wacresbryan Posted July 6, 2008 Share Posted July 6, 2008 I just bought a used set of Cornwalls for $75.00 that need some maintenance. I haven't had time to go through them yet. They have the square magnet woofers (I haven't ided them properly yet.) If it were to be woofers, can they be replaced with a jbl or cerwin vega speaker and perform as well? I also own a set of Bose 901's. What I want to achieve is a marriage between the two types of strengths that these speakers have. The Cornwalls will have their full range imagery with powerful lows where the 901's I will hang from the ceiling and let the sound bounce around.Any ideas upon on how to amplify this situation cleanly? Also, would a person consider getting a 5th speaker as a center or is this just overkill such as a 5.1 amp setup?So in summation traditional amps or surround sound as in new 5.1 etc.?If anyone would like to expand on this I would appreciate the interest and attention.Thank you,Bryan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheEvan Posted July 6, 2008 Share Posted July 6, 2008 No expert here, but won't matching levels between Cornwalls & 901s be something of a feat considering the huge difference in their sensitivities? The 901s appreciate all the grunt you can throw at them whereas the Cornies like a quality amp but can do with far less power. Different amps for each would seem to make some sense... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daddy Dee Posted July 6, 2008 Share Posted July 6, 2008 wacresbryan, welcome to the forum, bro. great post! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
russ69 Posted July 6, 2008 Share Posted July 6, 2008 I don't think this is going to work out. Two sets of loudspeakers do not sound better than one good pair. The 901's will need an arc welder for an amp and will still lag behind the Klipsch. Toss the 901's and get the Cornwalls working. Thanx, Russ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Islander Posted July 7, 2008 Share Posted July 7, 2008 I agree. Those two types of speakers are so dissimilar, both in sound quality and in amplifier requirements, that it would be unlikely that you'll get any kind of good sound. Just go with the Cornwalls and re-locate the 901s to another room. No need to replace the woofers with anything inferior, either. The square magnets may be proper original equipment. If they sound fine, you're all set. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldbuckster Posted July 7, 2008 Share Posted July 7, 2008 Go ahead hook-em up, I think you'll find the Cornwalls will dominate the room at low or mid power ....... high power,maybe the 901's can stay in the room with them, maybe not ................... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HarryO Posted July 7, 2008 Share Posted July 7, 2008 If I were to try to run both pairs of speakers at the same time I'd choose seperate amps and a multi-channel preamplifier to do the job. That's probably the only way you'd be able to control both pairs. If running both pairs I do believe the Bose would "muddy" up the clarity and cleaner reproduction of the CWs though. I've owned both. I'm not a big 901 fan though. It's one of the hardest speakers I've ever had to properly place for good sound. Hanging the 901s would take some time to get the placement correct. As far as woofer switching goes, stick with the K-33. Engineered for the CWs and best choice by far in the cabinets. If you just have to change them out then I'd choose the Crites CW1526 cast frame woofs. Good upgrade for the bucks. You got a steal for $75 on the CWs. 1: Make sure the drivers are all working properly. 2: check the crossovers for proper function. With the square magnet K-33s you're in the time frame to replace the old oil can caps. Fact is, the old caps just deteriorate with time and so does the quality of sound. And check out all the wiring connections in the CWs. Clean and tight connections are a must. Shoot us some pics and serial #s and you'll get more input from us. Definitely keep us up on the status of your project here. Should be an interesting project. Congrats, Harry Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fenderbender Posted July 7, 2008 Share Posted July 7, 2008 There was a long post here a few months ago where member GLA51 eloquently described the best usage of the 901's.....It can be done and it doesn't sound bad...if set up the right way........you will most likely need to run the 901's off a separate amp, s you can bring up the Cornwalls to listening levels and then slowly try to dial in the 901's . it can give you the "wall of sound effect" but you lose most of the stereo imaging and the bass frequencies can start to cancel each other out and sound flat If your goal is 2 channel stereo then it could be fun to mess around with ....but it's ultimately your "ear's " that will tell you which you like better....Having owned both .....the Cornwalls brought up to spec, simply .........destroy....IMO If your going for a 5.1 HT set up.....the timber match will be wayyyyyy off and if you love the corns I would suggest getting a pair of heresies or three and set up Cornwalls right and left fronts...single heresy center and surrounds.......Even todays modern analytical ht receivers wont be able to balance out the differences between two so radically different speakers to your liking...... If the 901's are your thing...stick with those, and put the corns in a spare room with a cheap fixed up tube amp....you'll fall in love!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wacresbryan Posted July 7, 2008 Author Share Posted July 7, 2008 Where are the oil cans on the woofers? I went to the Cripes web site and got the repair information for the squaker, crossover kits, and tweeters. I will have to troubleshoot later this week to find out actual problems. It very well could be just connections. I never thought that the sound imagery would be tainted with the two sets of speakers in the same room. The Bose are efficient as well but do not have hard hitting base. This is why I thought they would complement one another. It will be something to play with anyway (lol). I appreciate the feedback on those of you who have owned both sets. I have a Nakamichi 620 amp actually the whole rack 600 series. The amp needs repaired new cans etc. Any idea who could do that for me? I will display pics and numbers later this week. The numbers are faded. The speakers are in great shape! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wacresbryan Posted July 7, 2008 Author Share Posted July 7, 2008 I am using a turntable exclusively for the rich album sound. How does a tube amp complement this? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wacresbryan Posted July 7, 2008 Author Share Posted July 7, 2008 I cannot wait to hear the difference. The 901's are in a league of their own positive or negative. I used to own Polk Monitor 10s which had great sound imagery, efficiency etc. The CW must be a really nice speaker system. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
russ69 Posted July 7, 2008 Share Posted July 7, 2008 Bryan, You didn't say what series 901's you have but I had the original 901's back in the day. These are one of the least efficient loudspeakers on the market, plus they have over 6db of bass boost. They will eat up a weak amplifier. They clip a Phase Linear 700 with ease. (That's 350 watt's a channel). Your Nakamichi with 100 watts/per just won't give them the juice they need and they would be a total mis-match with a low powered tube amp. Don't get me wrong, I had a lot of fun with my Super Bose set-up (2 pair) but they are not hi-fi, sorry. If you want to run the Bose effectively, you'll need big power. Your best bet is run the Klipsch with a sweet little tube amp and you'll have a much better sound. Thanx, Russ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wacresbryan Posted July 8, 2008 Author Share Posted July 8, 2008 My Bose are series 6. I ran them with the Nakamichi 620 for several years. I believe that I am selling my Nakamichi rack as it has aged since 1978 and I really have no use for it (luggage)! I just cannot seem to let them go. Anyway, what is a tube amp like? I know of the old Macintosh when I bought my stereo. But why is it different or better than the say 620? I am building a home this year on Lake Cumberland overlooking the lake with a great room cathedral ceiling beams etc. I would like to fill the room with a great sound image. When I was in the USN, I went to clubs that run 901's hanging from the ceilings that bounced sounds off of walls where there were no speakers. I thought that was neat. Also I read every stereo review I could get my hands on while on ship. Boston Accoustic speakers were popular, Dalquist, Magneplans, and Accoustic Research. I bought the Nakamichi System One, Polk Audio Monitor 10's with a Thorens Belt Drive Turntable. I added a Apt Holman east coast preamp which was great (better than Nakamichi preamp by far.) My point is I at that time realized sound imagery as in good head room and cleanliness with a good damping factor on speakers. The Bose in some peoples opiniion deviated from that philosophy. They just sound great in their own way. My Polk 10s were different with the Nakamichi amp at .001 distortion because you could feel and hear people breath between lyrics. I would like to get back to that philosophy of clean full range sound imagery. Basically I do have to choose another amplifier or receiver. Any ideas? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wacresbryan Posted July 10, 2008 Author Share Posted July 10, 2008 I cannot read the invisble ink on the tags even thought they are in good shape. The box numbers are 168487 and 168488. The speakers are K-33E, K-55V, and K77 high. They look like Cherry finish. I don't know how to post photos online here yet...any info now? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Chandler Posted December 23, 2021 Share Posted December 23, 2021 (edited) I have a pair of series VI’s on custom mounts close to the ceiling and they run on a Sonamp 750w amplifier with Klipsch Cornwall IV’s run with a Parasound 250w amplifier in a huge room with a lot of leather furniture and they sound great together. The Bose provide a huge soundstage and booming base and the Klipsch do everything the Bose either cannot do or do poorly. For the audiophile snobs I have a pair of KEF Q-950’s and the huge KEF subwoofer run by another Parasound 225w amplifier in my master bedroom. You can rip on the Bose 901’s all you want and say they don’t deserve to be in the same room with Cornwalls, they are in a room packed with furniture and usually friends and along with the Klipsch and a good time is had by all. If I had no friends and I wanted to listen to perfect sound from a lone chair placed in the sweet spot all by myself I wouldn’t have this set-up. Edited December 23, 2021 by Rick Chandler Grammatical error Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wuzzzer Posted December 23, 2021 Share Posted December 23, 2021 13 years later. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dude Posted December 23, 2021 Share Posted December 23, 2021 13 years later.There seems to be a trend of this of lately. I don't mind it, think it's kind of cool.Sent from my SM-G986U using Tapatalk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coytee Posted December 28, 2021 Share Posted December 28, 2021 Heh, yep. I agree and get a kick out of seeing the old threads AND (just as importantly) get a kick out of seeing the old names. We have for example, both Daddy Dee and Old Buckster on this thread. Always nice hearing from them. RIP. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.