Jump to content
The Klipsch Audio Community

Kevin S

Regulars
  • Content Count

    306
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Kevin S

  1. Now that you mention the proportions, the center does look thinner than the other two. But in real life, they are identical Heresy III's. Cell phone camera distortion?
  2. I am extremely happy with the Heresy's as the mains and center channel. Although I could not put them in the corners, I have intentionally set them up the way I believe PWK would have intended them to be. Spaced wide,10 feet apart. Up against the wall and toed in at a 45° angle. According to the Audyssey room correction software in my receiver, they are 3 dB down at 40 Hz. So that is where I have crossed them over to the subs.
  3. After about 13 years of wandering in the audio wilderness, I have recently returned to the Klipsch brand. Much has changed in the 13 years, including equipment and where I live. While my room would be appropriately called a home theater, the fact is I do not watch movies, using the home theater mostly for sports watching. In this room I listen to music far more than watch TV, and do that in 2 channel. Hence my posting in this forum. Hopefully, I have attached a photo of the view from my listening seat, showing my new Heresy III's and the JBL subs that I had already owned.. Rear surrounds are a new pair of RP-240S. It is very good to be back.
  4. Having owned all three speakers, as well as LaScalas, I feel that the main difference is in the presentation of the bass. They all "load the room" in much different fashions. My Klipschorns and Cornwalls both got down to 35 hz or so, but the Klipschorns filled the room in a much different (and superior IMHO) manner than the Cornwalls. With certain floor/corner placements, I can get my Heresy's down to 40hz or so, but the bass does not fill the room as well as the Cornwalls. The main differences in how the mids and highs sound have more to do with the positioning of the speakers IMHO. For example, the Klipschorns mid and high horns are positioned higher than the Cornwall and Heresy, and by necessity are in the corner and toed in 45 degrees. This will again give a much different presentation than the typical Cornwall or Heresy setup. Just for fun, one day I placed my Heresy's, on their stands, in the corner and mimicked the Klipschorn placement as best I could. The height was still a little low, but I had the front of the speaker out of the corner the same distance the Klipschorn would have been, and had them in the corners at a 45 degree angle. The mid and high presentation was almost exactly as I remembered the Klipschorns. Unfortunately, keeping them this way makes the image far too wide for my H/T purposes. Frankly, a pair of Heresy's, paired with a quality subwoofer(s), which were not available in the "old" days, can get real close to Klipschorn like performance, for far less money. Also, keep in mind that PWK's recommended placement for all of the speakers I have mentioned was on the floor, in the corner, facing into the room at a 45 degree angle. IMHO, this was not only to maximize the bass output and minimize distortion, but it meant that the mids and highs of all of the speakers projected a similar "image" into the room, would have a similar frequency response balance, and therefore sounded more alike each other than different. ------------------ L/C/R: Klipsch Heresy II Surround: Klipsch RS-3 Subwoofers: 2 HSU-VTF-2 Pre/Pro/Tuner: McIntosh MX-132 AMP: McIntosh MC-7205 DVD: McIntosh MVP-831 CD Transport: Bang & Olufsen Beosound 9000 Turntable: Denon DP-72L Cassette: Nakamichi BX-1 T.V. : Mitsubishi 55905 SAT/HDTV: RCA DTC-100 Surge Protector: Monster Power HTS-5000 This message has been edited by Kevin S on 04-30-2002 at 01:19 PM
  5. Dean, The Stereophile magazine website has a couple of test CD's you can purchase. Most folks seem to use the analog SPL meter, thats what I have. The SVS web site has some information on what adjustments to make to the meter readings to compensate for the bass rolloff of the meter itself.
  6. From those of us who like the Heritage products, I would suggest the following: 3 pairs of Heresy's off E-bay (L/C/R/LR/RC/RR) = +/- $1500.00 1 HSU VTF-2 subwoofer = $500.00 1 Receiver (Outlaw, Yamaha, Denon, Onkyo, whatever)= $500.00 1 DVD/CD changer = $300.00 Tax & misc = $200.00 Total = $3000.00 ------------------ L/C/R: Klipsch Heresy II Surround: Klipsch RS-3 Subwoofers: 2 HSU-VTF-2 Pre/Pro/Tuner: McIntosh MX-132 AMP: McIntosh MC-7205 DVD: McIntosh MVP-831 CD Transport: Bang & Olufsen Beosound 9000 Turntable: Denon DP-72L Cassette: Nakamichi BX-1 T.V. : Mitsubishi 55905 SAT/HDTV: RCA DTC-100 Surge Protector: Monster Power HTS-5000
  7. Dean, Do you have a CD with frequency test tones on it and a sound pressure level meter? If so, or if you can get them, what I do is very simple: Play the 1khz test tone so that while the spl meter is at my listening position it reads around 75db, with the spl meter aimed up at the ceiling about level with where my head would be. I use a tripod to hold the meter. Then play the other test tones, with the meter in the same position, and read the levels on the meter that they produce and write them down. The relative level of all the frequency's you measure, when compared to the 75db 1khz test tone, gives you a very rudimentary picture of your speaker's bandwidth and frequency response. There are some adjustments that you have to make to the reading of the Radio Shack meter I use, because the meter itself rolls off the bass fequencies, so I adjust for that. There may be better meters that read flat. I think thats about it. Let us know what you find.
  8. Gil makes a good point concerning whether or not other brands of speakers are missing their specs as badly in the S&V measurements. I do not know the answer. It is also a bit odd, IMHO, that S&V does not really point out the fact that the measurements do not meet spec, or that the measurements do not correlate with the listening impressions noted by the writer of the article. The cynic in me chalked this up to not wanting to overly ruffle the feathers of a current advertiser. The main reason this jumped out at me was that recent test on the RSW-15 and these two S&V articles were the first times that I had seen any articles where measurements were made on Klipsch speakers and the speakers missed their specs by a wide margin. And in the case of the sub, it was two different testers, both with the sub placed in the corner (which I thought would give the sub it's best chance to meet it's low end extension claims). And all of the Klipsch speakers I have owned (Klipschorns, LaScala's, Cornwalls, Heresy's, SW-15II and KG-2's) met their low end specs, in my rooms, when set up in the corners as Klipsch recommended. Anyway, we have Klipsch's answer. How about all of you Reference Series owners, have any of you tested the bandwidth of your speakers in your setups? If so, I think that there are some of us who would like to know the results and how you have the speakers set up to achieve those results. Personally, if I had set up my HSU subs and found that, even though I thought they sounded good, that they were only good to say 35hz and not 25 hz as advertised, they would have been shipped right back. Because, although you cannot make a purchase only based on specs, the specs are supposed to be a representation of what you are getting from the product for your money, and I certainly wasn't looking for a sub that only went down to 35hz. Thats enough from me. Thanks again to Bob G, and everyone else who has been responding to my question.
  9. Bob G., Thanks for the response. I was hoping that perhaps Klipsch had contacted S&V and would have a more definitive expalanation for the actual reasons for the measurement differences, as opposed to the generic explanation given by the engineer. I've been in this hobby long enough to know that what he said is certainly true, but it does not really explain what happened in this particular test. Given that there have been at least three recent tests of Klipsch products, by two different testers, and none of them produced measured results that correlated with what Klipsch published, I would think that Klipsch would be more concerned with how that looks to potential consumers. As I have stated before in other posts, I have been an owner of Klipsch products since 1985 and have followed published test results fairly consistently. These tests are the first that I have seen where the Klipsch speakers did not pretty much meet their published specs in the independent tests. Certainly I have missed some. However, from where I sit, something has changed, either at Klipsch, or in the reviewing community. As for the trust your ears argument, no one can argue that how a product sounds to an individual is the ultimate criteria. However, if specs did not count for something, why publish them at all? (At least one well known speaker manufacturer takes this position and is villified for pulling the wool over the eyes of the unsuspecting public, who can do nothing more than trust their ears when making a purchase!) Finally, I would be very unhappy if it has been my posts which you refer to as "trashing the Klipsch brand". It is my opinion that questioning the variance between Klipsch's specs and the specs from these various tests is a legitimate question in light of the importance I have always felt that Klipsch placed on measured performance. Asking the question, which appears to have been much tougher to answer than I thought it would be, was not intended by me to "trash" anybody. Again, thanks for taking the time to respond. ------------------ L/C/R: Klipsch Heresy II Surround: Klipsch RS-3 Subwoofers: 2 HSU-VTF-2 Pre/Pro/Tuner: McIntosh MX-132 AMP: McIntosh MC-7205 DVD: McIntosh MVP-831 CD Transport: Bang & Olufsen Beosound 9000 Turntable: Denon DP-72L Cassette: Nakamichi BX-1 T.V. : Mitsubishi 55905 SAT/HDTV: RCA DTC-100 Surge Protector: Monster Power HTS-5000
  10. Moon, It does not matter where on the scale your speakers volume settings end up as long as they are all balanced with each other. The balanced relationship between the speakers will remain regardless of where your main volume control is set. When balanced, where the settings end up have no affect on the quality of the sound. However, I would try to balance the speakers out in a way that you do not have to place any of them at the maximum input volume, ie: +10. Some receivers will clip the input signal at their maximum settings. For example, if the surrounds will only balance at +10 when the other speakers are at 0, I would suggest setting the surrounds at +5 and lowering the other speakers to -5. You really should get a Radio Shack SPL meter. You will not achieve the proper balance by ear. IMHO the meter and a disc with test tones are the best tweaks you can buy. They are invaluable for properly setting up speakers and subs. And they are about the least expensive as well. Hope this helps. ------------------ L/C/R: Klipsch Heresy II Surround: Klipsch RS-3 Subwoofers: 2 HSU-VTF-2 Pre/Pro/Tuner: McIntosh MX-132 AMP: McIntosh MC-7205 DVD: McIntosh MVP-831 CD Transport: Bang & Olufsen Beosound 9000 Turntable: Denon DP-72L Cassette: Nakamichi BX-1 T.V. : Mitsubishi 55905 SAT/HDTV: RCA DTC-100 Surge Protector: Monster Power HTS-5000 This message has been edited by Kevin S on 04-21-2002 at 05:09 PM
  11. And how about the "new" Heritage prices. Or did I miss them? ------------------ L/C/R: Klipsch Heresy II Surround: Klipsch RS-3 Subwoofers: 2 HSU-VTF-2 Pre/Pro/Tuner: McIntosh MX-132 AMP: McIntosh MC-7205 DVD: McIntosh MVP-831 CD Transport: Bang & Olufsen Beosound 9000 Turntable: Denon DP-72L Cassette: Nakamichi BX-1 T.V. : Mitsubishi 55905 SAT/HDTV: RCA DTC-100 Surge Protector: Monster Power HTS-5000
  12. Perhaps you should wait until you have your other speaker and can compare one to the other. Perhaps the one you have is not working properly. Or perhaps your impression will change when you have the two of them positioned for "normal listening. Or perhaps the high end of the speakers are not going to be to your taste. You probably just need to be patient until you receive your other speaker. Spend some time on proper placement etc. and see how it goes from there.
  13. Very nice story. Thanks for taking the time to share it with us. ------------------ L/C/R: Klipsch Heresy II Surround: Klipsch RS-3 Subwoofers: 2 HSU-VTF-2 Pre/Pro/Tuner: McIntosh MX-132 AMP: McIntosh MC-7205 DVD: McIntosh MVP-831 CD Transport: Bang & Olufsen Beosound 9000 Turntable: Denon DP-72L Cassette: Nakamichi BX-1 T.V. : Mitsubishi 55905 SAT/HDTV: RCA DTC-100 Surge Protector: Monster Power HTS-5000
  14. Because of FM's limited frequency response, dynamic range, use of compression by most stations etc, etc, you really cannot compare Fm to CD IMHO. You need to listen to many different CD's to see if the harshness/brightness is there with all CD's, or is it just an artifact of how a couple of your CD's were recorded. And although I am not a proponent in the "sound" of cables, Radio Shack's return policy certainly makes it safe for you to get a pair and try for yourself. ------------------ L/C/R: Klipsch Heresy II Surround: Klipsch RS-3 Subwoofers: 2 HSU-VTF-2 Pre/Pro/Tuner: McIntosh MX-132 AMP: McIntosh MC-7205 DVD: McIntosh MVP-831 CD Transport: Bang & Olufsen Beosound 9000 Turntable: Denon DP-72L Cassette: Nakamichi BX-1 T.V. : Mitsubishi 55905 SAT/HDTV: RCA DTC-100 Surge Protector: Monster Power HTS-5000
  15. JoshT, Yes, they are solid oak.
  16. JoshT, How about a couple of photos, hopefully?
  17. IMHO, none of the other suggestions, assuming you have your receiver set up correctly, could compensate for a poor room (acoustically) or poor speaker placement. ------------------ L/C/R: Klipsch Heresy II Surround: Klipsch RS-3 Subwoofers: 2 HSU-VTF-2 Pre/Pro/Tuner: McIntosh MX-132 AMP: McIntosh MC-7205 DVD: McIntosh MVP-831 CD Transport: Bang & Olufsen Beosound 9000 Turntable: Denon DP-72L Cassette: Nakamichi BX-1 T.V. : Mitsubishi 55905 SAT/HDTV: RCA DTC-100 Surge Protector: Monster Power HTS-5000
  18. Seems like we need to start exploring the room and the speakers placement within the room for an explanation as to why you are not achieving the sound you expected. Your equipment is certainly satisfactory IMHO. How about some photos? ------------------ L/C/R: Klipsch Heresy II Surround: Klipsch RS-3 Subwoofers: 2 HSU-VTF-2 Pre/Pro/Tuner: McIntosh MX-132 AMP: McIntosh MC-7205 DVD: McIntosh MVP-831 CD Transport: Bang & Olufsen Beosound 9000 Turntable: Denon DP-72L Cassette: Nakamichi BX-1 T.V. : Mitsubishi 55905 SAT/HDTV: RCA DTC-100 Surge Protector: Monster Power HTS-5000
  19. Manuel, Same apologies that went out to Josh. Since you have a sub, I would definitely keep the Heresy's on a stand. With them on the floor, when anything is panned hard left or right, I had the definite sensation that the sound was coming from the floor. In fact with a strong center image, I could aurally tell that the pan had dropped a bit. After that, all of the placement rules that would apply to any other stand mounted speaker apply. The one major exception for me is that I have ended up with the speaker axis crossing just in front of my listening position as opposed to aiming them directly at me or straight ahead. This is how Klipsch recommends to aim them in the manual, and I do feel it gives the best image and certainly widens the "sweet spot". FYI, mine are about 10 feet apart on center, the rear of the speaker is about 18 inches from the rear wall, the sides are about 54 inches from the side wall and about 13 feet from my listening position. Hope this helps.
  20. Josh, Sorry, hadn't been paying attention, wasn't trying to ignore anyone. My stands were actually plant stands that I had an oak furniture store make custom for me by enlarging the size of the top on one of their designs. I could not find a ready made stand that ssemed proportional to the size of the Heresy's. They all looked like I had a square Mr. Potato Head sitting on the floor. Plus I have no aptitude for building anything. So my solution was pricey, but it works for me.
  21. Jim, Since I was the primary person who brought up the discrepancy between the measurements made in the S&V report and Klipsch's specs on the sub and RF-7, I want to thank you for responding. All of my observations were made to show the disparity in the measured specs and to get an answer as to why it was so, not to "knock the product", per se. Seldom have I seen products measured in a magazine that differed so dramatically from the manufacturers specs. I also pointed out in one of my posts that the writers comments were quite different from the measurements. I believe that my previous posts on the subject were self explanatory and do not need to be reiterated again here. I look forward to when you guys have figured out the answer to the measurement question and can report definitively back to us. FWIW, since 1985 I have owned Klipschorns, LaScalas, KG-2's, a SW15II and my current Heresy's. I have had friends and family members purchase Fortes, KG-4's and KG-1's on my recommendations. So I approach this as a concerned fan, not someone who is looking for Klipsch to "fail". But in the independent tests I had seen on the Klipschorns, KG-4's, Fortes, KG-2's, Cornwalls and Chorus in years past, they easily met their specs (or were real close) in the independent tests. Which is why this big discrepancy really caught my attention. Thanks again for showing an interest in this thread and the RF-7 thread. ------------------ L/C/R: Klipsch Heresy II Surround: Klipsch RS-3 Subwoofers: 2 HSU-VTF-2 Pre/Pro/Tuner: McIntosh MX-132 AMP: McIntosh MC-7205 DVD: McIntosh MVP-831 CD Transport: Bang & Olufsen Beosound 9000 Turntable: Denon DP-72L Cassette: Nakamichi BX-1 T.V. : Mitsubishi 55905 SAT/HDTV: RCA DTC-100 Surge Protector: Monster Power HTS-5000
  22. MM, With the maximum output capabilities that the RSW has, even as measured in the independent tests, I am sure that the sub can "shake your clothing". But, not to put too fine a point on it, -3db at 48hz is a long way from -3db at 19hz. When I bought my HSU's, they were rated -3db at 25hz. Every independent test I've seen, and my own experience shows that they easily can achieve this. The tests include tests done by the same fellow that tested the Klipsch, in the same room, under the same conditions, I believe. My point is not that my HSU's are better than the Klipsch. Or that the Klipsch is a "bad" sub. I just want to know why the Klipsch do not meet their specs when tested independently under conditions where other brands do meet theirs. A fair question I think, and not made to anger or insult anyone. ------------------ L/C/R: Klipsch Heresy II Surround: Klipsch RS-3 Subwoofers: 2 HSU-VTF-2 Pre/Pro/Tuner: McIntosh MX-132 AMP: McIntosh MC-7205 DVD: McIntosh MVP-831 CD Transport: Bang & Olufsen Beosound 9000 Turntable: Denon DP-72L Cassette: Nakamichi BX-1 T.V. : Mitsubishi 55905 SAT/HDTV: RCA DTC-100 Surge Protector: Monster Power HTS-5000
  23. Tvodhanel, I understand your point about maximum output and frequency response data. And I agree that the maximum output capabilities in a certain bandwidth are impressive. And you are certainly far more qualified than me to interpert the data. However, if Klipsch's bandwidth and frequency response spec is only valid up to a certain level, if that level is far below the maximum output capabilities and if that is the explanation for the sub not measuring up to spec in these tests, then someone should tell us that. Lets be honest, someone buying a sub that is supposed to be 3db down at 19hz isn't expecting that to only apply up to, lets say for the sake of this discussion, a more "moderate" level. If I remember TN's testing explanation correctly, he states that in smaller rooms, any sub he measures could achieve 3 db more in level and 3 db more in extension. In either case, this sub still would fall far short of spec. Also,I have seen other subs that Tom has measured where the 25hz to 63hz average seems impressive at first, but the average is skewed by much greater output above say 35 to 40hz, and pretty mediocre output below. I think that is the case with his measurements of this sub. Keep in mind that the RF-7's in the test also fell well short of meeting their bandwidth/frequency response specs. So this problem/anomalie did not just lie with the sub. With all of that said, none of us has yet to actually explain the differences between the independent measurements and the spec's. And I am perfectly willing to accept a logical explanation that can pin the problem on the testing method. I have no axe to grind against these speakers. I think I have given myself a brain cramp!
  24. Boa & MM, I am afraid I am completely lost on the B&K test tone thing. MM, just to be clear, I am not trying to bash the RSW-15. There may be a way of setting it up where it performs exactly as Klipsch specifies, and apparently you have. But for these test results to be so far off from the published specs certainly deserves comment. I agree that arguing over whether one sub that does 20hz at 115 db is better than one that does it at 110 db is fruitless if you do not listen that loud anyway. But it is not fruitless to be concerned when a sub is specified to be -3db at 19hz and a published test by an independent third party shows it to be down almost 3db at 48hz and 17db down at 20hz. And this is the second independent test where the RSW-15 fell substantially short of it's specified performance. Hometheaterhifi.com published a test back in December where 20 hz was about 18db below it's peak output. In fact the tester said " This sub could use a good kick in the 20-30hz range." If there is a special way this sub has to be set up to meet it's spec's, the people that test them, and Klipsch's potential customers should be clued in. For now, I still want to know why it falls so short of it's specs.
×
×
  • Create New...