ODS123
-
Posts
899 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Forums
Events
Gallery
Posts posted by ODS123
-
-
17 minutes ago, pzannucci said:
This is typical of the Klipsch's efficiency ratings when tested by Stereophile. I always give it 6 to 7db which appears to be right on. Nothing new.
I don't follow. ..So who is misrepresenting the truth?? ..I wouldn't like a Klipsch speaker less to learn that it is less efficient than it's rated. But it would reflect poorly on Klipsch and make me less likely to believe other specs.
So what is the right number??
-
Yes, it is indeed positive but it raises some questions about Klipsch's efficiency ratings. ..I don't have the review in front of me but Atkinson measured it to be something like 4 or 5 db lower than Klipch's stated rating. So who is right? ..I looked in the back of the issue for a response from Klipsch in the Manufactures' Comments section but... nothing. I would have expected Klipsch to reply if they wished to defend the accuracy of their efficient ratings.
-
This would be my go to.
Review with (more importantly) measurements:
https://www.kenrockwell.com/audio/audiosource/amp-100.htm
Just $119. AND it has a Balance And Tone Controls (on back, which is a bit unusual):
https://www.crutchfield.com/p_021AMP100V/AudioSource-AMP100VS.html
-
Now THAT's the way to have Klipsch Speakers shipped. ..Though Klipsch Heritage speakers are great, their boxes a bit flimsy. ..But having them shipped wrapped on a pallet makes it a non-issue.
Enjoy them... They're great!
-
1
-
-
The likelihood of hearing any differences in audio quality b/w these amps is nil, IMHO. Todays solid-state amps are engineered to be sonically linear while driving any typical loudspeaker, and the Klipsch is a very easy speaker to drive. 50 watts is more than enough unless you're interested in causing long-term hearing loss.
So, with that in mind, I'd consider the amps feature set and form factor. Several of these amps (the Peachtree, and Sprout for example) lack a balance control, would that be a problem (it sure would for me but not for everyone)? ...And tone controls (for me a must-have, but not for others)? ..How about the digital display on the NAD C 368? ..In my experience, these displays and touch-screens can deteriorate with time, but my one experience might not be representative. ..And how about having an internal DAC? Some believe that DAC technology is apt to change so you might believe it better to keep this "outboard" (I do not share this view). Are you ok with a "push & scroll" control knob that you use for both volume AND to chose inputs and access other settings? Some prefer this for it's simplicity/ tidiness, Others, like me, prefer separate, faceplate mounted controls for these purposes?
If it were me, I'd probably pick the Marantz or the Cambridge Audio, but only because of their feature set and form-factor. ..But sound-wise, I think they will all do just fine.
ods
-
12 hours ago, Archguy said:
Beautiful setup and you appear to have concealed the cables to your television, for which I tip my hat sir!
Thanks! ..My wife and I came to an understanding. She'd allow my big 2-channel system to be set up in our great room so long as I did everything possible to make it look nice. I consider myself lucky - most of our friends and family think it's kinda ostentatious and more than one said they'd say "no way". ..But it really has been a blessing. But setting it up in our great-room it has made music a family bonding activity.
-
51 minutes ago, glens said:
In what type of venue did you listen to both extensively? Did you not have the ability to experiment with placement(s) while doing so?
My Fortes III are as close or closer to the wall behind them as in that photo, thus they protrude out into the room quite less. Not to say what you might prefer between the two actually set up in your room (or which I might prefer there) but based on my experience with my Fortes III I'd think they'd sound quite remarkable there.
I'm sure you're right - the Forte's probably would sound terrific in my room as well. Not that I should be over influence by appearance but I also preferred the way the Cherry CW3's matched my cabinets and floors. The Cherry veneer on the Forte seemed wayyy lighter. Also, visually I think the Fortes wouldn't have filled the space b/w the cabinets and wall quite as nicely. But this is subjective of course.
Yes, I was able to play with placement at the dealer but only so much.
-
The delta between recorded music played through speakers and real live music is so huge that the few extra steps digital gets us to real music is almost meaningless. It's like instead of being 50 miles away, you're 49.9 miles.
People loved recorded music just as much when I was a kid when ALL we had was analog playback (vinyl and tape). The clicks, pops, vinyl surface noise, tape hiss, etc... are all gone today yet recorded music is no more AND no less effective and helping us through pain when things are bad or enhancing our joy when all is right.
So trashing either format is rather silly and misses the whole point of recorded music.
-
1 hour ago, DizRotus said:
Once digitally stored, individual tracks are easily retrieved, included in playlists or whole albums can be allowed to play in their entirety. Playing vinyl is a much more satisfying experience than listening to poorly mastered and compressed CDs or mp3s but it cannot equal the best digital recordings or reel to reel analog tape recordings for fidelity to the original.
All great points.
I will add this gripe about Digital Music....
When all we had was vinyl people would generally hear a whole album side before either changing the record or flipping it. ..Advancing the stylus to the next song or finding the lead-in grove to a favorite track was such a pain that people were more apt to listen to the whole album side. This would lead to becoming better acquainted and maybe even growing to love lesser known tracks. Case in point: If I was given Springsteen's "Greetings From Asbury Park" in digital-file format today I'd probably listen ONLY to Blinded By The Light, but having been introduced the LP on vinyl, I grew to love almost EVERY track on that album. "Blinded" grabbed me immediately, but others - for instance "Lost In The Flood" - took several listens to enjoy. They were less accessible but are now cherished tracks that today I might not ever listen to.
Witness how kids listen to music today.. The idea of buying, much less listening to, an entire album is anathema to them. The convenience of Digital music has given them a form of musical ADD. Heck, my kids will often not even wait until a song has mostly finished before moving on to the next. Can you imagine constantly doing that with a turntable?
..Just another reason why to appreciate vinyl even if it doesn't really sound better.
-
3
-
-
Agreed. That a piece of rock being dragged around a vinyl disc can sound so good is indeed a miracle. And though I don't share the view that vinyl sounds better than digital I do believe it sounds good enough to be very very enjoyable, particularly when played on a high quality table (ie. inaudible wow & flutter, accurate speed) that is properly set up.
To those trashing the format I would ask: So what does one do with the hundreds and hundreds of records they acquired prior to digital? Throw them away simply because they suffer by comparison to digital? ..Not everyone has the $ resources to replace all their vinyl w/ digital and in some cases it's not available. So what then?
If you're truly a music lover and not just a gear-geek, I'd think you'd find ways to enjoy vinyl despite it's shortcomings.
-
2
-
-
8 hours ago, Ceptorman said:
Very nice room. Those CWs look like a great match to your cabinet and even the flooring.
I like your avatar pic also, one of my favorite rockers!
Thanks!! ...Yes, Buddy Holly was incredible. ..To think of how much incredible music he made in his short life is just staggering.
"True Love Ways" sounds absolutely magical on my Cornwalls, and probably on any Klipsch speaker.
-
3 hours ago, moray james said:
I am confused why do you say the CW3 works better in a larger room and a Forte3 works better in a smaller room?
I preferred how the Cornwall III's sounded but they are extremely large and imposing looking. They are passably attractive in our great room - my wife was ok with getting them. However, if this room was smaller, they would be visually overwhelming, in which case she wouldn't have been and I would have had to make do with the F3's.
As for sound, the CW's sounded more expansive and open, and they extend deeper - though not by much and thus noticeable only on a sub-set of my music But again, the F3's sounded very good as well. I think the CW's are also a bit easier to place because they don't have a rear-firing passive-radiator. ..The F3's might have had to stick out further in the room. ..But that's a guess.
-
8 hours ago, EBEB said:
@ODS123 just bought these second hand Forte I three days ago 🙂 so no amp yet 🙂
I'd personally look for an integrated amp. As far as I'm concerned separate pre-amp & amps offer no audible advantage. So why deal with extra boxes and cable clutter if there isn't a performance upside? Separates also add expense AND they CAN present more hiss/hum problems b/c they introduce more connection & grounding points.
If you plan on incorporating a sub be sure your integrated has provisions for that. Onkyo, Yamaha, NAD, Emotiva..(and others) all have reasonably affordable offerings. ($300-$500). All of these (I believe) also have tone and balance controls, something I feel are essential to enjoying as much of your music library as possible. ..But you may not care for these features, which is fine of course. There are even cheaper offerings on Amazon that may work well but the brands are so obscure that you may have challenges getting them serviced.
As for wattage requirement, take a look at this wattage calculator. ..Thanks to your speakers high efficiency, it's hard to imagine ANY amplifier or AVR being unable to meet your SPL requirements.
https://geoffthegreygeek.com/calculator-amp-speaker-spl/
-
1
-
-
39 minutes ago, EBEB said:
thanks, @ODS123
any suggestions for paring with a forte I ?
*Room - big living room 15 x 20ft (4.6 x 6.0m)
* Setup - 2 Technics sl1200 and an e&s DJR400 mixer
*Music formats: mostly vinyl and from time to time streaming over an Audioengine B1 from the mixer
*Music type: Ambient, Jazz, Brazil, Disco and House (No rock or classic which seems to be on the paper the big plus of Klipsch
Well, what are you using now? And if you’re not happy with it, why?
-
31 minutes ago, EBEB said:
So based on this chat can I assume that I should not do a big fuss when choosing an amp for my Forte I and simply buy something for $100/$200 max? 🙂
Spend more for more features and form factor. Better sound? Possibly not.
-
19 minutes ago, jason str said:
Next is driver matching, why not since they are running them right ?
Another few grand for the process...
There has to be a compromise and breaking in a new set of speakers is just part of ownership.
Vandersteen does this (driver matching) even on their $2,700 2ce Signatures, or so he claims.
-
27 minutes ago, Shakeydeal said:
How many speaker manufacturers do you think are going to spend the time and effort to break in speakers before shipping them out? It might seem like a small thing to you, but the big boys have a schedule to adhere to, and it doesn't include this. Now I have heard of small outfits that will do it. Sometimes it's a free service, others charge for it.
Um... These are $15,000 speaker built to order - which takes 6-8 weeks. ..They got the time. They can run-in the drivers as they build the cabinets. Alternatively, they could simply allow sub-performing speakers to show up at dealers, fail comparison tests, then watch demand for the speaker disappear completely.
They promote the idea of break-in because it helps reduce the number of speakers that get returned to dealers.
-
3
-
-
11 minutes ago, jason str said:
Same reason a $20 driver won't sound its best until its broken in. They are new and not broken in.
Break in time varies from driver to driver. Who better to know how long one of these drivers in the design takes to break in than the ones who have been testing them ?
Please be more clear. I have no idea what you're saying here.
Again, I can't fathom Totem shipping a $15,000 speaker system that is performing sub-optimally simply just because they couldn't find a way to break-in a handful of drivers for a few days.
-
14 hours ago, Tizman said:
The idea that wires need break in is a far cry from the idea that a component that is mechanical needs break in. A loudspeaker driver is made out of materials that move, have compliance/flex etc.
Yes, this is true. ..But the surround material is chosen for it's imparting minimal drag on the cone. And the motor magnet is chosen for it's ability to overpower whatever drag is caused by the surround. This is what a speaker does...
And why would a speaker company allow a $15,000 speaker leave it's factory TRULY believing it won't sound it's best for 200-250 hours (i.e., The Totem Wind)?? ..Why would they risk the speaker being set up in a dealer's demo room then comparing unfavorably to whatever ALL BECAUSE they didn't find a way to break their drivers in before mounting them in the cabinet?? If they REALLY believed in break-in and it helped avoid unfavorable demos, I do believe they'd find a way to do this before packing / shipping.
..A few minutes of break-in is plausible. ..But 250 hours? It's incredible that they very first spec they list is break-in hours.
It's almost like they're saying, please listen to these for a full 250 hours before calling your dealer to say 'I'd like to return these - I've been listening to them for a few hours and I'm not really feelin' it."
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, glens said:
So my practical experience, off and on over the course of 4 decades, tells me that in all likelihood such changes that wrought an improvement one day would yield another improvement when undone a few days later.
An interesting perspective. And I agree. I believe head/ sinus congestion, hearing fatigue (..eg., if one just spent the day at a loud sporting event), the coming and going of headaches, and of course mood all affect what we hear day to day.
AND, the excitement of plugging in a new component, cable, or tweak... can certainly affect what we hear.
-
1
-
-
20 hours ago, Kidd said:
Okay , here 's what we need to do , get 2 pairs of Forte 3s , one with many hours and the other new and compare the sounds with the A&B switch
Blind test
I'm guessing no one will see/hear a difference
Or take a new pair out of the box, play one speaker overnight, then the next day play both using a mono recording and use your balance control to alternate b/w the speakers. Be sure to set them right beside each other or you'll be comparing L vs. R room acoustics.
I've done this very thing with several speakers and could not hear one iota of difference.
-
1 hour ago, Shakeydeal said:
You and ODS should start your own audio club. Two minds with but a single thought.......
I don't need to read about something to make it real. Unlike you, I trust my own judgement.
Shakey
Second only to PWK himself, isn't Richard Crites another esteemed speaker guru that many on this site look up to? Here are his thoughts on Break-in: From the FAQ section of his website:
Q: How about break in time for drivers or new driver diaphragms?
A: Yes, and depends on the size of the driver. Tweeter diaphragm probably break-in at a matter of seconds. They are very low mass and move very little, so any break in would happen almost instantly. Probably happened when the factory tested the diaphragm after manufacture. Midrange are a bit bigger and have a bit more mass. Break-in is probably on the order of minutes with these. Woofers would take the longest. I think that break-in on a 12 to 15 inch woofer would be less than an hour played at pretty good volume using music with a lot of low frequency con
Q: But my speakers sound so bright after putting in the new caps that I have to hope they change with break-in. In fact I am pretty sure they are getting better as I listen longer. They must be changing.
A: .. The fact that you think they are changing now is because you are getting used to them sounding like they should. The break in is occurring but it is inside your head instead of inside the speakers.
Q: How about break in time for wires and interconnect cables?
A: None
-
B E A U T I F U L ! ! Congratulations!! The Indian Rosewood looks lovely! Enjoy!
-
38 minutes ago, muel said:
Would any electrical engineer say that they know everything there is to know? Well, maybe you can find someone like that.
Hundreds of years ago people joked and made fun of the idea that there were little creatures smaller than the naked eye could see. It wasn't until the invention of the microscope that the existence of microorganisms could be proved. If I'd lived at the time perhaps I would have laughed too.
I'd suggest we look at things with a tentative eye... or ear.That is true, but scientific understanding is not broadened or deepend by those who eschew any reasonable validity testing.
-
3
-
RP-600 Review in Stereophile
in 2-Channel Home Audio
Posted
Perhaps... and it is also true that Atkinson seems to always measure speakers to be less efficient than specified by the manufacturer. ...But NEVER to the degree that this particular speaker came up short on its efficiency rating.