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
You have me there since I'm not familiar with horns I can't speak on the progress. Does the first LaScala sound the same as one bought today? if so I really should have stocked up as prices have gone up x10.
@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.
My buddy upgraded from the lascalas to the klipsch corner horns and the differences were quite audible and educational back in the day.
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