JubScala?

[sfogg]

"wow Shawn... How big is your room?"

Tiny, but very heavily treated, extremely solid and quiet.

"I assume the screen comes down in front of this? What is the Orange Pole thing for? "

Holding up the screen. It is a framed screen that hangs off the ceiling about 2' off the front wall to be even with the front of the speakers, to fit the LFE sub behind it and to give that mini-split on the wall room to breathe. To take that picture I pivoted it up and held it there with the pole. This is what it normally looks like with the screen down and the covering on the front speakers.



Shawn

[sfogg]

"The 510 would be the straightforward and sensible way to go, but
getting the best sound is rarely straightforward. We're all here
because we're not all there, as the saying goes..."

If I could have gone with three K402s I would have. But I couldn't. (See tiny room width above)

The K510 is miles beyond the K400/K77.....

Shawn

[Islander]

I've read that the price of the K-69/K402 combo is around $1000. If you don't mind me asking, what's the price of the K510 with driver and what driver does it come with, if not the K-69?

[jwc]

K510 with K69....~$600-700.

I own a pair.

jc

[Blvdre]

Informative thread. I've also been pondering an upgrade to my La Scalas, wanting to go the two-way route to start with. I've been researching the Altec 511/902 combo, and thought that might be the way to go, but this thread has me re-thinking my plan. The K510/K69 price-wise runs about the same as a pair of new 902's and some used 511's. The question is, are there significant differences between the performance of these two set-ups, all things considered? I'm inclined to stay with Klipsch, brand loyalty and all that. Any comments, impressions?

[sfogg]

I think the 902/511 is going to be cheaper. I believe that price is per unit for K510/K69.

Going two way with the LaScala were you planning on using active crossovers or passive units?

The 511B/902 combo is a little easier to deal with going the passive route as you don't need the EQ boost. That is unless Roy has cooked up a passive for the K510/K69 on a LaScala.

Going active then it is a wash either way as far as complexity.

The Lascala and 511B/902 is a nice combination if you are on axis. Off axis the 511b trades dispersion for EQ so it sounds more and more rolled off the further off axis you get from it. The K510 is more even over its dispersion then drops off. If you can swing it the K510/K69 is the way to go.

Shawn

[Guest " "]

'When they flipped over to the 510, it was as though someone just lopped the entire top end of the sound off. "

I'm surprised to hear this.....second thought I'm not.

I have a pair k510/k69 that came with k-701/k-70-g, so they don't miss anything in three way mode.

I was expecting that the k-402 vs 510 had bigger issues at the 400 - 800 range, but now it's unclear.

[Blvdre]

Thanks for the input, Shawn. I called Klipsch up earlier today, and the k-510/k69 combo is $600 for the pair, so reasonably affordable. My plan is to stay passive, and try one of Al's gentle slope x-overs (AP12 series), which would allow me to adjust the high end by using the various autoformer taps. The SET crowd seems to like the synergy of SET w/ the GS, as opposed to the ES. As I'm an SET guy myself, and don't listen at more than moderately loud levels (and that's rare), I think the GS's would be fine. Just a matter of ordering the bits and pieces, and solder the mess together. I'm certainly open to suggestions, though.

[sfogg]

Al's crossover won't work with the K69/K510. The crossover needs a shelving filter because the K510 does not trade dispersion for EQ, so you need to compensate for the mass rolloff in the driver.

Shawn

[sfogg]

""

I'm surprised to hear this.....second thought I'm not"

Coytee was outside of the coverage pattern of the K510. He was hearing the range of the horn where it doesn't have pattern control. It is not really a good comparison for how the K510 and K402 sound relative to each other when inside their coverage patterns.

Shawn

[Blvdre]

Shawn

Pardon my ignorance, I'm a bit x-over impaired, so the k510/k69 combo would require a shelving filter to boost the high-end, due to the mass roll-off? Does this mean there is roll off present at the drivers high-end, inherent in the driver design? Can you elaborate on the concept of "...does not trade dispersion for EQ..", having a hard time wrapping my around that one. BTW, are those your Alt-Scalas? I was thinking along those lines, integrating the 511 in to the top. nice to see it realized.

[sfogg]

" Does this mean there is roll off present, inherent in the driver design?"

Yes, as it is in all drivers. The 902 has it too. The difference is in the horns.

A horn has a coverage pattern... that is the horizontal and veritical angles it covers with sound.

Some horns keep that pattern for all (almost) frequencies. Some keep that pattern for most of the frequencies then loose control (get wider) at the low end of its response. Some horns get narrower as frequency increases. Some horns get narrower as frequency increase as well as get wider when the horn looses control on the bottom end.

The 511B looses coverage as frequency increases and looses pattern control on the bottom end. It literally focuses the sound into a narrow and narrower pattern as frequency increases. By focusing the drivers output up high it boosts the level in that area. It is effectively an EQ boost. The horn trades dispersion for EQ and if the horn and driver are well matched the horn will provide the needed EQ for the drivers mass rolloff. This means you only get the full range sound from the driver in a narrower on axis area and that the power response is uneven which can further make the driver sound more rolled off if you are off axis as you hear a combination of the direct sound and the reflected sound within the room. The reflected sound will be midrange heavy since the top end of the driver wasn't sprayed around the room as much as the mids.

The K510 does not trade dispersion for EQ. It keeps its coverage constant up top and looses pattern control on the bottom end. As such it will sound more even over a wider area then the 511B. However because it does not trade dispersion for EQ you need to deal with the mass rolloff of the driver hooked into it. That means EQ in the crossover. Al's crossovers don't have this and you will need it or this combo will sound rolled off.

Shawn

[sfogg]

You can see how the FR of the same driver varies on different horns in this thread:

http://forums.klipsch.com/forums/p/75942/749000.aspx#749000

Shawn

[Blvdre]

Shawn, thanks for the clear explanation, and the visuals, very helpful. I like the fact that the Klipsch combo has better dispersion, but to deal with the EQ issue, I assume I would need to go with active x-overs, which would also require at least an extra low-end amp. My assumption being you can't implement a shelving x-over in a passive network.

[jwc]

Al's crossover won't work with the K69/K510. The crossover needs a shelving filter because the K510 does not trade dispersion for EQ, so you need to compensate for the mass rolloff in the driver.

Shawn

Shawn, not that I recommend this route....but why can't he use the AP 12 or ESN network and use a parametric EQ unit. Then just one amp.

jc

[Blvdre]

I'm not opposed to trying an active x-over set-up. In fact I'd love to give it a go, but it would be a more expensive (slower) route.

[Islander]

The K510 is miles beyond the K400/K77.....

Just how is it better? I'm not doubting you, just curious as to specifics.

[sfogg]

"My assumption being you can't implement a shelving x-over in a passive network."

That can be done in a passive network actually. Al's crossovers just don't have that function in them. It Roy designed a passive for the K510/K69 on a LaScala you could go that route for example.

Shawn

[sfogg]

"....but why can't he use the AP 12 or ESN network and use a parametric EQ unit. Then just one amp. "

He
could try that and see how it works out. I really just meant he can't
simply take the AP12 or ESN and hook it up to a K510/K69 and have it
work well without doing anything else. It won't because of the need for
EQ.

OTOH either of those networks alone would work
better with the 511/902 alone since that combo doesn't need the EQ as
it is built into the horn. The ES600 was designed for my setup of the
902/511B on a LaScala. It is a nice sounding combo.

Shawn

[sfogg]

"Just how is it better? I'm not doubting you, just curious as to specifics."

(Note: This relates to a different driver then the K69 on the K510, I haven't heard the K69)

If you want to start at the basics you have considerably better/smoother FR. The original combo is kind of ragged and the K77 rolls off hard at about 12k.

You get rid of that 9k glitch/ringing in the K55 that can make it sound harsh. (A bandpass crossover on the squawker (later Klipsch networks, Als) helps greatly here with the k55 too).

The K400 is kind of closed in sounding with a sort of shouty megaphone quality to it. The K510 is a more natural open sounding horn.

The off axis response of the K510 is considerably smoother then the K400/K77 which narrows then gets wide then gets narrower again as you cross over between them. The K510 stays pretty constant all the way up once it gains control over the pattern. In room this improves the sound pretty much everywhere including on axis due to the better power response of the K510.

More detail/coherency.

Etc...etc...etc.

Shawn