Meagain's at it again

[bodcaw boy]

Well I guess some here haven't read(or read carefully enough) the orginal design paper published in the: Journal Audio Engineering Vol. 48, No 10 2000 October

Especially note the Opening Paragraph and the Conclusion!

If this Paper by Roy and PWK doesn't satisfy some of you then I doubt anything will.

If the statements by the people directly involved isn't proof enough what else can be said?

Most of the guessing in this thread is just a big waist of time and is acheiving nothing but spreading speculation with motives that definitly should be questioned. Most of the ones making the loudest noise here have no facts or are ignoring facts stated in the past.

mike tn

miketn,

you have gone and done it!!! don't you know how to instantly kill a thread......throw in some FACTS!!!!! (oh agony, agony, agony) (the humanity of it all) (gnashing of teeth for those that still have some) (ohhhhhhhhh, arrrrrrrgggg, waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaail (psst don't i die good!))

have a blessed day,

roy delgado

[sfogg]

"I just don't understand what the big whoop is with the bass bin. I
almost can't believe that no one in the world makes a driver that goes
up high enough for one of these horn sections. "

The same driver (K33) goes higher in the LaScala, Belle and Cornwall. That should tell you something about where the HF limit is from.....

Shawn

[Coytee]

The difference should be lightyears apart.

They are

[DrWho]

I think Hollywood is in your foreseeable future Roy...but I think we (well some of us at least) would prefer to have you at klipsch building new speakers. [Y]

So when does the Jubilee II come out? []

[bodcaw boy]

This statement of Andy's from years ago also confirms what I posted in the now-locked thread. The Bad Cowboy seemed to deny it, though.

1. The Klipschorn is a more difficult(ie., expensive in materials and labor) bass bin to manufacture than the bass bin of the proposed home-version of the Jubilee is...from what I have seen(and YES...I gave the Jubilee bass bin a close "builder's eye-view" scrutiny when I saw them...): matchpoint, Jubilee!

sorry andy hadn't worked at klipsch in years and was certainly not around while the jub was developed so close but no cigar.......and for the record.....i have built many a jub AND many a khorn......not.....that......it.......would......matter........don't bother me with the facts, i got my mind made up!!

have a blessed day,

roy delgado

[bodcaw boy]

Well I guess some here haven't read(or read carefully enough) the orginal design paper published in the: Journal Audio Engineering Vol. 48, No 10 2000 October

Especially note the Opening Paragraph and the Conclusion!

If this Paper by Roy and PWK doesn't satisfy some of you then I doubt anything will.

If the statements by the people directly involved isn't proof enough what else can be said?

Most of the guessing in this thread is just a big waist of time and is acheiving nothing but spreading speculation with motives that definitly should be questioned. Most of the ones making the loudest noise here have no facts or are ignoring facts stated in the past.

Good point Mike!

I'll copy it down (type it out) so those inclined (perhaps Mr. Parrott?) might see/read it.

Opening paragraph: More than 50 years after the introduction of the Klipschorn, a revised low frequency horn for the system is presented, which will return the system to a two way design as originally envisioned by its inventor. How this was achieved is discussed with the support of data and results.

<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

CONCLUSION

Our first goal was to match the performance of the current low frequency section. Improving the current Klipschorn low frequency unit presents a formidable task. After all, this loudspeaker was the basis and anchor of the company that Paul Klipsch started.

The frequency responses of the current low frequency cabinet and the new low frequency cabinet, shown in figs 9 and 8, show at the very least that the new design matches the performance of the current low frequency cabinet. The design does provide some significant improvements.

Smoother response in the passband

Decrease in second and third harmonic distortion

Very noticeable improvement in the dip between 50 and 120 Hz

New low frequency cabinet having the same footprint as the current one

Increase in upper frequency limit. Klipschs main goal

Folding the horn in one plane to provide a more consistent, defined area expansion for a 38 Hz horn.

(emphasis added by me)

Of course, this has not been signed and notarized by PWK so it's certainly possible there will be some who will quibble with it's direct comments AND direct implications.

Fret not though... I'm sure there will be some way to twist the above words, all we gotta do is wait.

[]

FORGERY!!! FORGERY!!!

have a blessed day,

roy delgado

[bodcaw boy]

Performance critics obviously haven't read the JAES article, read most the threads on the other forums, followed all of the threads up in the technical section here, seen any of the plots, and in most cases -- actually heard them. The only thing running amok around here is ignorance.

Are you fantasizing again? Who criticized the performance of the Jubilee?

i think it was me.....[:$]

have a blessed day,

roy delgado

[bodcaw boy]

I think Hollywood is in your foreseeable future Roy...but I think we (well some of us at least) would prefer to have you at klipsch building new speakers. [Y]

So when does the Jubilee II come out? []

i am working on jub iii......just think triple the envy!!

have a blessed day,

roy delgado

[Coytee]

Roy, you ever notice how when you show up on a thread spewing your supposed "facts", how you manage to quiet some down?

Sure is interesting how that happens.

[Deang]

I've said this before, but if you put Klipschorns in false corners and pull them off the walls a bit, the bass takes on a LaScala like character -- more 'at you' as opposed to the enveloping effect -- which is due in part from being coupled to the walls, which tend to resonate and contribute to the output. If a Jub wants to seen as a LaScala on steroids, then at least try to remember that the LaScala is a 100Hz horn. The Jubilee, like the Klipschorn -- has a cutoff an octave below that.

The thought of using a Jub bottom with a 1" exit paging driver and K-77 gives me chest pains. It kind of defeats one of the primary purposes of the design -- to take advantage of the performance offered by the better 2" drivers. Even if you decide to make it a three-way, you've really lifted midrange performance.

[Parrot]

Are you fantasizing again? Who criticized the performance of the Jubilee?

You had said, "The home Jubilee as envisioned by PWK does not exist. A bastardized rendition can be special ordered..."

Well, I don't know how else to take the latter statement. As far as what PK envisioned, how in the hell would you know? There were lower cost, unfinished versions of most his speakers when he ran the company, it's likely his vision included those of us who wouldn't be able to afford the full blown finished model. As a side note, the Jubilee in his home has a composite version of the wood horn (and black no less).

These are 'Man' speakers Paul, your preoccupation with WAF has me concerned.

Since you didn't address the performance issue, I'm going to take that as you admitting that you are not a careful reader and were just blowing smoke.

Do you think the bastardized version looks the same as the one PWK posed with? Do you think PWK thought anyone would be crazy enough to want a 402 in his living room? Even the Mad Cowboy didn't think he'd sell any. Turns out, he underestimated the number of people who can be talked into having "the best."

The AES paper is all about the bass cabinet. The completed Jubilee home version does not exist. It went to prototype. Bean counters said the wooden horn was too expensive. That's why people are using different top configurations and why you are going to run through dozens of combinations and never be satisfied.

Sure as God makes little green apples, PWK did not intend a 402 for the home.

[Parrot]

I've got to say that the level of argument here is extraordinarily pathetic. When someone says the 402 was not designed for home use, that is then twisted into claiming the Jubilee was not meant for home use.

And several of you don't know the difference between facts, opinions, and sales patter.

Anyway, my three incontrovertible statements still stand. I realize it's tempting to argue about something else, but I'm paying attention.

[Parrot]

Roy, you ever notice how when you show up on a thread spewing your supposed "facts", how you manage to quiet some down?

Sure is interesting how that happens.

What, I'm not allowed to take a break for a few minutes?

[mark1101]

It sounds like a lascala.

So a bass bin good to 40Hz (the Jubilee) sounds the same as a bassbin that starts dropping off at 100Hz, maybe 70Hz if you're lucky (the lascala)? The difference should be lightyears apart. How do the khorns sound in the same room? What kind of music are you listening to?

Mike,

C'mon buddy you quoted me. I said it sounds like a lascala. No not the same...like one. I think everyone knows what I meant. Yes, the clone I have goes lower. But the more I say the deeper I seem to dig.

Everyone without them seems to know just how they should sound......the people who have them can't do any fair comparisons and the guy who can do the comparison doesn't have the real thing. We are all screwed.

I'm going to Walmart. Talk to everyone later.

[anarchist]

I think maybe the "truthsayers" need to review the "facts" they purport to reference.

Lemme see. I say the Jubilee wasn't meant to replace the Khorn. I am told this is wrong because Paul "wanted to build a Klipschorn II." Hmm, a Klipschorn II is what... a Klipschorn. It was "such an upgrade" it became the Khorn Jubilee. I don't see how it was a replacement Klipschorn. If it were such an incredible upgrade and was given a new name, it was supplanting the Khorn not replacing it - and not in agreement with the "original intention". The facts here are not in question - the extrapolation of intent and what would have happened, of course, are.

Secondly, lets review a fact from this white paper or whatever. It states - based on the performance graphs - the new bass bin is at least as good as the original. How does it go from at least as good to far surpasses, huge upgrade, on another level, and every other euphanism and exclamation which has been bandied about? Since we are sticking to facts...

I don't have a dog in this race. I think the Jubilee was an exciting development and if Klipsch (the corporation) wanted to honor Paul they would have made it even if it were a loss leader just to promote his legacy. There is nothing wrong with offering the Jub in its current form and Kudo's to Roy for making or helping to make it happen. I don't know if it bests the Khorn or not but I am eager to take up someone (thanks) on their offer to let me listen to theirs.

But lets be consistent when wanting to refer back to facts and particularly careful when trying to use PWK's name and declaring what was in his mind or his intent or what the future would have been if his intent had actually been brought to fruition.

[Parrot]

Everyone without them seems to know just how they should sound......the people who have them can't do any fair comparisons and the guy who can do the comparison doesn't have the real thing. We are all screwed.

I'm going to Walmart. Talk to everyone later.

You nailed it, great job.

Enjoy the Mart.

[Coytee]

Everyone without them seems to know just how they should sound......the people who have them can't do any fair comparisons and the guy who can do the comparison doesn't have the real thing. We are all screwed.

I'm going to Walmart. Talk to everyone later.

Now isn't that a good point!

Hope you enjoyed your trip to WMT.

[meagain]

I think most know I have JCs Jub clones. Well this past weekend I got them going and did a direct comparison with my Lascalas. My Khorns happen to be in an adjacent room, but the test I did was pretty fair since I have a K-77 and K-55 top section on the jubs, and I used the same receiver using speakers a/b to instantly switch back and forth. The jubs at one end of the room, lascalas facing them but at the other end of the room. 37 x18 rectangular...basically empty with an 11 ft. ceiling.

So my comparison was bass cabinet vs. bass cabinet really.

My results are this. Until you hear them together you won't know how they really compare...and it might surprise you. The differences are not what everyone thinks. I would equate 1 jub to about 1 1/2 lascalas at most. It is not anymore than that in my room and on the system I used.

I think what the revelation may be is that big top section some have.....that I don't.

I can also tell you that the Jub clone cabinets I have sound remarkably like lascalas but with more output. They do not sound like my Khorns at all.

I really should not say anymore than this for now....as I have some work left to do on the Jubs.

Sorry but I have to disagree!

If the speakers aren't auditioned in the same room/location then there really is no fair comparison!

mike tn[]

Yep! And crossovers!

[meagain]

Could someone post the pic of the pretty one with PWK next to it?

[Parrot]

I think maybe the "truthsayers" need to review the "facts" they purport to reference.

Lemme see. I say the Jubilee wasn't meant to replace the Khorn. I am told this is wrong because Paul "wanted to build a Klipschorn II." Hmm, a Klipschorn II is what... a Klipschorn. It was "such an upgrade" it became the Khorn Jubilee. I don't see how it was a replacement Klipschorn. If it were such an incredible upgrade and was given a new name, it was supplanting the Khorn not replacing it - and not in agreement with the "original intention". The facts here are not in question - the extrapolation of intent and what would have happened, of course, are.

Secondly, lets review a fact from this white paper or whatever. It states - based on the performance graphs - the new bass bin is at least as good as the original. How does it go from at least as good to far surpasses, huge upgrade, on another level, and every other euphanism and exclamation which has been bandied about? Since we are sticking to facts...

I don't have a dog in this race. I think the Jubilee was an exciting development and if Klipsch (the corporation) wanted to honor Paul they would have made it even if it were a loss leader just to promote his legacy. There is nothing wrong with offering the Jub in its current form and Kudo's to Roy for making or helping to make it happen. I don't know if it bests the Khorn or not but I am eager to take up someone (thanks) on their offer to let me listen to theirs.

But lets be consistent when wanting to refer back to facts and particularly careful when trying to use PWK's name and declaring what was in his mind or his intent or what the future would have been if his intent had actually been brought to fruition.

Very well said.

The true home Jubilee will never happen, and you can take that to the bank. Even if they could sell a hundred pairs of them a year, Klipsch would not be interested. This is based on my questioning Fred Klipsch about it at Indy. I think he outranks the Bad Cowboy. If not, I'm sure the latter will pop up with a correction.