russ69

It may be a simple loose connection on one of the speakers. It has happened before. If it is under warranty, give Klipsch a call.

I find it difficult to make general statements on loudspeaker design. There are many ways to skin a cat, and some executions of designs are better than others.

Do that first. Next see if you can borrow the Yamaha you like, then go from there.

It's a hobby, blow the walls out if you wish. Tens of thousands is not too much to spend on a hobby, enjoy. For me personally, I enjoy my more affordable systems but my reference system really gets my juices flowing. It's hard to think about downsizing...

I'd get a beater pair of Heresys and a old used receiver until I was out of school.

I can only speculate having never heard the Heathkits. It is a 1950s design and the noise specification looks a little high. They may be great, I just don't know but are they as valuable as a pair of LaScalas? I wouldn't think so unless they are collectable for some reason. I would much rather have a pair of Quicksiver Horn Monos. We know those are first rate power amps. That's what I would look at.

If it was me I'd get a pair of Quicksilver Monos and a preamp later on. The Quicksilvers are sweet and powerful.

I have a Mac402 (400 WPC), I would not match that with Khorns. How about a nice tube amp?

Just about any EL-34 though I have my favorites....like my dual six pacs!

Just a guess but the longer the arm the lower the resonant frequency. The idea is to get the arm to resonate above the audio band.

You NEED a tube integrated. Horn and tubes are a great marriage.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AM_stereo Initially adopted by many commercial AM broadcasters in the mid to late 1980s, AM stereo broadcasting soon began to decline due to a lack of receivers (most "AM/FM stereo" radios only receive in stereo on FM), a growing exodus of music broadcasters to FM, concentration of ownership of the few remaining stations in the hands of large corporations and the removal of music from AM stations in favor of news/talk or sports broadcasting. By the turn of the millennium, most of the former AM stereo broadcasters were no longer stereo or had left the AM band entirely.

Well I don't use them often but the frequency steps (test tones) are useful, the test where they walk around the studio for positioning of playback and also the left/right channel test (on complicated systems it's easy to get the wires crossed or reversed). The absolute phase test is not as useful for me, I can't hear the difference. The dynamic range drum cut is always fun.

Yes, the front baffle where the drivers screw in. Top/side panels are fine. Issue is only on one speaker. That is commonly called the motor board. A baffle would be behind a motor board.

I think it's the same thing? I have had very good success with this on various systems and all 5 of my systems are dead quiet. Here's a linky: http://www.upscaleaudio.com/a-discussion-about-idle-hiss/

I've had some luck using a pad (attenuator) between the pre-amp and amp. You only need about 3 or 6 db in most cases with normal efficiency loudspeakers. They are a lot cheaper than buying a new amp.

Useful...I don't have the time to be an all around expert so input from those with specific expertise is most welcome. But the point is that grapheme may eliminate this "pay to play" make them cheaper than dynamic driver based systems. BTW...graphene is essentially transparent which could make for some interesting designs. Dave Time will tell but since I'm living in the current world (for now) I just wanted to say that today's electrostatics are a major improvement from the 20 year old designs. The Sanders system is just lovely sounding with few drawbacks. It was an interesting post for sure.

If you want to play, you have to pay. But seriously, the newer systems have a lot fewer issues than in the past and are quite efficient. I play mine with 25 watt tube amps. The larger systems are also much better than in the past and relatively affordable.

.... I have heard many instances of audio sounding "just like" a live orchestra -- although it usually does not.... I have heard some very fine systems in my time. The idea is to get a reasonable reproduction of recorded music and let your imagination fill in the missing parts. Every system has a weakness, so if you are a critical listener you will hear and know the weakness. You can't get around that but the whole idea is to get a satisfying system and that is good enough to create a decent allusion but it's never as good as the real thing.

Clocking is wrong. The bolts should be rotated until the correct torque setting is achieved, they end up where they end up.

Welcome.

I agree with Thebes. In my 40 plus years of Hi-FI, I have never walked into a listening room and thought; "Geeze that sounds just like the philharmonic orchestra, right there in my room". It never happened and never will. I play recorded music on my system, that's what it does. It doesn't create a live orchestra and it is not designed to.

I owned the original Series I and I have a pair of Series VI sitting here in boxes. They truly suck now. The series I were much better but have limitations on the frequency extremes, among other issues.

RF25s are warmer than 602s.

Are we talking current production? Both Onkyo and Marantz are what I call mass consumer electronic products and I have no experience with those kind of products. Also I don't think Heritage Klipsch have a forward aggressive signature at all. My H3s are very neutral. Perhaps you can ask a more detailed question and include the model numbers you are trying to compare.