moray james

Wuzzer: thanks for the comment regarding your titanium domes on the T35's. Many here seem very pleased with them. I did consider that route but it is almost a third of the cost of a new set of modern tweeters. While the T35's don't sound bad they have a scary response curve and roll early. I see them as the real weak link in the forte ll. I don't suppose that anybody has a set of curves with the new metal domes on a T35 do they? Regarding the new tweeters I think I have decided upon a set of Beyma slot radiators the CP21F. Very good response to 20K and smooth both on and off axis 105 efficient 140 degrees horizontal and 40 degrees vertical. Am hoping this will blend well from a dispersion point of view with the tractrix mid horn on the Forte ll . I may have to pad it down but I don't think that is likely and the only real change will be to install it on the baffle. Can anybody here point me to any threads pertaining to the Tractrix mid horm in the Forte ll? I am particularly interested in curves showing the response on and off axis efficiency and the xover point in the Forte ll. Thanks in advance for any assistance. Regards Moray James.

Have been thinking about upgrading the tweeters in my Forte ll speakers. On my consideration list are the Beyma CP25 which has been sucessfully used to replace the T35 or K77 by Electrovoice. There are also some other Beyma models which look very interesting and might be worth consideration. Each of the following have very good response both on and off axis. They are the SMC2012/N which has incredibly smooth response, the SMC8060 and the CP12N which is vey smooth and while a conical horn is well controlled at 40 degrees. I do not know what the dispersion characteristics of the Forte ll mid horn is and am wondering if any of the faithfull here do. While a similar polar response is probably a safe bet for intigrating a new tweeter into the Forte ll the tight polar response of the CP12N seems very attractive and might help minimize room interaction though the price to pay for this will probably be more toe in than is normal with a Forte ll. I have not yet found out what the prices of these tweeters is but I have sent out a request to Greg Roberts at Volti as he is a Beyma dealer (I would like to support those who contribut here) for unit costs. I would expect that since the CP25 costs about $125.00 each the other tweeters on my list are likely at least that much or or possibly more and that may well be the deciding factor. Like most I don't want to spend any more than I feel I have to. As an aside of interest would be any horn replacements which any of you have found to be sucessful. My guess is that it may be the horn of the T35/K77 which is responsible for a large part of how this tweeter sounds and that the stock phenolic compression driver may in fact be perfectly suitable if mated with a new horn. This approach would also negate any need to touch the crossover in the Forte ll and the only modification necessary would be to the baffle itself. Your comments would be most welcome and any accounts of your experience with any of these or other tweeters or horns would be most useful. Thanks in advance for any assistance regarding this matter.Best regards Moray James. www.beymaamerica.com

Thank you Dennis. I did check with Klipsch but they said they did not give out this info. Much appreciated. Moray James.

I have decided that I don't think that I will play with the crossover myself. I think I will look into an after market version. So that taken care of I am still interested to know if anybody has T/S data for the Forte ll woofer and info on the passive . Then I am also interested if anybody has experimented with time aligning the horn diaphragms with the woofer voice coil. Obviously this precludes using the stock cabinet. Anyone tried this and did you have sucess?

Has anybody got T/S data on the woofer and passive used in the Forte ll? Or has any one measured them? Am interested in runnig some simulations and need the numbers. Thanks Moray James.

Thank you HarryO: I have sent a pm to Dean. Regards Moray James.

I just got a set of Forte ll and am looking at my upgrade options. From reading at the forum it seems that aftermarket titanium tweeter diaphragms are popular. The BEC diaphragms seem to be well regarded but dropping them into a stock xover seems to result in more extension in both directions. While this is supposed to help the tweeter it also results in a bump to the top end of the midrange output when dropped into a stock crossover (the titanium diaphragm has a wider bandwidth than the stock diaphragm) which is not required, So since I have been told that the Forte ll have phenolic diaphragms in both mid and tweeter horns and since I have a bit of a soft spot for phenolic diaphragms I am wondering if a simple lift circuit could be added to the stock Forte ll tweeter crossover section to extend its usable response. I have little to no experience with xover design so I am wondering if anybody here with expertise has done this or would know how? Does this seem like a logical approach and a good alternative to switching to titanium diaphragms.? Any discussion and ideas or suggestions would be most welcome. Thanks Moray James. PS I have the crossover schematic for the Forte ll but have no idea on how to attach it to this post.

Does anybody know if there is a current source for either chrome or brass PWK "V" emblem? Have looked aon ebay did not see any .Checked with Klipsch no luck. Do these only come up used? Thanks for any direction.

Thanks made the connect.

has anybody done any driver mods to Forte ll? Am wondering if there have been sucessful upgrades to the compression drivers and or the bass driver. I just bought a set of 1996 Forte ll and I am considering possible options. Thanks Moray James.

Chris do you have a web site? Am interested to know what you have for Forte ll speakers by way of upgrades. Am checking out what is available. You can Pm me via the form. Thank you.

I don't have any issue with the profile used there are well designed horns that ate exponential which sound great. I was more concerned if the the horn used in say the RF5 and RF7 were up to the task od getting the job done at least as well or better than the two horns used in either a Heresy or Forte ll and no concern to the chosenn profile. I sounds as if it just comes back to limiting the band and spreading the load so each horn is happy and clean when it does its job. I had looked at one of the Paladium three way book shelf speakers but decided to go with either a Heresy or a Forte ll because of the higher efficiency. Has any one auditioned the Paladium bookshelf three ways? The other problem is that with the booksheld designs they all get scaled down so there again you are compromizing the horns performance (in the mid band). Any how I went out this afternoon and checked ot a set of 1996 Forte ll which were in very good condition and decided to buy them as the price was right ($500.00/pr.) The gaskets on the drivers and the passive are leaking so need to be replaced but aside from that they seem to be just fine and sounded good. I have to admit I only got to listen to them for perhaps five minutes and then my ride had to go. So I will pick them up in a day or two and give them a listen then. I wanted to get a good reference quality speaker with high sensitivity to have as a base reference. Your assistance here was very useful. In the next year or so I am planning to pick up the necessary drivers to fit out a set of Unity Horns designed by Tom Danley and built by Nick McKinney. They each use a single 1 inch comp driver with four 5 inch mids and run from 300 Hz. up. Then I will need to get some high effiency bass drivers because I want to run the Unity's as hot as possible. So I have been looking at some Beyma drivers which are over 100 db efficient. I have not even looked at the price yet for fear of shock. The Forte ll's will help me to get acquainted with LOUD speakers.Saving cash will be difficult for me so in the mean time I will probably do some or a lot to the Forte's depending upon how I feel about them. Have been thinking about a new box for the Forte with the passive radiator on the outside walls and a bare frame to position the horns in space above the bass box. Has anybody here done any time allignment of the horns on a Forte ll? Thank you all so much for your kind welcome and most useful advice. It is great to find such a community. I hope you don't think me rude to discuss playing with my new Forte but I don't think Paul would mind. So can you point me into the direction that others here who have taken the road to upgrade their Forte drivers? I don't even know what the diaphragm materials are in the two comp drivers but I do have had a soft spot for phenolic. Am open to any and all suggestions. Best regards from the new member of the club. Moray James.

I have thick old skin and don't take offense easily. I really appreciate the great community here and am thankful to be able to talk to people who own and use Klipsch gear. I hoe that I am not harping on the differences between the horn types too much, but it seems that some think the new plastic single mid/hi Tractrix horns don't deliver the goods. What do you think? Thanks again for the opinions and ideas. Regards Moray james.

lived with dipole electrostaic loudspeakers for a long time I had to get used to playing the room to get the speaker with respect to bass and had similar directional qualities when compared to horn though not quite as directional as some horns are. A forte cabinet which had the passive rariators on the outside cabinet walls (directed toward the room side walls) might make placement a lot easier. However I digress. I am still most interested in the sonic comparrisons of the older Klipsch mid tweeter horns and the newer single mid/hi Tractric horns as used in the R series (RB61 RF5 and RF7etc.). Seems the R&D staff at Klipsch spent some time and money to develope them and had the old standards to compare to. Have they really missed the mark? Did they compromise performance just to save the cost od a small horn tweeter and its associated crossover components?Is there a rift between the old school three ways users and the new school two way with a single mid/hi tractric horn designs? Have the designers lost their way or have the bean counters taken over? Thanks for your input.Regards Moray James.

The size isssue is not my major concern. Though from a visual point of view smaller size is nice. But a Heresy on a small stand or a Forte ll on the floor or an RB61 on a stand all take up fairly similar floor space. To me it is more about the sound. Getting a Forte ll to position in a given room so the bass works and the stage and image work is harder to do than positioning a set of smaller two or three ways with a pair of powered subs. I have had large speakers Acoustat plus series at 7'10" tall and Karlson K15's amoungst others so I have had some big speakers.Bigger speakers require more room and more attention to placement to get them to work their best.

Thank you gentlemen: what a wonerful group of audio friends you are as well as being a supreb support system for Klipsch owners and interested fans. So I am a bit confused. Lets say for the moment that I am more inclined to go with a smaller main and augment with stereo subs. Now it has been commented on that the Heritage line will out perform the new RB series of two way speakers. It has also been said the tractrix mid horn is superior to the older exponential horns of the early Heresy. So aside from the slightly lower efficiency of the RB series they do have a tractrix mid/high frequency horn. So why then are the older squaker and tweeter horns better? I am confused which is better in you (collective opinions). I visited my local Klipsch dealer today and found a new (demo) set if RB61's with full warranty for only $390.00 the pair which seems like a very good deal. Also a pair of RB81's for $612.00 the pair. Yes they both need subs but so do Heresy's or even Forte's if you want deep bass. Does the real difference lie in the comp driver? Both the 61 and the 81 were smooth and well extended with good image and stage even sitting on a shelf. Aside from the efficiency difference (stated as abut 2db) between the new designs and the classics are the older three ways with their more complex crossovers really better and if so in what way or rather what accounts for the superiority of one over the other. I must admit that the price and size are attractive to me for the RB61's so I am tempted purchase these new RB61's rather than to buy an older Heritage set at as high or higher price and still face diaphragm upgrades etc.. I am open to compelling comments either way.Thanks for such great assistance. Regards Moray James.

My appology this is posten in the wrong thread please ignore this post. Regards Moray James.

Thank you gentlemen: what a wonerful group of audio friends you are as well as being a supreb support system for Klipsch owners and interested fans. so I am a bit confused. Lets say for the moment that I am more inclined to go with a smaller main and augment with stereo subs. Now it has been commented on that the heritage line will out perform the new RB series of two ways. I has also been said the tractrix mid horn is superior to the older exponential horns of the early Heresy. So aside from the slightly lower efficiency of the RB series they do have a tractrix mid/high frequency horn. So why then is the older squakers and tweeter horns better? I confused which is better in you (collective opinions). I visited my local Klipsch dealer today and found a new (demp) set if RB61's with full warranty for only $390.00 the pair which seems like a very good deal. A pair of RB81's for $612.00 the pair. Yes they both need subs and so do Heresy's or even Forte's if you want deep bass. Does the real difference lie in the comp driver? Both the 61 and the 81 were smooth and well extended with good image and stage even sitting on a shelf. Aside from the efficienct difference (stated as abut 2db) between the new designs and the classics are the older three ways with their more complex crossovers really better and if so in what way or rather what accounts for the superiority of one over the other. I must admit that the price and size are right of the RB61's so I am tempted rather than to buy old at as high or higher price and still face diaphragm upgrades etc.. I am open to compelling comments either way.Thanks for such great assistance. Regards Moray James.

Thanks guys: I like what high effiency does for a speaker and I like the idea of sattlelight with stereo subs. So what about going with a used RB81 ll with subs? Is the RB81 ll a better speaker thaneither the heresy or Forte in terms of response and stage image qualities?

tragusa3 thanks that was more or less where my thinking was going. I have heard that the Heresy was kind of magic butI don't know which version. Has anybody married the Forte ll mid horn with a Heresy? I do like the idea of smaller main speakers positioned to image and stage well while stereo subs do the grunt work. Are there any good threads or sites which detail the differences in the Klipsch speakers? Thanks.

Thanks James: I am in Calgary and will see if I can find some hard core Klipsch dudes here.

is the mid driver in the Forte ll the same as the Heresy? Is the difference just the flare profile of the mid horn?

After a lot of years with Klipsch in my head as a good loudspeaker I am thinking about picking up a used set of Heresy or Forte ll. Am thinking in two possible directions; Heresy with subs or Forte perhaps without subs. Without opening a can of worms is a Forte a Heresy with extra grunt or are they different beasts? Which of the Heresy versions are the ones to get? Perhaps a better question would be what are the basic sonic differences in the Heresy versions? Also I see a lot of posts on upgrading these speakers with metal dome diaphragms. Do all the stock Heresy and Forte ll have phenolic diaphragms? Metal diaphragms in comp drivers don't always sound as good as phenolic diaphragms. While the Klipsch drivers are not pro style comp drivers and have (I believe) lower compression compared to pro units I wonder if the phenolic diaphragms are the real problem. I don't have the first hand knowledge to know so I figure those here will.There is also the possible third way to go with mix and match drivers and crossovers to create a hybrid but that is more time work and money so I would want to have a look at possible versions done by some of the more adventurous inmates at this asylum. Thanks and looking forward to your comments.