meagain Posted January 23, 2007 Author Share Posted January 23, 2007 Larry - IDK what's the culprit at this point. I do know I listened to the offending music through a Cornwall and could clearly hear "most" of it thru the Squawker. Not sure what this tells me. On another note - I think my ak-3 tweeters simply don't work. The pillow test is tricky cuz I can't tell if the squawker is filtering through, but I'm pretty convinced at least this one is dead. This of course would indicate why I hear such a discrepancy between the 2 pairs of khorns. AND give me an eye opener as to what sounds come out of what. I see that I can unscrew the whole thing from the back. My thinking is to detach it so I can listen to it. If anyone thinks I will get electrocuted or hurt the speakers, please raise your hand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meagain Posted January 23, 2007 Author Share Posted January 23, 2007 (insert highly embarrassed smiley faced icon here) Surely my husband will learn to stop argueing with me and that in the end - I'll be right... Just takes a long time to get there. (envisioning Dean/Craig laughing their a$$es off shortly)..... Ummm.... I suppose it would help to compare tweeters between 2 pairs when all the tweeters work.... and umm.... the pillow test sucks.... and umm... I was convinced they worked when standing in the cold garage listening to the guy play Phil Collins.... and umm.... I didn't realize so much high stuff comes out of the tweeter..... Ooops! Yea, I think they're both dead which was my first impression and answer the question as to why they sound like crapola. I only removed one. I'm hearing bass from the bass bin. Still - I think they were a good deal - Umm.. depending on what this will cost. I guess it could be worse as I originally thought the squawks were messed up also. Ducking..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BEC Posted January 23, 2007 Share Posted January 23, 2007 Here is a quick way to test tweeters if you haven't decided on whether they are bad or not. This MP3 is of a closely miked tweeter on both channels. Most of what you hear if you play this should come out of the tweeter. http://bandksound.com/tweet1.MP3 Bob Crites Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meagain Posted January 23, 2007 Author Share Posted January 23, 2007 Too late, I already took them off the mounting board. They are both toast. I wonder if it's the crossover? Also, I sent you an email already. If not the crossovers - I'm in for either a repair or part (clueless).... I'll check out and save that MP3!! Isn't this uncommon? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BEC Posted January 23, 2007 Share Posted January 23, 2007 I have answered your email. Probably just bad diaphragms and that is not uncommon at all. Likely not the fault of the crossovers. If you have a meter, you can measure on the terminals of the tweeters after you disconnect the wires. Should read about 6 ohms. If it reads a lot more or infinite, they need diaphragms. Bob Crites Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PrestonTom Posted January 23, 2007 Share Posted January 23, 2007 Tom - I'm thinking here... "Shrillness".... I think I could peg many things as 'shrill' sounding in comparison with a cello, etc...., but I believe the main problem here is that the "shrill" parts are unnaturally just plain too damn loud. Like... Listening to the same offending parts in other speakers seems to have the same tone, quality, and all, but aren't as loud. Maybe that's it in a nutshell. Husband's home so I'm going to ask him if he agrees with that breakdown of it. Like... the same sound on the ak-3's is physically way lower and more blended into the picture. But sounds like the same notes, etc. Like I said above which Dean apparently didn't know..... these parts sound clear and not distorted. Just asked husband to describe again. He says it's harsh around the 6k area. I asked him to describe 'harsh' and agreed that the "quality" of the sound is good - it's just attenuated (loud). In fact, when I first started playing around here again over the weekend, I played one of our test songs with again (Sinatra) and the part came in and I looked at him. He was laughing cuz it's so... wow. This happens on a vocal on another, etc. etc. So I'm saying I think it's just a volume issue there. And no, I'm not blasting the music. We are both 100% on the same page with this and both agree the rest of it sounds great. Unlike the AK-3's in general. Does this make better sense? Ahh, You have raised two isues that simply confirm my notion that we need to do away with words and talk about frequency bands identified by my suggested experiment (at least as a start) . First, you use the word "attenuated" to indicate that it is loud. These are your words but they are incorrect. Attenuated means "less loud" Second, you raise the issue of "shrillness". This is a timely eaxample. The other day some guy on this forum was using the word "shrill" to describe some problem he was having with some La Scalas (if I remember correctly). Ultimately the problem was resolved by a change in gain to the mid-range (changing gtaps on the autoformer). Now the word "shrill" to me and many of my collegues means a loud distortion at the higher frequencies (we can quibble about the exact frequency range, but who cares). A mid-range that had too much gain might be described by some of us, myself included, as being "forward", certainly not "shrill". This is why it is difficult to get a handle on what the problem is using words. My little experiment outlined before will be helpful. It is time consuming and tedious however. Incidentally, most people are not good at naming or guessing the frequency at which "something" occurs (musicians included). Hence my little experiement with the Behringer is even more valuable. For instance you ascribe 6kHz as the problem area. I remain skeptical (unless you have gone through my test), since there is actually relatively little energy produced at that high of a frequency. Listen to the output of a tweeter in isolation - there is not much there, and what is there does not sound very musical. The words used by some to describe changes with these higher frequencies (when they are either attenuated or given some gain) typically include: "crisp", "sparkle", "snap" etc. But again, people use words differently. Good Luck, -Tom Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pauln Posted January 23, 2007 Share Posted January 23, 2007 First, you use the word "attenuated" to indicate that it is loud. These are your words but they are incorrect. Attenuated means "less loud" THANK YOU - it was driving me crazy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cjgeraci Posted January 23, 2007 Share Posted January 23, 2007 Ok, Lisa, here is your chance to upgrade at a relatively modest expense - and no, its not Trachorns. Since both of your tweeters are toast - Bob can certainly replace the diaphrams in them. But, why throw more money after bad? Unless you are totally in love with K77s, Bob's CT125 tweeters are a major upgrade ($150/pair), and are drop in replacements. I am currently running versions of Bob's tweeters in all five of my Heritage 5.1 setup, and the more that I listen to them, the more amazed that I am with them. Of course, some have preferred K77s over Bob's new tweeters, and if that is the case, you can turn around and resell the CT125s easily. It is not a big risk, upgrade-wise, to take. Just a thought. Carl. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meagain Posted January 23, 2007 Author Share Posted January 23, 2007 My bad on "attenuation". I trusted the person who took me down that road. Bob - I'm going to send them off to you because I want it done right with testing gear, etc. The bass seems less on these things but I clearly hear something coming out the bass bin. I better crack open that door for a visual. I'm scared. Bob - Do you have any MP3's handy for a woofer? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arky Posted January 23, 2007 Share Posted January 23, 2007 Ok, Lisa, here is your chance to upgrade at a relatively modest expense - and no, its not Trachorns. Since both of your tweeters are toast - Bob can certainly replace the diaphrams in them. But, why throw more money after bad? Unless you are totally in love with K77s, Bob's CT125 tweeters are a major upgrade ($150/pair), and are drop in replacements. I am currently running versions of Bob's tweeters in all five of my Heritage 5.1 setup, and the more that I listen to them, the more amazed that I am with them. Of course, some have preferred K77s over Bob's new tweeters, and if that is the case, you can turn around and resell the CT125s easily. It is not a big risk, upgrade-wise, to take. Just a thought. Carl. Good idea. Lisa, you're accumulating spks pretty rapidly, you need a pair of those on hand anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deang Posted January 23, 2007 Share Posted January 23, 2007 I second the BEC tweeter recommendation. I would get a pair for the 81's, then move the working K-77-M's from the 81's over to the AK-3 Khorns. Have Bob send you the Z-brackets for the K-77-M's. If sound is coming out of the bottoms then they are working. If the bass sounds weak compared to the other set it's probably room related. In fact, your tweeter issue in your 81's may be room related as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meagain Posted January 23, 2007 Author Share Posted January 23, 2007 :| Oh boy. When I first saw this suggestion in my mailbox, I thought the same thing. Put them in the 81's. What if they are hotER than I already have? I'm a bit fearful of that. And, will they "go with" the other tweeters if listening to DVD-A, etc? I'd have to read up on those again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrWho Posted January 23, 2007 Share Posted January 23, 2007 Any option of actually measuring the speakers to see what's really going on? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meagain Posted January 23, 2007 Author Share Posted January 23, 2007 I did that before and the tweeter section showed higher. One of them is linked in the first post. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrWho Posted January 24, 2007 Share Posted January 24, 2007 My apologies - I missed that the first time around: The first thing you can try is to drop the tweeter 3dB by moving it down a tap. If you're good with a soldering iron it shouldn't take more than a minute. After that, remeasure. I have a feeling that the peak has more to do with the squawker than the tweeter. I have a similar problem with my Heresy speakers and I plan to put a low pass on the squawker to ensure its output is down in that region. It'll only be around $5-$10 per speaker. You might even consider moving both the tap and employing the LPF on the squawker. Where was your mic when you took the measurement? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meagain Posted January 24, 2007 Author Share Posted January 24, 2007 Dean - Regarding room issues.... I've had the khorns all over the place so if it's a room issue, I need a new house. I've shoved the microphone up them and get the readings that seem to support what I'm hearing. I'm permanently off the room issue concept with the piercy issue. Who - I've been using an eq to chill things down. What is this "low pass" though? The mic was 3 feet away at the high of between squawk & tweet. Used measuring tape, etc. I think the pic is of one speaker on taps 5/2. That might not be the latest pic, etc. but it's the general idea of the results here. OK - so given I've had no good understanding of what sound is from squawk vs. tweet (which was why I started this thread).... and hearing khorns with dead tweeters thinking because I'm hearing highs out of it that it's coming from the tweeters - those sounds were actually from the squawks. So yea, maybe I have a squawk issue and as the squawk goes up high, then the tweeter comes in and is amplifying the squawk highs? Then maybe I want the squawk to chill out more towards the end where the tweeter comes in, or the tweeter to not jump in right there or have a softer ramp up? I started on taps 5/2, then tried 4/x, then went back to 5/2. The problem with changing the taps is that it'll do the squawk across the board right? I guess I want taps to just change the high part of the squawker. Dean - I'm going to try to get in some listsening time without the DEQ to better compare these AA's with the Jensen PIO. To compare apples to apples, let me know if I should change the taps from 5/2. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LarryC Posted January 24, 2007 Share Posted January 24, 2007 ...understanding of what sound is from squawk vs. tweet (which was why I started this thread).... and hearing khorns with dead tweeters thinking because I'm hearing highs out of it that it's coming from the tweeters - those sounds were actually from the squawks. So yea, maybe I have a squawk issue and as the squawk goes up high, then the tweeter comes in and is amplifying the squawk highs?This is what some of us have been saying -- a tweeter's sounds are very high-pitched, basically adding sheen to a cymbal but not the basic cymbal sound, or the tingle to the triangle or glockenspiel but not the main body of those instruments, etc. Since the tweeter's crossover point is higher than the highest note on a piano, it's no surprise that you would hear so much treble out of your midrange drivers. I'd expect a K-77 peak to exaggerate cymbal sounds but probably not a trumpet's. Exaggerated trumpet or voice highs seem more like an upper midrange issue to me. I think you've needed a visit all along from someone like Dean, Gil, Craig, or Who(ever) to get a better handle on what's so bothersome. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PrestonTom Posted January 24, 2007 Share Posted January 24, 2007 Dean - Regarding room issues.... I've had the khorns all over the place so if it's a room issue, I need a new house. I've shoved the microphone up them and get the readings that seem to support what I'm hearing. I'm permanently off the room issue concept with the piercy issue. Who - I've been using an eq to chill things down. What is this "low pass" though? The mic was 3 feet away at the high of between squawk & tweet. Used measuring tape, etc. I think the pic is of one speaker on taps 5/2. That might not be the latest pic, etc. but it's the general idea of the results here. OK - so given I've had no good understanding of what sound is from squawk vs. tweet (which was why I started this thread).... and hearing khorns with dead tweeters thinking because I'm hearing highs out of it that it's coming from the tweeters - those sounds were actually from the squawks. So yea, maybe I have a squawk issue and as the squawk goes up high, then the tweeter comes in and is amplifying the squawk highs? Then maybe I want the squawk to chill out more towards the end where the tweeter comes in, or the tweeter to not jump in right there or have a softer ramp up? I started on taps 5/2, then tried 4/x, then went back to 5/2. The problem with changing the taps is that it'll do the squawk across the board right? I guess I want taps to just change the high part of the squawker. Dean - I'm going to try to get in some listsening time without the DEQ to better compare these AA's with the Jensen PIO. To compare apples to apples, let me know if I should change the taps from 5/2. In statistics they would call this strategy a "random walk". I hear words like "shrillness" and "chill" and others deternine from this "diagnostic" that you need new tweeters or you need to change the gain to the mid-range (changing taps) etc. This approach seems a bit fanciful and I am skeptical it will address the actual problem. I don't think anyone is yet in a postion to determine what the problem is. Everyone is being helpful but for the life of me I am not sure that any of us know what the actual problem is. The picture of the Frequency Response was helpful but I am not sure (nor are any of us) how much of that response is due to a lack of gain to the mid-range (in which case swapping taps would be appropriate) or that is that response due to some room issues (then EQ is only a band aid cure). Have these taps been cahnged from the original setting? Have these Tweeters been altered? As I recall you you have tried a number of things with this set up so I am no longer certain what the actual baseline is. Your K-Horns are about the some vintage as mine. Are these AA crosovers with a K77M tweeter and and a K55V (soldered) mid range driver? -Tom Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meagain Posted January 24, 2007 Author Share Posted January 24, 2007 Tom - Yes, K77M & K55V (soldered) with AA. The only thing changed was swapping the xovers for Dean's version. This gave me nicer bass and just a prettier/fuller, more quality sound. But I have this "pierce" issue. I don't recall exactly how the old stock AA's sounded but I know there was an improvement with Deans mostly in the lower sections. At the time I had the stock AA's, I didn't have the gear I have now either. If I had my druthers & didn't have to deal with BS tomorrow & Friday - I'd pop them back in for a reminder quickie. Dean's came in on taps 5/2 which I played around with and ended back on 5/2. Again, I don't recall exactly why I didn't like 4/x. Maybe it was my thinking I had hot tweeters and chilling down the squawk accentuated it. I just find it hard to imagine that others have the same stuff but find this acceptable. I know my husband doesn't have great hearing (unless he blocks me out alot), cuz he's been in bands his whole life and is in one now. I can't imagine I have great hearing either as I've gone & continue to go to concerts whenever I can and I like my music loud. No virgin ears here. But IDK why more people are biatching about it. So either somthing's goofy or we just don't like this particular squawker in this high area. If they didn't bring goodness everywhere else, they'd be out of here. Ideally, we'd like to like ALL the pieces and not have to use this EQ. Tho I think there is no alternative. Dean has arranged to hook me up with a test of Jensen PIO which will arrive Friday. I think I'm Dean's beta tester for Piercy. I'm not expecting any fix with them. Maybe just a different tone.... perhaps a warmer sound. IDK. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meagain Posted January 24, 2007 Author Share Posted January 24, 2007 Oh - the other thing I have issue with is when playing music with alot of stuff in it, instruments get a bit jumbled up at higher volumes. The Cornwalls with Dean's xovers seem to handle this better where I can hear more instrument separation. I can crank those Cornwalls! Question - Is the Trachorn more like a bigger, higher quality version of the horn in a Chorus II (basically)? We relistened to the Chorus II and liked what it brought to the table. Seems like the sound comes out more on the surface of it vs. the Cornwall where it seems sound emits from far inside. And the Chorus II seems more airy and seems to come out 'easier' or more effortless? Very different but I think I like some of that. But I don't like the quality - tho maybe those need caps as well. Dean - if you're going to klipschfest, can you toss your khorns in the car and haul them over? 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.