Klipsch Cornwall IV

D

duder1982

Enthusiast
Power does not wake speakers up.
I was never sold on the idea, same with break-in. I do believe in head room.

I'm thinking the OP just had his hopes up, guess I'm glad I purchased b stock for less.

One difference i did notice was the stereo image is alot better. This I know as I can sit anywhere on my couch and get good imaging.
 
D

duder1982

Enthusiast
No am saying they use an in-room equivalent which would be higher stated sensitivity than typical tests/spec as used by most others (as evidenced by many reviews with measurements). I don't know if they test anechoically and then add to it with a formula or not, tho.
That's a good question, one I believe has been brought up before on the Klipsch forum. Not sure what the "explanation" was. From what I understand was that they used the chamber for R&D, guess I assumed they used those numbers.
 
lovinthehd

lovinthehd

Audioholic Jedi
That's a good question, one I believe has been brought up before on the Klipsch forum. Not sure what the "explanation" was. From what I understand was that they used the chamber for R&D, guess I assumed they used those numbers.
From comments I've seen they're kind of defensive on the subject in their forum, but its fairly well known/documented.
 
D

duder1982

Enthusiast
From comments I've seen they're kind of defensive on the subject in their forum, but its fairly well known/documented.
Just out of curiosity I went to check how it's listed, if it means anything, the IVs appear to be lower, and now at 2.83v/1m versus 1 watt/1 meter (i reallydont know what the differencewould be), with a note that states "sensitivity in average listening room" so at least their being honest about it.
 
ski2xblack

ski2xblack

Audioholic Field Marshall
own Heresy 1s, Cornwall IVs, and have owned Cornwall Is, along with DIY Belles. I've always thought my Cornwalls had more bass than all.
You're not imagining things. Of all of those, the CW do in fact dig the deepest, with solid response south of 40hz, if you have them in close proximity to the walls (as mentioned, the design assumes quarter space loading). For the majority of musical content, they're sufficient. Power demand is still quite low. Those using more powerful amps are probably still only actually using a few watts. 50 watts through those is outrageously loud.

The horn length of Belles isn't long enough to support frequencies under 60hz or so. Heresies trade extension for a smaller cab in their compromise with Hoffman's Iron Law and drop below 70hzor so.

Are you saying that since Klipsch test their speakers in a anechoci chamber that their sensitivity is overstated?
Klipsch has false corners used for KHorns/Jube measurements in their anechoic chamber. If they were to use those on other models, and call the results "estimated in room sensitivity" it would explain the inflated values they come up with. ??
 
TLS Guy

TLS Guy

Seriously, I have no life.
Just out of curiosity I went to check how it's listed, if it means anything, the IVs appear to be lower, and now at 2.83v/1m versus 1 watt/1 meter (i reallydont know what the differencewould be), with a note that states "sensitivity in average listening room" so at least their being honest about it.
2.83 volts 1 meter makes a four ohm speaker look 3 db. better than an 8 ohm one. However the four ohm speakers is taking twice the amp power. On the other hand a watt is a watt, and will be the same no matter what the impedance of the speaker. The problem gets compounded as impedance is pretty much anything a manufacturer says it is, as all speakers have a unique curve, and the marketers can pull the impedance from any part of the curve they want. So this adds to the confusion, and also people unwittingly buying speakers that have a much lower impedance than they were lead to believe.
 
lovinthehd

lovinthehd

Audioholic Jedi
Just out of curiosity I went to check how it's listed, if it means anything, the IVs appear to be lower, and now at 2.83v/1m versus 1 watt/1 meter (i reallydont know what the differencewould be), with a note that states "sensitivity in average listening room" so at least their being honest about it.
2.83V at 8 ohm is one watt, at 4 ohm it's two watts.
 
highfigh

highfigh

Seriously, I have no life.
How is it possible that no-name, piss-ant car and home audio speaker companies can make speakers that loosen fillings, straighten crooked teeth, cure Polio and win the war for the Allies, but Klipsch can't manage to yank some bass out of these behemoths. Sure, they're not as huge as some, but c'mon!
 
highfigh

highfigh

Seriously, I have no life.
2.83 volts 1 meter makes a four ohm speaker look 3 db. better than an 8 ohm one. However the four ohm speakers is taking twice the amp power. On the other hand a watt is a watt, and will be the same no matter what the impedance of the speaker. The problem gets compounded as impedance is pretty much anything a manufacturer says it is, as all speakers have a unique curve, and the marketers can pull the impedance from any part of the curve they want. So this adds to the confusion, and also people unwittingly buying speakers that have a much lower impedance than they were lead to believe.
But Watts are a calculated value, so 2.83VAC into four Ohms is 2 Watts.

See? This is what happens when the marketing departments aren't on a leash.

What do you think about some of us creating a good glossary, with explanations for this stuff? I think it's pretty late in the game for this confusion to exist and the manufacturers aren't helping.
 
highfigh

highfigh

Seriously, I have no life.
So I just purchased a set of Klipsch Cornwall IV's and of course they were quite pricey. As it stands now I'm not overly impressed given their price tag. Currently I'm driving them with a Marantz PM8006 which I realize isn't exactly state of the art, yet it's a pretty good amp. I just purchased an NAD M23 amp with a Parasound Halo P6 pre-amp which are head and shoulders above the Marantz. I haven't received the Amp and Pre-amp yet, but my "hope" is obviously that the new amp and pre-amp "wake up" the speakers. I also understand that speaker placement can be critical and I have experimented with that, but no joy. Time will tell I guess, but so far I'm not thrilled, in fact my rear speakers are Polk RTi- A2's and to my ear sound "nrearly" as good for a fraction of the cost.
If you want an honest 20Hz (or lower), you need some of the large woofers in this photo. EV's spec sheets showed that the big box was good for F3 of 17.5 Hz. I had a pair and I should have kept them, rather than selling so I could buy my house.

 
ski2xblack

ski2xblack

Audioholic Field Marshall
One difference i did notice was the stereo image is alot better. This I know as I can sit anywhere on my couch and get good imaging
You're doing it right. That broad, stable sweet spot trick is compelling, seductive even, and something wide dispersion speakers simply can't pull off.

I wonder if @hart3369 has returned them or squeezed some lemonade and decided they're keepers.
 
TLS Guy

TLS Guy

Seriously, I have no life.
You're doing it right. That broad, stable sweet spot trick is compelling, seductive even, and something wide dispersion speakers simply can't pull off.

I wonder if @hart3369 has returned them or squeezed some lemonade and decided they're keepers.
That is absolute nonsense. Wide dispersion with the off axis following the axis response closely is the way to go. No question about that. Then you get not only left right localization but front back beyond the wall, and even good phantom imaging beyond the boundaries of the room. Narrow dispersion speakers can not produce a realistic sound stage.
 
ski2xblack

ski2xblack

Audioholic Field Marshall
It's not perfect, Doc.

IME that image stability, which is a very real phenomenon, comes at the expense of the detailed, highly specific delineation of the soundstage of good wide dispersion speakers, which can be exquisite, but in a smaller sweet spot. If that sort of imaging prowess is the goal, CW's really aren't the speaker for the job.

I'm just trying to help the OP decide if he should return them or not, as the speakers are in his possession, he's on the hook for over 6 large, so he might as well try everything.

As far as the merits of time/intensity trading, JBL published papers in the AES decades ago on the topic. It really works, and happens to work with the OP's speakers. The center phantom image will be rock solid. It won't move to the right or left, even if the listener does. Try that with a stereo pair of wide dispersion speakers and the image will collapse into the nearer speaker the more the listener moves away from the sweer spot.

Narrow dispersion speakers can not produce a realistic sound stage.
Now THAT is utter nonsense.
 
Last edited:
TLS Guy

TLS Guy

Seriously, I have no life.
It's not perfect, Doc.

IME that image stability, which is a very real phenomenon, comes at the expense of the detailed, highly specific delineation of the soundstage of good wide dispersion speakers, which can be exquisite, but in a smaller sweet spot. If that sort of imaging prowess is the goal, CW's really aren't the speaker for the job.

I'm just trying to help the OP decide if he should return them or not, as the speakers are in his possession, he's on the hook for over 6 large, so he might as well try everything.

As far as the merits of time/intensity trading, JBL published papers in the AES decades ago on the topic. It really works, and happens to work with the OP's speakers. The center phantom image will be rock solid. It won't move to the right or left, even if the listener does. Try that with a stereo pair of wide dispersion speakers and the image will collapse into the nearer speaker the more the listener moves away from the sweer spot.


Now THAT is utter nonsense.
They can produce a sound stage, but not a realistic one.

My Family room speakers have excellent dispersion, but they lock a really solid central image where ever you are.

I think part of this is the pop music cult. Pop aficionados seem to tolerate, and even like those horn loaded narrow dispersion speakers. But play an orchestral, chamber or choral music through them and they make an absolute hash of it. So they a very much single genre speakers. I never listen to that genre.

The other issue is that when I do analyze music from the pop culture within WaveLab, the recording techniques are more often then not poor. In particular the wave scope shows pretty much a strong adherence to the vertical axis, with very little spread to the horizontal axis. Whereas the classical recordings in the main produce vivid circular waves on the spectroscope, with about even proportions on the horizontal and vertical axes.
 
D

duder1982

Enthusiast
I think you all have some great points, but are more than likely way off track on helping the op. At the end of the day if the speakers don't sound good to him in his environment, then he needs to move on.

@TLS Guy what speakers do you run that you speak so highly of? Maybe those may be a better fit for the OP?
 
TLS Guy

TLS Guy

Seriously, I have no life.
I think you all have some great points, but are more than likely way off track on helping the op. At the end of the day if the speakers don't sound good to him in his environment, then he needs to move on.

@TLS Guy what speakers do you run that you speak so highly of? Maybe those may be a better fit for the OP?
I design and build my own, so they will not help the OP.



Main speaker triamped active, and the center biamped active.



This is an FR and dispersion pattern of a main speaker. There is good dispersion to 7 kHz, were all tweeters will start to beam.



Aperiodically damped transmission line speaker.

 
highfigh

highfigh

Seriously, I have no life.
Are those the 30w? If so, I know where there might be 5 of them.
Yes- 30W but I don't have 12 grand for woofers. If you can buy one or more and it won't break the budget, I would do it.

These are a "What would you buy if you get a chunk of money- I would create a dedicated music/AV room and do it right. Since the cabinets can be made to fit them into a corner, they wouldn't waste a lot of space in the room.
 
Eppie

Eppie

Audioholic Ninja
Power does not wake speakers up. However the undiscerning often don't miss deep bass, as most of what is perceived as bass is actually above 60 Hz. So a speaker with good solid performance to 60 Hz, will not sound bass deficient on a lot of program. Most of the old Altecs rolled off around 60 Hz, and yet their bass was sought after.
I am very tempted to start a separate thread on this as it is topic that I have long been curious about. I play electric bass and also listen to a lot of rock music. The low E string on a bass is 41Hz which is well below the stated +/- 3dB frequency response of most speakers. Many players use 5 string basses now where the low B is 31Hz. Those notes are still audible on bookshelf speakers, but compared to the real thing they sound anemic and lacking "punch" or energy. The same would hold true for the bass string section of an orchestra which also plays down to E (and there are 5 string double basses as well). The low E (41Hz) is a very common note so pretty much all speakers must be able to produce it, albeit at varying levels.

The logical conclusion is that the important factor becomes the slope at which the bass rolls off, or the -6dB and -10dB points, which few manufacturers list. Boundary gain also needs to be taken into account, but that will vary greatly between speaker models and room configurations. My Studio 20's are rated down to 54Hz +/- 2dB and from the graphs on Stereophile look to be -7dB at 40Hz and -14dB at 30Hz. Without subwoofers those low bass notes will never have the same impact as the live instrument. My bass cabinet, for example, uses a 15" Electrovoice driver that has no problems getting down to 30Hz. It's no surprise that the 7" woofer in the Studio 20 can't compete. As Mr Boat would say, you can't beat displacement.

Unless you have true full range speakers, this just reinforces the importance of having properly integrated subs to cover the below 60Hz content. For the "undiscerning" that you mention, I think ignorance is bliss, as they say. You don't miss what you don't know about. Once you have heard a system that reproduces deep bass properly, though, it's hard to go back.
 
highfigh

highfigh

Seriously, I have no life.
I am very tempted to start a separate thread on this as it is topic that I have long been curious about. I play electric bass and also listen to a lot of rock music. The low E string on a bass is 41Hz which is well below the stated +/- 3dB frequency response of most speakers. Many players use 5 string basses now where the low B is 31Hz. Those notes are still audible on bookshelf speakers, but compared to the real thing they sound anemic and lacking "punch" or energy. The same would hold true for the bass string section of an orchestra which also plays down to E (and there are 5 string double basses as well). The low E (41Hz) is a very common note so pretty much all speakers must be able to produce it, albeit at varying levels.

The logical conclusion is that the important factor becomes the slope at which the bass rolls off, or the -6dB and -10dB points, which few manufacturers list. Boundary gain also needs to be taken into account, but that will vary greatly between speaker models and room configurations. My Studio 20's are rated down to 54Hz +/- 2dB and from the graphs on Stereophile look to be -7dB at 40Hz and -14dB at 30Hz. Without subwoofers those low bass notes will never have the same impact as the live instrument. My bass cabinet, for example, uses a 15" Electrovoice driver that has no problems getting down to 30Hz. It's no surprise that the 7" woofer in the Studio 20 can't compete. As Mr Boat would say, you can't beat displacement.

Unless you have true full range speakers, this just reinforces the importance of having properly integrated subs to cover the below 60Hz content. For the "undiscerning" that you mention, I think ignorance is bliss, as they say. You don't miss what you don't know about. Once you have heard a system that reproduces deep bass properly, though, it's hard to go back.
OK, but the frequency that's most prominent from a bass is the first harmonic, which is double the frequency of the fundamental, unless you pick/pluck the string at the 12th fret. At that point, the string is acting as a half-wave, rather than a full wave, if viewed on video with incandescent lighting.
 
newsletter

  • RBHsound.com
  • BlueJeansCable.com
  • SVS Sound Subwoofers
  • Experience the Martin Logan Montis
Top