Klipsch Cornwall IV

i too wonder about comparison to o/96 or even o/93

i have heard earlier cornwalls not the iv version...to my ear, live-sounding for sure but highly colored, honky horn nature in the midrange and upper bass area, slight rasp/grit to treble leading edges... lil hard to believe the new speaker is a ’whole new deal’ as some proponents espouse... not to knock it as i just haven’t heard it, and am not motivated to try it in my own system but i just wonder when i read the posts

been burned and disappointed by so many purported solutions over the years to the full range dynamic speaker driven by sweetie pie flea watt amps

Well I guess I'm one of the fan bois.

I have owned 1987 CW IIs and Bob Crites Cornscalas. The CW IV is very much improved on the earlier cornwalls and also head and shoulders above a stock cornscala.

That said, if you have an aversion to (good) horns, you still might not like it. What I'm saying is, if you value a speaker that never offends, but also never engages, you won't like the CW. If Sonus Faber and  Harbeth appeal to you, you won't like the CW.

But if you value fleshed out midrange detail, good instrument tone and of course, whip crack dynamics, then you might like the Cornwall IV.

Oz

@jjss49 I would love to try a pair of 0/96's or 93's; however, they rarely come up for sale on the used market for a price I can entertain.

ozzy i like that description of who may like cornwall 4 and who won't - generalization but still helpful.

@kren0006 Yes it is a generalization. I can appreciate what other designs do and enjoy listening to them. My buddy has a pair of Focal Kanta 2s that I like every time I hear them. But I wouldn't trade him even for my cornwalls, and I'm sure he feels the same way.

Oz