Klipsch guys, Upgrading LaScalas to III

[cjgeraci]

Didn't they move to the K-55X for the squawker and then a tractrix tweeter? Or was the new tweeter only put on the cornwall/heresy? I do know the crossover had to be reworked to account for the extra LF gained by the beefier cabinet.

If I was going to go through all the work to jerry-rig myself some LSIII's, I would just sooner build a pair of Jubilee bass bins and enjoy the far superior performance.

Really?? If you are already fairly happy with the LaScala sound? Instead of spending about an hour or so to glue and nail a second 3/4 layer of void-free birch on the sides to beef up the bottom of existing LaScalas, install some Crites tweeters, and put in some steep slope crossovers........you would really buy all the lumber and screws and spend countless hours and build a set of Jubilee bottoms (see Rigma's thread) - essentially starting from scratch?

No question that the Jubilee is far superior to a modded LaScala II bass bin, but you would really build a set of Jubilee bass bins from scratch instead of trying some mods first?[]

Wow, I envy the free time that you have..............

Carl.

If you don't enjoy the building process, then by all means just purchase the bins....

As far as the build time, Rigma is a slow poke and you can't expect nobody else in the world to have the time because you don't. I certainly don't have the time, tools, nor the funds to do it right now - but that also means I wouldn't have the time to arse around with modding a lascala bass bin either. The overhaul process to replicate the LIII would take a lot longer than you ellude to, especially if you want it to look as nice.

And not everyone is in agreement about "super slopes" and Bob's tweeters...it's certainly no longer a Klipsch once you start doing that level of mod too.

Well, I'm not sure that Klewless has the time to build a set of Jub bass bins either. As for myself, I really have no desire to purchase the Jubilee bass bins. I'm currently pretty happy with my little 'ol "inferior" modded Klipschorns []. Admittedly, I need to hear a pair of Jubs first, and maybe that will convince me that I have to have a set.....

Klewless asked for advice on modding the LaScala from a performance perspective - I do not recall him asking for advice on how to completely mod a pair of LaScalas so that aethestically they match the latest models. John proposed one way of beefing up the bass bin, which I though was a reasonable approach - and which I cited. After all, performance-wise, isn't that the major improvement with the LaScala II - the bass response? If John's proposed method of beefing up the bass bins in not sufficient, what alternative would you propose? I just don't see how any of the time necessary for a proposed "overhaul process" to bring a LaScala up to speed performance-wise with the latest model could be construed as being in the ball park time-wise with the construction of Jubilee bass bins from scratch? What additional mods would be necessary for the LaScalas to bring them up to snuff? Again, from a performance perspective.

I believe John suggested steep slope crossovers as a mod because the crossovers in the latest K-horn and LaScalas also have somewhat steep slope crossovers. As for what still constitutes a Klipsch speaker, that is subject to debate. So, you believe that by simply replacing the speaker's crossover with a different design and changing out the tweeter, that the speaker is no longer a Klipsch speaker even though it maintains the same basic cabinet structure, the same bass and midrange drivers, and the same midrange horn? Hmmmm.......interesting. At what point for you does the first (or second) mod turn a Klipsch speaker into a non-Klipsch speaker? Do you have to stay with all of the original crossover designs from the company - and if you use an aftermarket (or your own) crossover design, your speaker is no longer a Klipsch? How about tweeters? If you maintain an all-stock Heritage speaker but simply put in a different brand of tweeters, is the speaker no longer a Klipsch speaker? Does the first mod (or replacement) of any type make it a non-Klipsch speaker or does it have to be two mods (or more)?

Depending on where the line is, I guess that means that a number of people in here do not still own "Klipsch" speakers. [:$]

Carl.

[cjgeraci]

"If I was going to go through all the work to jerry-rig myself some LSIII's, I would just sooner build a pair of Jubilee bass bins and enjoy the far superior performance."

Let's see some pic's, past, present, or if you elect, any future wood project.

I heard Jubilees, Khorn, LaScala's, and my take is that if you use the same drivers, the Jubilee concept is different, but not superior for home use. The thing is just too big.

Fritz, it takes some balls to make that statement in these pro-Jubilee waters. Yikes!!!

Expect flames or sarcastic quips any second now. I would love to hear a pair of Jubs so I could also weigh in on the subject with my own comparisons of the three speakers.

Next, you'll be asserting that the much smaller 510 horn is better for short throw applications, and you will be questioning why everyone is insisting on the monsterous 402 horn? Hey, wait a second, didn't someone from Klipsch already ask that? [:$]

Carl.

First I would like to make a few points about the K510/K402 misinformation that is spread about on the forum.

Size itself doesn't make a horn a long throw or short throw and at best the coverage angle designed into the horn would be a better way to describe a so called long throw versus a short throw horn.

The K402 and K510 share a very similar coverage angle design excepting that the K402 is superior in it's ability to maintain it's coverage angle to a much lower frequency (250Hz Horizontal and 550Hz vertical) versus the K510's (600z horizontal and 1400Hz Vertical) if held to the same points of deviation from the designs coverage angles. Actually the K402 measures smoother than the K510 across the board.

The fact is the K402 is the superior horn in every way measurable compared to the K510 and no doubt there would be audible differances between the K510/Jubilee versus the K402/Jubilee but if you tweak the crossover frequencies and design for the right compromises the K510/Jubilee might easily satisfy many and would probably be a very good compromise for asthetic reasons for some.

As far as judging the sound of the Jubilee keep in mind that with all speakers and even the Khorn there are as many different sounds to the KHorn as there are rooms to put them in! In other words the KHorn sound is in a big part influenced by the room and so it will be the same with the Jubilee. what I can say to anyone is when I replaced my Khorns with the Jubilee in the same room the Jubilee was clearly superior and if that difference is worth it to someone then that is actually a personel decision. By the way for what its worth the Jubilees are the last speakers I intend to own.

mike tn[]

PS. Sorry for getting a little off topic Klewless with the Jubilee talk.

For the record - and to be clear, the comment I posted regarding the preference of the K510 for short throw applications was not my own but was from a Klipsch employee in another thread. Thank you for the clarification as to the applications and/or performance of both horns.

Carl.

[Klewless]

Thanks for input guys.  I am not unhappy with my current LaScalas.  Was just wondering what were the technical differences between the new version and mine.  Such that a minor change to drivers or xover that improves sound might  be a reasonable upgrade.  I have had thoughts of rebuilding the enclosure (tired of black) and converting to removable top similar to Khorn.  Of course additional bracing would be part of that type of project.

Heaven  forbid but have had thoughts on building a  scaled down Jubilee using the LaScala components.  Would not expect much change in performance but it would fit better in my room.  I have too much time on my hands anyway.

[seti]

"The fact is the K402 is the superior horn in every way measurable compared to the K510 and no doubt there would be audible differances between the K510/Jubilee versus the K402/Jubilee but if you tweak the crossover frequencies and design for the right compromises the K510/Jubilee might easily satisfy many and would probably be a very good compromise for asthetic reasons for some."

Mike, did you get to hear the 510 in 2005? I have heard some say they couldn't hear a difference. I myself haven't heard the 510.

I could not detect a difference in sound between the two when we listened to them in Hope. I thought they both sounded grand at the time. Perhaps if I could live with both horns for a while I could tell a difference.

[DrWho]

Didn't they move to the K-55X for the squawker and then a tractrix tweeter? Or was the new tweeter only put on the cornwall/heresy? I do know the crossover had to be reworked to account for the extra LF gained by the beefier cabinet.

If I was going to go through all the work to jerry-rig myself some LSIII's, I would just sooner build a pair of Jubilee bass bins and enjoy the far superior performance.

Really?? If you are already fairly happy with the LaScala sound? Instead of spending about an hour or so to glue and nail a second 3/4 layer of void-free birch on the sides to beef up the bottom of existing LaScalas, install some Crites tweeters, and put in some steep slope crossovers........you would really buy all the lumber and screws and spend countless hours and build a set of Jubilee bottoms (see Rigma's thread) - essentially starting from scratch?

No question that the Jubilee is far superior to a modded LaScala II bass bin, but you would really build a set of Jubilee bass bins from scratch instead of trying some mods first?[]

Wow, I envy the free time that you have..............

Carl.

If you don't enjoy the building process, then by all means just purchase the bins....

As far as the build time, Rigma is a slow poke and you can't expect nobody else in the world to have the time because you don't. I certainly don't have the time, tools, nor the funds to do it right now - but that also means I wouldn't have the time to arse around with modding a lascala bass bin either. The overhaul process to replicate the LIII would take a lot longer than you ellude to, especially if you want it to look as nice.

And not everyone is in agreement about "super slopes" and Bob's tweeters...it's certainly no longer a Klipsch once you start doing that level of mod too.

Well, I'm not sure that Klewless has the time to build a set of Jub bass bins either. As for myself, I really have no desire to purchase the Jubilee bass bins. I'm currently pretty happy with my little 'ol "inferior" modded Klipschorns []. Admittedly, I need to hear a pair of Jubs first, and maybe that will convince me that I have to have a set.....

Klewless asked for advice on modding the LaScala from a performance perspective - I do not recall him asking for advice on how to completely mod a pair of LaScalas so that aethestically they match the latest models. John proposed one way of beefing up the bass bin, which I though was a reasonable approach - and which I cited. After all, performance-wise, isn't that the major improvement with the LaScala II - the bass response? If John's proposed method of beefing up the bass bins in not sufficient, what alternative would you propose? I just don't see how any of the time necessary for a proposed "overhaul process" to bring a LaScala up to speed performance-wise with the latest model could be construed as being in the ball park time-wise with the construction of Jubilee bass bins from scratch? What additional mods would be necessary for the LaScalas to bring them up to snuff? Again, from a performance perspective.

I believe John suggested steep slope crossovers as a mod because the crossovers in the latest K-horn and LaScalas also have somewhat steep slope crossovers. As for what still constitutes a Klipsch speaker, that is subject to debate. So, you believe that by simply replacing the speaker's crossover with a different design and changing out the tweeter, that the speaker is no longer a Klipsch speaker even though it maintains the same basic cabinet structure, the same bass and midrange drivers, and the same midrange horn? Hmmmm.......interesting. At what point for you does the first (or second) mod turn a Klipsch speaker into a non-Klipsch speaker? Do you have to stay with all of the original crossover designs from the company - and if you use an aftermarket (or your own) crossover design, your speaker is no longer a Klipsch? How about tweeters? If you maintain an all-stock Heritage speaker but simply put in a different brand of tweeters, is the speaker no longer a Klipsch speaker? Does the first mod (or replacement) of any type make it a non-Klipsch speaker or does it have to be two mods (or more)?

Depending on where the line is, I guess that means that a number of people in here do not still own "Klipsch" speakers. [:$]

Carl.

lol Carl, who said non-Klipsch was bad? [] Heck, even PWK encourage the modding of his products. [Y] But apart from "repairs", I'd have to say any mod that deviates from a Klipsch topology is no longer a Klipsch. Of course, that's just my own crazy opinion.

As far as going from a Lascala I to a II, you're essentially going to need to reassemble the bass bin and cut the top section off. If you look closely, the doghouse isn't perfectly centered, so there is quite a bit of work involved with building braces that fit to the inside of the horn. And maybe it's because I suck at woodwork, but it's kinda difficult to cut a piece of wood to just glue on to the outside of the horn. I think it'd be easier to just rip the whole panel off and install a new piece of wood of double thickness. But trying to make it look good is a whole different level. I dunno, I suppose I could make it sound as difficult as possible....when it comes down to it, I think it'd take me a day to finish, if not two.

In that light, I bet I could whip together a pair of Jubilees in a day - provided I had all the proper tools and wasn't building to within 0.00001" like Rigma [] Maybe that's a bit ambitious, so let's call it a 2.5 day weekend job. How long did it take JC to build his clones?

Perhaps I'm just sorely misled, but I enjoy the build process so I wouldn't really care if it took longer knowing the results would be worth the effort.

[DrWho]

"The fact is the K402 is the superior horn in every way measurable compared to the K510 and no doubt there would be audible differances between the K510/Jubilee versus the K402/Jubilee but if you tweak the crossover frequencies and design for the right compromises the K510/Jubilee might easily satisfy many and would probably be a very good compromise for asthetic reasons for some."

Mike, did you get to hear the 510 in 2005? I have heard some say they couldn't hear a difference. I myself haven't heard the 510.

I could not detect a difference in sound between the two when we listened to them in Hope. I thought they both sounded grand at the time. Perhaps if I could live with both horns for a while I could tell a difference.

If when comparing both horns you were listening in a position where the off-axis response didn't greatly influence the sound, then you probably wouldn't hear much of a difference. I would think most of the benefits of a controlled off-axis response would get lost in a room full of people - mainly due to the extra noise floor and other strange acoustical effects.

[jwc]

Yes Mike Who. That is what I am hoping for when I try out the 510's. I have a feel what the 402's sounds like now that I have heard them in two environments. I am not worried about this "coverage" issue.

For those with time constaints.....get a good understanding of the jubilee and just pay someone to make the cuts. If you line it up so that a skilled woodworker can just go down a sheet with the listed sized/angled panels, you won't have to pay for that many hours of work.

Then at your leasure......it is like putting together a puzzle. Pretty easy really. It would make you sick to know how little money I had in my unfinished pair.

The info is out there to come up with the cuts almost down to the exact thing. I purposely made some modifications to my clones. However....at this point I have seen many different person's version's and it is all migrating into a common CAD.

jc

[mikebse2a3]

"The fact is the K402 is the superior horn in every way measurable compared to the K510 and no doubt there would be audible differances between the K510/Jubilee versus the K402/Jubilee but if you tweak the crossover frequencies and design for the right compromises the K510/Jubilee might easily satisfy many and would probably be a very good compromise for asthetic reasons for some."

Mike, did you get to hear the 510 in 2005? I have heard some say they couldn't hear a difference. I myself haven't heard the 510.

Jc I haven't heard the 510 (sure would like to though) and like you I have read where others say they couldn't hear a difference. My guess is that most haven't heard them for any extended period of time and the differences would probably be revealed as more listening time was spent with many different types of music being experienced. I do believe these observations point to a couple of things that seem to speak really well of the over all quality of the Jubilee LF/K510 in that they did compare so closely to the Jubilee/K402 combination and might be all that many would desire.

The real question for most would be how large/noticable would the difference be between the K510 versus the K402 combined with the Jubilee LF Section. This doesn't have a simple answer though because of many variables that should be taken into account but we can make some observations due to the different design implementations involved and maybe Roy will comment on some of them.

Lets do a little theoretical thinking here for some answers:

What would we expect and want from a pratical horn design approaching perfection?

(1) The Maintaining of the Controlled Dispersion Angles chosen across its designed frequency bandwidth.

(2) A very smooth frequency response on and off axis.

(3) A very wide frequency bandwidth.

(4) A very smooth phase response

(5) Very low distortion(harmonic and intermodulation) across its entire bandwidth which would be a good indication of optimal driver loading.

So what would we expect as we get closer to these goals? In the case of the Jubilee TwoWay System as the LF Horn and the HF Horn get closer to perfection it should allow a better integration of the LF Horn/HF Horn as a complete system with the benefit being better definition, clarity, and overall accuracy with the lowest distortion especially as it would pertain to the crossover region of the speaker system. Another equally important benefit is the way the system integrates with the listening enviroment because as the system as a whole gets closer to perfection it should integrate in a more ideal and predictable manner with the room.

With all the above being mentioned its pretty evident that the Jubilee LF Horn is closer to perfection than what we've had in the past and The K402 is again closer to pefection than anything I'm aware of to this date and by combining these two horns into a system with the added benefit of Time Delay you have a Horn Speaker System as close to perfection as present technology will allow! (UNLESS ROY IS KEEPING SOMETHING FROM US IN HIS LAB!!!!![])

As far as the K402 versus K510 again I believe the fact is that the K510 puts a few more constraints on the designing of the speaker system and the fact that Roy has designed such a close comparison in sound compared to the Jubilee/K402 speaks to the high quality of the K510 Horn and Jubilee LF Horn. I would expect the K510/Jubilee combination to interact with the room in a more unpredictable manner for the good or bad around the crossover region. I also want to say I selected the K402 because I wanted to get as close to the ideal speaker as I could but if I didn't have the K402 my next choice would be the K510 with the Jubilee LF section.

mike tn[]

[Coytee]

Carl...c'mon over (down?) to Knoxville & you can have at it.

[cjgeraci]

Carl...c'mon over (down?) to Knoxville & you can have at it.

Thanks, I probably will take you up on that invite later on this year. But, first - I have a change or two that I am implementing into my system, and I want to hear the final sound before I come on down to hear the Jubes.

There is no doubt that quite a few have been impressed with the Jubes. After all, Tom Brennan has said that they were the best pair of Klipsch speakers that he has ever heard. Did Tom hear your pair?

Carl.

[jwc]

Mike tn.

There is nothing that I would want to disagree with in your thought process. But here is my thinking. Curves, dispersion, control, distortion, etc are objective goals a sound engineer needs to use as a guide to make better designs.

However, Those things aren't a direct correlation with results to the ears. Now here is where is gets very subjective. I have no arguement for that and noone else will have a good one either.

Some examples. The K700 vs say a new horn from the reference line. I have listened to the reference and I'm not impressed. But is this apples to apples?....don't know...If you left everything the same in a Heresy but throw in a newer reference tractrix horn.....would it "sound better" since it incorporates all this new techno? I don't think it would.

The Altec 511 which is over 50 years old. Would it sound "better" than the ton of new Pyle horns out there or some of the JBL horns. I don't know.

I will wait to hear it....just like others and yourself....but the "data" of the K402 vs the K510 isn't leaning me into the expectation that the K402 will be "noteably better". By all means.....it "seems" it would......but I am nowhere to the conclusion that there would be no doubt there would be audible differances between the K510/Jubilee versus the K402/Jubilee.

Remember....note....I am all for the growth of popularity of the Jubilee combinations and definately I think the bass bin is a winner compared to the previous Heritage horn bass bins. I am still skeptical of the top end and not sure if this is two way or just the new horns.

All the above items are new technologies and I am giving them a chance to win to my ears. I will get to hear the 510's in my house and maybe get to hear the 510 and 402's at Indy if I can make it. If I notice a significant "audible difference", then I may just throw the 510's on the top and use for tweeters on top of a 402....or use the 510's as surrounds.....who knows.

jc

[mikebse2a3]

no doubt there would be audible differances between the K510/Jubilee versus the K402/Jubilee.

jc

I do understand your points and I want to clarify my thoughts in that from what others have said about the K510/Jubilee and the Test I've seen on it compared to the K402 that I do believe that Roy has been able to make a Jubilee version that gives up very little to the K402/Jubilee version.

Roy has stated several times that he believes that the K402/K69A with Active Crossover and Time Alignment to be the best version in sound of the Jubilees to date and is the version for those who want the best audible performance possible at this time.

Whether a person picks the K402/K69A or the K510/K69A will come down to a matter of personel priorities and the K402/K69A is for sure a winner in my book and I believe the K510 is also especially from what others who have heard the K510 have said as well as observations made by Shawn recently from using them. I will be very interested in your observations as well jc!

One other observation related to my statement about "no doubt there will be audible differences". I have to balance the levels of my LF Amplifier versus my HF Amplifier(the two different amplifiers have different input drive level requirements) at the 500Hz crossover point of the Active Crossover for the proper integration of the LF Horn to the HF Horn and level changes as small as (.5db) becomes noticeable (to my surprise and most noticable on vocals) and it is something I believe anyone could hear if demonstrated to them. Also for anyone who has not experienced bringing the LF and HF Drivers/Horns into Time Alignment "within a time window" are also in for an ear opener and it is most obvious to me in increased clarity for the system and clearly a shift in the lobing pattern of the system into the room again causing a perceptable change in the sound. The fact is that the K402 and K502 behave so differently in their direcitivity at there lower ends that I have very little doubt that different crossover points will be chosen and with room interaction happening also due to the two different HF Horns performance that there will be audible differences but also note that I do understand and believe that the differences might be subtle and take some time to notice as a person becomes accustomed to their different signatures in sound.

I've really enjoyed this discussion jc and again I will be very interested in your observations of the K510/K69A as I know you will be trying it in many different ways.[]

mike tn

[bodcaw boy]

"If I was going to go through all the work to jerry-rig myself some LSIII's, I would just sooner build a pair of Jubilee bass bins and enjoy the far superior performance."

Let's see some pic's, past, present, or if you elect, any future wood project.

I heard Jubilees, Khorn, LaScala's, and my take is that if you use the same drivers, the Jubilee concept is different, but not superior for home use. The thing is just too big.

ya weiner!!

have a blessed day,

roy delgado

[bodcaw boy]

Thanks for input guys. I am not unhappy with my current LaScalas. Was just wondering what were the technical differences between the new version and mine. Such that a minor change to drivers or xover that improves sound might be a reasonable upgrade. I have had thoughts of rebuilding the enclosure (tired of black) and converting to removable top similar to Khorn. Of course additional bracing would be part of that type of project.

Heaven forbid but have had thoughts on building a scaled down Jubilee using the LaScala components. Would not expect much change in performance but it would fit better in my room. I have too much time on my hands anyway.

i would try reinforcing the lf side panels first (and if you can all the lf panels) and go from there.....it might surprise you.

have a blessed day,

roy delgado

[bodcaw boy]

Mike tn.

There is nothing that I would want to disagree with in your thought process. But here is my thinking. Curves, dispersion, control, distortion, etc are objective goals a sound engineer needs to use as a guide to make better designs.

and anyone listening to music should be concerned with these as well.

However, Those things aren't a direct correlation with results to the ears. Now here is where is gets very subjective. I have no arguement for that and noone else will have a good one either.

direct correlation? hmmmmmmm......i believe that the more we get right, the closer it gets to sound right.....if not, we haven't measured something.

Some examples. The K700 vs say a new horn from the reference line. I have listened to the reference and I'm not impressed. But is this apples to apples?....don't know...If you left everything the same in a Heresy but throw in a newer reference tractrix horn.....would it "sound better" since it incorporates all this new techno? I don't think it would.

you would lose that bet.

The Altec 511 which is over 50 years old. Would it sound "better" than the ton of new Pyle horns out there or some of the JBL horns. I don't know.

I will wait to hear it....just like others and yourself....but the "data" of the K402 vs the K510 isn't leaning me into the expectation that the K402 will be "noteably better". By all means.....it "seems" it would......but I am nowhere to the conclusion that there would be no doubt there would be audible differances between the K510/Jubilee versus the K402/Jubilee.

Remember....note....I am all for the growth of popularity of the Jubilee combinations and definately I think the bass bin is a winner compared to the previous Heritage horn bass bins. I am still skeptical of the top end and not sure if this is two way or just the new horns.

All the above items are new technologies and I am giving them a chance to win to my ears. I will get to hear the 510's in my house and maybe get to hear the 510 and 402's at Indy if I can make it. If I notice a significant "audible difference", then I may just throw the 510's on the top and use for tweeters on top of a 402....or use the 510's as surrounds.....who knows.

jc

the biggest difference in the 510 and 402 is the coverage pattern which has a direct relationship to sound power or in a room, the reflected energy messing up the direct energy.

have a blessed night,

roy delgado

[jwc]

Roy. I can't counter any techno with you as I would obviously fail. As said...I will wait and let my ears tell me the deal.

As for the reference or slightly earlier designs such as the KG series...for some reasons...those horns don't sound as good to me. Maybe it is the overall sound from the speaker. This isn't a slam on whomever designed them. My ears talking. The K700 sounds more "live". Maybe that is distortion...bad coverage...; my ears must like it. I have extra K700's, K61, KG 4 model tweeters. I was hoping to build some simple enclosures to answer that very question.

I won't let a curve or specs lean me to thinking there is a obvious sound difference....good or bad.

If the K501 has an Obvious difference...then it will become a tweeter.

jc

[jwc]

"Some examples. The K700 vs say a new horn from the reference line. I have listened to the reference and I'm not impressed. But is this apples to apples?....don't know...If you left everything the same in a Heresy but throw in a newer reference tractrix horn.....would it "sound better" since it incorporates all this new techno? I don't think it would.

you would lose that bet."

Just a note. The above statement is my opinion.....not that there could be a "bet" that everyone else would agree the K700 is "better sounding". Again....my ears. Of course I still could lose the bet to myself.

[Coytee]

Carl...c'mon over (down?) to Knoxville & you can have at it.

Thanks, I probably will take you up on that invite later on this year. But, first - I have a change or two that I am implementing into my system, and I want to hear the final sound before I come on down to hear the Jubes.

There is no doubt that quite a few have been impressed with the Jubes. After all, Tom Brennan has said that they were the best pair of Klipsch speakers that he has ever heard. Did Tom hear your pair?

Carl.

Yes, Tom came down one Saturday afternoon...spent probably 5/6 hours going through various cd's/dvd's including his Ben Hur test. Seems there are several passages on that movie that as a youngster, helped enamor him to audio when he was at the big screen. As I understand it, he's spent the rest of the years since, trying to find his Nirvona speakers that would reproduce that same impact.

I may not have the story exact but I think I've got the flavor of it. Had nice visit and I understand they passed his 'ear wire' tests.

[JohnA]

OK I will restate my question this way.

Were there any driver changes?

Sort of; the LSIII has (effectively) the same drivers as a 1980 LS.

Was there a xover change?

Yes,

big time. Steep slopes, EQ (similar to AL-2 and AL-3) crossover

points moved. Due to dispersion characteristics and the early

K-55-V and K-55-X poor response above ~4500 Hz, moving the tweeter down

is very important.

Beefed up cab is something I can handle.

Have

you seen mine? The cabinet maker covered the plys with a 3/4" x

3/4" solid strip of cherry. You could do similar and make them

prettier.

Thanks

You might even ask nicely and buy a set of AL-4 xovers from Klipsch.