Jump to content

Heritage_Head

Heritage Members
  • Posts

    5546
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    6

Posts posted by Heritage_Head

  1. DillonW, thanks so much for your input! It not only supports my thinking, but was an interesting read even if it hadn't! :)

    Listen, I feel like I tip toed around earlier partly in effort to not insult. There is no comparison of the two lines in my room. Referencehead, your comment about giving up little if anything is not accurate to my experience. It isn't a competition though. As mentioned, there are many reasons one makes there choice, and Reference speakers are better at some of those variables. My room allowed me to pull aesthetics and size out of the equation. Once that's removed, I don't know who would pick anything Reference over a Khorn or LaScala? It's a world of compromises, and all of my own choices have compromise of some fashion. I will admit that I had far fewer than most folks.

    If I made it sound like I was comparing reference to Heritage

    in that post I’m sorry (cause I know I have in other posts). When I said you

    can go in other directions to get amazing sound today I wasn’t referring to any

    one speaker line or brand. I meant you don’t need that older style design today

    to get that sound. You could go with Palladium for example. (Not the 20k ones).

    Heritage price point has a ton of competition from a lot of speakers out there

    and I was using that as a rebuttal to why Heritage is fading. I know it sounds

    like I have grudge against Heritage and I apologize to everyone that owns Heritage

    if you took it that way. If it wasn’t for Heritage I wouldn’t have the speakers

    I have today. I’m just giving my opinion on why they have faded from

    popularity.

  2. So then, why doesn't everyone own Klipsch Reference? Well, It's aggressive, in both looks and sound. The casual music/movie fan doesn't necessarily want huge dynamics playing as "background music" during diner. They much prefer the more laid back Bose or Paradigm speakers that fade into the background. The second trade-off is that the serious stereo enthusiast that wants to listen to jazz and classical, but still need a double-duty HT system will want a three-way speaker. The Reference speakers aren't, and as a result the mid-bass muddies up. It's a matter of musical taste, and it just so happens that it's what the stereo magazines love to audition.

    I don't know about Reference, but my Klipschorns provide quiet, beautiful, and articulate dinner music. They are located on the other side of the kitchen from the dining room (with large wall openings, so the music can flow through). They seem to sound better than other speakers I've tried when all are heard from a room other than the one the listeners are sitting in. Heyser said the same thing in his review of Klipschorns in Audio. I usually play quiet classical or jazz at dinner. The sound is so clear that when the conversation of guests at the table sinks into annoying invalidity, hostility, or occasionally warranted misanthropy, my attention can easily flow into the music. It's better than Buspar.

    Klipsch Horns are far superb to Reference speakers in both filling large spaces and playing classical or jazz music...I would imagine.

    I think khorns look awesome

    and are by far my favorite Heritage speakers. When I used to go to audio king

    in the 90s I would sit in there and listen to the khorns all the time. Them and

    the old polk speakers rti12 (not the new style but the big ones with (4) domes,

    (8) 6 ½ s and a 15”

    radiator) also great speakers. Biggest problem with khorns is they cost 8k new and

    are one of the biggest placement slaves( They have to be set up right) speakers

    I have seen. They also have almost doubled

    in cost if I remember right. I would probably go Palladium P-37Fs for that kind

    of money before khorns. (Same cost and also have a voice matched center) as far

    as the khorns vs reference imo if you gave me my choice for ht I wouldn’t trade

    the rf-7ii for khorns(cause then I would lose the rc-64ii voice match and my 2

    subs up front wouldn’t fit) . But for 2 channel only khorns are the better

    speaker. (But they cost 5k more and are twice as big)

  3. Great post corn I read that review as well and the reviewer

    seemed blown away by the speakers. Some of your points are spot on to what I was

    trying to say in a lot of my posts. Technology changes so much that 30 years

    ago to get amazing sound they built speakers like Heritage. And even though Heritage

    speakers still sound just as amazing as they did 35 years ago. Today we can go

    other directions and not lose much of anything. I think the 4 keys when buying

    speakers is sound, price, looks, and size. In that order for me but I’m sure everyone’s

    order is a little different. If I was

    buying speakers in the 70s I bet I would have owned speakers like Heritage or

    the closest thing I could get to it (price permitted).

  4. I love the rc 64ii. ... Best speaker I own. I came from the rc52ii though so I never heard the 62ii.

    I am getting one VERY soon.

    Personally I have owned all 3 (rc-52, rc-62 and the rc-64ii)

    the latter of each are all huge upgrades. The 52 to me couldn’t keep up very

    well. The 62 keeps up pretty good and is a great speaker but the 64 is a different

    level of sound compared to all the reference centers I have owned. (I also had

    the RVX-42)

  5. Just a little follow-up on the RF-7IIs... while I miss some of the punch from the La Scalas, these speakers really do hold their own. Love the copper! Seems a shame to cover them. So do most owners use grills or does the copper win with no grills?



    Great to hear you’re happy with the 7s. I kind of do on and
    off with the grills they look way better off I think but I’m always scared something
    might happen. By the way where did you get that avatar? lol



  6. Does anyone know how seamless the front stage is with the RF-7II and RC-64II (respective crossovers of 1200Hz and 1400Hz)? They are similar to the RF-83/RC-64 combo in that the RF-7II and RC-64II have different woofers but the same tweeter. If they are indeed seamless, then so too should be the RF-83/RC-64 (respective crossovers of 1650Hz and 1150Hz/1800Hz (tapered/overall)). Klipsch does not advertise the RC-64II as having the tapered arrray.



    They sound very close. The rf-7ii is huge compared to the
    rc-64ii (probably 3x as big at least) and does have overall better sound. The
    sound is so much alike that they do sound seamless to my ears though. The rf-83
    is a better speaker than the rc-64 as well so I’m sure it has a better sound
    also. I would pull the rc-64 out from the bottom of the entertainment cabinet and set it up ear level just to try it
    that way and see if it improves the sound. If it does you know its placement.



  7. I really think the cd vs lp is a different debate. It’s my

    fault I brought it up. Statistic facts are cds have much more detail capabilities

    than lps. I’m not sure how anyone would even try and argue different but it’s

    not the first time I have read that in a forum. (Misinformation)

  8. Your definition of "better" needs to be explained. An LP can never have the clarity of an sa-cd. That doesn't mean that the sound of an LP is poor.... It has it's own sound. It's kinda close minded to act like everything from "yester-year" is superior. Some people like live music some like LP's and some like clean studio recorded sound. Doesn't make 1 better or worse. But as far as clarity of intended sound is concerned there is no comparison.

    No, I don't believe all the old stuff is better than all the new stuff. Most new stuff is better. My 2010 Technics turntable sounds a lot better than my 1978 Technics turntable, even though I'm using the mat, headshell and cartridge from the 1978. As well, that 2005 cartridge sounds better than the 1970s cartridge I used to listen to.

    Better how? More detail and clarity, more bass impact, more realistic sound overall. I was surprised at just how much difference the new turntable made, considering the parts from the old one that were on it. Its new bearing and new electronics, along with its better-quality tonearm wiring and better vibration isolation, added up to improvements that were obvious to the ears.

    I've never heard an SACD, so I can't comment on how good they may sound. I do listen to well-recorded DVDs and they sound better than a good LP. However, some LPs sound better than some CDs, in a "hearing through to the music" sort of way. Some LPs are not very good, whether through poor quality control or poor recording techniques, just like some CDs. Have you heard of the "loudness wars"?

    CDs have a very low noise floor, which is what impressed everyone when they first came out, since most of our records were pretty scratchy then, from playing on our old cheap turntables. However, listening to CDs now reveals that the low noise floor comes at the expense of some of the low-level detail, which is sorted of chopped off. It can give a kind of "canned" feeling to the music. Not only that, the pits on a CD that are read by the laser are five times as large as the smallest ridges on an LP, so that's one of the reasons that vinyl records can retrieve more detail.

    The drawback is that those details won't be retrieved by a cheap turntable and cartridge, plus the cheap gear will cause wear and surface noise to show up pretty quickly. The discs themselves are also easily damaged, so the CDs are the safer choice at a party.

    As for preferred listening, you're right, it's often preferable to stay home and listen to recorded music instead of going out for a noisy and expensive evening of live music, but for Paul Klipsch and for many others, the sound of live music is the reference, the sound that home systems should be designed and built to reproduce.

    Even if you're listening to a studio recording, the ideal system is the one that puts you in the mixing room, the control room, or wherever closest to the actual music is. For me, the Heritage speakers do that better than other speakers.

    "CDs have a very low noise floor, which is what impressed everyone when they first came out, since most of our records were pretty scratchy then, from playing on our old cheap turntables. However, listening to CDs now reveals that the low noise floor comes at the expense of some of the low-level detail, which is sorted of chopped off. It can give a kind of "canned" feeling to the music. Not only that, the pits on a CD that are read by the laser are five times as large as the smallest ridges on an LP, so that's one of the reasons that vinyl records can retrieve more detail" [:S]

    I smell alcohol

  9. A $100 cd player is very close to a $5,000 one in sound quality.

    The main reason is the technology is so good that most people (99%) won’t hear the

    upgrade (I can’t and I have pretty good audio ears). When I hear someone say

    that an LP sounds more like real music i kind of know I’m probably beating a

    dead horse at this point. Nothing wrong with likening one over the other for

    personal taste but one is far superior to the other.

  10. Not to get into record vs cd debate (is there really one) but cds destroy a record in size, information, and sound quality to 99% of the world. I see Heritage speakers very similar as records in that people hang on to what they love and there’s nothing wrong with that. I just think like with power steering in cars or cds for music people just moved on. If you have ever seen the movie other people’s money he talks about the company’s that used to sell buggies whips (for the horses). And he said “I bet the company that made the best buggies whips out lasted every other company”

    1: Apparently, you've never heard a good LP played on a really good turntable through a good system. It's true that cheap CD players are way better than cheap turntables and cartridges, but once you get into the better equipment, the LPs definitely sound more like real music.

    2: Buggy whips went out of use when horse-drawn buggies went out of use. On the other hand, people still listen to music, so they still need speakers to listen to it, because earphones are only useful some of the time.

    I have heard many high end lp players. My dad is who got me

    into all this when I was a kid. His brother was an electronic engineer who had

    a job in this (not sure of job title but he had as much stuff as a local small

    hi fi store. He had the speakerlab k

    horns in his main set up (very close to klipschs khorn) (I have two pair of speakerlabs

    I got from him in storage great speakers). They both had very hi end turntables

    and horn speakers. They got so into it they had different cartridges for certain

    types of music. (Very expensive) It

    sounded amazing and is probably what got me hooked so many years ago. They both have cd players now and there

    records and players are in boxes. I almost did put that the buggie whip companies

    are gone now and music isn’t but I thought everyone would get that part. I just

    meant that like speakerlab who is pretty much just a retail store now because those

    types of speakers don’t keep the lights on. But klipsch is still going strong

    and is able to still offer those types of speakers. Imo if it wasn’t for the

    new age klipsch line speakers they (Heritage) wouldn’t be available. Let’s put

    it another way that maybe we can all agree on, if all klipsch was able to offer

    was Heritage speakers would they go out of business? My guess is absolutely. And I think that hits my main point more than

    anything.

  11. Here is my 2 cents on why the Heritage line has faded.

    Faded?? I guess I never got that that memo. Really good things are always hard to find, even when they're right under your nose.

    Lot's of broad generalizations going on in this thread. Interesting.



    They used to be in
    every klipsch dealer (store), now you have to get on plane to even see them for
    most people. I would say that’s fading. Most of my favorite music is from the
    70s, and I only wish it had sound quality as good as a lot of today’s music. They
    have been using compressors for music forever. They had to or they would never
    fit it on a tiny record. Not to get into record vs cd debate (is there really
    one) but cds destroy a record in size, information, and sound quality to 99% of
    the world. I see Heritage speakers very similar as records in that people hang
    on to what they love and there’s nothing wrong with that. I just think like
    with power steering in cars or cds for music people just moved on. If you have ever seen the movie other people’s
    money he talks about the company’s that used to sell buggies whips (for the
    horses). And he said “I bet the company that made the best buggies whips out
    lasted every other company”



  12. What year is the car you drive? Lol but seriously I feel like the RF series is something that meets all your "old school" criteria. I have not owned them for long but just seems like they should last forever. The drivers are stiff and the cabinet seems well built. I don't think your "old schol" title applies to heritage only. I men my brother-in-law has an old set of kenwoods he bought 20 years ago and they don't have a scratch on them. Anything that is well cared for should last well beyond it's intended life.



    That’s a very good point Jason. Before the technology boom
    of 80s, 90s, and 2000s there was definitely a different way to do things. A good
    example is the micro-processor in a typical avr (receiver) has more power in it
    than it took to get a man on the moon (fact). I know speakers haven’t come as
    far as computers but when a cell phone has a computer in it now the size of one
    that would fill a warehouse in the 60s it tells us that things are built different
    for more than just cutting corners. They built lots of cheap stuff back then
    too it’s just the only stuff people still talk about is what was good. Also the
    average cost of a pair of Heritage speakers new (including the Heresy) is about
    5k. A lot of really great speakers in that price range.



  13. I didn't end up with LaScalas because of a sentimental attachment to old speakers. I ended up with them precisely for one of cornfed's points. Nothing filled my large room like them! Add to that the value of the used market. I don't know if there are ANY options for the $1400 I spent on three LaScala that could give me what they do? Certainly nothing new, and likely a small handful of used.

    Tony you have an amazing set up and no doubt put a ton of

    time and work into it. And for your behind the screen set up it’s a perfect

    match. I wouldn’t be able to pull off

    the center speaker but if I had your set up I’m sure I would be 100% satisfied.

    My comment about sentimental attachment isn’t meant to mean in every case. I also

    agree on the used market they are some of the great value speakers of all time.

    Your front row new would run (3) $9,000 would you have paid that? And if you didn’t

    would it be because you don’t care about sound as much as someone who paid 2k

    for them 20 years ago?

  14. Guys I’m honestly a little

    surprised that so many longtime members on here have posted that people don’t care

    as much about sound as a big part of the reason that klipsch Heritage has faded.

    If I have learned anything on these forums

    (avs ,blu ray.com, ect) is that people

    care a lot. Why else would they even waste their time on here? In the 60s and

    70s if you wanted hi end sound you had to buy those kinds of speakers. Biggest

    difference now is you don’t.

  15. No doubt they sound amazing. They just don’t offer a value

    for their cost that is equal or greater than the competition. If they did they

    would sell them in stores and not just to people that have a sentimental

    attachment for the old klipsch speakers (they would also sell for more than 1/8th

    the cost on used market). Music is the same way, we all like the music we like

    but to say that it’s better because it’s your favorite would be misplaced. Yes tvs

    and speakers are apples and oranges but the idea is that people aren’t satisfied

    with their movie playing cell phones and iPods! They want a big screen hd tv on

    the wall that looks amazing. Just because the way we listen to music has

    changed doesn’t mean people don’t like music as much. Yes 20 years ago we

    bought an album and played it over and over because it was all we had. So we

    became attached to the band, music, and the speakers we played it on. Now we

    can download a thousand different songs online in 5min and not even know what

    band is playing. Look at car audio now vs the 70s it’s night and day not even

    close in sound quilty like hd vs non hd in comparison. My point is people DO care

    just as much about sound as ever. Below is a link to blu ray.com community. Look

    at these set ups!! And tell them that they don’t care as much about sound as

    you. What I’m hearing is a basic “kids these days don’t know anything” (about

    sound) which is absolutely 100% bs!

    http://www.blu-ray.com/community/

  16. Speaker design 101 is

    still used today as it was 50 years ago but there are many things like materials

    and technology advancements that have changed the rules. I think it’s just too

    easy to say that people don’t care about sound like they used to. I couldn’t disagree more. People are just are

    able to find it in other ways. You don’t need to buy Heritage looking speakers

    to have amazing sound. When the only speakers on the market had the wide style design

    of course that’s what people are going to buy. Look at tvs this is a great

    example of progress in technology. Would any anybody on here say that people don’t

    care about picture quality like they used to? That’s just silly people want quality

    that’s why they got rid of their old square tvs and got hd flat panels. I know that tv advancement is bigger than

    speakers but it’s just a great example that people do care. The average home

    today will probably have a better cd stereo somewhere in the home than the one

    box record player that was in most homes in the 70s. Look at cars they used to

    get 10mpg now they make cars that get 50mpg. Do people not care as much as they

    used to? No disrespect but that just seems like a copout.

  17. I posted this on the

    klipsch avs forum in response to a little debate that arose about why Heritage

    line has faded from stores and talks on forums. I spent so long typing it out I

    thought I would post it here as well. This is a pretty big debate that I have

    seen pop up so many times. Here is my 2 cents on why the Heritage line has faded.

    Owners of Heritage speaker will usually say that they wouldn’t trade or sell

    them for anything (strange they always seem like they are available used for a

    fraction of their cost but so are reference speakers), and the other side is normally

    saying that they are too big (if that’s even possible) or ugly. Comparing them

    to mid-level reference line stuff (like rf-62ii or even rf-82ii) is apples to oranges.

    First Heritage speakers are way more expensive. Yes the Heresy III are only

    1600(which is still 500 more than the rf-82ii, and almost twice the cost of the

    rf-62ii) but the Heresy III is more of a mini Heritage speaker (almost the

    large bookshelf of the line). The cheapest full size Heritage speaker costs $3,750

    a pair the Cornwall III (next is $6,000 for La Scala II, and then$8,000 for the

    mighty khorns). So unless someone wants to buy used, which a lot of people won’t

    (1. People want their money spent on new gear not someone else’s old stuff regardless

    of the value. 2. Most don’t know enough about this stuff to know what to buy,

    and the list goes on and on). Really the only reference line speaker they make

    or made that even compares to the Heritage line would be the rf-7, rf-83, or

    the rf-7ii. And even those are cheaper than any full size Heritage. I also think

    the fact that they don’t put them in stores to much anymore kind of tells the

    story a little bit. If these speakers could sell in stores they would be in

    most klipsch stores (Like they used to be). We can try to speculate why they wouldn’t

    sell (too big? Look like they are from

    that 70s show? Or maybe they don’t look and sound as good as the speakers next

    to them that cost $6,000 or less?). It’s the HT age of home audio (2 channel is

    almost like vinyl).Now this isn’t saying one speaker sounds better than another

    cause that’s taste but If a store put the La Scala II ($6,000) next to rf-7ii ($3,200)

    and I mean this in the nicest way especially to the La Scala owners. But if

    people had to pick one of the two imo i think 10/10 people would buy the rf-7ii

    and save $2,800(And to be honest even if the La Scala II cost the same 3200 imo

    the 7s would still out sell them). Then

    you put other speakers like rf-82ii or rf-62ii for 1k or less in the mix and I don’t

    think the Heritage speakers even gets a 2nd look for those prices. Heritage

    speakers are amazing speakers, i remember when they were in every store that

    sold klipsch (I’m 37) so whenever I heard the name klipsch I always thought of Heritage.

    I just think they went out of style more than anything. It’s hard to compete

    with new age looking stuff that costs half as much and still blows you away. I also

    think that klipsch keeps the lineup partially in respect to paul klipsch. Just my

    opinion on why they have fallen off the map here in the US. *** note all prices are retail, and all other

    info is my opinion only***

  18. sorry, my response was garbled, i had just woken up, i vow to let my brain wake up before typing :). I did fix my response.

    Sub placement in of itself is a true art. As CECAA850 said, a crappy sub in optimal placement can out perform the high dollar sub thats in a "meh" location. I was viewing placement as a 3-dimensional view of taking into consideration versatility in multiple locations. I wanted to bring to light that although a completely front firing/ported sub make easy placement in many more locations than downfiring, sidefiring, rearfiring etc it may also not be the best sub for your room. In a case of the situation we have here, downfiring may not have been the best solution but they may not necessarily be ruled out as there may be a fix.

    I would disagree and say the easiest sub to place if

    anything would be a down firing sub because you can place it anywhere in any

    direction.

  19. The most versatile sub you can buy is a simple single front firing driver in a sealed enclosure, this always cabinet placement and it can really be put anywhere and sealed cabinets are typically smaller than ported.

    I really didn't understand this statement, especially the "this always cabinet placement" part. If you're saying that sealed subs are more versitile as far as placement goes as opposed to other configurations then I would disagree. Ideal placement is more a product of the room and the subs interaction with the room than the type of sub used. Subs can't be put just anywhere. Well, I guess they can be, but they can't be placed just anywhere and then be considered to be in the "ideal" spot. The ideal asthetic placement spot is rarely, if ever, the ideal spot for optimal sub performance in regards to room interaction. You can take a cheap sub and place it in the correct spot in a room and can outperform (at the listening position) a sub costing many times more if it's placed in the wrong spot.

    Agreed front, side, rear, and down firing subs all have the

    same versatility. In fact the main reason they make subs front loaded is for cosmetic

    reasons. svs for example changed from down firing to front and said the reason

    they changed was people wanted to be able to see the driver, and other than

    that there was no advantage. Placement is the key. As mentioned bad subs in

    the right spot can outperform good subs

    in bad spots. Sealed and ported do have

    advantages over each other but that becomes more output and taste then placement.

    Most audiophiles will tell you ported are easier to place but its pretty close.

  20. Hi,

    any opinions to this question?

    I can get "old" used RF 7 for a good price - near the price for the new RF 82 II.

    What will be the better choice for a home cinema setup.

    Currently I'm replacing my old setup (Teufel) with Klipsch and i started with the center RC 62 II -> I'm absolutely happy with this center ;-)

    Now I have to find the best matching front box (and will continue with the rest afterwards - step by step)

    THANX!

    The 82s are nice but as mentioned above the rf-7 are

    amazing. Imo they are the ultimate HT speaker. But if you are buying used

    condition of them is important. Also you can get rf-82ii for a lot less then

    retail. You can find them for 700-800 if you wait for a sale. Comes down to

    what you want. Will you be happy with good or do you have to have amazing.

    [:D]

    Also as mentioned the rc-62ii is a perfect match to the

    rf-82ii.

  21. Hi,

    any opinions to this question?

    I can get "old" used RF 7 for a good price - near the price for the new RF 82 II.

    What will be the better choice for a home cinema setup.

    Currently I'm replacing my old setup (Teufel) with Klipsch and i started with the center RC 62 II -> I'm absolutely happy with this center ;-)

    Now I have to find the best matching front box (and will continue with the rest afterwards - step by step)

    THANX!

    The 82s are nice but as mentioned above the rf-7 are

    amazing. Imo they are the ultimate HT speaker. But if you are buying used

    condition of them is important. Also you can get rf-82ii for a lot less then

    retail. You can find them for 700-800 if you wait for a sale. Comes down to

    what you want. Will you be happy with good or do you have to have amazing.

    [:D]

    Also as mentioned the rc-62ii is a perfect match to the

    rf-82ii.

×
×
  • Create New...