Number 9

Hey, I tried it too at one time. Maybe I should not have said "everyone". Let's put it this way, there are purists who have moved on to more sophisticated approaches than just a summed channel. I can see the logic with Klipschorns, that are wide apart in a room, to avoid a hole in the middle effect.

---------------- On 7/1/2005 12:02:09 AM Audible Nectar wrote: For the best overall HT experience (performance, video, and sound), Talking Heads: Stop Making Sense is my favorite. IMO, it is the best concert video of all time. ---------------- Ditto!

There is an old school, and new school approach to this. The old school, which PW Klipsch seemed to advocate at one time, was to have a mono center channel to supplement the discrete right and left channels. An ultimate system at one time, was to have Klipschorns in the corners along a long wall, with a Belle in the center (fed a mono summed signal). Some of the '60s receivers, for example Fisher, offered an output for a summed center channel. Nothing sophisticated about it. But there were three, not two outputs. Many people felt this approach caused more problems than it solved, and pretty much was abandoned by everyone. The New School, uses electronic circuitry to create a center channel based on a variety of techniques, including phase differences between the L and R channels. There are various approaches. Look at James Bongiorno's site for his explanation of his trinaural circuit. http://www.ampzilla2000.com/trinaural.html Meridian adopted some of the approaches floating out there for Ambisonic and Trifield and included these algorithms in the DSP of their uber preamp controller. http://www.meridian-audio.com/m_800_bro_861.htm Do a Google on trifield, ambisonics or trinaural ... you will find various explanations as to the science of this, including a review by Kalman Rubinson of Stereophile of Bongiorno's Trinaural. But just shoving a mono channel in the center as they did back in the '60s ... well, I'm not convinced.

I'm using one with a pair of Forte IIs. I would give it a thumbs up. My only issue is that because the amp is so strong and the speakers are so effecient, for day-to-day listening, I don't get the volume pot much higher than the 8 o'clock position. If I really want to crank, perhaps 10 o'clock. Power to spare.

One of my favourite vinyl LPs I've owned (no more) was the Mobile Fidelity version of Stardust. Just fantastic. The CD version does not even come close, including the re-master.

What goes around, comes around in marketing. Klipsch killed the Forte, Cornwall and Chorus, just when there was a revival starting (thanks to eBay) in vintage gear, and espescially lower-powered tube amps. McIntosh, Scott, Heathkit, Fisher, Eico... quite a few good ones in there. No rocket-science to tell you those who seek out the Forte or Cornwall are very likely using tubed vintage gear. They killed the line because demand had fallen, but I can bet that the demand would have bounced back post-1999. What's left of the Heritage line, safe for the Heresey, is too big for most average people's homes. A 3-way horn speaker, of high effeciency, of reasonable size with a benign impedancee above 8 Ohms, and reasonable price, would sell very well to the the tube amp crowd in my opinion. A Forte/Chorus III - slightly narrower but taller, re-worked crossover would fit the ticket. True, the market for this would not be nowhere as near as big as the home-theater crowd looking at RF-7s, but as long as SET amps are around, they will need easy speakers to get the most of them.

My McIntosh MCD-7005 CDP is based on the Philips TDA1541A, also uses the heavy-duty Philips drive mechanism with glass optics which has become scarce. I installed this little chip that not only replaces the 7220, but also adds a clock buffer, a more accurate clock, and converts to non-oversampling. Swapping one chip is a lot easier than rewiring the pins IMO. Also easily reversible. http://www.net-audio.co.uk/tda1541nos.html Maybe there is ultra-sonic noise going on, who knows ... sounds better to my ears. Maybe I like distortion. I certainly don't "hear" any of the potential negative effects described. My amp is not oscillating, and my Forte tweeters are not frying. Hey, I was skeptical too ... I didn't want to hurt my McIntosh amp or Klipsch speakers. I installed a socket to be able to take the chip in or take it out during my A/B testing, and it always sound somewhat smoother with NOS. Adding a 1541A double-crown chip version also helped, but the biggest improvement overall came by swapping the op-amps in the audio stage. To be honest, my Mc CDP prior to mods never sounded harsh. But these changes overall added a lot more clarity and depth to what I hear. The op-amp swap was probably the most bang for the buck overall. Too bad my McIntosh 7005 did not make into the best all time CDP list ... its built like a tank, and now sounds great (to my ears).

I suggest a search here, has been discussed several times before. Gets people arguing at times. The room size has the most bearing which speaker you go with. If you've got the room for the Chorus (16 x 14 is the minimum in my opinion for these) then go for it, otherwise, the Fortes will be more than just fine in a smaller to normal size room. Some will argue to the death here that the Chorus will sound fine in a closet, but I would caveat those comments.

I had no problem loading, but I have an extremely fast internet connection. This is an amazing accomplishment. Two questions though. If you were going to swap drivers, why use that EV tweeter which others have acknowledged as being only so-so. Maybe a Beyma? The boxes are qute big, I wonder how much they could be reduced if you did not use a dedicated bass bin, such that you used the top portion of the enclosure too. IMO, what you've got more-or-less is a near-ideal Cornwall III if Klipsch were to re-introduce one.

---------------- On 5/15/2005 4:37:49 PM Bill H. wrote: Place them , as you first had them- no closer than 12 inches from the Wall. The neat thing about Fortes, is they have wonderful dispersion of their sound facing straight forward. No need to toe them in..............Enjoy! My experience has been the exact opposite. I have them about 5-7 inches from the back wall, slightly toed-in. After experimentation, this worked out best for me. Strange

---------------- On 5/13/2005 6:09:37 AM Al Klappenberger wrote: Inductors are more important to a filter becasue they are naturally a higher loss component. THEY are the bottleneck, not the caps. ---------------- Pertaining to the Heritage line, So would you say the inductors Klipsch has been using are not great or just fine?

I know its a long shot, but I am hoping someone has compared a good 6L6GC amp (like and MC30) to a 2A3 or 45 amp. Or even a KT-66 to a 2A3 amp. I know, two different animals. I'm just wondering if a fine-tuned 6L6GC amp will get close to a fine 2A3 SET in the midrange.

Hey Dean. When I asked about the Mundorfs over a month ago, you said why not give them a try them and pass along the results, and so I did. You know, they can be made from crapola for all I care. All I know is (IMHO, YMMV), the Mundorf made a bigger difference (improvement) in the midrange than replacing with an Auricap. A smoother, more clear and bigger sound. Is it worth it? Is their marketing mumbo-jumbo going on that that's turning off people? I'm not going to go there. People pay more for Jensen PIOs and rave about those. But give the Mundorfs a try and see what you think before passing judgement. Obviously they can't be placed everywhere unless you are King Solomon, but in some strategic spots, it may be worth using a premium cap (as in the midrange). P.S. I don't own any shares or stock of Mundorf Corp.

I just put in Bob's titanium diaphrams in my Forte IIs this weekend. They balance seemlessly with the midrange, but I do find there is a little bit more energy in the highs than before. In my case, I like it. There may be something else going on which the graphs don't show. Of course, with tweaks like this, it could be just my imagination too. Titanium diaphrams, particularly when they first came out, got a bad rap, but supposedly the newer generations are much better because the self-damping has been improved.

- Has anyone tried something like a FI X 2A3/45 or 300B with Fortes? -

Craig. I don't know if you saw the folllow-up to my earlier post elsewhere, but I tried out the Mundorf Supreme-Oil cap cap this weekend in the midrange xover in my Forte. Very nice improvement over the Auricap which I was using. The V-Cap too has been getting good reviews. Seem comparable in price.

Well its good to hear that I am not alone. maybe more people should give the Mundorfs a try. I have not tried Hovlands or Jensens, which seem to be the favorite caps on the discussion board here, but the Mundorfs should be considered too IMO, given they are a step up to Auricaps, which many say are excellent in their own right.

Well I decided to try and give these a whirl in my Forte IIs, in the midrage. I ordered a pair of 1.5uF caps from www.audiyo.com I put my Fortes within two feet of each other, about 3 feet from the back wall. Set my McIntosh amp to mono, and use the balance control to switch between the two speakers. One with the Mundorf in the midrange xover, the over with an Auricap. I did not spend hours listening for nuances. The differences were quite clear to me after listening to only a few CDs. I focused on those with vocals I am famiiar with ... Louis Armstrong (The Great Summit: Master Takes with Louis Armstrong), Norah Jones, Diana Krall. The vocals on the Auricap'd Forte were evidently drier and colder. Supprising, since the Auricaps have a reputation for being somewhat a warm cap. The Mundorf had a smoother, more detailed but nice warm presentation. The voices floated from the box more freely. I can see someone who loves SET amps and what they do in the midrage, really liking these, or perhaps it could turn out to be too much of a good thing. The difference was not huge whereby I could not tolerate the Auricap anymore, but on close listening, to my ears was fairly easy to discern. They are expensive, not as much as the Jensens, and are also big, barely fitting onto the crossover, but I give them a thumbs up. As always, this is only MHO, and YMMV.

I own an MA-6200 and it is a great value for the money, but I've noticed that the prices have really gone up in the past couple of years, so I guess the word is starting to get out.

_____________________________________________________________________ I owned an MX-110 for a while and thought the BB was a significant improvement. Most of my listening was vinyl which may have something to do with it but to me it was night and day. I really liked the 110 but the transparency of the BB just knocked my socks off. _____________________________________________________________________ Gary, had your MX-110 been updated (e.g. new caps etc..) or was it stock.

Nice!!!!

Stan ... I would add, that when I sold my B&Ws and Linns, the people that I sold them to thought I was crazy going to Klipsch. To each his own. They were happy, and I was happy to move on. Klipsch speakers are a bargain IMO. I think bsafirebird1969 has got the sound chrarecteristics spot on. I would add that the Klipsch Heritage line have a consistent "house sound" across the board. Wheras, Altecs at least to me sounded quite different. The 19 sounded big and laid back to my ears compared to the 18, which was considerably more forward and punchy (almost Klipsch like). I heard a pair of 14s not that long ago, and did not like them too much. They were too low to the ground IMO to get good dispersion. The bass did not seem as good as my Fortes or Cornwalls (from memory). One that I also liked in the Altec line was the Stonehenge with the 15" 604 driver (not the smaller ones). Altecs also seem to need a bit more power than Klipsch if you want to get good bass. Those who like the Altec sound, should keep an eye for Westlake spearkers which were used as Monitors in many recording studios. These used Altec drivers in proprietary enclosures and custom horns. Great sound ...if you have the room.

Don't worry about the power, comes in handy. I used to run my Cornwalls with a Bryston 2B for a while, and the extra wattage did not kill the Cornwalls. I did not like the Bryston sound though, but that's another story.

That list spans thrity years. So this is not stuff I cycled through over the past year and have vivid memories of. Going from Altec (Santana's) at the time to B&W (DM7s) was a huge change, not only in sound but listening philosophy. I went through a "British" phase if can call it, where I thought Linn/B&W/Naim was the ultimate because Stereophile said they were great. A lot of people did that in the '80s. I woke up and got off that bandwagon when I hear a pair of Cornwalls (picked them up for $200) and realized that my listening tastes leaned towords the American sound (and much of that audiophile crap was BS). To me, the Cornies sounded alive. I have Forte IIs now. The point I was trying to make I guess, is that while Altec and Klipsch may sound somewhat different, people who like one will also find an appeal in the other. Its classic, bold American sound.

The progression of my life ... Electroice Altec B&W (big mistake) Linn Klipsch Altec Klipsch Much to be admired in both. I find the Klipsch sound more punchy. Though, I always had a soft spot for the Model 18, which sounds quite different to the Model 19.