edwinr

Go the SW450. Make sure you stick it in a corner behind one of your main spealers. It's a good idea to first push it hard in the corner and slowly pull it out until you get the most bass. This helps the sub 'load' the room better. Turn it down after that to a suitable level to match the output of your main speakers. You may wish to experiment with the direction of the port. Sometimes it sounds better firing into the room. Enjoy...

I wonder if all this insanity is contagious.... []

My favorite non Heritage speakers were/are the KG 5.5's, of which my brother is now the proud owner. They were followed by some Heritage speakers all of which were much better than the KG speakers. I first had an older pair of Klipschorns, then a pair of Heresy IIs before I settled on my brand new Belles. The most surprising were the Heresys. I was warned off the Heresys by some, but these 'little' 3 ways sounded fantastic - even without a sub. I have never heard the Heresy IIIs. If they are an improvement on the previous model, they should be in contention for someone with a smaller listening room. With the Heresy IIIs, you can have Heritage and 'new'. I like the cherry finish:

La Scalas DO have the same midrange as the Klipschorn but - for some reason when the same mid range horn is used in a pair of Klipschorns which are properly sealed into good corners, the mids sound so much better. [*-)]

I believe most reputable loudspeaker manufacturers have a 'reference' loudspeaker they use to voice their products. The voicing of the reference product should have been based on 'live' sound, real instruments, the human voice, and such like. It's a very interesting subtopic you have raised, dtel. Perhaps we might have a comment from Klipsch...

I guess not everyone can buy Klipschorns first up. We all have to start somewhere... I really like it when friends come over to my dedicated listening room. I get ribbed because I haven't gone multichannel and I watch and listen to movies in 'steam-age' stereo. They reckon their fantastic 5.1 setups, be it Paradigm, Bose, Klipsch, Energy etc. have the technological edge on my 2 channel system. Then they hear my stereo only 3 way, tube driven horn setup... I have never failed to elicit comments like; 'Wow!' 'OMG!' 'I didn't realize!' 'I have to buy something like this!' And so on and so forth. In saying that, I guess some of the better quality 5.1 systems go someway towards offering a taste of the 2 channel big speaker sound by putting small satellite speakers in various positions around the room. They partly recreate the ambiance and room filling sound of really big stereo systems. If I had just a small speaker 2 channel system, I wouldn't be happy. Many of the new tall and slender products do sound okay when compared with others of their ilk. But when compared with true full range systems, they sound... I don't know, they still sound kind of SMALL, I guess.

I agree with your compromise point. Tall and slender just doesn't cut it for true to life sound. Although some of the tall and slender products can sound okay in smaller rooms. In most cases, WAF issues mean there is no choice, anyway. BUT... as with most things in life, size is everything. Unless near field monitoring is desirable, nothing beats big speakers in a big room. I recently heard the new Martin Logan CLX speakers. Good as the smaller Summits are, the bigger CLXs just blow them out of the water. Similarly there is a massive difference between the Magna Planar MG3.6R and the mighty MG20.1. Comparing my sturdy Belles with the stunning Klipschorn reveals a considerable improvement in soundstaging, dynamics and life like sound. Big IS better. P,S. You need to have a big room too...

My Belles are surprisingly good for most music. They do lack extended bass, but most horn speakers without the Klipschorn's corner reinforcement will not offer huge very low frequency extension. I used to have REL subwoofers, but I sold those. I am considering a SVS PC-ultra sub, bit I'm in no hurry. I drive my Belles with a CEC Classic Tube 53 integrated. I would have bought your La Scalas in a heart beat. You must be very happy with them.

One of the best looking La Scalas I have ever seen... What are you driving them with?

KG 5.5's in medium Oak were my first Klipsch speakers. I sold them to my brother who still has them. My vote is for the 5.5's. Great speakers...

I bought my 3 way horn speakers (Belles) brand new in 2007. NOTHING touches these loudspeakers for realism and dynamics - except maybe another pair of 3 way horns. Listening to small string ensembles or any well recorded music is breathtaking. Whether you buy new or used is not as much of an issue with Klipsch Heritage as other speaker brands. Good sound, design and build quality doesn't go out of style. Regarding the newer Klipsch stuff, I've heard most of it. It's okay too, but the higher level horn loaded gear is much better. The thing is, if you buy the older Heritage gear, you pay the same or similar money for new stuff for something so much better. Of course buying brand new Heritage is the very best way to go. You get the upgraded crossovers, new drivers and cabinets etc... It's simple, really...

I don't know about the design of the speakers. If I saw them in the flesh I reckon I'd have an overwhelming desire to reach for the insect spray...

I agree with the Heresy option. They are much, much better than some folks would have you believe. Especially for smaller rooms. The ultimate solution, however, is to buy a pair of fully horn loaded speakers. Either the Belle/La Scala or even better, the Klipschorn. These speakers sound much more coherent in larger rooms, but do okay in smaller rooms. I would buy for the future rather than current circumstances. If I had my choice, I would go for Klipschorns now, knowing that even in less than ideal room circumstances, you have one of the very best loudspeakers money can buy.

I'm beginning to lean towards the philosophy that the quality of the power is more important than how much power you have...

The bass from the Belles is surprisngly robust. At least it is now that I've repositioned them in the room. I had a pair of REL Strata 5 subwoofers before, and I had to sell them due to some medical bills. I also had to sell my Audio Note amplifier. Fortunately I was able to keep the Belles. To compensate for the loss of the subs, I began experimenting with the room positioning. I read somewhere on the Klipsch Site that the Belles sounded 'better' when pushed into corners. So that's what I did. I rammed them hard into the corners (like my old Klipschorns) and I was rewarded with substantially more lower end punch! (Wow!) But the downside was there was a little boom in the bass - possibly due to room nodes etc. So I gradually pulled the Belles out from the corners until I found a sweet spot where the Belles have decent low end punch without the boom. They sound pretty decent now and I can listen to most MOR CDs like Dire Straits and stuff like that without wishing I had a sub. Classical music sound great and I would probably never desire a sub if that's all I listened to. But a sub is high on my list of things to buy this year. I was thinkiing about a low cost Sub-12 or maybe a RW-12d for a little more money. I've heard good things about the SVS PC-12 NSD as well. Now before I got the CEC tube amplifier, I was driving the Belles with a s/s Pioneer thing. It's about 102 years old and it hisses like a cobra on heat. So I went begging to my old hi-fi store and after I fell in a blubbering heap at the store owners feet, he gave me this CEC amplifer at an outstanding price. In case you're wondering, I haven't paid him yet! OMG! I feel a bit like thebes!!! (Sorry Marty...) So getting back to the CEC Tube 53/Belle issue, I wnated to make sure that this was an okay match, because if I really stuffed up with the amplfier choice, I could take it back, maybe. But based on what you guys said, and the way the CEC has opened right out vis a vis sound quality and music reproduction, I am reluctantly developing a little respect for this little mother. It's not a bad amplifer at all. It has NO hiss at all, Even with my ears right up against the horns. That's pretty impressive. I think, more importantly, the Tube 53 seems to like the Belles. I know there's a lot more to amplifer/loudspeaker matching than mere specifications... Sorry about the ramblings guys. It's just that when I think I know everything about hi-fi... I seem to hit a wall and have to start my knowledge base all over again. [*-)] P.S. Colin, reading that enjoythemusic.com link about the Pass Labs X250 makes me smile when I think of the CEC Tube 53's thumping 7 watts per channel output @ 30Hz!

For those with the Sony Playstation 3, the latest firmware upgrade means you can play 3D games. In a few weeks Sony will release a firmware upgrade meaning you can play 3D bluray discs. Sony will sell 3D glasses for use with the Playstation 3. The only thing Sony hasn't confirmed, is whether you can use your current display. I have a Panasonic PT-AE700 projector (a 720p HD model). I would be disappointed if I had to change this projector in the short term. Maybe Sony's 3D upgrade will be compatible with older displays. BTW, I didn't like 3D at first. But a friend has a new 3D flat screen tv. Watching 'Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs 3D' is a revelation.

Thanks for the comments. Thanks Gil for that interesting article on power requirements. It looks as though the power rating of my amplifier is sufficient for what I want. I can understand those that listen at lower spl's or may have smaller room may require less power. But I like listening LOUD. Those with larger rooms will require more power for the extra headroom. Frankly Craig's VRDs would be ideal. But I got the CEC at a really good price. I have to say, initial listening impressions are very good, although the first few hours sounded very ordinary. After a couple of days, the amplifier opened right up, with crystal clear highs and a surprisngly robust bottom end. The soundstage is excellent as well. I had a Audio Note Soro SE before. The Soro was okay, but I couldn't see the tubes (!) and the bass was a little soft on the Belles. Here's a pic:

Okay... My Belles have a sensitivity of around 103dB @ 1watt/1meter. I am driving them with a CEC Classic Tube 53 amplifier rated at 20 watts per channel. Bench tests have indicated this little amplifier punches out about 14 'clean' watts per channel. I'm trying to work out what maximum spls I can expect in my room with this miserly 14 clean watts. I have searched the web, but this area is a little confusing for the uninitiated. I've kinda worked out that loudspeakers generally require a doubling of amplifier power for a small 3dB increase in spl. And this small increase is only just able to be detected by most people. So, I guess buying a huge and expensive high power amplifier to get more spl's is a waste of time and money for most people. Do I need more than 20 watts for spl's of say - 115dB in my room? Not that I'd ever listen that loud, but it's nice to have some headroom. []

An interesting list. I agree with the Totem and the Maggie. I'm not sure about the others. What about the LS3/5a? For the cost no object list I wold consider the Klpschorns. Maybe Martin Logan CLX. Incidently I heard CLXs last week. All I can say is, wow! Lists like these are just so subjective. But they're lots of fun...

I've tried just about every kind of amplifier with my Belles. They don't seem to mind either way. But I reckon tubes sound best. And they look pretty cool with the lights down...

Hi Colin. Tone Audio is a great read. I like Stereophile too. I used to be an avid reader of TAS, buying the hardcopy regularly. But kids and lack of dollars lately have resulted in me no longer buying this mag.. I also read 'enjoy the music' and 'Positive Feedback'. Any other magazines you could recommend?

I have always understood that many passive preamps are difficult to match correctly to most power amps. Unless of course the pre and power amplifiers have been specifcally designed to go together. I believe Mark is quite correct in what he is saying.

My sincere condolences.

I guess the question is; "Which is better? Stereo or multichannel?" And the answer is; "Done right, they both are..." []

Audible Nectar makes a good point about HT. Lots of current HT hardware doesn't scratch the surface of what HT is really capable of (think of the home-theatre-in-a-box products that are so popular at the moment). And it's not just the hardware. How many movie makers properly exploit the medium? But let me talk about 2 channel. It is unfair to make judgements on this format by merely switching back and forth between the surround and 2 channel options on a HT receiver. Most HT receivers suck on 2 channel. They are not optimized for this format. Why would they be? It would defeat the purpose of paying for those extra channels and processing. Also we should consider whether the software used in any evaluation has been mixed to exploit the advantages of 2 channel listening. How was it recorded? Are the reverberations in the 2 channel mix natural or added later via electronic wizardary? Properly recorded 2 channel music has the most amazing ability to surround the listener with all kinds of sound localization information. I have some recordings that have been made with just 2 microphones. Listening to these recordings makes me feel as though I am actually at the concert. I know good 5.1 can do that too. But I don't have the money to spend on several sub-standard speakers and amplification. I have spent all my money on the best stereo speakers and I can afford. []