George Roland Posted September 27, 2006 Share Posted September 27, 2006 I would like to know what is the difference between Cornwalls I and II, both in terms of the parts used and any sonic differences. Also, what are the sonic differences between Cornwall II's and Klipschorns both in terms of frequency range covered and sonic character. I'm not so much interested in the specifications as in the listening impressions of forum members who have been able to AB these speakers. Thanks, George Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daddy Dee Posted September 27, 2006 Share Posted September 27, 2006 George, Simply put, a Khorn has a bigger sound than the Cornwall. There at least three things at work that make the difference. 1. The Khorn is fully horn loaded. The drivers are actually the same in a Khorn and Cornwall, however, the woofer being horn loaded causes it to have less distortion than the same woofer in the Cornwall. 2. The mid-horn and crossover are different. The Khorn midrange comprises (I believe) four octaves. It goes as low as 400hz. The Cornwall mid goes to 600hz. 3. The Khorn placed in the corner, even makes the tweeter and midhorn have a bigger sound. This makes the speaker load the room differently and a Khorn can nestle in the corner in a way that a cornwall or LaScala never can. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boom3 Posted September 27, 2006 Share Posted September 27, 2006 What Daddy Dee said and...the Cornwalls ( I have 4 of the model IIs) have a rounder, fuller bass down to about 50 Hz, since they have, in most settings, a rounded peak at 80 Hz. However, they can't touch the K-horn for response below 50 Hz and overall accuracy of response. As always, proper set-up is essential to get the best from either. My Corns are a little out from the corners to minimize the "boom"...the K-horns need to be nestled snugly in good, sturdy corners. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colterphoto1 Posted September 27, 2006 Share Posted September 27, 2006 In CW vs CWII, the woofer and cabinet should be the same (except for construction detail like front mounting of components for the II), the mid horn will be of composite materials on the II, the driver goes from the K55 to the K52 (2" to 1.5" voice coil) and the tweeter changed from K77 to K79. I'd think the CWII would be a little 'toppier' if anything, since the K77 really only runs out to what 16k or so flat. I have no personal experience with the II. The Khorn will blow the doors off it in terms of deep bass response, although the CW is solid in this regard. Khorn is much much much more room dependent. You can put the CW just about anywhere. Collect em all, it's a set! Michael Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IndyKlipschFan Posted September 27, 2006 Share Posted September 27, 2006 Collect em all, it's a set! Sounds good to me... All of em! Just my opinion here... Older vertical Cornwalls are wonderful IMO should not be played as loud.. but still awesome.. I like em on the sides horizontal mids and highs wise. Regular cornwalls I's are the best buy here in the Cornwall line... Basically indestructable! Cornwall 2's with the front driver mountings without getting technical I am sure someone can jump in here (and sorry if this offends someone I never fully appreciated as musch as what I had..) (whew..... is that politically correct enough... ?? ) Stay with the I's. Now the new Cornwall 3's. I think they re found the 1's sound.. and improved it some too. (Grin) I think the new tweeter on the newer Cornwall 3 and Heresy 3 is the same but not the same one now used in the La Scala and K horns. As per a prior post?<<< I would say they go a lot lower than 50Htz. Maybe your room is causing problems? A good Cornwall is listed at 38 Htz and a K horn to 33 Htz... your missing out on something there?? La Scalas at at the 50- 55 Htz level a Cornwall will def go lower than a La Scala.. As for the K horn... If you have a good room for them.. By all means go for the k horn.. You will never look back if you have these in your house to fully appreciate that BIG Klipsch sound. As the saying goes...... It's all gooooooood! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RFP Posted September 28, 2006 Share Posted September 28, 2006 "Collect 'em all..." I love it! I can't speak to the Cornwall I vs. Cornwall II (or even III for that matter), but we do have Cornwall Is in the den... connected to what passes for a home theater set-up in our house (at least it is all Klipsch!). We occasionally play CDs on the HT system and the CWs do an excellent job. But when I get down to some 'real listening' I fire up the K-horn systems and it is an entirely different experience. The K-horns not only have good frequency response and awsome dynamics, they are 'musical' and 'involving' in a way that no other speaker that I have heard can match. Now, I'll admit that the CWs are not fed the same super-pure watts as the K-horns (bix box store Yamaha receiver vs. Audio Research & Sonic Frontiers all-tube gear), and the rooms are as different as day and night. If the CWs got the same treatment as the K-horns, the difference might be less. Even so, I am absolutely sure that the K-horns would win my vote every time. Cheerz, Rob Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PrestonTom Posted September 28, 2006 Share Posted September 28, 2006 "Collect 'em all..." I love it! I can't speak to the Cornwall I vs. Cornwall II (or even III for that matter), but we do have Cornwall Is in the den... connected to what passes for a home theater set-up in our house (at least it is all Klipsch!). We occasionally play CDs on the HT system and the CWs do an excellent job. But when I get down to some 'real listening' I fire up the K-horn systems and it is an entirely different experience. The K-horns not only have good frequency response and awsome dynamics, they are 'musical' and 'involving' in a way that no other speaker that I have heard can match. Now, I'll admit that the CWs are not fed the same super-pure watts as the K-horns (bix box store Yamaha receiver vs. Audio Research & Sonic Frontiers all-tube gear), and the rooms are as different as day and night. If the CWs got the same treatment as the K-horns, the difference might be less. Even so, I am absolutely sure that the K-horns would win my vote every time. Cheerz, Rob Rob, I think you have captured it. I also have both CWs and K-Horns. The CW are great. The K-Horns are special. There is really no sense in trying to comapre them. Second point..... "....... As per a prior post?<<< I would say they go a lot lower than 50Htz. Maybe your room is causing problems? A good Cornwall is listed at 38 Htz and a K horn to 33 Htz... your missing out on something there?? ....." I agree that the speaker/room interface is typically neglected. This is unfortunate since it is so very, very important. Also..... These numbers, 38Hz vs 33 Hz, suggest that the two cabinets are fairly close in their bass response. They are not. The K-horns have an accuracy in the bass that is quite good. Listening to solid , undistorted bass is a real treat. Loaded horn designs are a wonderful experience. I will confess, I love the sound of my Klipschorns. -Tom 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.