Modifications mean “tuning” the component to your taste and to work better with your other components. That means that any particular change may not be an improvement. Make sure that any change can be reversed. Damping horns is something easily done and reversed. Likewise, putting thin felt strips in the horn opening can be tried and reversed. If you are going with crossover modifications, make sure that the modifier gives you back the old parts so you or someone else can undo the change.
The biggest change, most probably for the better, would be to find a suitable tube amplifier. Take your time hearing alternatives. I know it is a matter of taste and system synergy, but, I find the MC 275 mentioned as a suggestion to be less than mediocre, particularly given the price. There are many low power tube amps that would work well with these speakers.
|
Cleeds,
It is not like using lossy MP3 videos,; it is MUCH worse. With any video you are hearing the gear in the video, the room, the recording gear, etc., before you even consider what the audience is using for playback. Even if the person shooting the video is a recording engineer, the sound would differ based on the technique employed. I also doubt that $5,000 microphones were used for the recording.
I think you were being too kind in omitting words like “idiotic” in your put down of auditions via YT.
|
It is true that low cost parts do not necessarily mean bad sound or a substantial compromise in sound quality. At its price point, the Cornwall cannot be built without some cost cutting and savvy design means making the right choices on where to use “cheap” parts. But, to suggest that those who substitute parts or modify the design to improve its performance or better suit their preference are just “fickle” and must meet some kind of blind testing criteria to justify their choice is unreasonable. First, it is a personal choice and does not have to meet a long term market-supported approval measure. Second, is there any evidence that Klipsch applied blind testing for every one of their design choices? I bet they do what most of us do; they listen to the results. I am sure Klipsch designers hear many improvements that they chose not to adopt because of cost, manufacturing difficulty, or some other practical consideration. Those consideration may not be in play to stop an individual from making a modification.
|
I suppose it depends on what one calls “subtle” and “obvious,” but if something has to survive YT treatment to constitute a meaningful improvement, I will agree that most modifications won’t pass the test. It is up to each owner whether any improvement is worth the cost and effort. It is not up to some self-appointed expert on cognitive dissonance to shame those who find such changes desirable.
|
So, your comparisons of DACs on YT were scientifically controlled blind tests? You were able to verify that the person making the video properly controlled all variables and your own evaluation was blind and you had enough samples to reach some level of confidence in the results?
I’ve participated in blind tests, including DACs, so I am confident that their are meaningful difference (though not at .05 confidence level), but, that does not mean everything outside of such testing is delusional. It is unfair to insist on blind testing to prove modifications are efficacious, while insisting that YT videos should be provided by modifiers when there is no evidence (blind testing?) that YT videos can make differences, or lack thereof, evident.
|
As I said before, these modifications tune the speaker to fit the owner’s particular taste and system, and as such, the changes can be unfavorable. A local dealer in my area makes custom speaker systems (mostly horn-based) and tuning involves trying external damping of the horn, applying thin felt strips to the inside of the horn, changing the type and amount of damping to the sides of the cabinet, changing crossover parts based on a prospective buyer’s preference, etc. I get to hear these changes, and any one of them can result in dramatic changes.
The issue I have with the kind of modifications mentioned in the video is that a lot of people assume that certain types of changes are always better—more damping is better, more expensive caps are better than cheap ones, etc. Additional cabinet damping might make the bass tighter, which one person may like, but someone else might find the sound to be too dry and lifeless. The type and brand of caps that sound good is likewise subjective. The custom builder I mentioned above thoroughly hates Mundorf caps in any of his speaker or electronic builds.
If you ever heard the effect of even a tiny change in the level of the midrange and tweeter, you will appreciate the value of L-pad attenuators controlling such drivers. I don’t understand how manufacturers expect their designs to be optimized to the particular buyer’s taste and room acoustics such that such basic adjustment is not necessary. The removal of such controls has to be among the worse modern design trends; reversing this by adding back controls would probably be the best modification one can try.
|
Perkadin,
I agree with you that listeners tend to be biased to favor the “improvement” they invested in and may go overboard in a particular direction. You rarely hear someone say that a particular tweak made the sound worse when any such change should have a fair chance at being for worse.
When it comes to vibration damping, I’ve experienced where some additional damping was an improvement, but more than that sounds bad; it is NOT the case that more of something good is always better. I heard a demonstration by a representative from Symposium who put a vibration damping shelf under a CD player and it improved the sound (everyone in attendance agreed). The next level up in their product line slightly improved the sound. But, the flagship shelf made the sound too dry and unpleasant; even the Symposium guy agreed the sound got worse. How could better damping worsen the sound? I don’t know, but I heard it.
|
Most of the horns I like don’t necessarily require additional damping, including those made of metal or resin or plastic. I like these horns because they were made right from the start. But, it doesn’t hurt to try damping if it is reversible.
|
I am a fan of the vast array of horns made by Yoshimura Laboratories (YL) when coupled to their compression drivers. They made metal horns, wood horns and some kind of resin; the horns come in all sorts of shapes and sizes, including horns almost the size of Western Electric 15A horns. But regardless of shape and size and configuration of the throat, they are consistently free of gross horn coloration—not nasal sounding nor shouty—and they sound smooth and relaxed (no sharp peaks).
I also like a number of Western Electric horns and compression drivers. Some that sound good to me, like the 15A, are not very practical, but horns like the 32A, are nice sounding compact horns. I also like Western Electric compression drivers and the currently manufactured replicas by G.I.P. Laboratories.
My own horns are Western Electric 12025 sectoral horns driven by Western Electric 713b drivers. Those drivers are very hard to find in matched pairs. My horns are metallic, but I have left them untreated. They are relatively compact but they are very heavy and the thick metal does not ring much.
|
Mrdecibel,
While it is hard to separate out the sonic influences of other aspects of a horn’s design, I’ve heard replicas of classic designs where the primary difference was the material used, which means the big difference is resonance behavior. I recently heard a wooden replica of a Western Electric 22A horn that I liked more than the original and other replicas I’ve heard.
What has been hard for me to understand are the notable exceptions where the horn rings like mad yet sound very good. The Western Electric 16A is such a horn. It is spectacularly massive and made of huge, thin metal parts (you can walk into the opening by crouching just a little bit). When the music stops playing, you hear a distinct echo that takes more than a second to fade away. Despite the echo, the sound is not muddy or distorted and the sense of ease (lack of strain) and the large scale of the image is unmatched. It took me quite a few listening sessions to overcome my initial prejudice from hearing that loud echo.
|
mrdecibel,
I generally agree with you on horn coloration. I was just pointing out some examples which don’t, in my opinion, fit the pattern. While I would not pick the 16A as my horn, even if I had a room big enough, hearing it was an interesting experience.
The big problem with currently available horn systems is the compression driver. I don’t know of many that I like, as compared to vintage drivers, that are not crazy expensive. I am not saying that modern horn/compression driver combinations are not good sounding, I just don’t find them as good as some 1930-70 drivers. I particularly like Western Electric, YL, and IPC drivers from the past.
|
