Jump to content

"The Juliebee" (or Jubilating the Khorn)


Recommended Posts

(Amy, I promise, no baseball bats!)

TigerwoodKhorns is probably the first on this forum to try to jubilate (or is it jubilize?) a Khorn (a clone, to be exact). I can't find the thread, hopefully he'll chime in and lead us in the right direction, but on that thread, he tried to bend the exit paths of an SK to bring the mouths together, like a Jub. I thought it was a very clever idea, and I kinda helped, using autocad. Gil, though had concerns about its effectiveness as the bends were happening at the last six inches or so of the mouths.

(I have several drawings to post, so let me finish first, before posting, or making a comment. TNX).


Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was obvious that some surgery is required on the SK to jubilate it.So, here's what I came up with.

This enclosure can be built to look just like a Jubilee, the dimensions are pretty close, and can easily be mistaken as a Jub, until one notices the driver access is not on top, or the bottom. (It is 2.5 inches deeper). Here's the front sheet of the drawing set. Please note that this has not been built, so disregard the frequency response statement, that still remains to be proven. Also, the driver chosen is not a Klipsch, but an EV, because that's what I have, but a Klipsch driver can be used.

FOR SOME, THIS IS STILL, PLUG UGLY. Sorry, I can't fix that.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Inside, the similarities with a Jub end, the paths follow the Khorn, although straighter. The initial path is narrower, the channel twist is still there, but not as severe. I'm posting the sheets with the parts callouts, to make it convenient if you want to make a comment on a certain part. The parts count is less, and there is only one part (and its mirror image) that has compound cuts, part N.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Last drawing.

Here's the problem, not a big one. And I need suggestions, ideas, etc. etc.

Driver access requires removing the panel outboard of the access cover. IOW, panel E (left) must be removable. I thought of using a piano hinge between pieces E and F, and securing E using wood screws to a 1 x 1 poplar. Maybe somebody has a better idea.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

The driver access opening is 7 inches. I think the K-33 is about 6.5. Using any driver deeper than 7 is do-able, but will require more work

The flare rate is 38hz, exponential. I know someone will suggest a rubber throat, I thought of it too, that I'll do it if it will simplify construction.

Not on this one, though. Every thing fits like a glove for a 38hz.

Like my size 8 shoe up in Da....

Daddy's closet.

I'll try to do a 40hz version, maybe I'll need it there.

I have no doubt that this design can go down to 40hz, the question that remains is, will it go as high as a Jub for a two-way?

Personally I will be happy if it gets up to 600-700hz. I really prefer three-way, but that's a completely different subject, just personal preference, let's not discuss it here, please, thank you.

I will appreciate inputs, suggestions, ideas to improve this design.

(Duke, my friend at the patent office says he will take a good look at patent applications coming from Seattle area. ..and any horn designs similar to this that may have a name like The Bothellian, or Jambalaya or V4, V5 ).

Gil, please let me know what you think.

Thank you all in advance.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

AJ, You have been busy, very busy.

A couple of quick question before I look more carefully. Could you fill me in on two points.

1. Is the Length of the horn now longer?

2. Is the Mouth the same size (it looks smaller, if I am seeing it correctly)?

This is an interesting project.


Link to comment
Share on other sites


It's actually 'longer", 65 inches, compared to 55 (?) inches on the jub, but most of the difference in length is at the throat end, because of the difference on throat sizes (78/90). It is a little 'longer" at the mouth end, and larger, as shown.

The "forum jubilee" (reverse-engineered version) says it is 55" long, I got 57+, I think it depends on how you measure it at the turn at the tailboard.

I have a copy of the juliebee 'development' drawing that shows the expansion versus length, but my scanner went OOC this a.m. Will try to get access to a working one.

The mouth area was measured from an imaginary perpendicular line to the center of the path, not at that angled line at the mouth, otherwise that will be a number larger than what it really is.

Plz check the front sheet posted earlier.

I am at work now, and unlike Edgar, I don't have boring days at work, have to crank out drawings for government contracts. I'll try to answer the easy questions, if you don't hear from me, it'll be tonight.

The dashed lines below belong to the Jub.

The expansion was checked at five different points during drawing development, before the first 90 degee turn, halfway inside, at the rear exit, after the rear exit or beginning of final exit, and at the mouth itself.

Have fun and have a nice day.




Link to comment
Share on other sites


I think Klipsch has a Khorn bass bin enclosed as your reverse engineered drawing indicates in their pro line.

You might get more bottom end out of this.....but your going to loose quite a bit on the top end....

I may have missed the point on all this....maybe some narratives to go along with the drawings will help.

I built a pair of these in 1986. I sized them 15% above stock khorn bins. I used 3/4 MDF. The driver I used was an ACR PA38 which has an spl of 101 db. It delivered on the low end, but the khorn core restricted the mid bass range.

As far as the access panel question. I used bolts, which were easy to work with using a ratchet and socket.

I also used a wood jig sized large than the woofer perm installed to help center it duing install since you can't see inside the woofer chamber.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Speakerfritz, you missed the whole point of this design.

The goal of this, as shown on my first post, is to bring the mouths of the Khorn inward like a Jub, reduce the splay angle which was proven to increase the high freq response. I also used full-channel reflectors, (Bruce Edgar suggests that, too, for SK modifications) and arranged the tailboard pieces to reflect the wave more effifciently. The paths inside are more direct towards the rear exit and don't bend like the Khorn, which will also help. All done to increase the high freq response. Exactly, which part of the design will cause this to lose quite a bit on the top end? Help me out and I'll do the design change.

Mounting the access cover and driver is not the problem, it's the panel outboard of the access, which must also be removed when changing drivers. The path is too tight to allow removal of the driver.

The pair that you built in 1986, did it look like a pair of Jubs when finished , with the mouths closer to each other? You must be the first one then to "jubilate" (or jubilize) the Klipschorn. If it didn't, then you built a larger Khorn clone. Not this one.

Please post a picture of that pro-line speaker.



Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Speakerfritz, you missed the whole point of this design."

I know...thats why I asked where this was heading

" Exactly, which part of the design will cause this to lose quite a bit on the top end? Help me out and I'll do the design change."

The use of a Khorn core...if that is what I'm supposed to be getting out of this...the fix is to use a LaScala core as used in the Jubilee. The loss of the higher end is due to the the basic turns in the folds of the khorn along with the pathway compressions before the last turn. These turns and compressions do not exist in the Jubilee.

"The pair that you built in 1986, did it look like a pair of Jubs when finished , with the mouths closer to each other? You must be the first one then to "jubilate" (or jubilize) the Klipschorn. If it didn't, then you built a larger Khorn clone. Not this one."

It looked just like a jubilee. I needed something for a field party that was projected to have 3000 attendees. I doubt that I am the first person to do this.

"Please post a picture of that pro-line speaker. "

I think the proline speaker I'm thinking about is the TSCM. It's on page 4 of the Klipsch "Dependable lifelike Sound For Motion Picture Theaters" brochure.

I think you have some nice drawings....but I also think a set of double stacked LaScala bass bins used with one of the proline subwoofers will have a smaller footprint, deeper range as well as a higher one. Deeper due to the proline subwoofer. Higher due to not having the last fold as used in the Jubilee.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The use of the Khorn core....the path is expanding exponentially, so the compression is decreasing as it gets farther away from the throat. Also, the taillboard is now just like the Jub...I don't get it. I changed that core and used full channel reflectors...

LaScala core? Now, please take a good look at the Juliebee's SIDE VIEW or profile and tell me which speaker 's folding you see?

Remember, the SIDE VIEW, or the one on the right. Think of it as another speaker's TOP view.

Here it is.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

The TSCM is a Khorn core design.......your Juliebee seems like a Khorn core design....my comments are simply that this has been done....and it does not have the high end reach of a LaScala cab or a Jubilee.....stretching here and compressing there...does not make the Juliebee a new design. If the focus of your thread is the mouth relationships...I'm not getting it....the mouth relationships will not extend the upper reach of a khorn core design.

but in any event...build one...let us know how it goes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

THAT IS THE WHOLE POINT, Michael!!!!!!!!

The title of the thread says JUBILATING A KLIPSCHORN.

Use a Khorn core, and build it with a mouth like the Jubilee. The TSCM DOESN'T have a mouth like the Jub so it doesn't qualify.

I think I have applied everything there is on that core to make it get a higher freq response

English is my second language, but I think I'm telling this like it is.

Now, what folding do you see looking at the SIDE VIEW?.[:D]

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.

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...