Digital Equalization For The Cornwall ?

[DrWho]

Harmon kardon has a white paper on EQ and how it helps with corrections that room treatments can NOT.

Did you get that backwards? Or got a link to the white paper? Usually the argument goes the other way: non-minimum phase aberations in the frequency response cannot be fixed by EQ. That's not to say that EQ is never necessary, but one would expect the louspeaker manufacturer to address all those issues within the crossover [^o)]

[bodcaw boy]

ka7niq

I have heard Klipschorns sound screechy on strings occasionally --- I attributed it to the recording, or over-close miking, because they usually sound fine. I haven't heard Horns sound tubby in the two houses I've had them in.

Others on this forum mentioned that the AK - 4 Klipschorn is sweeter and less "hard" sounding than the AK- 2. I don't think I've heard the AK-2. I originally had either A or AA (1982).

It's interesting that you mention the B & W 801 --- When I originally picked the Thorns, I did so after a several day stand off against whatever B & W 801 was around in '82 ... it may have been the F ... anyway it was the runner-up to the Khorn, after eliminating Canton, Altec, Bozak, Bose, Magnepan, Acoustat, DCM, and many others. It was a very close call, between two very different sounding speakers. I actually found it rather disturbing, because the choice could have gone either way. The B & W seemed very well balanced, more forgiving of bad recordings, very "musical," and never gave offense. The Klipschorn sounded more "there" and "live" and "immediate," and captured more of the excitement and air of the orchestra, especially on very dynamic material. And on some string recordings, the live, gutty, rosiny, detailed sheen of the strings came through more forcefully.

Now, with our stereo system doubling as a simple Home Theatre, I love some of the dynamic movie soundtracks, and wonder if the B & W would have sounded as exciting.

Ribbon speakers can sound beautiful, as can ribbon microphones.

Now to look up song, thanks to Dr. Who!

My Grandpa had Horns, and I don't remember them sounding screechy either.

But Gramps listened to a lot of Polka and Marching Band stuff, you know Sousa and the University Of Michigan Fight song type stuff, and Notre Dame too.

Maybe it was my rooms, or amps, etc.

I just never had any luck with then Klipschorns.

My old Cornwall's sound better, in this room, and I preferred the Forte's too.

This rooms corners are 20 feet apart, and I sit 16 feet away.

The Cornwalls work well.

Back to the 801's, I have owned the F's, but the Matrix is a whole new ball game.

Listening to Bob Seegers song "The fire inside" , there is an electric piano solo.

The Cornwalls are unmatched in reproducing this, it sounds like you are in a bar and someone is playing a piano right in front of you.

The 801's are more "polite" sounding.

As I told you, I have the digital EQ on the VMPS RM 40's right now.

They need a LOT of power, but IMHO combine the smoothness of the 801's, and the tremendous detail of a horn.

They just cannot match the

lively" sound of a horn speaker, even with a ton of juice, but they image incredibly, and have about zero coloration in comparison to MOST horns I have heard.

Now, I have heard Western Electric systems .....and Zingali's, and Avant Gards.

I really wished I had not sold the old Forte;s I had.

I completely re capped them, and they sounded great, but JUST a little "edgy".

With some Digital EQ, they MIGHT have been "the ones" ?

But, they were small, and looked "lost" in my wide room.

BTW, digital EQ has changed me, for good.

I really wish I had learned about it sooner.

I had several good speakers with flaws I could not live with.

I see now i might have ":fixed" them with digital EQ.

The CF 3's are next to get the "digital workover", but honestly, right now the VMPS RM 40's sound so good it's scary.

Besides, I am a LITTLE "upset" with the "Bodcaw boy", at the moment, LOL

So, his "punishment" shall be to have his CF 3's shoved into a corner.

I was so "mad" at him I purposely even faced the unhooked CF 3's into the corner.

That's what my dad did to me when I was "bad".

hey if you are not going to listen to the cf-3's send them my way......

roy delgado

[ka7niq]

Roy, you can't have the CF 3's.

They are going in the system tomorrow.

I have kept these CF 3's because they are beautiful whitewash oak.

No, they ain't CF 4's, and not version ones either, but still very musical!

They are version 2's.

I WISH you could find the "small crossover change" you guys did to the version 2's someday ?

I know the ports were shortened on the version 2's.

The version ones had 6 inch ports, version 2 has 2 1/2.

Box tuning was raised, but guess what, so was woofer distortion!

Isn't that how it goes ?

And, these woofers play midrange, yikes ....

I wonder Roy if it was a crossover slope or a level change ?

If it was just a level change, one could passively biamp with two amps if the top amp, or both, had level controls ?

Then, manipulation of the horns level relative to woofers could be changed.

I can't wait to try the CF 3's with the digital EQ ....!

[Colin]

I am working in Brandon for the next 2 weeks

http://www.harman.com/about_harman/technology_leadership.aspx

[tigerwoodKhorns]

I also own B&W Matrix 801's, now THEY sound like music, and violins sound like violins on them.

I hooked the Behringer to my B&W N801's. I thought that the midrange was outstandign before, just runnign the auto eq with the mic made an immediate improvement. Better balance and even more natural. I didn't have to keep fiddling with it like I did with my K Horns. Highly recommended.

[bodcaw boy]

Roy, you can't have the CF 3's.

They are going in the system tomorrow.

I have kept these CF 3's because they are beautiful whitewash oak.

No, they ain't CF 4's, and not version ones either, but still very musical!

They are version 2's.

I WISH you could find the "small crossover change" you guys did to the version 2's someday ?

I know the ports were shortened on the version 2's.

The version ones had 6 inch ports, version 2 has 2 1/2.

Box tuning was raised, but guess what, so was woofer distortion!

Isn't that how it goes ?

And, these woofers play midrange, yikes ....

I wonder Roy if it was a crossover slope or a level change ?

If it was just a level change, one could passively biamp with two amps if the top amp, or both, had level controls ?

Then, manipulation of the horns level relative to woofers could be changed.

I can't wait to try the CF 3's with the digital EQ ....!

i haven't been able to find the details of the network change but i think it was a crosspoint change and level change for the hf and heavier cone woofers with a lower tuning. we did play with a digital processor on the epic series and it was one of the first times that i decided that my systems at home were going to digital processors.

roy delgado

[ka7niq]

Roy, you can't have the CF 3's.

They are going in the system tomorrow.

I have kept these CF 3's because they are beautiful whitewash oak.

No, they ain't CF 4's, and not version ones either, but still very musical!

They are version 2's.

I WISH you could find the "small crossover change" you guys did to the version 2's someday ?

I know the ports were shortened on the version 2's.

The version ones had 6 inch ports, version 2 has 2 1/2.

Box tuning was raised, but guess what, so was woofer distortion!

Isn't that how it goes ?

And, these woofers play midrange, yikes ....

I wonder Roy if it was a crossover slope or a level change ?

If it was just a level change, one could passively biamp with two amps if the top amp, or both, had level controls ?

Then, manipulation of the horns level relative to woofers could be changed.

I can't wait to try the CF 3's with the digital EQ ....!

i haven't been able to find the details of the network change but i think it was a crosspoint change and level change for the hf and heavier cone woofers with a lower tuning. we did play with a digital processor on the epic series and it was one of the first times that i decided that my systems at home were going to digital processors.

Roy Delgado

I thought series 1 and 2 had the good, heavier woofers, and series 3's changed woofers ?

If series 2 indeed have the same woofers of their vastly superior version one cousins, then all is not lost.

One need only re tune to the version one tuning frequency by changing the 2 1/2 inch series 2 ports to the 6 inch ports of series 1.

I have a RANE 24 db stereo 2 way electronic crossover using fixed linkwitz Riley filters with adjustable slopes.

I strongly feel the drivers in my CF 3's and the horn are quite good, and might benefit from active crossover ?

Not that the stock crossovers aren't good, I just think that biamping with electronic crossover might be better ?

I know you are busy Roy, and it was a long time ago when the Epic series was designed.

But there are several of us Epic owners out here who would love to "return" our series 2 Epic series speakers to their original "Glory".

I understand that because of the woofer change in the series 3's, this is not feasible.

But IF series 2 drivers are same as series 1, a couple new longer ports, and a little soldering in the crossovers, and we are there!

I could KILL myself for ever selling my CF 4 series 1's!

[Good2BHome]

ka7niq,

Your 9kHz spike can be corrected with an addition to the crossovers of a "P-Trap" circuit (a rather simple circuit). I've used it and it works. Do a search on "P-Trap" and you will find multiple threads in Updates and Modifications .

This was / is a problem with a percentage of all the push-on connector K-55's from their introduction. In the spring of 1980, a K-55 with a new phase plug was introduced with solder connectors. The new phase plug corrected the problem.

Mike

[ka7niq]

ka7niq

Now, with our stereo system doubling as a simple Home Theatre, I love some of the dynamic movie soundtracks, and wonder if the B & W would have sounded as exciting.

As far as home theater, I have never heard any speaker that even approaches the B&W Matrix 801's for sounding real.

Perhaps it is because Lucasfilms used em for monitors, and things are made to sound right on them, I do not know ?

The CF 3's are very good on watching movies and TV too.

Digital EQ has really opened my eyes, and maybe Mark Levinson was right ?

Maybe you make a speaker as efficient as you can as smooth as you can, and then use digital EQ so it sounds like you want ?