the bottom flange of the squawker horn (so it will fit with the Heresy) and the 800Hz crossover point. The only difference is the cabinet and 15" woofer and possibly the network. I too feel that the new CW III is way overpriced. It kind of makes me think that Klipsch really didn't want to bring the CW back, so when they did, they used a much smaller squawker horn (which was already an issue with the larger/older K-600 being too small), a much higher crossover point for the K-33 (also an issue at even 600Hz), and trying to price it right out of the market which will result in low sales numbers and make the decision to discontinue them again, once and for all. But that's just my thoughts on the matter... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colterphoto1 Posted May 28, 2006 Share Posted May 28, 2006 There is much more to a speaker than box and drivers. There's this thing that any business has called overhead- to a company like Klipsch that is research and engineering, setup costs for production, marketing, etc. Also remember the economies of scale don't play favorably into the new Heritage series and none of these will be sold in huge numbers. WIth the HIII at $1500 CIII at $3500 and LSII at $6000 (very approximate), they seem to represent a reasonable pricing structure throughout the line. If past sales are any indicator, H will outsell CW by dozens to one, lowering the amount of fixed costs attributed to each unit sold. As the number of units sold lessens, the amount of research and setup costs per unit has to increase. Retooling for the 600 Hz horn would have cost tens of thousands of dollars, which would have been an astronomical cost increase in those units. Klipsch did take the position of retaining the exponential squawkers as tribute to PWK. No doubt an existing Tractrix horn combination could have worked and might have sounded better. But the engineers were firm on leaving some of the Heritage in the Heritage line. I can't comment on the soundness of that decision. Its mathematics and accounting. And profit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chops Posted May 28, 2006 Share Posted May 28, 2006 A simple fix for the "missing" K-600 mold would be to redesign the cabinet to handle the larger/better K-400 horn, which is still made and a known fact of being an improvement over the K-600 and certainly much better than the K-700. Then I could justify the higher price. All Klipsch did is take the new CW backwards a step moving to the smaller K-700, not to mention stretching the K-33 up higher to 800Hz, as if 600Hz wasn't bad enough. Plus, the gap in the pricing structure from the Belle no longer being made should not be compensated with jacking the CW up that high unless the improvements I mentioned were made to the CW III. Everbody knows the K-600 was an issue because it was too small, so why cut corners and go with an even smaller horn? You of all people should know about that, being that you have several pairs of CW, which you are also a big fan of. It doesn't make sence at all with the CW III and doesn't say much for the engineers of the current Heritage line either. Please keep in mind that I am not trying to argue with you, but mearly stating my thoughts on the matter and what I would have done of I were Klipsch. And maybe PWK might have done similar. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parrot Posted May 28, 2006 Share Posted May 28, 2006 I wonder who lost the K-600 mold. There was a lot of skepticism displayed about using the K-700 by many people who attended the Klipsch Indy get-together. There's always going to be arguments between engineers and bean-counters. Score one for the bean-counters. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chops Posted May 28, 2006 Share Posted May 28, 2006 I wonder who lost the K-600 mold. There was a lot of skepticism displayed about using the K-700 by many people who attended the Klipsch Indy get-together. There's always going to be arguments between engineers and bean-counters. Score one for the bean-counters. You've got that right! Oh well, what do I care? I have a nice pair of original '79 CWs thanks to my father that now sound much better than ever, thanks to the swell members on this forum! [] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrWho Posted May 28, 2006 Share Posted May 28, 2006 Well then...sounds like Klipsch needs to charge more for the new H3's...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colterphoto1 Posted May 28, 2006 Share Posted May 28, 2006 Chops- Please don't attack me personally (the 'you of all people'). Just stop it. State your opinion but please refrain from comments on the opinions of others. I would respectfully ask you to consider how much time have you spent with a CWIII in order to formulate your thoughts on the subject? I said "I can't comment on the soundness of that decision." regarding the mid horn situation. I don't pretend to be smarter than PWK or their engineers and accountants. I'm happy that they produced a CWIII at all. But I won't run the company and their decisions OR OTHERS ON THIS FORUM down. Period. I have heard the CWIII on two occasions- it is magnificent. My comments on the accounting come from a degree in Accounting from the IU School of Business. My comments re the engineering of the CWIII come directly from personal discussions at Hope last year with Mr. Delgado who designed it. I don't make this stuff up. I guess if it's too expensive for some of you, there are still many bargains on used CW units. Or you could purchase the HIII. Michael Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3dzapper Posted May 28, 2006 Share Posted May 28, 2006 When considering horn size, "saleability" must be a concern. Not many women I know would allow a Cornwall sized box in the living room let alone with an ugly, open 511 on top. Great for guys in the man den. The K-401 is too long for the Cornwall box. Lascalas are available for those who wish to buy a slightly larger speaker. My wife, after a while, has learned to love our Cornwalls in the living room paired with a Scott 340B both for the combined sound and the retro look. That's "her" system. CP1 made a good very point with R&D cost amortization. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jt1stcav Posted May 28, 2006 Share Posted May 28, 2006 I dunno...I have the feeling the Cornwall IIIs won't be produced for too long (and the Premiere and consumer Jubilee will probably never see the light of day neither), and that would be a shame. Hope I'm wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay481985 Posted May 28, 2006 Share Posted May 28, 2006 its rather funny how moderately priced speakers (5000 and below) are subject to size and such while esoteric and exotic speakers have no "WAF" or size factor. Look at the flagships of most high end speakers. Ummm Wilson X2: monsters, dynaudio: monsters, McIntosh: monsters, avantgarde: big but the subwoofer is a monster, Martin Logan E2 Statement, ridiculous!..... I wonder if its the pricetag that throws the WAF out the window? Sorta like those ugly designer label clothes on fashion shows but obviously its grate when its from a haute coture designer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chops Posted May 28, 2006 Share Posted May 28, 2006 Chops- Please don't attack me personally (the 'you of all people'). Just stop it. Michael Will you stop blowing up at me and thinking I'm attacking you?! I'M NOT! If you read my post correctly, you would see that I said "you of all people", as in YOU have several pairs of Cornwalls (which is the subject under discussion here), and that YOU know how the older original Cornwalls sound and probably are well aware of the issues with the sound of the K-600 horn (honky, harsh, scratchy). Stop being so darn paranoid and thinking I'm always trying to screw with you. Trust me, I have much better things to do. My world doesn't revolve around you! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hightone Posted May 29, 2006 Share Posted May 29, 2006 Ya all have to give them a listen. Yesterday I gave them a listen at Simply Stereo In Hoffman Estates. I have owned Cornwall I and cornwall II's and it seems to me that the construction or least the fit and finish is better for sure. Also these Cornwalls imaging and sound stage depth is much better than what I remember. The bass punch seems tighter as well. Just my two cents. The price is just over twice that of the H3 and you do relly get twice as much speaker. Buy the way they still sound like a huge speaker and not harsh or honkey at all. I have never heard Heresy's described as honkey. They sound great. Joel Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kg5.5 Posted May 29, 2006 Author Share Posted May 29, 2006 What does *** mean? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pauln Posted May 29, 2006 Share Posted May 29, 2006 " *** " is an explitive adjective, adverb, noun, or gerund standing for (insert bad word here). As a new poster the responses to your question devolved very quickly into *** personality disputes among members, sometimes its like that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parrot Posted May 29, 2006 Share Posted May 29, 2006 In Joel's post, the automatic censor put in the asterisks for the word "h o n k e y" which is pretty darned ridiculous. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacksonbart Posted May 30, 2006 Share Posted May 30, 2006 . 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.