Guest jobe Posted March 17, 2004 Report Share Posted March 17, 2004 Hello guys,I saw these huge klh speakers in a second hand store, and could resist to buy them, if it was just only for the looks. They seem to have 2 midspeakers, one high, and a big light brown bass speaker.On the back there are tone controls for mid and high (increase/decrease) The model should be SCX-3A, but i can't find anything on the model on google or anywhere else. It might be a custom job i figured, but it might also not be... (what strong logic ey So, does anyone out there know them/own them, and have some specs for me? For instance the watts and such, cause it doesn't tell on the speakers. Well anyway thanx in advance, greetings from the Lowlands!Bye! papajob@home.nl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest rickcee Posted April 8, 2004 Report Share Posted April 8, 2004 Hi may not be correct, found a little - ( funny, part of the 'research ten' line as mentioned in other post.. . .)KLH SCX-3A 12" bass, 4" mid, 1" dome ( plus '2-DVR' have no idea what that means.?) power 40 w min - 200 oiled walnut finish. drawing looks like tower, no measurements. late '70's Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest biancom Posted June 14, 2004 Report Share Posted June 14, 2004 I have a pair, too. Tall well made columns. Had the woofers refoamed and they still sound terrific. Mine have 3 ribbon tweeters-2 vertically mounted, the other horizontal. There's a 3"x6" port in the top right of the cabinet. Mine could be the 4A models. I bought them for $100 from a friend who bought them new in 1978. He paid $400-500 each. They're not in my main system anymore but they're still nice enough to keep. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest eldoradocaddy Posted July 4, 2004 Report Share Posted July 4, 2004 I sold those speakers back in '77-78-79, info you got in the previous 2 replies sounds accurate to me. Watts are meaningless, The thing that made them a draw at the time was they claimed something like 32-24,000 Hz. +/-2db which was about as flat as anyone would claim back then. They were terribly inefficient, something like 79dB/watt, so a 40 watt minimun is pretty hopeful. I wouldn't sell them to anyone with less than 100, and they were low impedance so it had to be a tough 100.Their flat response and low end extension was the old AR recipe, high mass/low damping on the woofer, which explains the lack of efficiency. They really wouldn't sound "live" without a dynaco stereo 400 or better pushing them, and pushing hard. Even then, really strictly a classical/chamber music sound.The super-tweeter was a predecessor to the EMIT that infinity used (uses) so successfully, called the DVR because its inventor/patent holder was Daniel Von Recklinghausen (exact spelling may differ, but remember, no one else had that piece of trivia...). It didn't make a big splash because 1) they hadn't developed or spent the money for a magnet material strong enough to excite the planar element to extreme detail over a wide enough band, and 2)They had the sense to use the thing within its limits, unlike Infinity, who (at first) applied EMITs over too broad a band with too shallow a crossover slope and far too optimistic a minimum power recommendation. True, the EMIT sounded great, but people burned them out left and right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest eldoradocaddy Posted July 10, 2004 Report Share Posted July 10, 2004 Just a little follow-up, here's a link from the H.H. Scott website with a reference to the DVR/Emit and a long celebration of the accomplishments of Mr. VonRecklinghausen, including some of his wit & wisdom.http://hhscott.com/vonrecklinghausen.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.