Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Maximus89

  1. 7 minutes ago, RandyH000 said:

    so you prefer the CF4  to the KLF-30  --------what's better on the CF-4  ? -----You said Bass , but both use the same woofers ----how about the HF -

    Maybe v3's use the same woofers, but not v.1 and v2.  Different woofers. Someone correct me if i'm wrong.

    • Like 1
  2. Holy Crap. That's awesome.  I should buy 2 pairs of the 10's as backups for my CF-3 v.1 if they sound good. 

    Can't wait to hear your impressions.

    I mentioned earlier how i'm not getting as much low end as i thought.  I finally got some back switching my DAC's ASIO driver to a WASAPI driver, but it's still not as good as i want it to be.  I remember the KLF-30 guys raving about these ciare woofers

    What was the model number so i can look for the same model but 10" please?

    • Like 2
  3. 2 minutes ago, Maximus89 said:

    If i used the k510, i'd likely use a different compression driver with aluminum diaphragm out to 20khz to keep that CF sound i'm getting used to, and i'd have to go active 2 way crossover. I think i'd have to keep the horn on top of the cabinet for lower crossover. I don't know anything about speaker building so i'm not sure if D'Appolito design should be crossed low even if you got the cd to do it?

    I came across this quote 


    "The primary advantage of a concentric driver is avoidance of interference/cancellation between the tweeter and the bigger driver, thereby avoiding nulls and lobes in the vertical polar plane. Symmetry above and below the horizontal plane is likewise achieved, but I think this is of secondary importance. Since the MTM arrangement achieves the symmetry effect but does not avoid the interference/cancellation between the tweeter and the larger driver, it does not really emulate the concentric driver. Interference/cancellation between the tweeter and the larger driver still occurs, although it is different. There are double nulls, one associated with each of the larger drivers, and each is slightly milder than it would be with just a single one of the two larger drivers. (Each of the larger drivers partially fills in the null associated with the other one, but this effect is not strong because cancellation frequency is nearly the same for both of the larger drivers.) And in addition you generally get interference/cancellation between the two larger drivers, and thus nulls and lobes in the vertical polar plane at frequencies below the crossover point. This can't practically be avoided except perhaps by using a "full-range" driver in place of the tweeter so that the crossover point can be much lower than it would be with any normal tweeter. (Full-range drivers are more highly damped, to achieve a broader frequency response, and as such they are poorer in terms of efficiency and sensitivity.)"

    So i supposed i can use a lower crossover point if i got the full range driver to do it. 

  4. 1 minute ago, jjptkd said:

    Yes klf horn for tweeter and 510 for mid this large mid driver is at a whole new level it just sounds so right blends perfectly with the woofer and tweeter although the tweeter level is quite low I can certainly see how a 2-way could be possible and not feel like you're missing anything. 


    I'm thinking a ki-396 in a Chorus cabinet would be alright nice to get a little lower extension beyond what the smaller trapezoidal cabinets can offer. 

    If i used the k510, i'd likely use a different compression driver with aluminum diaphragm out to 20khz to keep that CF sound i'm getting used to, and i'd have to go active 2 way crossover. I think i'd have to keep the horn on top of the cabinet for lower crossover. I don't know anything about speaker building so i'm not sure if D'Appolito design should be crossed low even if you got the cd to do it?

  5. I use an MX120 as a preamp so i suppose my synergy is fine. I'm happy with everything except i just can't get my CF-3 (version 1)drivers to wake up even with bridged 320wpc even though i felt i had it before. I might be having an issue with my amp input sensitivity? It's the last thing i haven't tried. Currently have it at 2.5v but McIntosh recommends 1v THX with their pre that came out with the mc7106.

    My question was mostly to give me peace of mind so as to get rid of the upgrade bug or curiosity. I suppose though, Mac holds resale so i could always recoup. I just can't get these CF-3 drivers to impact me at my preferred volumes. I have to go up pretty high to where my ears can't take it in my small room. I feel the 100wpc unbridged to the 320wpc bridged made zero difference whereas the first time i tried, i was blown away.   More experiments to come.  I keep hearing about power conditioners sapping the dynamics of amps, but i've tried the power amp directly in the wall, and not much difference. It and the Pre are on the outlets with no current limiting. 🤷‍♂️ I also switched the DAC into the current limiting outlet and power amp to wall, same lack of bass, but i do feel it was the best for black background.  I'm just trying to get it to where i'm happy without using my RSW15, and have that only as a bonus. I don't want to use the RSW15 to bandaid over this issue, because i know my CF-3's can hit me in the chest on their own. 

    Sorry to derail. I got my autoformer answers. Thanks gents.

  6. Are they that big of a jump compared to their non autoformer amps? I use an MC7106 bridged to 320wpc, but curious what kind of leap i'd make to a traditional mac amp with the autoformer and if even lower 150-200wpc would sound fuller and more authoritative than the non autoformer mac amps bridged to more wpc.

  7. Doh! I actually forgot to take my ebay ad down and it literally just got purchased. Upset with myself but have to honor it.
    I guess back to figuring out what happened to my bass without it. I dont want to end up integrating my sub but still lacking in punch from 80 down to where I cross the sub so I need to figure it out for sure.

    Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

  8. 52 minutes ago, Shiva said:

    Weak bass is unsatisfying for sure and the CF3's usually deliver.  Something is amiss.  So the MX120 is a preamp, I was just reading about it.


    What amp are you using?  320 watts should do the job quite nicely.  This mystery needs solving. 🤔 We got to get you back to rockin.🤘 



    McIntosh MC7106, got 3 channels bridged to 320wpc for the CF-3, and KV4, BUT i don't remember if i had 1v input sensitivity or 2.5v. I have it at 2.5 v right now. Not sure i understand how to use that. 

    Funny thing about that perception and all...either this device i just added made a huge difference or my mind is getting used to sans subwoofer lows.  So i added a Black Ice Audio FOZ-SSX Soundstage Expander between my power amp and the pre(previously used it between DAC and pre-can be used between any source). It acts as a distortion-less tube buffer with dimension control and bass eq. Originally purchased for that dimension control. For making my narrow room set up feel wider and for making long wall, wide set up narrow.  The CF-3's already have a great center image, but it's fun fine tuning with a knob. Neat little device designed by Jim Fosgate. I actually just put it up for sale, but maybe it's best to keep around. 
    Anyway, I turned up the BASS EQ and left the dimension at 0. Turned on some tunes, and i got low end all through out the house. Was shocked and wondered if it's just my perception getting used to it. 
    So last night, i watched a show in full range stereo to continue to get my dac burned in and i noticed really nice low end during action scenes. That was without this device and same set up where i couldn't get bass-my immediate thought was something is wrong with my pc settings. Added the foz-ssx b4 trouble shooting anything.
    I'm playing with the bass eq right now and turning it back to 12'oclock still gives me plenty of low end without feeling bloated like the bass trim selections on the pre amp. Full bass eq almost overwhelms the room. 

    I'll remove the device tomorrow and see if my mind really did get used to full range again or the device helped that much which leaves me wondering how i got such impressive bass before. I remember describing to @wvu80 as overwhelming bass.  

    • Like 2
  9. Do you have the speakers set to small or are you running them full range?  

    Full range. Well. Small.. The MX120 in pure stereo plays with the sub, and 2 channel mode plays full range whether the speaker is set to large or small. Its the same set up ive always had. Only difference is before with hdmi dac, I used external inputs which allowed me to use a subwoofer dsp on foobar2000 and I had it integrated really well. Now that I got a new dac, the sub dsp won't work with 2 channel mode. In pure stereo, i can set the speakers to large without the sub and probably then I can add the sub through foobar. I just don't have a screen with components so I need to look at component video to hdmi converters to access the set up.


    As is, 2 channel feels too weak bass and pure stereo with sub is too overwhelming and sub or bass trim doesn't sound good


    Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk




  10. Its strange because I had 320 wpc bridged via a McIntosh amp and my CF3s were beefy and I had all the bass I could want. I then unbridged and went back to 100wpc but trying to integrate my RSW15 sub. Enjoyed that for a while but now I went back to 320wpc without the sub and I feel like my bass is really weak and the drivers are barely waking up at moderate levels. Strangest thing. Ive been so bugged about it for the past few days. Is it all perception? I got used to a subwoofer that the normal full range of the cf3 just isn't enough or is it some setting i must have changed. I dont know and still trying to figure it out, but they sound beautiful in the midrange with my new dac and even the top end is, but the bass is really weak. Plugged my power amp straight to wall from my non current limiting power conditioner and no difference.

    Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

  11. I wasn't too impressed with the musicality of modern AVRs so I purchased a McIntosh MX120(was looking for MX119), both the mx119 and mx120 focused on 2ch with surround as an added bonus. This was Mac made as well and not rebranded Marantz AVRs like the the MX series that followed. Of course these are pres so you'd still need your power amps. But, i chose this route along with an HDMI Dac from Essense. The Evolve II-4k with 8ch analog out to the older Mac avr. Added a cheap 4k hdr hdmi switcher and now I have all my 4k hdr devices and tv hooked up and external inputs on the mac play uncompressed original files. 5.1 is all I need though. Had a 6th rear channel with this set up too but sold that speaker. If you need more channels, you need another option.


    I just wanted modern hdmi audio pass-through and video with a musical AVR and added another dac for music, but I still use the HDMI dac for multichannel music too. The HDMI dac is actually pretty good for 2ch music too, but slightly too much digital glare, like the built in Mac dac, so I added a tube buffer to the left and right analog outputs from the hdmi dac and I was quite pleased, but I wanted more so went with a separate dac for music.


    Just an option and route for you to consider.


    Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk





  12. have you contacted Bob Crites? If this has been suggested then please carry on.
    Yes he can recap the Epic speakers but that's all he'll do on them. Not sure what I'd get with SoniCaps or if there's even a need to recap. These caps on the CF don't go out of spec like the vintage heritage caps im told?

    Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

  13. Deang is done. Call JEM and report back. Then if they won't do the work, call the place I suggested earlier because they are legit, but not factory accurate "voltage tranfer curve", but can definitely build a high quality board. If you read the links I post you will understand why so few are involved in this kind of work. Applied math yes, applied income...well a few actually figured that part out pretty well.
    Deans done? Well through the years it seems he always eventually returns. JEM only does heritage according to email response, so a no go on the Epic line of speakers. I wonder if they consider the Forte/Chorus/KLF/KG speakers heritage?

    I'll probably hold off on the crossover work for these cf3s and spend a lot of time researching going active. If anything id like a Jubescala set up with some split la scalas/k510. Easiest route to meet my 2 way desire. The cf3 would need a new motorboard cut out or cut into the original for the 2 " wider K510 plus start active crossover from scratch which i have no idea where to begin.

    Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

    Can you elaborate on or clarify this regarding changing capacitors to the common polypropylene type caps many people use when changing factory klipsch caps?  Does keeping the same uf value but increasing the voltage alter the voltage transfer curve?  Most of the poly caps out there are much higher voltage ratings, 250v for the popular sonicap brand caps.  Just curious if changing the cap voltage has any adverse effect on the voltage transfer curve you explain above.  I agree some types of caps can "go bad" or fall out of spec after X amount of time & there are better quality caps than what klipsch used in the post heritage models, but is all the changing to different voltage caps causing any potential issues? 
    I own a pair of chorus 2 speakers & when i got them they sounded terrible, like a towel was covering the fronts.  I changed to some budget but good rated poly caps with same value but 100v rating & it instantly improved the sound back to what they should sound like.  However, I've owned 2 other pairs of chorus 2 with original caps that sounded great, have also owned numerous other models like forte, forte2, cf-4, & tons of KG models & they all sounded good with original caps, so there must be other variables that determine if/when a capacitor needs to be replaced.     
    I'm also curious why replacing heritage vintage caps with the new poly caps just bc they are klilsch approved for their current speakers is right to replace but the rest of the network is using different parts than the current models aslo. Aren't PIO caps closer to the original than the new yellow poly caps? One simply not Klipsch approved equals not original sound, the other is Klipsch approved which equals original sound?

    Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

  15. 25 minutes ago, Micklipsch said:

    Oh for sure; my existing receiver won’t be the downfall of these speakers. I’ll buy a suitable amp if anything!


     You mention blowing your amp. Is there something I should not do as to avoid any equipment damage?


    I also may have to read into bi-amp intricacies. You just mentioned a bunch of different setups and I thought it was basically a one way road (hook right channel to one post set, hook right rear surround to other post set, and so on).

    It had issues before and and the center amp had failed on it already, so something happened and now i think only 1 amp works on it. It was a nice sounding unit. I since got an HDMI DAC that basically adds all the bells and whistles of future proof that the Marantz SR7007 didn't have, but instead of repair, i purchased a McIntosh MX120 preamp in combination with my HDMI DAC+4kHDMI switch. That Essence Evolve II-4K DAC really helped me open up options of using older, better built legacy AVR's with all the modern things i need like HDR and uncompressed audio rather than buy an overpriced AVR every time the tech advances. 

    You shouldn't have anything to worry about bi-amping with your rear channels on your Denon. 

    • Like 1
  16. 16 hours ago, Micklipsch said:

    What else to look for as far as when I power them up? I’m initially going to just run them bi-amp’d with a Denon AVR 7.1. I know these are absolute beasts that can take a whole world more of power but I’ve also come to understand klipsch is very efficient and will get loud with less than the 90w this receiver is pushing per channel. 

    CF-3 version 1 here with dual 10's.  You might require more power for these CF-4's. They're not as efficient as their listed rating apparently.  I've never bi-amped them myself, but i can barely get the drivers moving and the bass sounds really weak with the 100wpc i use on my McIntosh amp. It's not until i bridge my amp to 320wpc that i really get those drivers moving and the bass comes in.  I did first have these set up in corners and the bass was overwhelming and that was just using a Marantz SR7007 back then...might have bi amped come to think of it and blew my Marantz amps, but now i have a 6ch MC7106 that can be bridged to 3x 320wpc or 2x 320wpc + 2x 100wpc or 1x 320wpc +4x 100wpc.  I'm now experimenting with using 100wpc to my mains and surrounds and 320wpc to my center and using my RSW-15 to fill in the bass for 2ch. I've always found it difficult to integrate a sub into your 2ch set up, but a basic 80hz crossover and the RSW-15 is blending in nicely. 
    Point is, don't give up if you can't really get those drivers moving with the Denon. Even if it's a version 2 or 3, they're really great all around speakers. 

    • Thanks 1
  17. 18 hours ago, Chief bonehead said:

    JEM Performance     5




    So those yellow capacitors used on all the newer Klipsch models are going to be Klipsch approved even for the Epic CF-3, and CF-4 series and matching KV-4 center? These seem so different to the heritage products. Do the caps on the CF-3/4 even need to be replaced? Do they go out of spec like the heritage caps?

    EDIT: for those wondering JEM only works on the heritage line

    • Like 1
  • Create New...