Jump to content

TAD 1601A in Klipschorn


Recommended Posts

Sorry....Ive been out of town....I didnt mean to leave this site in such an uproar....This all started 25 years ago..George Ashworth the other friend of paul Klipsch who worked on outer surround problems of woofers for earlier Khorns...His bass bin was special made with J lugs & wing nuts for quick woofer changing....Carls one unit sports this type of side door....Owned by Joe Sharp, another scientest friend of Ashworth...We found that a very very earley 2205 JBL woofer having the same T.S as the TAD 1601a....We suspect the TAD is a clone of this earley 2205...Looking at the outer surround with 5 corrugation pattern.. the next year JBL changed the cone design on the 2205 going from freeair of 27hz up to 32 hz then the next year changing to double roll M shape outer surround and Freeair of 40 hz then changeing it to 2225 pro number....It was the very very earley 2205 that did the majick George was shocked with his findings...He made frequency plot after plot ..Finding lower distortion in its bandwidth...And yes the woofers in the Khorn is only down 5db at 530hz... So what accounts for the clarity in the 300hz to 500hz range...4" VC ? lighter cone? well the larger VC would offset lighter cone weight....Remember we used a special electronic Xover, 3 way and 30 watt amps....I had a burned out earley 2205 so we pealed out the cone and weighed it for further reference ...I havent had the heart to rip out a TAD 1601a to examin and weigh the cone...Or even measure cone voice coil length...(I shudder at that) Yes it sounds cleaner with more clarity and definition in the woofer upper register....I would not trust my own ears....Joe Sharp, Hauled one unit down to Central Institute for the Deaf..Where they have two anechoic chambers....One full chamber & one half chamber with concrete floor....For further measurment...& measurment equip.,...of higher caliber and plotting charts......I still have the very earley JBL 2205 woofers....I sold another pair to a friend in Kenai Alaska were they still reside in a Khorn. Yes the bass bin can be tweeked...But useing a EQ is not recommend...George tried this adding distortion...George was a mono man..One Khorn upstairs in the living room and the other down stairs in the lab. That lab looked like Frankensteins test chamber....He,s long gone now,, His equipment scattered ammong his crazy friends. Buy the way those electrode plugs are still in my neck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 88
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Maron - I don't want to hijack this thread, but I have a comment that may actually be a question.

I have JBL 2205 reconed with 2225 paper. It is in a vented box made to spec for the JBL 2225 (with a horn cabinet using 2425 and 2404 - the networks are 3110 and 3105) - I didn't imitate any speaker - just speced and T/Sed for a specific sound (it does work for me).

The comment - the jewel of the speaker (to my ear - not measured) is the bass bin. I measured some before building the box mainly to see what network tweaks I needed to make, but I never measured after (the reason is simple - I like the sound too much to be colored by actual measurements and a misguided attempt to get better measurements).

The question - should I have tried to recone with 2205 paper (I had this done - not something I would do myself)? I am not sure I would care that much, the current sound from these woofers is outstanding.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, the skeptics...................................

I'm a bit disappointed with the questioning responses thus far. After all, haven't we read a number of threads about the mighty Jubilee that outline one of its benefits is to improve upon and smooth out the bass response - even in the 200-400 hz range. Of course, the Jubs ability to go higher up (and smoother) opens up the door to using a host of intriguing two inch drivers, but a Klipschorn bass bin with a TAD driver should be a much fairer fight - at least until you reach the true upper limits of the Khorn bass bin. And after all, what have the pro Jubs out there in homes been cutting off at? 500hz? I would like to see the Jub bass bin dialed in at 800-900 and see how much you can actually get out of it. Based on Roy's statements and the papers, it can probably do it with ease, but I am curious to see it fly that high (instead of being "skeptical").

actually, the "home" jub was acoustically crossed over at 750.....and some of the demos i have done were at acoustic crossover points of 700......

Just because the K33 does an admirable job for the Klipschorn, that does not mean that there is not room for improvement in the overall bass response (and sound quality). Its never been a big secret. A number of proposed upgrades have been suggested and implemented over the years, from small bass drivers in the upper bass region to lowering the high pass to 200 or so and going with a big Altec 288, etc. The Klipsch party line response is that the bass bin design artificially limits the overall upper end response (and smoothness), but if that conclusion was based only on using K33 woofers, is the conclusion flawed?

uhhhh....no....the path length difference in a horn will detemine the first freq of cancellation and then harmonically cycle back and forth from that point on. you would have to design a woofer that basically did what the horn did and then inverse it 180 degrees.

That's not to say that the Klipschorn does not improve more by modding the top end, and I like mine with the stock K33s - but they could be better if I had the extra jack to spend.

Well, I have heard Maron's Klipschorns with the TAD bass drivers in them (and JBLs on the top end), and there is a considerable difference between Klipschorns with the TAD drivers and the stock K33s. Very,very smooth and even response all the way up. Soooo good that I would seriously think about upgrading to those drivers before I jumped on the rapidly accelerating commercial Jubilee train. Of course, the drivers are very expensive, but as Maron states, you gotta pay if you want to play. Are they worth it?? Well, I've seen people spend large jack on upgrades that may or may not work - so its a bit of a personal question - this cost benefit thing.

4"' voice coils tend to give more damping control than a 2" voice coil. i played with 4" voice coil 12" for the jub. definitely something to the transient response (measurable); but there are some compromises. again what is the goal; we wanted to maximize the total bandwidth of the lf horn. 4" voice coils tend to be too "overdamp" and can limit bottom end response. they also tend to start to collpase at a lower freq in the polar realm. but proof is in the pudding and what you are willing to "compromise".

On the other hand, maybe Dean will throw a pair of TADs in Smilin's upcoming Khorns and there will not be that much of a difference. At least I have heard the diff at Maron's pad.

Maron, at least Dave and I know where you are coming from.

Carl.

have a blessed day,

roy delgado

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As paul Klipsch said to me,,,Looking down and shaking his finger....Some times you have too good an engine and the car will get away from you... Ashworth would look at me saying, Don,t let him scare you. Just put on your brass nucks and swing away...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With those T/S parameters, using Keele's equations, I come up with the following for the TAD 1601a:

Vb (reactance annulment chamber volume) = 3.18 cubic feet
St (throat area) = 74.2 square inches
fHM (upper mass rolloff frequency) = 181 Hz

By comparison, I have some Eminence numbers for the K33 that show:

Fs = 34.46 Hz
Vas = 10.65 cubic feet
Qts = 0.39
Vb = 5.83 cubic feet
St = 114.1 square inches
fHM = 181 Hz

This shows the 1601 to actually be a better match to the KHorn than the K33.  (If anyone has more up-to-date K33 T/S numbers, please post them and I'll run them through the equations.)

-- Greg



Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dunno - I'm kinda skeptical about dropping new drivers into the khorn - it's the horn that's the problem, not the driver... [:o]

You (Mr. The Bass is "Tubby"), need to start spilling..... 1) how many khorns have you heard 2) who's did you hear and what x-overs, drivers, etc. did they have 3) What kinda room they were in.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

With those T/S parameters, using Keele's equations, I come up with the following for the TAD 1601a:

Vb (reactance annulment chamber volume) = 3.18 cubic feet

St (throat area) = 74.2 square inches

fHM (upper mass rolloff frequency) = 181 Hz

By comparison, I have some Eminence numbers for the K33 that show:

Fs = 34.46 Hz

Vas = 10.65 cubic feet

Qts = 0.39

Vb = 5.83 cubic feet

St = 114.1 square inches

fHM = 181 Hz

This shows the 1601 to actually be a better match to the KHorn than the K33. (If anyone has more up-to-date K33 T/S numbers, please post them and I'll run them through the equations.)

-- Greg

Greg the numbers I have on the new K33 are like yours. Bob Crites 2 woofers to emulate the older K33 are somewhat the same as well. If you look at the scala, Belle, and the Khorn........those calculations that you did make no sense in any of those bass bins. I've scratched my head on this for awhile. However.........the K33 obviously works. Weird things there. Klipsch has one up on us on that.

The other calculation common is the one for calculating the throat for the K33. That makes no sense either. Calculations dictate a big throat per driver of over 100 sq inches. The Heritage bass horns are only 78 sq in.

jc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like I've said before.

You guys are being far too strict in the St calculation for resistance.

It takes a 6:1 and 1:6 impedance mismatch before there is 3 dB loss from optimum. So if a given driver, driving impedance is off by a factor of even 2, that is nothing.

This is implied in the Wente and Thuras Bell Lab paper where it is discussed in terms of the variances in throat impedance.

Reactance annulling deserves a close look too. PWK published his analysis of throat impedance for the then K-Horn. The reactive part is far different than for an infinite length horn.

Gil

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dunno - I'm kinda skeptical

about dropping new drivers into the khorn - it's the horn that's the

problem, not the driver... [:o]

You (Mr. The Bass is "Tubby"),

need to start spilling..... 1) how many khorns have you heard 2)

who's did you hear and what x-overs, drivers, etc. did they have 3)

What kinda room they were in.

For what it's worth, I should mention that I absolutely love the khorn.

It's mostly for its engineering genious and innovative design, but

there are a lot of great sonic attributes too. I haven't kept track of

how many khorns I've heard, but it's been a lot. Some have only been

one time short listens when picking up something for someone else while

others have been repeated visits with very long listening sessions.

They all sound like khorns - doesn't matter what room, amp, or source

is driving them - it's a very signature sound. I've sorta been on a quest to find a khorn system that is the best system I've ever heard, but it hasn't happened yet. Two of my favorites have been Woodog's place (very intimate room) and actually Colter's gallery (very live wood panelled room). I believe I wrote extensively about both of them within the last year?

Anyways, I love the khorn, but it's not perfect either. After the most recent visit to Colter's I'm beginning to realize that different source material isn't as affected by the shortcomings - in fact, classical is absolutely amazing on khorns...along with light rock and the more easy going genre's and more relaxed listening sessions. I believe we share a similar sentiment in wanting a system to focus attention onto the musc, and not itself?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

JBL "fixed'/changed the 2205 for many reasons...I dont think it had any thing to do with horns....When Bart Locanthi left JBL & went to Pioneer to develope the TAD line....It seems he copied cold some of the woofer designs..The TAD 1602 was borrowed from the JBL LE15A....and the 1601a looks like a close clone of the very earley 2205. The JBL375 driver was refind taking the basic motor structure upgrading the phase plug from 4 slit to 5 slit adding the berylium diaphram material to extend to higher bandwidth. JBL moving away from the 2205 original intent, cone change, shifting free air resonce up to 34hz then 40hz outer surround from 5 corregations to the M double roll sorround etc. shifting to 2225 & later to 2226. The 4" voice coil does help damping (witch i like) & sure eliminates the tubby sound i hear in the K33 go figure!!! BUT the difinition in the 300hz to 400hz is audible & that I really like. This week end on the recommendations from Kenai Alaska Officiendo Khorn ...suggested inserting the K33 woofers both square magnet & round magnet version (27hz & 35hz) to re evaluate comparisons My findings & chart plots closely track what George Ashworth found...The Khorn bass bin with its limitations are long on the tooth......I believe the Jubilee might be the answere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was kind of wanting a simpleton answer if the 1601 could be bolted into the bass bin without any drilling or cutting and weather or not the crossover networks would have to be changed.

Thanks,

JJK

My friend - did you forget where you were? A simple answer is viewed here as niether practical nor probable.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was kind of wanting a simpleton answer if the 1601 could be bolted into the bass bin without any drilling or cutting and weather or not the crossover networks would have to be changed.

Thanks,

JJK

My friend - did you forget where you were? A simple answer is viewed here as niether practical nor probable.....

LOL perhaps I'll start a Schordengers Cat discussion in the genereal forum : )

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schr%C3%B6dinger's_cat

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I notice on your profile you have 65 khorns....Those woofers are mounted on a seperate sliding woofer board...take those out and make new speaker mounting boards....I then mount other woofers to that & slide the assembly back in place....all held by the two verticle steel i beams inside....Open your side door, you will see what i mean. Now I,m useing a electronic crossover...Triamping.....I have,nt played with passives for along time...But I,m sure you will have to modify your passive unit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The K-33 is a 4 ohm woofer that becomes 6-8 ohms when horn loaded. The TAD is an 8 ohm woofer and probably becomes a 12-16 ohm woofer. Seems you would just double the coil size on the simple low pass. Of course this now basically amounts to a 16 ohm LF section, and it should now be 3dB down further in relationship to the squawker than the K-33 is now. I wish I understood Gil's post better. If I'm reading it right, then one might not have to do anything to the network.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...