Manuel Delaflor

quote: Originally posted by TheEAR: Well I would like Klipsch to design a RF-10 flagship R series speakers with horn loaded midrange.I liked the Cornwall midrange projection.I think Klipsch should continue to horn load their midrange drives(when used). TheEAR(s) Now theears Thanks theears, just exactly what I think. I certainly enjoy to read Im not alone in my intuition! ;-)

quote: Originally posted by ShapeShifter: Not sure if this would raise an impedance issue for some tube amps/receivers. Yes, is a good question. Any of the tube lovers care to answer?

quote: Originally posted by mobile homeless: The vintage EICO HF-81 actually made more music! If we had to really gauge which amps were more musically satisfying, the Wrights came in first, followed by the EICO, then the $2300 Bryston 4B-ST .... You are pretty eloquent regarding this amp. Im actually looking for one just to hear how it sounds! Any hints on where to buy one other than Ebay? I have a brother living in New York, and I bet there could be a store around there carring the EICO, am I right? or what do you suggest. Im willing to bet that this EICO will drive my Heresy's with easy, and very probably anihilating my audio experience with my trusty 30wpc Technics "new class A" amplfier!

Im posting again this question that was lost since the first page of this thread: ______________________________ Good to see you liked them theears (Cornwalls), having as you do, so much expensive gear, is fine to know that you found that the "old Heritage sound" is indeed good. What do you think about the mid horn? I feel that the detailed sound those speakers can make is in part due to the work of this driver. And more importantly, do you think that the new RF-7's sounds more or less than the old Cornwall's? if no, where do you note the differences? Thanks

thanks deang does the RP-5 were in production for little time? how come they appear to be the least reviewed Klipsch? (at least I can't find the reviews). I also want to know how they sound compared to both the new Reference line and the Heritage's I have the Heresy´s, and I want to tell my brother if he will be better with a pair of them instead of the RP-5's?

quote: Originally posted by mdeneen: P.S. I can hear people asking, "What does ANY of this B.S. have to do with speaker wire?" To which my answer would be absolutely everything, and positively nothing. Agreed. The point is, when dealing with the "boundaries of the knowledgeable" or in other words, with matters in which the opinion of the people seems to be more important than the raw data (because no one knows exactly how to represent that data, or even more, what exactly is that data), one have to take the next natural step, and find what is really going on. If one don't do this, one will end with a dogma (An authoritative principle, belief, or statement of ideas or opinion, especially one considered to be absolutely true). This message has been edited by Manuel on 01-25-2002 at 07:00 PM

Lol! quote: Originally posted by Kevin S: Mdeneen, Please take me out of the "science" circle and place me in the "lost" circle, which is where I have been in relation to this thread for the past couple of days.

I definitely choose Philosophy and what I think is its newer branch; Science. How can philosophy is not represented in that chart? ... by the way, I think philosophy holds both, religion and politics.

just a reminder theears, about what I asked above

Colin and Mobile, Thanks for your imputs on Tube amplifiers. I will need to hear some of them soon, you really put me to think about their sound qualities, specially when the Heritage line is used (I own a pair of Heresy's). One question remains, can I attach a sub to a tube amplifier? Because My Heresy's sound great, but they are "helped" by a KSW12, and I don't want to lose the sub, in fact, what I want is to add a bigger sub!

My brother wants to buy some Klipsch speakers, we have seen the Ubid offers and the RP5 are constantly there for around $400 each. How does the RP5 sound compared to the new reference line? or the Heritage line? Thanks!

quote: Originally posted by mobile homeless: "A tube integrated amp is SOOOO much better...I cant stress this enough." "I take it tubes are out of the question?" "But to be honest, the tube integrated walks over the standard low to medium cost solid state amp with such ease, it is almost no contest. Literally. Personally, I think you would agree, even if totally in the SS camp." You need to illustrate me a little. Can you mention a few options on tube integrated amps in good price? (no more than $500). Thanks!

Good to see you liked them theears, having as you do, so much expensive gear, is fine to know that you found that the "old Heritage sound" is still good. What do you think about the mid horn? I feel that the detailed sound those speakers make is in part due to the work of this driver. And more importantly, do you think that the new RF-7's sounds more or less than the old Cornwall's? if no, where do you note the differences? Reading a pair of trained ears is always good. ;-) This message has been edited by Manuel on 01-23-2002 at 09:56 PM

Colin, I do want to believe that review about the AudioSource. But of course I have my reserves on that. I have read the reviews on audioreview.com Granted, you can't trust everything you read in there, but as I can't read the $ensible Sound mag either I have to keep searching for more reviews. Why do you trust their review? can you tell me more details on how do they test? do they publish also graphs or side by side results? Thanks, so far Im really considering either NAD or AudioSource.

Im considering their C350 or C370 Integrated Amplifiers. How are they compared to the "real stuff" like Bryston? The low prices on NAD's means consumer market quality?

My guess is also the phase, or the sub out on the Denon, or something else. A dorm room should be easily excited even with an eight inch sub with 100watts! Huh, and in case it is working ok.... just how much bass do you need? Buy an SPL meter and tell us the dB's from 30Hz to 16hz.

Lol mobile Excellent post mdeneen, I think this should make clear what is a good set of tests to prove (or unprove) any claims. What I would still like, is a quantifiable definition of those oscure terms that most audiophiles always say. Of course I understand them, but as soon as one digs in what they REALLY are, they appear to be composed by nothing but faith and opinions.

Sometimes the harshness and the bright sound are a result of a lack of bass. Most of the time I see people adding subs to their two channel systems and finding that the harshness is gone.

Good to read that theears is going to test the "heritage sound" for the first time. I honestly think he will be impressed. For me, the real "differentiator" between the old Heritage's and the new Reference's is the Mid Horn. I just love the sound it makes. Coupled with a revealing amplifier it can bring details I have yet to hear with any other set of speakers.

t-man where are you?

I beg to differ. I think we must DISCARD any subjective-sensorial questions right from the beggining. Humans are not a reliable source of information regarding his own internal states. If one is going to ask "does this sounds better than this?" one is really asking a personal opinion. Now, you say that questions like "How do the transients compare?" are better. But no. What is the reference (I mean absolute, non relative reference) in what is a "transient" or the "soundstage"? If you say that a human opinions or feelings, then the hole argument is lost. So, the right questions should be based on the external objective plane, common to every listener in the world. Now, how to translate such terms as "depth of soundstage" to the objective plane? That is a really good question to start! This message has been edited by Manuel on 01-22-2002 at 12:08 PM

Where are you?

Really interesting discussion, to say the least. But Im not really concerned by the cables. What I really see (and amazes me) behind all this discussion is the old "I am right you are wrong". Science can deal with all the problems that have arised in here, and this is because science is just a methodology to test claims. True, not all the people who make scientific tests deal with all or most of the variables involved, and this may be specially truth when dealing with subjectivity. Still, one can design a set of experimental conditions that will lead us to the conclusions we all want. First of all, we need to start with specific and well designed questions, then we need to understand fully which are the variables involved, and only then we can design a proper methodology to make the relevant experiments. Now, if this sounds appealing, it could be useful for this discussion that believers and not believers joined to define the question, and then we all be prepared to deal with the next steps... This message has been edited by Manuel on 01-21-2002 at 12:38 PM

toussi1 WHERE?

I agree with Colin. If they miss the lower octaves, they are NOT hearing accurate reproduction. Period.