2-Channel Audio

Re: Official August 9th Palladium Listening Party Thread!

dtel — Thu, 14 Aug 2008 02:50:06 GMT

mikebse2a3:

dtel:

Darn, now I will have to go look it up !
Here you go dtel

Luddite
Function: noun
Etymology: perhaps from Ned Ludd, 18th century Leicestershire workman who destroyed a knitting frame
Date: 1811
: one of a group of early 19th century English workmen destroying laborsaving machinery as a protest; broadly : one who is opposed to especially technological change
— Luddite adjective
mike tn

I had looked it up just before I posted, but I did have to look it up !

Ok that does not describe me, actually looking at something not even out yet it's so new !

Re: Official August 9th Palladium Listening Party Thread!

mikebse2a3 — Thu, 14 Aug 2008 02:31:37 GMT

DrWho:
Obviously the Klipsch engineers chose midrange clarity over bass performance, but apparently some would have rather had the bass...I just wonder how many are drawing hasty/ignorant/arrogant conclusions...

Happens all to often in Audio sometimes by the best of us

Non-Luddite

mike tn

Re: Official August 9th Palladium Listening Party Thread!

mikebse2a3 — Thu, 14 Aug 2008 02:22:28 GMT

DrWho:

mikebse2a3:
So why did you feel the luddist comment was needed here Mike? Please explain futher!
It was directed solely at Larry's "maybe..." comment about the P-39 bass and had nothing to do with "technology" - let alone the age of the technology.
mikebse2a3:
So to say that people that still find value in older technology as luddist when they aren't totally satisfied with newer technology is ridiculous.

I agree - and I never said that!

Btw, technology is only a means to an end and it is the end that defines whether or not something is good, not the tool that was used to get there.

Thats my point Mike luddite is about someone opposed to technology and for whatever reason Larry feels as he does it has nothing to do with him being opposed to technology IMO and shouldn't be used in a response to him.

mike tn

Re: Official August 9th Palladium Listening Party Thread!

mikebse2a3 — Thu, 14 Aug 2008 02:02:51 GMT

dtel:

Darn, now I will have to go look it up !

Here you go dtel

Luddite

Function: noun
Etymology: perhaps from Ned Ludd, 18th century Leicestershire workman who destroyed a knitting frame
Date: 1811
: one of a group of early 19th century English workmen destroying laborsaving machinery as a protest; broadly : one who is opposed to especially technological change
— Luddite adjective

mike tn

Re: Official August 9th Palladium Listening Party Thread!

dtel — Thu, 14 Aug 2008 01:50:55 GMT

Mallette:

AMEN, dtel
BTW, I think the word is "luddite." Perhaps there are variants of which I am unaware. Anyway, I aren't one.
Dave

Darn, now I will have to go look it up !

No reason for any personal attacks from anyone really,..........my opinion is the correct one anyway ! " IMO "

Re: Official August 9th Palladium Listening Party Thread!

Mallette — Thu, 14 Aug 2008 01:42:25 GMT

AMEN, dtel

BTW, I think the word is "luddite." Perhaps there are variants of which I am unaware. Anyway, I aren't one.

Dave

Re: Official August 9th Palladium Listening Party Thread!

dtel — Thu, 14 Aug 2008 01:39:27 GMT

" Also remember that most of us are a bunch of cheap ba$$tard$ "

Oh that hurt, JM but very true !

I don't believe the Palladium was designed to compare to any previous Klipsch, it's a new market for these.

Also could be said for the Jub's and all the other lines Klipsch makes, Like Michael C says " Choose your weapons"

The best thing anyone could do is listen, and put your money where it sounds best to you, it's all a personal choice in the end anyway.

Don't worry be happy

Re: Official August 9th Palladium Listening Party Thread!

DrWho — Thu, 14 Aug 2008 01:15:43 GMT

mikebse2a3:
So why did you feel the luddist comment was needed here Mike? Please explain futher!

It was directed solely at Larry's "maybe..." comment about the P-39 bass and had nothing to do with "technology" - let alone the age of the technology.

mikebse2a3:
So to say that people that still find value in older technology as luddist when they aren't totally satisfied with newer technology is ridiculous.

I agree - and I never said that!

Btw, technology is only a means to an end and it is the end that defines whether or not something is good, not the tool that was used to get there.

Re: Official August 9th Palladium Listening Party Thread!

DrWho — Thu, 14 Aug 2008 01:02:43 GMT

mikebse2a3:
DrWho:
Room acoustics....it totally dominates the bass response. The room that had the P-39's has the best bass response with the speakers in the corner - pulled out like that there were quite obvious suck outs from the modal distribution.
I agree the room acoustics greatly determines the bass response of a system.
How do you know your above statement to be certain Mike? Why couldn't the P39s placement be setup to minimize the modal problems and are you saying if the P39s were placed in the corners they would have performed better?
mike tn

I've heard lots of speakers in that room, but the bass never sounds right unless the speakers are in the corners - which tends to work out well for Khorns. In fact, even the Jubilees sound like they have absolutely no bass when they're not in the corners....which is one reason why an AB between them and the khorns didn't happen at the pilgrimage the year before last. I actually got to hear them just inside the khorns in that room and it was rather horrid sounding actually. I believe I also got to hear some Synergy style speakers in that room too...and again, same problem.

The thing about modal problems is that the suckouts don't exist in every single position in the room.....when walking around, you'll know real fast when you can hear the "missing" frequencies suddenly jump out at ya. This wouldn't happen if the speaker wasn't pumping out those notes in the first place!

But even despite that, it's kinda easy to tell when something is a modal dip versus a natural performance of the speaker....they simply sound different. I want to say extremely different, but that's probably not fair because I've made a positive effort to learn to hear the difference - so it's just second nature now.

Just to provide some rational behind that...speakers don't randomly notch out narrow frequency bands (unless the xover is outta whack, but the bass anomalies weren't happening at 400Hz) - nor do they ever roll off the bottom end at a million dB/octave. Modal effects on the other hand are very narrow Q and very dramatic. Modal effects also have a time smear issue with them too....you can sense that the direct sound is there, but then the standing wave builds, cancelling the sound at the listening position, and you're left hanging - wondering where the impact went. It's like the impact is there without the reinforcement...kinda like the difference between splashing water in your face and getting your face shoved into the sand from a wave in the ocean. I've actually done some psuedo AB listening where I add EQ to emulate the frequency response of a room mode....the sound is totally different (which means the time smear is likely the contributing factor there).

Anyways, the reason the P39s couldn't have been positioned for better bass response is because the P39 probably doesn't sound very good when tucked into a corner. I would expect this to mostly be a direct result of the loss of pattern control in the squawker, which would in turn push the P39 into sounding way too warm when in the corner (not to mention the comb-filtering at the higher frequencies). You also naturally get a better direct to reflected sound ratio when the speakers are pulled out a ways, not to mention early reflections will have a larger path to travel, which in turn dramatically improves your Haas window effects. It's really no wonder why a lot of the super high end systems have the speakers out away from the walls....or totally flushmounted with irregular room geometries (as is the case in a lot of the nicer studios).

So all that to say, you could probably yield better bass performance by tucking them into the corners, but it's going to come at the cost of some midrange clarity and shifting the tonal balance of the speaker. Obviously the Klipsch engineers chose midrange clarity over bass performance, but apparently some would have rather had the bass...I just wonder how many are drawing hasty/ignorant/arrogant conclusions...

Re: Official August 9th Palladium Listening Party Thread!

mikebse2a3 — Thu, 14 Aug 2008 00:37:17 GMT

DrWho:

Of course I now also have measurements to back it up too. How much more luddist can we get?

So why did you feel the luddist comment was needed here Mike? Please explain futher!

Like Damon's comments earlier just because some one points out a weakness/flaw in one area of older technology doesn't make all areas of said technology flawed (nor is newer technology flawless) and without value and the people that still respect what is right about the older technology are not luddits (you both do realise many so called audophiles would call us Horn Lovers luddits). So to say that people that still find value in older technology as luddist when they aren't totally satisfied with newer technology is ridiculous.

mike tn

Re: Official August 9th Palladium Listening Party Thread!

mikebse2a3 — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 23:56:31 GMT

DrWho:

Room acoustics....it totally dominates the bass response. The room that had the P-39's has the best bass response with the speakers in the corner - pulled out like that there were quite obvious suck outs from the modal distribution.

I agree the room acoustics greatly determines the bass response of a system.

How do you know your above statement to be certain Mike? Why couldn't the P39s placement be setup to minimize the modal problems and are you saying if the P39s were placed in the corners they would have performed better?

mike tn

Re: Official August 9th Palladium Listening Party Thread!

DrWho — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 22:59:29 GMT

LarryC:
DrWho:
Room acoustics....it totally dominates the bass response. The room that had the P-39's has the best bass response with the speakers in the corner - pulled out like that there were quite obvious suck outs from the modal distribution.
So the P-37's were pulled out and the sub had little to do with the bass in that room, while I was mis-hearing nodal suckouts in the other room? Maybe... [edit] but I doubt it.

I didn't pay real attention to the P37 room so can't comment there other than the THX room is very bass friendly.

However, there is absolutely no doubt in my mind about the bass performance of the P-39's, which was easily verified by walking around the room at Klipsch or just listening in Damon's room. But to be honest, I really didn't need to walk around the room at Klipsch....it was incredibly easy to tell from the listening position.

Of course I now also have measurements to back it up too. How much more luddist can we get?

Re: Official August 9th Palladium Listening Party Thread!

DrWho — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 02:13:47 GMT

Mallette:
As to your questions, Mike, I have not a clue. I would ASSUME the folding had something to do with a 32' horn being impossible and the folding of little loss other than the 30' or so that made any sales rather unlikely. As to the tweeter, you tell me. I don't even know what tweeter is in mine...but it sho' nuff tweets.

Well to avoid going way off topic, I was trying trying to provide examples of where PWK took aesthetics/marketeability into account. I agree that it's absurd to even think someone would purchase a 32' long horn, but if you follow the physics towards ideal performances that's where you're gonna end up.

Btw, the K403 is the perty wooden horn shown in the Jubilee pic with PWK from CES.

Re: Official August 9th Palladium Listening Party Thread!

Mallette — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 02:01:06 GMT

Now we are getting somewhere... Remember, I've not heard these and have only the bias that comes with assuming excellence from anything Klipsch.

As to your questions, Mike, I have not a clue. I would ASSUME the folding had something to do with a 32' horn being impossible and the folding of little loss other than the 30' or so that made any sales rather unlikely. As to the tweeter, you tell me. I don't even know what tweeter is in mine...but it sho' nuff tweets.

Dave

Re: Official August 9th Palladium Listening Party Thread!

j-malotky — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 01:53:52 GMT

Underwhelmed... No Way.

Like I have said before, I heard detail on recordings on Damon's P's that I never heard with my Khorns.

The midrange is increadible. The bass is much faster and more accurate than the horn loaded predisessors. As compared to my Khorns I heard more realistic drum and bass reproduction on Damon's P39s.

My earlier comparison was "accuracy" vs "presense". The winner of Accuracy went to the P39, Presense to the large Heritage. How do you describe "presense? My definition of "presense" is the ease of wall shaking at low and modest volumes.

I would really like to hear Some VRD's or Scott's BAT on these. The best my Khorns ever sounded was when Scott brought his BAT over to my house.

As for the number of replies. Think about how many people on the forum have heard the P39. Maybe 40-50 at Indy and 20 more at Damon's house. Now compare that to the number of people who have heard Heritage. The ratio is probably something like 8000 to 1.

Also remember that most of us are a bunch of cheap ba$$tard$ and or need to mod our speakers every few months. The P39 is way out of most peoples budget as compared to a used set of Heritage. And no one is going to mod a P39.

I don't think the lack of chatter says anything about the overall feelings about the new P speakers.