Jump to content

Richard C. Heyser's Klipschorn review


Arkytype

Recommended Posts

Several forum members have mentioned the late Richard C. Heyser's review of the Klipschorn that appeared in the November 1986 issue of Audio magazine. I was able to locate the review at a university library's reference section. The Audio magazines were bound twelve issues at a time so the text on some of the page edges is a little hard to read. There are six pages so I'll post each one separately for those with dial up.

Some of Heyser's measurements and comments will no doubt spark some interesting forum posts. Enjoy.

Lee

Review page 1 of 6.pdf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmmmmnnn .......

Richard .......

Should He ... be Banned .. too ..??

Sure, why not. As the truth scares far too many people who already think they know it all.

But hey, it certainly adds to the entertainment value of the site.

The problem? Signal alignment of the various acoustical centeris (origins) of the drivers in the time domain!!!!!!

So while so many here pursue audio nirvana in the form expensive passive crossovers and new caps (but hey, that's sacred, as isn't that what PWK put in them!?) [|-)], one might want to consider an active crossover with signal alignment!!!

So, in keeping with business as usual (after the usual obligatory lauding of Heyser and the comments of a few who question his knowledge without having a clue as to what he actually said), I expect the next thread to be "What cap should I use to upgrade my new Klipschorns/LaScalas/Cornwalls/etc." [|-)]

But hey, I'm an optimist! At least a few will say a couple of nice things about Heyser before totally ignoring his message.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not only the bass bin needs alignment! ALL of he drivers do! When you measure acoustical origin offsets in feet, the phase relationships exceed 360 degrees and passives can't do that - not to mention that they constitute a significant reactive load seen by the source! And that is why so many discount the damping factor of an amp, NOT because it isn't effective in controlling a dynamic driver, but in that, seeing the load, it does not truly see the driver! So, damping with a passive crossover...yeah, whatever. That's an oxymoron. And we have not even gotten into the amount of energy that is stored as potential energy in the real component of the crossover and not converted in real time to kinetic energy (in the reactive imaginary realm of the impedance ) of the driver.

There are myriad sources of problems with passive components, and they are insufficient to overcome the more significant signal offsets that constitute massive group delay errors, and the resultant superposition affects of acoustical comb filtering and polar anomalies in the crossover region. And simply using higher order slopes does not remedy this.

You can play all you like with the passives, but ultimately you have to deal with that which they cannot (in addition to their already significant overhead), and that is alignment in the time domain.

The horns weren't the problem, the offsets were - and still are.

The rather fascinating aspect of this is that this topic is old news in most other legitimate acoustics circles, And no, I am not referring to some other web chat rooms filled with self-anointed experts who spend their days debating which cable or interconnect is best. This ranks right up their with what one can and cannot EQ. And when it comes down to it, it merges with the topic, as that is exactly what most passive crossovers attempt to do! And this situation, just like a room, is not minimum phase! And that debate (and all of the residual vestiges) was rendered moot by ~1992.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmmmmnnn .......

Richard .......

Should He ... be Banned .. too ..??

Sure, why not. As the truth scares far too many people who already think they know it all.

But hey, it certainly adds to the entertainment value of the site.

I'm only speculating here but I think we missed Dukes intended target...?

be that as it may... I too say BAN HIS HINEY!!

(can I say hiney on a public forum?)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now .. Mark ...

I .. should caution you ...

the JBL 4430's ... sound much better w/ the Passive X-Over ...

never got a electronic one to better that

look at JBL's electric model of phase relationships in the X-Over

uh oh....

now you've done it.....

have a blessed night,

roy

Not at all. It is non sequitur.

It helps to understand the offsets in acoustic centers/origins between drivers.

What is it in the 4430? Is it measured in feet???? Hardly.

My guess is within ~1-3 cm...

If the frequency range is within 360 degrees you can adjust the phase with a passive (albeit with all the other fundamental shortcomings).

So,if one wishes to debate an issue, it would help to use an example that is similar to the case at hand and show how it invalidates the original point.

[;)]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dr. Who ..

You should find it interesting that R. Heyser states the KH bass bin .. needs 8ms alignment ..

didn't we always talk 7 ms...?? in the Ball Park, baby ..[;)]

The real trick would have been dialing it in by ear. [;)]
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.

×
×
  • Create New...