When is a Klipsch no longer a Klipsch?

[George Roland]

It has been fascinating to me to read the posts to this forum. It has stimulated in me the desire to philosophize a little, and while nothing I am saying here is new to most of you, I couldn't resist focusing on what seem to me two very different "takes" on updating and modifying Klipsch speakers as represented by forum members. Clearly the forum is well and correctly named! I have looked at other forums, the asylums, etc., but I think the liveliness of this one is unique in my limited experience.

I am struck by the difference between the update school and the modification school of forum members. To be sure, it's a spectrum with many members in the middle somewhere, but it seems useful to consider the underlying ideas at work.

My interest in this topic is partly due to my surprise at some members' restless and seemingly endless switching out of drivers, horns, networks, building new cabinets, modifying old ones and so on. It surprises me because, I tend to want to arrive at a place where I can enjoy the music and have a rest from this endless search for "it". The spirit of exploration the modifiers represent, the desire to know, to try and to reflect on the results is admirable. I suspect these follks believe that Klipsch advanced the state of the art significantly, but that times change, knowledge advances, parts get better and that his spirit of invention lives on and is honored by their experiments.

On the update side, it seems the reverence for Klipsch takes the form of wanting what he designed to be preserved, to "get back to what Paul heard," as one member put it, or as close to that as possible. Recognizing that parts fail, go out of spec, etc. these folks try to reestablish the original. I suspect they would say that what they are interested in is Klipsch's auditory expertise as it was rather than using his equipment as a jumping off place for more invention. They may feel that what the modifiers end up with is not a Klipsch speaker at all.

I am a visual artist and the situation is analogous to the "restoration" versus "conservation" conflict one faces with aging or deteriorating works of art. Do you try to keep what's left of a masterpiece from further deterioration and let the audience see whatever is left of the original, or do you inpaint and repair damaged areas to try to give the audience a "true" sense of the original as far as contemporary art historical scholarship can get?

Clearly there is merit and passion on both sides that deserves respect. I will be checking in often to this forum for sure. Fascinating stuff!

Good listening to you!

George

[ZAKO]

Im from the OLD Klipsch school....I heard what Paul Klipsch Heard..He did as mutch tweeking & swapping of woofers and drivers as any body has today...He,s been there , Ive been there. WE flashed BS buttens at each other many times. Ashworth was his sounding board in St louis. I was there to see the fire brands cross swords.with sparks flying , lightnig bolts flashing.. Many many woofers were throne into the Klipsch bass bin fire box....Tests were made by both of them..Some bad some very very good. Different HF horns were analyzed....Both Western Electric & other brands ...Klipsch took from the best and shaped his own....There is no Holy Grail Klipschorn. He had to solidify the design to lock in production disitions. He pulled licencing of other people making The Khorn (Brocenior. Vitavox etc) Some changes were made on the way. So now you see the present Khorn in all its glory with some warts.

[popbumper]

George:

As an Erie native now living in Dallas, TX, let me welcome you on board. The subjust you approach is one of "great controversy", but the answer is quite simple - everything is subjective. Modifying Klipsch speakers does not make it "Non-Klipsch", in much the same manner as turning a 1963 Chevy into a low rider with custom paint, motor, drive train and suspension does not make it "Non-Chevy". If you personally are a "purist", and are happy with a product the way it is, count yourself fortunate. There are plenty of folks in the world who have a spirit of modification and adaptation (many engineering types like myself) that have restless nights awash in ideas and notions to change things. Each person needs the other, as they both have something to offer the world - sameness and differentiation - yin and yang.

Enjoy what you have, and remember - it's not about making it "non-Klipsch", it's about deriving what YOU think is best - and if it's good for you, be happy with it.

Again, a warm welcome.

Chris

[George Roland]

Maron,

You make an interesting and important point. No doubt Klipsch tried everything and anything available at the time to improve his speakers. He would have been foolish not to, and he was no fool.

[tigerwoodKhorns]

Maron, You make an interesting and important point. No doubt Klipsch tried everything and anything available at the time to improve his speakers. He would have been foolish not to, and he was no fool.

There are a lot of engineers here and remember, it's not the kill, it's the thrill of the chase. I can also say that once I started modifying, the sound quality increased a lot from the old design.

[Fish]

I'm no "modder" but here's my take.There is only so much money to spend on a product if you want to sell more than a few.To offer an outstanding product at a price many can afford you have to have great design but also stay in a budget.Most Klipsch offer almost everything you could want in a speaker at it's price,but,if you want a little more out of the basic product you have to spend more.If I had a pair of Khorns I would not touch em'(with my very limited knowledge) unless they needed repair.That said,were all different and if you prefer B to A and have the knowlrdge to build to suit,that's fine too.Dean does great mods on 7's from most all accounts,but I've always been happy w/mine just like they are.If I ever get unhappy then I'll do the mod also,if Dean's still doin' em'.

[Daddy Dee]

George,

I think you have articulated pretty well what I've also observed on the forum. Interesting questions.

I have at times found myself drawn to the no compromises kinds of mods, but partly due to appreciation and admiration for PWK and trying to be a sane grownup, I often find myself settling in to the sound of factory spec and deriving great satisfaction from being a "conservator" of PWK's designs and returning a vintage pair of Heritage speakers to factory spec. Just enjoying the music in this way is wonderful to me.

[D-MAN]

My opinion is that if the bass bin is a Klipsch, no matter what else is changed, it's still a Klipsch, even if it sounds completely different from a stock version. That is because the bass horn design itself imposes a certain limitation AND capability, regardless of what happens to be driving it, or is in it, etc.

As far as carrying the torch for Klipsch, for me, it's the technical aspects of PWK's published work that matters, not the products he sold. You people who want to "touch" the man, that's where he lives, seems to me. Stop being lazy by just touching his products!

His advancements of the art are far more important than what he sold to the public to make a buck.

But some people prefer a "cherry" model T vs. a hot rod tub. Ain't nothing wrong with having a preference. Some here, seems to me, fail to recognize that the same preference that they hold cannot be demanded of others.

Remember that this section is called "UPDATES and MODIFICATIONS". What other speaker company would have that section in their forum? Disapprove of it or not, there is reason to assume that KlipschCO has an insight into what makes their products (in particular, the Heritage line) stand apart.

DM

[Cut-Throat]

The objective is not Klipsch, it is the best sound.

[Coytee]

This idea always intrigued me. Moreso from those who suggest that you need to keep it 100% bone stock or else it's not "pure" (for lack of better word)

That kind of got me thinking.. didn't Klipsch use different drivers? how about the wooden midrange of eons ago? Would those be fakes now?

If one should keep the speaker 100% stock, would that mean that Klipsch Inc, would not be allowed to modify the line as time moves forward?

I agree with what Chris said, you can take a Chevy & modify the heck out of it and it's still a Chevy.

[IndyKlipschFan]

I did the AK-4 networks (and driver updates ) to my 1989 K horns.. AMAZING!!!

(I had AK-2's)< still own them too!

Yes, it was dramatic all in a good way .. yes, I am also more leaning to the purist camp. So, first get your x overs and speakers tested and back to stock and see if you like it?

What you do or go afterwards is up to you of course.. let's face it though, you would never put a chevy vega engine in a corvette... You might tweek the corvette though to do what YOU want it to do. But even stock.. It is still a hotter than heck Vette!

[IndyKlipschFan]

You have to remember even when Paul W Klipsch was alive, not sure if it was Jim, Roy, or Trey, that said it too.. the k horn was "modified" if you include drivers and x overs.. over 60 times..

I will say this, please also do not cut down my idea hear me out:

It is like baking a cake.. the best ingredients do make a difference but the real key is to have the perfect MIX of them to create beautiful music. The finest $ 2000.00 woofer might sound like crap mixed in with the other drivers in a K horn.. That 129 dollar k-33 does a great job for its purpose.. Just a thought.

[SilverSport]

...Cheers IndyKlipschFan...as ANOTHER member of the "AK-4 Modified" KHorn Klub, I agree with your thoughts.

Bill

[Clarence]

he strikes again.. another thread dead.[]

(jk!)

[ZAKO]

Indy K Fan.....Leaning to the purest camp. Paul Klipsch at the time I knew him did not want a shrine around his K design , No candles or alter saying this is the final resting place of my design. He kept tweeking. some things hidden in the horn , Some things found. Some things obvious. some not.. Aha !!! some things locked for ever with him. George Ashworth worked through all this . Disecting every inch. Coming out with his brass nuxs swinging back at Paul. PWP taking the jab & like a good fighter & gave his reasons for his design approach. Paul never missed a chance to hear Ashworths scientific approach to a problem ,,,Both going back to the lab and backing the therey with proven facts. Paul loved this exchange of debate. It sharpened his Knowleged. To use in selling his (chiled) to the public.

[George Roland]

You know, I would find it very interesting if some of the members here who are engineers and have an informed understanding of the technical aspects of Klipsch's work would write a paragraph or two explaining his contributions to the state of the art in layman's terms for those of us who, like me, are not electronics or acoustical engineers.

Back in the early '70s, I bought a pair of Cornwalls. At that time, Klipsch and Associates sold a notebook of PWK's Audio Papers. I bought that book and read it, and I do remember some of what he worked on, but I have little sense of the place of his contributions vis-a-vis the field as a whole.

His ingenious folded bass horns, for which he is mostly known, are not all there is of course.

After selling my Cornwalls and trying out some other speakers--KEFs, PSBs and Magneplanars--I have returned to Klipsch and am enjoying my "new" 1977 k-horns a lot.

So what's your take on some of Klipsch's most significant work?

George

[WMcD]

There were many aspects to his work. I'll put down some of my ideas: Others will join in I'm sure.

1) Overall, PWK must have been fresh air in the consumer industry. Much of his work was documented in professional and enthusiast publications by him. Then you could buy the stuff and use it at home. Many other manufacturer's claims were BS; hence the button.

2) A bit OT: IN the late '40s serious engineers started building K-Horns. He had to be goaded into building them himself.

3) The K-5 is credited as being the first constant directivity mid horn. Others were building these too. It looks like others were building these, before he put them into production. BTW you can find two of his articles from FM-TV in my "The Caves" thread. They describe the early history of use of the K-Horn and show a K-5. It is the tread with the action figures.

4) The CW was the first port loaded box. Before then, people put holes in the plywood. TS parameters made it more available from a design standpoint. In his circuit model, he was using the "dual" of driver as an additional filter element. This turned out to be the Butterworth alignment used in TS parameters.

5) He kept the center channel idea alive even though Bell Labs described it much earlier. To some extent this was high tech for the home with solid testing. Of course it became an aspect of Dolby 5.1. I'm not quite sure what makes it hard to sell. The idea seems to be "just another speaker and amp". Before Dolby, it was not mainstream.

6) Used a variation of the Shorthorn under a TV set. TV had good audio but no one was presenting a good speaker to use with TV. Arguably the start of home theater.

7) You can see a bit of trend in the above. He had ideas, built prototypes, published articles. Serious engineers must have said, "This guy knows what he is doing, I'm going to build one." No small feat even by true believer.

8) There are three articles by him on distortion eleminated by horns. It seems that this was something listeners recognized but pundits questioned. Eventually he was able to work up solid proof that our ears are correct. It may be that many people listen to (as a insightful forum member said) "Little Girl with a Guitar". His work was more about really loud, dramatic music.

9) He did speak to room issues. It is a bit of shame that he didn't do more to give cookbook solutions. It is such a can of worms that I can't blame him. He can design a speaker. He can't redesign everyone's living room. Even re speakers, I'll bet he got inquires saying, I want to substitute XYZ driver, how will it sound better, can you run tests for me, let me know the results? He become the test lab slave for every hairbrained noodler.

10) He had some comments on amps. This didn't go far enough. I suspect that the K-Horn eliminated itermod and harmonics. But people wanted harmonics and some amps add them. (I'm not quite sure you can have harmonic distortion and not intermod, probably not.)

11) His advice was to listen to live performances, presumbably not performed through direct radiators. This leaves out a lot of modern music. People these days hear music through bad reproduction and so live acoustic music sounds like K-Horn music; but this sounds "bad" or accurate, depending what anyone is used to.

12) I'd like to think that PWK was a rock and roller in his own way. Big music at loud levels. Organs, marching bands, swing music. Beethoven can be characterized that way too. But PWK had to make reproducers and turned solid engineering to the task of getting it into his living room. Happily he let us get it in our living rooms.

Smile,

Gil

[JJkizak]

My opinion would be an on-going program from the company to replace or offer certified kits to upgrade performance, improved crossovers, tweeter replacement, squawker replacement, woofer replacement, power handling improvements, etc. Then you could still call it "Klipsch" technically. Mine have "Dean Crossovers" so I will have to call mine "Klipschdeans".

JJK

[colterphoto1]

My opinion would be an on-going program from the company to replace or offer certified kits to upgrade performance, improved crossovers, tweeter replacement, squawker replacement, woofer replacement, power handling improvements, etc. Then you could still call it "Klipsch" technically. Mine have "Dean Crossovers" so I will have to call mine "Klipschdeans".

JJK

In 1992 when I purchased a totally beat set of Cornwalls, I wrote to Klipsch, they offered various modifications including, if I remember correctly, a set of B2 crossover networks and different squawker driver to improve performance.

Welcome to the madness George, your thought provoking questions are ones that many of us ponder. I will be hosting a crossover 'shoot-out' of sorts to allow several of our members to hear a closely controlled A/B test of various modifications.

To me, it's always a cost benefit equation (the accountant in me fights the creative artist in me), whether its Klipsch engineering and production or aftermarket modificaitons.

One has to remember that there were certain cost-saving measures at the factory to speed production and create profits. How could the K33 be the perfect woofer for the Khorn, LS, and CW? And was the K55 really the optimum driver for all those horns K400- K700? Why secure the woofers with 4 wood screws when there are 8 holes in the woofer basket, and about those capacitors......

Even in our hands, I do wonder how much improvement can be gained by the incessant tweaking, but to some it's not just listening to beautiful music but the tinkering that is enjoyable. So long as it's a Klipsch cabinet I suppose it deserves the moniker, but I do wonder when 'enough is enough'.

Just have fun and remember, it's about the music. At least to me.

Michael

[Deang]

My opinion would be an on-going program from the company to replace or offer certified kits to upgrade performance, improved crossovers, tweeter replacement, squawker replacement, woofer replacement, power handling improvements, etc. Then you could still call it "Klipsch" technically. Mine have "Dean Crossovers" so I will have to call mine "Klipschdeans".

Klispch actually does this for the big three Heritage speakers. They offer the AK-4 Upgrade Kit for the Klipschorn, and corresponding upgrade kits for the Belle Klipsch and LaScala. The cost is $1800, and includes the networks, new K-77-F tweeter, and K-55-X midrange. One could actually just purchase the networks I think for $900.

I personally believe they are still Klipsch speakers until you start swapping drivers and horns. Different networks change up the sound, but the speakers still sound like "Klipsch".