I was thinking about do this and wanted to get some feedback from those that have done this.  I have a pair of Chorus II's and a pair of KLF-20's.

Thanks.

You mean like one of these bullet tweeters?  I don't know that I would advise that... if you thought some people thought Heritage lines were "harsh" before - these thing sound like two metal plates scraping against each other... *cringe*

My K'horns and Cornwall came with really super tweeters...

Dave

I want to hear one of these Tannoy super tweeters.

http://www.usspeaker.com/Tannoy%20Supertweeter-1.htm 

Have you verified you can actually hear above 15khz? 

mdeneen:

Have you verified you can actually hear above 15khz? 

Did you say something?

mdeneen:

Have you verified you can actually hear above 15khz? 

Well if an amp can produce anomalies in frequencies above 20khz in such a manner as to eliminate it from contention as a valid amp, then who to say how high we can hear.

mdeneen:

Have you verified you can actually hear above 15khz? 

Indeed.  However, it is my belief (scientifically unsubstantiated by any available evidence of which I am aware) that the presence of harmonics that may be inaudible in themselves has impact on audible lower frequencies. 

There has to be a reason why extremely wide frequency response recordings seem to be more "open" and "airy" than those that are restricted even though the "restriction" may be at frequencies many of us cannot hear directly.

Dave

Yes, I bought a pair of vintage JBL 075 Alnico V bullet tweeters and was thinking I could use them either with my KLF-20's or Chorus II's.

From somebody's description of the JBL 075 bullet tweeter:

"JBL developed the 075 as a "super-tweeter" to extend the high-frequency range of the larger midrange horns (using i.e. a 375 driver), or to be used as a tweeter in a two-way system with an "extended range" (i.e. D130) bass driver. The physical quality is superb - the front of the horn is machined aluminum, with a huge magnet of about 5 pounds, made from Alnico V. The rated frequency range is "from 2500 cps to beyond the limit of audibility". Its response is very even across its rated 90-degree dispersion angle. They are rated at 16 ohms, but rumor has it that all JBL 075s are the same impedance regardless of whether they say 8 ohms or 16 ohms."

mdeneen:

Have you verified you can actually hear above 15khz? 

No I haven't but I'd like to give the pretty tweeter a spin anyway. If it is one thing I have learned it is to at least give everything you can a chance. I'd love to give these a spin.

Mallette:

mdeneen:

Have you verified you can actually hear above 15khz? 

Indeed.  However, it is my belief (scientifically unsubstantiated by any available evidence of which I am aware) that the presence of harmonics that may be inaudible in themselves has impact on audible lower frequencies. 

There has to be a reason why extremely wide frequency response recordings seem to be more "open" and "airy" than those that are restricted even though the "restriction" may be at frequencies many of us cannot hear directly.

Dave

The acoustic side is not the same as the electrical side.  

Mark:

>The acoustic side is not the same as the electrical side. 

After I sent that it occured to me that, properly recorded, any such interactions would be audible on a CD even if caused by harmonics beyond the range of a CD. 

Is that what you are saying? 

As you know, I have come to believe through experiments to which you've been privy that the limitations of 16/44.1 are not as severe as what we've been served up had us believing.  OTOH, there ARE audible differences in this sampling rate compared to higher resolutions. 

In my case, I know I have little after 13khz in one ear and barely 15khz in the other, so I remain mystified as to why I can hear these differences. 

Regards,

Dave

mdeneen:

Have you verified you can actually hear above 15khz? 

Thats what I'm talkin' about!

Don

Honk if you love Horns

Mallette:

As you know, I have come to believe through experiments to which you've been privy that the limitations of 16/44.1 are not as severe as what we've been served up had us believing.  OTOH, there ARE audible differences in this sampling rate compared to higher resolutions. 

In my case, I know I have little after 13khz in one ear and barely 15khz in the other, so I remain mystified as to why I can hear these differences. 

Bruce 

Bruce:
I like the SACD spec, but recorders have been way too expensive and there is (to my knowledge) no way of distributing the files without transcoding to PCM or making a SACD disc, for which almost nobody has a player. 

My plan at the moment is to acquire a Sound Devices 744T, about 4k new.  It's good to 24/192X4 and I believe that is about all the resolution anybody needs (not that I wouldn't use more if there was more...more is good, and how can I know what YOU hear?).

Further, even with my limitations I seem to be able to detect nuances and such that many younger ears miss entirely.  My goddaughter and her husband are nerd/geek/artists (she owns a highly successful web design studio) and they listen to new age music mp3's all day.  They get irritated when I ask just how they can stand the sound of castrated music grating on their ears constantly.  They have no idea what I am talking about.  I do not understand it. 

As a young man my hearing extended well into the ultrasonic to at least 22khz.  I could clearly hear "silent" audio based motion detectors in banks and such (actually quite painful when I stepped right under one).  Wish I still had that problem, but I wonder if I don't at least still have the memory.

Dave