Your Side by Side Experience With Best Vintage vs Newer Expensive Hi Tech Speakers


Has anyone here ever done a side by side comparison between Tannoy Autograph, Bozak Concert Hall Grand, EV Patrician, Jensen Imperial Triaxial, Goodmans, Stentorian, Western Electric, Altec A4, Jbl Everest/Hartsfield/Summit/Paragon/4435, Tannoy Westminsters, Klipschorns vs the Hundreds of Thousand even Million Dollar speakers of today like Totems, Sonus Farber, BW, Cabasse, Wilsons, Dmt, Infinity, Polk ...etc
vinny55

Showing 5 responses by mrdecibel

@wester17 Updating the khorns, crossover rebuild, upgraded voicecoils, horn damping ( and some other damping ), and of course room corners, with the right equipment, are still hard to beat, for what they do best, but I am prejudiced. Of course, to each his own.
@steve59 The couple of main differences between the early Lascala and the series II, are : ( 1 ) went from 3/4 inch birch ply to 1 inch birch ply and MDF, in the cabinet design. The dog houses ( woofer sections ) were resonant in the originals. The series II are now two boxes, dog houses is one, and mid horn / tweeter horn in upper. The combined weight of the speaker is now 175 lbs, versus 123 lbs for the original. ( 2 ) The crossovers have changed a little, with the woofer crossing over at a lower frequency to the mid horn. The crossovers are now using newer, higher grade, closer tolerance components, giving them the ability of passive biamping / biwiring, and to extract an extra db of effieciency, from 104, to 105 ( according to the specs Klipsch publishes. The crossover in the series II is based on the " AL3 " crossover, as there were a few various crossovers during the original productions. Also need to mention, that at some point Klipsch changed from metal mid horns to a ( and I hate to use the term, a plastic type horn ), to reduce ringing, in the originals. The series II, can be gotten in several different finishes, and although sometimes special ordered, some retailers stock a few finishes. The originals were available in, I believe, 3 ( Walnut Oak, Oak Oak, and raw birch ). Klipsch also had the " pro " version, with handles built into the upper portion of the cabinets, sealed the back of the mid / tweeter / crossover section, fused the tweeter, as well as the entire speaker, used a higher power handling woofer and added 5 way binding posts, with the original non pro versions having screw terminal barrier strips for hook up. I am sure I am leaving some things out. The original Lascala, was produced actually as a PA speaker for a well known politician for his campaigning. They were also produced with a specific price point. The original Lascala had some inherent weaknesses, which became noticeable as people were buying them for their homes, and using early,higher power solid state amps ( as the tube amp users did not hear these issues, ime ). So is there still a family resemblance between the old and the new ?. I think so. Is the series II worth the extra price difference ? Well, that depends. I could purchase a pair of originals, and do so much to them, that they might be indistinguishable from the new ones, or, even better. So sorry for my long rant, but I guess you can see I am a " Klipsch guy " ( specifically the Heritage Line ). I do feel the new Lascala is price competitive with other speakers, as, imo, they do more of what " I want ". They could use some additional bass augmentation, by adding a pair of extremely fast subwoofers. The Lascala is my favorite Heritage, as it is the most versatile. Enjoy ! MrD.
I meant to say Walnut oil and Oak oil. Also, the crossovers have always been housed in the mid / tweeter section. That's all. Thank you. Enjoy ! MrD.
I agree, and if I were able to build a special room specifically to accommodate the Khorns ( room corners become part of the doghouse ), and then get rid of some of the other room corner " problems ", I would own a pair. Some of the best systems I have heard were with this exact situation. Enjoy ! MrD