reduce midrange horn on the LaScal***

[biglaz]

Are there any easy ways to reduce thr overall volume of the midrange horn in the LaScala. I presently have the AAL-3 crossover.

Thanks

Biglaz

[DrWho]

You could always move the squawker to different taps on the autoformer. Here's a good resource:

http://home.comcast.net/~wooferboy/Page_7.html

http://home.comcast.net/~wooferboy/T2A_Autoformer.pdf

Just curious...what are you hoping to achieve by reducing its output?

welcome to the forum

[biglaz]

Trying to smooth the sound out a bit.

[Guest " "]

Only Dr WHo can change the tap settings on the AL-3 xover.

The rest of us have to replace the autoformer with an after market one, since there are no tap options used on the autoformer used with the AL-3 xover . The instructions on setting taps on the t2a do not apply to the t4a.

[DrWho]

Yep, guess I'm special. [] I shoulda zoomed in to see the label on the autoformer - I thought it said T2A. My bad.

Another alternative would be to install an L-Pad. There are variable types or you can build your own with fixed resistors. Just keep in mind that any method of reducing the squawker output will require you to change the value of the cap before the autoformer.

[Islander]

There is a simple way to reduce the squawker volume, but people may laugh at you. If your Scalas have grille cloth, just add 2 or 3 layers of grille cloth in front of the horn. If you have a model with no grille cloth, the tidy-looking way is to remove the horns, then staple 2 or 3 layers of nicely stretched grille cloth over the horn opening on the cabinet and re-install the horns. That will drop the volume slightly and take away the harshness, or as it sounded to me, the "shoutiness". Don't put any cloth in front of the tweeter, as even a single layer will give a muffled sound.

Plenty of midrange detail still comes through, such as backup singers breathing in. As I mentioned in another post some time ago, to use a visual analogy, the midrange was like a TV with the contrast turned up too high, and the extra layers of cloth smoothed the sound back to normal. As well, it tidied up the look of the speakers, at least to me.

[ZAKO]

That acts like a acoustal filter...NOT good...over its bandwidth. Equivelent to putting foot in mouth.

[stereohermit]

Reducing swawker level on these large Klipsches can really exacerbate the real problem, lack of constant directivity, or flat power response. The system lacks off axis energy from 2-5k, and reducing mid driver level wil just make the power response sag even more in that region. This is probably why the new heritage series has lowered tweeter x-over to 4500.Louspeakers are a myriad of compromises!

[Islander]

That acts like a acoustal filter...NOT good...over its bandwidth. Equivelent to putting foot in mouth.

See, the scoffing begins already... Yes, it's an acoustical filter. It filters out the harshness without sounding muffled. All I can say is that with my speakers, in my listening room, the sound went from unpleasant and annoying to smooth but still very clear and revealing.

What apparent logic states and what practice shows is not always the same thing. You could always try it before dismissing it. No disrespect is implied, but that way your opinion would have more validity.

[biglaz]

Does anyone think changing to after market crossover would help?

Thanks,Bob

[BEC]

Going to a crossover with provisions to adjust the output of the squawker would help. One like ALK or Dean Wescott makes.  Or, your problem could be low tweeter output instead of high midrange output.  New capacitors for your AL-3 would help that.

Bob Crites

[J.4knee]

If you want to improve your sound get a set of Al's ALK networks and Bob's CT 125 tweeters. I'd ditch the K400/401 sqwuaker horns as well and go with Altec 511B's. Just my humble opine

[DrWho]

That acts like

a acoustal filter...NOT good...over its bandwidth. Equivelent to

putting foot in mouth.

See, the scoffing begins already... Yes, it's an acoustical

filter. It filters out the harshness without sounding muffled. All I

can say is that with my speakers, in my listening room, the sound went

from unpleasant and annoying to smooth but still very clear and

revealing.

What apparent logic states and what practice shows is not always the

same thing. You could always try it before dismissing it. No

disrespect is implied, but that way your opinion would have more

validity.

Well there is this little bit of physics that

talks about the minimum width that a perfect absorber needs to be to

attenuate the signal is on the order of 1/4 wavelength. 1kHz is about

12 inches, so you're talking a minimum of 3 inches at 1kHz. Go up a few

octaves and you're talking a minimum width of 1.5" at 2kHz, .75" at

4kHz, and about 1/4" for around 10kHz...

And then I think it's safe to say that the grill material isn't even a

perfect absorber and thus is going to be reflecting a good portion of

the acoustical energy. In fact, the comb-filtering that results from

this is a major concern in the professional cinemas where you have even

greater reflection coefficients. I personally don't prefer the sound of

comb-filtering, but hey - everyone is different.

So to recap, if we have any absorption at all, it's going to be

non-linear with frequency and there is a good argument that no amount

of audible absorbtion is even going to take place. And then if anything

we have the introduction of increased comb-filtering. I suppose I could

always mention that I have tried it too - mostly outta morbid

curiosity, but I have to confess that the science and measurements both

correlate to the listening experience.

My final conclusion is then one of questioning how susceptible humans

are to the placebo effect - and really the only way to verify would be

through some form of blind listening test. If you maintain that you

hear a difference, then knock yourself out - I won't argue with

anyone's perceptions. However, in light of the big picture I gotta

wonder what you guys are listening to...there are a lot more problems

with the stock lascala that have way more audible impact than at best

0.1dB differences in acoustical output (like room acoustics, signal

alignment, resonances in the bass bin, collapsing polars, horn throat

distortion, etc....)

My apologies if I offend or come across as scoffing. For what it's

worth, I think the best solution to the current problem is the stock

performance of the slightly aged K400 and K77. I think a completely new

crossover with the K510 replacing the squawker and tweeter would yield

far better results. I know that's moving to a whole new level of cost,

but I think it's worth mentioning just in case...

My limited experience measuring the stock lascala indicates that they

generally benefit from rolling off the top-end response of the squawker

- not reducing the output of the entire horn. The work hardening tends

to reduce the low frequency extension of the squawker while increasing

resurgance at the top-end of its response. I think adding a low-pass

filter section at the top of the horn's response will be more

beneficial than reducing the total output of the horn and relying upon

the natural roll-off of the squawker. There's also that 9kHz glitch

that is a problem in some of the squawker drivers too, but I don't

remember how to identify which ones have the problem - and I can't find

the thread with all the measurements at the moment.

[Islander]

Based on my listening, not just with the La Scalas, it's my impression that grille cloths have a much greater effect on higher frequencies than on lower frequencies, in that woofers are not noticeably affected, while tweeter output is muffled, sometimes slightly, sometimes a lot. Accordingly, the lower end of the squawker output would be less affected than the higher end, giving the desirable squawker top-end roll-off that I'm hearing. That 9kHz glitch may also be greatly reduced, although I don't have the gear to measure that.

Collapsing polars? Is that a global warming thing? []

[ZAKO]

Well its still a acoustic filter and will effect clarity of instruments,, and you want to throw all this out? Find out where this so called glitch is....Is it a spike in the mid driver? Poor xover point? Throwing multiple grill blankets is a poor way to solve this problem.....Yes polor plots would show what you have in your room ...moving your head from side to side will show differences in horn pattern.....Did you measure that 9K glitch or take a random auditory guess? Air viscosity in the room changes from day to day & can change sound pattern at listening positions....I would lower mid driver at crossover taps as a first suggestion taking all grill cloth off.......I dont use that rag on my Khorn.....Solve the driver problem first....If you didnt want our problem solving technic,s why get thin skinned about our comments? I solved the Klipsch problem by going to better drivers....Believe me its a great solution....Of course you have to have deep pockets like mine and not wet tear blankets (grill cloth) to accomplish clarity.. Dont take this as a spanking but take it as many years of spooking the mid anomality. By all of us....Maybe a complete change as the Tracktrix ALK design is needed,,...

[cjgeraci]

Grabbing some popcorn, this is getting good. Islander, your retort??

Carl.

P.S. If you want to reduce the squawker output without changing the crossover (assuming the crossover does not have adjustable taps), I would do it with a set of Al Klappenberger's tweeter attentuators - as opposed to L-pads. Works just as well for a midrange application as for tweeters (using a set on my rear Belle squawkers now) - www.alkeng.com.

I'm in the camp that advocates improving the mid horn and/or driver first. Then, you will not need the extra cloth layers and layers and layers. But, to each their own.

[Guest " "]

"I would do it with a set of Al Klappenberger's tweeter attentuators - as opposed to L-pads. "

Risky.

The attentuator is only rated at 10 watts.

The K-55 handles 40 watts.

[cjgeraci]

"I would do it with a set of Al Klappenberger's tweeter attentuators - as opposed to L-pads. "

Risky.

The attentuator is only rated at 10 watts.

The K-55 handles 40 watts.

Well, I did run the idea by Al before I tried it. So far, I've pushed some considerable volume into the rear Belles, with nary a problem. And, with my 200 watt QSC driving them.

Risky - what's the risk? Frying the attentuators? Or maybe Al underrated the attentuators...... or maybe I haven't pushed more than 10 watts through the midrange......But, based on Al's ratings, I probably will not recommend the attentuators for midrange use in the future.

In any event, worked so far for me. I'll be ditching them as soon as I move the ALK Srs. to the rear Belles (going to extremes....)

Carl.

[Guest " "]

(going to extremes....)

congrats...

[Islander]

Heck, the factory puts grilles over the tweeters, which I would never do, unless they're in danger from pokey fingers. The factory grilIe covers the squawkers, too. Is that bad? I just put an extra layer or two on the squawkers. It's really not like stuffing a sock up the horn.

Squawker attenuators? Hmm, might be an idea. I've already got new Sonicaps and CT125 tweeters, both of which made very noticeable improvements, so I really don't have tin ears. In the meantime, $10 worth of grille cloth makes the speakers very pleasant to listen to and appears not to sacrifice clarity at all. It's mechanical attenuation rather than electrical attenuation, with increasing effect at higher frequencies.

Some folks don't like the sound of La Scalas, but every guest listener I've had (and a couple actually know what they're listening to) has told me mine sound great, so it's not just me. I know the concept sounds bogus to technoids, but it's my little tweak that seems to work.

As I mentioned, if you haven't heard it yourself, you don't know. Try it, you might be surprised.