Klipsch Jubilee & Klipschorn Experience

@ditusa @phusis @mrdecibel @johnk : ...Loving this discussion and hope to hear the new jubes at some point soon.  Do you have plans to hear the new Jubilee's? Would love to hear your thoughts on them.

@phusis - can expand upon your criticism of the new Jubilees' ported bass horns ... do any other manufacturers' or DIYers bass horn place the woofer is in a ported enclosure (vs the typical sealed)?  I think Roy said this was his invention and he patented it.  I understand the intent is for lower extension, what is the tradeoff in your opinion?  Is the bass horn just being asked to perform too far out if its range and start impact the sound negatively? I have seen some folks on the klipsch forum with the older underground jubilee's who have done what you recommended, ie, tapped horn for the lowest octaves, Jube horn up to say 400-500hz, then let the K402 take over.  I'm not sure Klipsch would dip into tapped horns, as that tech belongs to Danley sound labs, no?  

At Axpona last year, what space were they playing in, and what was their placement within that room?  I have seen videos where the new Jubilees are out in the middle of the room playing, as opposed to being placed in the corners like the klipschorns and underground jubilees.  Perhaps the bass horns are sufficient in size along with their onboard DSP as to not require the corner bass reinforcement, but maybe that comes as a tradeoff in sound quality? Maybe they would still benefit from corner placement for more natural playback...

Have any other companies/DIYer's utilized the Celestion Axi2050 in their horns? I've read they are similar in sound quality to a TAD 4002 with out the high frequency extension, and extend down to ~250hz.  really, i want to know what Celestion envisions as the perfect horn for the Axi2050. 

It's been a year, so I don't remember the specifics of exactly why they didn't sound good, but I do know they had no synergy at all. Considering the efficiency of these speakers and how well they match with good tube amplifiers, I was very surprised Klipsch decided to match these with the Mitchi electronics. I would have thought Klipsch would want these sounding their best considering it was a new speaker demo. Nothing against Mitchi but I assume they could have done better. Could this have been a marketing decision and agreement with Rotel? I will definitely be going back to their room on the 14th. I'm looking for some new speakers and will also be evaluating the Volti speakers too although I have heard them before. I need some speakers in the $5K-$7K range that sound good at low listening levels. Both the Volti Razz and Klipsch Cornwall's look interesting.

I was lucky to get my hands on the axi2050 before they hit the market and was asked to give my opinions on it in different horns sized enough to take advantage of it. Celestron has a CD horn they suggest it's good if you want to use CD EQ DSP and not a tweeter. But I found axi sounds best with tweeters and has a nice roll-off after 3000hz. All horns I used it in have a 150hz-250hz lower range. I greatly enjoyed it in massive multicell and a huge biradial I have. It also did well with more narrow 40x90 radials. I updated my pic to show system axi is used in now.

@mikld wrote:

can expand upon your criticism of the new Jubilees’ ported bass horns ... do any other manufacturers’ or DIYers bass horn place the woofer is in a ported enclosure (vs the typical sealed)? I think Roy said this was his invention and he patented it. I understand the intent is for lower extension, what is the tradeoff in your opinion? Is the bass horn just being asked to perform too far out if its range and start impact the sound negatively?

In the domestic Jubilee’s the ported output via the back wave of the woofers comes out of phase in relation to the output of the front wave of the woofers, as per usual with ported designs, but here it is then - as a summed output - horn-loaded. Quite a few folded bass horns I’ve seen use ports in the woofer chamber, that’s usually sealed, to assist the lower end, but in those cases the ports radiate their output independently of the horn loading, and not into the horn itself like the Jub’s. Both options seem dubious to me being they impact the impulse response in the effort to squeeze out some extra extension/gain in the lower range from a limitedly sized package. Moreover, even though this mayn’t be a practical issue, there’s port noise to deal with, but the horn acts as a low pass filter, so with the Jub’s at least this may be a non-issue.

I have seen some folks on the klipsch forum with the older underground jubilee’s who have done what you recommended, ie, tapped horn for the lowest octaves, Jube horn up to say 400-500hz, then let the K402 take over. I’m not sure Klipsch would dip into tapped horns, as that tech belongs to Danley sound labs, no?

Yes, the tapped horn design is patented by DSL, but my suggestion wasn’t for Klipsch to make/design TH’s, but rather that the users could choose to implement TH’s from either DSL or DIY (DIY’ers are allowed by Danley to fiddle with the TH design as they choose, and who could prevent them) in their setup in conjunction with the Jub’s in their older, non-port incarnation. Or, a classic Front Horn Loaded design for subs, but they’re often hampered by being too small with a stunted mouth area to be their best; if people think TH’s take up a load of space (which they do covering down <25Hz, certainly with 12-15" on up woofers), wait till you see a more all-out FLH with a mouth area to match..

To reiterate: I haven’t listened to the domestic Jub’s, so I wouldn’t know how they perform in the lower mids on down. Maybe Roy has got his patented solution to work just fine sonically, but I suspect there’s a price to pay.