Looking for my Final Pair!!

You certainly seem to have a lot of free time on your hands Raul.

I will assert my privilege and ask of you, Raul, to stop disagreeing with me!  Thanks 🙏🏻 

Bruno's comments contradict Raul's conclusion. Bruno teaches that a larger cone can get the job done with less excursion (which means 'lower distortion' in this case). The Klipsch has a 15" woofer, which is a larger cone resulting in less excursion. Bruno then uses the example of a 1KHz tone intermodulated thru Doppler Effect (with a high excursion cone); the Klipsch woofer is crossed over at 700Hz.

Because the Klipsch horn is well active at 1000Hz it masks the lower level distortions of the woofer at the same frequency in the same way that this occurs with many other loudspeakers. Bruno's comments support the idea that the Klipsch is a lower distortion loudspeaker insofar as its woofer is concerned.


We can see from this conversation that so far no particular argument has been leveled at the woofer itself. If there is a weak argument (re. Bruno) for distortion it would have to be about the crossover frequency not the woofer.

Occam's Razor is the oldest scientific principle. It teaches that given two explanations, the simpler one is probably the right one. We have Raul's remonstrations as the complex explanation, and we have the far simpler explanation: In a nutshell Raul was/is simply wrong; we see this in spades from Bruno's text, which explains why the Klipsch is a lower distortion design.

Dear @roxy54  : I can see in this thread that some of you ( including that stupid. ) posted everything against my posts even laugjhin of me and yes is very easy to make critics to any one posts when those critics has not to be proved by facts that were used as the critics foundation.

I can't see/read here to any of you posted any single contribution that can helps to improve the quality sound reproduction of the OP or in any of your systems.

Applaud is not a contribution and makes more damage than helps in any way.

Forums are places ( for me. ) where we can learn ( that's why I post, trying always to learn or help. ) or confirm what we already knew, it is a " win to win " excersice: no one is defeated but here some want to beat the other person ( in this case me. ) and try to do it with no first hand experience facts to do it.

I don't post to beats any one, this kind attitudes is almost the rule in the audio forums and is way wrong.

So instead to follow making useless/futile critics ( including Dave. ) my advise to all of you is to make true contributions that in any way can enhance the different issues developed through any thread.

Btw, I learned, by " test and error " , several years ago the critical and main characteristic that impedes to any system to have top quality sound reproduction and that has a name: IMD levels.

My ADS goes down to below 18hz and is designed to run with a stereo amp or to run in bi-amp way ( with out using external crossover. ) as many other speaker manfacturers designs.
Bi-amp works really good and enhance the quality level sound reproduction. Latter on ADS made it a dedicated external crossover for my speakers and obviously I bougth it and I achieved higher quality sound reproduction levels.
All those gaves me some kind of first hand experiences about and then I asked my self: why not add subwoofers? that in those times was a crazy idea due that my ADS goes really low but even that I tryed and for may self I step by step learned about that IMD.
For my self and not through links information or advise of other gentlemans else where.

That's why I posted in Agon the " old " subwoofer thread with foundation mainly as the subs main target is not to achieve better and lower bass range but to put at minimum the IMD developed by the passive woofers in speakers and as a side advantage better and lower bass.

Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.

Gotta love Raul...keep chasing those DISTORTIONS 🔊