heresy2guy

Thanks to Masterxela, Frzinvt, and Indyklipschfan for chiming in and Dr. Who, I'd like to be able to read those papers if you can find them and post them. Best, H2G

MFK, I'm the opposite of you - I was raised in the Northeast and eventually settled out here in California many moons ago after completing my final duty station as a Marine at Camp Pendleton. Bose and the Northeast seem to have a particularly friendly relationship since I knew many, many people who had Bose speakers...more so then I’ve seen in any other part of the US, and I've lived in North Carolina, South Carolina, Arkansas, Arizona, and California. Perhaps this is due to Bose being HQd in Massachusetts and Amar Bose having been a professor at MIT; either way, he was something of an audio celebrity in MA, CT, RI, NY, CT, etc... when I was a kid and adolescent, most likely due to the early days of the Bose Marketing Machine. As you stated, they were pretty big on college campuses too at one time (maybe they still are...it's been awhile since I found myself on one) but they always sounded pretty lifeless to me and I'll give PWK his due by saying that he never played the Bose or Polk marketing game with all their ridiculous buzz-words and other miscellaneous marketing fluff. Truth is, Bose was the King of all that direct/reflected sound bullsh_t and I've yet to hear a Bose (or cone speaker in general) sound as live or real or dynamic to me as a horn-loaded one so when I see or hear anything pertaining to indirect or reflected sound I cringe and dismiss it as yet another take on a tired and beaten (and erroneous) ploy in order to push their supposedly "new" advancement in sound reproduction/technology out of their factory doors and into your living room. The whole reason for me posting this topic is that I noticed a lot of marketing fluff employing (seemingly) pseudo-science in home theater speakers and it didn't tale long for even a boob like me to see that it a) sounded suspiciously like old rhetoric rewashed for the times and if it's so good, then why aren't commercial theaters using it and c) they are, after all, trying to sell you on their ability to replicate the commercial theater experience in your home so why do they follow the commercial theater recipe for speaker design and placement (allowing for the differences and preferences between cone and horn speaker types, obviously) but abandon it when it comes to the surround speakers?Fact or fiction? Is there a real reason or is it just more corporate pseudo-science and marketing hype?As the commercial for a well-known rag said years ago...Enquiring minds want to know.

Shawn, thanks for the input. I understand what you're saying about the WDST theory, but aren't most home theaters pretty small inasmuch as only having one typical sweet spot (where the couch and/or lazy-boy-type chair(s) tend to be) wherein the listeners generally sit? If you follow the THX instructions from the website on the placement of the surround speakers, that'll mean that they'll be placed exactly to the left and right of where you'll be sitting in your home theater, assuming that you have it set up like the THX website with your seating area more or less in the center of the room. With that being the case, the WDST format will have you sitting off axis of the the two horns that are shooting 90 degrees each but converging at their ends in order to form the 180 degree arc, yes? The WDST design surely seems better to me then either the bi-pole or di-pole but still seems to be be coming up short because it appears to be an approximation of the commercial theater setup. The immediate, major difference I think everyone can see between home theater and commercial theater speaker placement is in the surround speaker category. It seems reasonable to me to say, therefore, that until home theaters utilize direct-radiating surround/side speakers (be they only one per wall or multiple units, depending on the size of the room and/or listener/audience location within the room) then they'll continue to come up short of the real experience, or real deal, irrespective of what audio manufacturers, Hollywood studios, or THX may say. - H2G PS - The WDST, bi-pole, or di-pole surround theory must not hold water in a performance or professional/commercial sense, because if it did, the theater conglomerates would realize a reduction in their newly-constructed theater costs by replacing the multitude of direct radiating surround speakers with fewer speakers of a WDST, bi-pole, or di-pole design. In today's world, every company's trying to pinch their dimes tighter then ever on practically every level (except on its Officer or Board compensation it seems) so I imagine this notion has already been examined thoroughly and has since been rejected.

Maybe to create non-localizable surround 'effects'? To mimic multiple direct radiators? Keith _______________________________ Don't know much to say about this one expect that there has to be localization to the sounds because you have separate channels (Left Front, Center Front, Right Front, Right Surround, Left Surround, Right Rear and Left Rear) and the engineers direct the sounds on the soundtrack to the appropriate channel(s) in order to give the listener/audience the impression that they're immersed in the action and that although the screen is only two-dimensional, the soundtrack places you in a real-time three-dimensional environment by enveloping you (via precise locations) with multi-channel sound from the various speakers strategically placed around you. I guess what I'm saying is that I see (in my layperson's persepective) that the engineers want the sounds to be localizable, i.e. noticeably coming from the front (right, center and left), rear (left and right), left side, right side, etc... You make sense with the notion of those "pole" and WDST speakers trying to mimic multiple, direct-radiating surrounds that are found in the theater. This might have some traction, but it still seems to take home theater on a different course then what's found in commercial theaters. If there's truth to this, then the only way to "fix it" for the home theater environment would be to add even MORE speakers - direct radiating surround ones - on the left and right walls, and that doesn't seem feasible considering how small most home theaters tend to be. Again, I'm just throwing darts here...

...commercial movie theaters don't use them and employ front-firing speakers instead? The next time you're at your movie theater, remember to take a look - all the ones I've been at here in Southern California use multiple, front-firing speakers evenly (or so it seems) spaced along the side walls. Furthermore, the di-pole designs seem to create a sonic hole, or void, directly in front of them (where you, the listener would be sitting) while the bi-pole design seems to rely on focusing the lower and middle frequencies directly at you but then using two tweeters pointed in opposite directions to disperse the high frequencies away from you, at opposite ends of the spectrum. The Klipsch WDST design seems to direct the complete frequency pattern away, at close angels, from the listener. In the end, both "pole" designs seem to rely on "reflecting" sound - via the listening room's physical properties (i.e. walls) while the Klipsch WDST design directs the sound away from the listener at two distinct, albeit close, angles. Any way you cut it, this seems to go against the entire Klipsch concept of using horns to control the frequency dispersion directly towards the listener in a focused pattern. That, therefore, brings me to this point: Whenever I think about "reflected" sound I think about Bose marketing their products throughout the 70s and 80s with their mantra that their reflected sound is more natural and therefore better. Needless to say, I've never heard a Bose system utilizing a "reflected sound" dispersion come even close to sounding "live" or "natural." In fact, this just seemed to make their cone-driven speakers sound even worse then a "conventional" cone-driven speaker because they were pointed away from you, and since they were all naturally low in sensitivity to begin with, facing them away from the listener, as per Bose, made them seem even more muted and even less efficent and even less realistic. I guess what I'm saying is that the whole surround sound concept using bi-pole, di-pole, or WDST speakers seems to stand in contrast to PWK's philosophy on controlled, directed sound towards the listener via his horns, not to mention that I've yet to sit in a movie theater that utilized anything rather then direct-firing, non-reflecting surround speakers faced directly towards the audience...and I live in the most densely populated section of the United States with lots of new construction to boot, so a lot of the theaters I've been in are pretty new. It begs the question as to why one should use bi-pole, di-pole, or Klipsch WDST for home theater use when the goal of the home theater is, after all, to re-create the commercial theater experience in your home? I've thought about this for quite some time but never got around to asking the question openly on the forum; here's my chance...hope it pays off. Thanks, H2G Postscript: I heard or read that Klipsch professional cinema products were being used in approximately 1/3 to 1/2 of all new movie theaters being constructed today....or something to that effect. I don't know if this is true or not, but I just checked the website for their professional cinema products and low and behold, there are no bi-pole, di-pole, or WDST surround speakers to be found, only the direct-firing KPT-1201, KPT-8001, and KPT-250.

The CF-4's may have been a precursor to the KLF-30s but the CF-4s are a two-way design with the cones providing most, if not all, of the midrange while the KLF-30s are a three-way design with a dedicated compression driver & horn covering the midrange. That's akin to comparing apples to oranges in my book. I've never heard a pair of CF-4s personally, but I know I've liked/chosen the sound of a compression driver & horn over a cone for the midrange time and time again so I suppose it would remain the same here as well. H2G

"Cornwalls may have them beat on the low end, but, in every other aspect the Lascalas win hands down." Very common assessment of the cornwall v. la scala comparison, which inevitably lead to the creation of the Cornscala, which offers the best of both worlds - the low, deep bass of the cornwall with the magical midrange of the la scala. -H2G

"That will make a nice addition to your LaScala, it's 44"x44"x40"D(with driver), and it barely made it from 400hz to 2.2Khz." I, for one, have always been partial to - and entertained by - Dennis' subtlety - LOL. I had no idea a suitable horn would be 4 feet by 4 feet and the driver itself had frequency issues; from what is stated on the JBL Pro website, you'd think it was the Mother of All Midrange Compression Drivers or something. Then again, if it was, I guess it would still be in production then... Thanks for helping me out and settin' me straight fellas. -H2G

Hey Guys, There's a fellow I know who has two JBL 2490H compression drivers that he's looking to sell. I've seen them and they look huge compared to the Klipsch K55 midrange drivers on my 1992 and 1993 La Scalas. I looked at the JBL Pro website ( http://www.jblpro.com/pages/components/cmp_drvs.htm and http://www.jblpro.com/pages/pub/components/2490.pdf )and they said the 2490H has a 4" diaphragm and a massive 3" exit (I think the K55 uses a 2" diaphragm and has a 1" exit...and it's actually necked-down to .75" with the K401 horn, if my memory serves from an earlier post here on the board). The JBL site also has the 2490H rated at 200 watts continuous from 250hz up (compared to 40 watts for the K55) and has its sensitivity listed as 116db 1w/1m on a JBL 2393 horn and 116 db 1mW (.089 volts)/1m on a 25mm plane wave tube and that the sensitivity with 1 watt on the tube is 30db greater, which I guess would make it 146db with 1w/1m? Am I reading this properly?? It doesn't sound right to me; seems way too high. At any rate, does anybody know anything about these drivers? The're supposed to be low compression and that, with the big 3" exits, are supposed to make them sound more "relaxed." Problem is, I couldn't use them with the K401 horn; anybody know of any horns that could take a 3" exit driver and be able to deliver the low-end of the 2490H which is 250hz ? The guy says that JBL doesn't make those drivers anymore and they used to cost $1,000 new, each, but he'd be willing to sell them to me for $500 each. My internet searches haven't come up with anything regarding 2490H prices so I have no clue if what he's saying is correct or whether or not his asking price of $500 each is too steep, or even if it isn't, is there that big of an audible difference between the 2940H and the K55? Any help/thoughts/insight would be appreciated. Best, -H2G

$600 for 4 Forte IIs is a great buy; I think I paid $1200 (if memory serves) for my 4 La Scalas, early 90s vintage, with AL-3 crossovers...which was quite a buy as well. Thank you, Craigslist!

"When I first connected it to the Cornwall lll's Michael Colter was here for the wedding. When Michael turned it on I walked over to the sub to turn it off, then I realized it was not even connected it was the 930 and CWlll, completely different setup ! The Yamaha HT receiver did not make the CW's sound like that, " Been there, done that, and heard that (but with Technics and Sony AV/HT receivers and Heresy IIs) - the difference is simply amazing, isn't it? I don't know why those vintage HKs sound infinitely better then today's typical HT receivers on Klipsch Heritage, but there's a night and day difference and you've gotta hear it yourself to really grasp it. -H2G

I agree with the above - Chorus offers better bass, higher efficiency, and a "bigger" sound. Speaking of Cornwall, I used to live there; in fact, I still have family there. -H2G

Thanks guys! The reason I was asking had to do with the khorn - I know that there's an issue with proper stereo imaging in large rooms do to the necessity of corner placement. It had been discussed on this board before that one way to avoid this would be for the HF section of the khorn to be moveable, so you could track it, or pan it, left or right in order to adjust for the proper imaging depending on the size and shape of the room without having to yank the speakers out of their corner recesses, which woudl destroy the bottom end. I know the khorn squawker dips to 400hz, so from there on up you could effectively direct the sound to where you want it to go should the khorn HF section swivel. It was the low frequency folded horn that I was thinking about. I guess I don't really have the technical expertise and/or lingo to explain it all, but I was picturing the khorns in the corner with their HF sections swiveled somewhat to project the best stereo image for the chosen spot of a large room (say, where the couch is placed). I can envision the dispersion from the HF section with the section thus swiveled and was, mentally, trying to contrast it with the dispersion from the folded horn (below 400hz) radiating straight out of the corners and into the room. In other words, if the Khorns upper section could swivel as above to affect a proper stereo image in the desired spot in a large room, would the resulting sound still sound "right" and "whole" seeing how the bass bin would be fixed into the corner and not able to match the same directional pattern as the swiveled HF section? That's why I was originally asking about the omnidirectional pattern/dispersion of the lower frequencies. I hope I didn't overly complicate or confuse anyone with what I'm trying to say and learn - lol. Thanks - H2G.

I've heard and read about bass being omnidirectional, but where does this begin in terms of frequency, i.e. below 200hz, 100hz, 60hz, etc...?

I've noticed how often he said that too; it seems he absolutely hated those "100 watt stoves." (100 wpc amplifiers) He also spoke negatively about electronic equalization as well. The most postive thing he seemed to harp time and time again was his theory about "distortion being inversely proportional to efficiency." To PWK, efficiency meant practicially everything...or so it would seem.

This might be an elementary question to some, so I apologize beforehand, but I've got a question about the "new' multichannel home theater amps of today. First off, I'd like to say that I love my HK430 and its twin power design and I've also liked an old Proton D1200 amp I used to own that had DMC (dual mono construction - which, to my understanding, is simply another way of saying "twin-powered," or having separate power supplies for each channel).<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /> I understand the differences between the twin-powered/DMC two-channel amplifiers of days-gone-by but is this principle applied to todays multichannel home theater amps? In other words, if the amp is of a 5.1 design, does the amp have 5 or 6 **separate** power supplies (one for each channel) or does it simply provide one, single power supply that it uses to evenly distribute power across all 5 or 6 channels? I guess I'm a bit behind the times in my understanding of today's multichannel amps, but I'm always willing to learn, hence this question. Thanks in advance!

This might be an elementary question to some, so I apologize beforehand, but I've got a question about the "new' multichannel home theater amps of today. First off, I'd like to say that I love my HK430 and its twin power design and I've also liked an old Proton D1200 amp I used to own that had DMC (dual mono construction - which, to my understanding, is simply another way of saying "twin-powered," or having separate power supplies for each channel).<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /> I understand the differences between the twin-powered/DMC two-channel amplifiers of days-gone-by but is this principle applied to todays multichannel home theater amps? In other words, if the amp is of a 5.1 design, does the amp have 5 or 6 **separate** power supplies (one for each channel) or does it simply provide one, single power supply that it uses to evenly distribute power across all 5 or 6 channels? I guess I'm a bit behind the times in my understanding of today's multichannel amps, but I'm always willing to learn, hence this question. Thanks in advance!

That is the crux of the question; What is headroom? Is it more rated watts? Or is it the ability to double the watts when the impeadence halves? My layperson's understanding of dynamic headroom is this: it's the amount of power an amplifer has to deliver on musical peaks, or bursts, above and beyond is rated RMS power. For instance, if an amp was rated at 100wpc and had 3db of dynamic headroom, then it has enough "reserves" in order to deliver twice it's maximum rated power during musical peaks. In this particular case, that would mean the amp could put out 200 watts total, for short, musical peaks, or bursts. If a 100wpc amp had 6db of dynamic headroom (like the old NAD and Proton units of the 1980s) then it can deliver four times it maximum rated power during musical peaks. In this particular case, that would mean 400 watts for musical peaks and bursts. You need to ensure you have enough dynamic headroom to ensure the amp doesn't clip during musical peaks. Clipping is basically just that - the amp runs out of power when the music demands more then it can offer. Amps with high dynamic headroom mean they should clip less because of their high power reserves. This means the music should sound cleaner, with less distortion due to the avoidance of clipping. This also helps to save your speakers. You can also ensure sufficient dynamic headroom by purchasing a more power amp then you need, i.e. buying a 400wpc amp and then running it more then 100watts RMS which means the amp can still utilize it's full-rated power (in this case, 400 watts) which means that it'll be able to deliver four times its rated power (or 6db, like the above example) for musical peaks, or bursts. Of course, it's pretty difficult to know just how many watts are coming out of your amp at any given moment so this can become quite tricky. The problem is, most amps today offer poor dynamic headroom - 1 to 2.5db - which means that if you run them towards their maximum RMS, they'll have little left for reserves and will thus clip fairly quickly. Clipping is dangerous because it distorts the waveforms and this damages your speakers. I seem to recall reading something some years back that explained it as the low-frequency waves becomming distorted and then being sent to the tweeter instead of the woofer, which is why when people usually talk of a "blown speaker," they're usually talking about damaged, or "blown" tweeters. The worst thing you can do to a speaker (other then flat-out sending more "clean," continuous power into them then they are designed to take) is to send them excessive clipping, or "dirty" power, which generally blows the tweeters pretty quickly. High dynamic headroom - regardless of whether or not it's offered by design (i.e. high dynamic headroom built into the amp like NAD and Proton used to do) or by "smart" usage (i.e. never running a 400wpc amp past 100 watts RMS, thereby saving approximately 300 or so watts for reserves) is what is needed to avoid clipping. As a rule of thumb - the more dynamic headroom you have, the better off you are, because the amp is less likely to clip and therefore, your music will sound much cleaner. The above is just my take on this concept; no need for any engineer wanna-bes to cut me off at my kneecaps for my layperson's approach to it all - lol. Hope this helps. -H2G

I think Dr. Who hit the nail on the head with respect to this one - if you're gonna do home theater/movies (or plan on it eventually) - then grab the SVS and you can then add another 3 Heresys later on for a 5.1 setup. If you're just interested in 2 channel audio (music only) then the fortes do a fine job in my opinion, seeing how they go down to 32hz and have very low distortion in their bottom end. There's a old stereo review article on them from 1986. I'll look around for it and attach it here for your informed reading should I find a digital copy of it. I happen to like non-subwoofer bass for my music listening. Subs have always tended to sound too boomy for my musical tastes, and I'm not really into screwing around with the sub settings for every song I listen to in order to get it to blend "just right." This is a subjective opinion, mind you. If you're looking at home theater one day, then a subwoofer's a must for all of those explosions, machine-gun fire, and T.rex roaring - lol. On another note, the Heresy/SVS combo allows you more freedom in positioning your speakers in order to get those crucial mids & highs at ear level because you can prop the Heresys up on stands; the Forte's are floor-standing units and their mids are where they are - vertically speaking - end of story. It's your call; hope this helps. -H2G

I agree with Michael - a clipping (or over-driven) amp putting out square waves (at least I think that's what it does when it clips) is, to my knowledge, more dangerous to a loudspeaker then a non-clipping amp providing slightly more power (clean power) then the speaker's rated to handle. In other words, it's better to have more then enough juice then to come up short because coming up short drives the amp to clip and send "dirty," driver-destroying spikes to the speaker. PWK had, in an old DFH (Dope From Hope), spoke about this very issue...with the K77 in particular. H2G

05-10-2006, 10:30 PM 731481 in reply to 731242 heresy2guy Joined on 12-16-2002 La Jolla, CA Posts 352 Re: Need help with my Heresy III purchase.... Reply Quote Edit Favorites //</p><p>/*** ComponentArt Web.UI client-side storage for ctl00_ctl01_bcr_ctl00___PostRepeater_ctl01_FavoritePopupMenu___Menu ***/</p><p>window.ComponentArt_Storage_ctl00_ctl01_bcr_ctl00___PostRepeater_ctl01_FavoritePopupMenu___Menu=[];</p><p>window.ComponentArt_ItemLooks_ctl00_ctl01_bcr_ctl00___PostRepeater_ctl01_FavoritePopupMenu___Menu=[[0,'DefaultItemLook',1,'CommonContextMenuItem',2,'CommonContextMenuItemHover',5,2,6,5,7,15,8,2,10,'CommonContextMenuItemExpanded']];</p><p>window.ComponentArt_ScrollLooks_ctl00_ctl01_bcr_ctl00___PostRepeater_ctl01_FavoritePopupMenu___Menu=[[0,'DefaultItemLook'],[0,'DefaultItemLook']];</p><p>// //</p><p>if (!(window.cart_menu_documentmousedownhandled))</p><p>{</p><p>ComponentArt_AddEventHandler(document,'mousedown',new Function('event','ComponentArt_Menu_DocumentMouseDown(event)'));</p><p>window.cart_menu_documentmousedownhandled = true;</p><p>}</p><p>// //</p><p>if (!(window.cart_menu_documentmouseuphandled))</p><p>{</p><p>ComponentArt_AddEventHandler(document,'mouseup',new Function('event','ComponentArt_Menu_DocumentMouseUp(event)'));</p><p>window.cart_menu_documentmouseuphandled = true;</p><p>}</p><p>// //</p><p>/*** ComponentArt_Menu_Startup_ctl00_ctl01_bcr_ctl00___PostRepeater_ctl01_FavoritePopupMenu___Menu ***/</p><p>window.ComponentArt_Init_ctl00_ctl01_bcr_ctl00___PostRepeater_ctl01_FavoritePopupMenu___Menu = function() {</p><p>if (!(window.cart_menu_kernel_loaded && window.cart_menu_support_loaded))</p><p>{</p><p> setTimeout('ComponentArt_Init_ctl00_ctl01_bcr_ctl00___PostRepeater_ctl01_FavoritePopupMenu___Menu()', 500);</p><p> return;</p><p>}</p><p>window.ctl00_ctl01_bcr_ctl00___PostRepeater_ctl01_FavoritePopupMenu___Menu = new ComponentArt_Menu('ctl00_ctl01_bcr_ctl00___PostRepeater_ctl01_FavoritePopupMenu___Menu',ComponentArt_Storage_ctl00_ctl01_bcr_ctl00___PostRepeater_ctl01_FavoritePopupMenu___Menu,ComponentArt_ItemLooks_ctl00_ctl01_bcr_ctl00___PostRepeater_ctl01_FavoritePopupMenu___Menu,ComponentArt_ScrollLooks_ctl00_ctl01_bcr_ctl00___PostRepeater_ctl01_FavoritePopupMenu___Menu);</p><p>var properties = [</p><p>['CascadeCollapse',true],['ClientSideOnContextMenuHide',new Function('eval(&#092;'window.ctl00_ctl01_bcr_ctl00___PostRepeater_ctl01_FavoritePopupMenu___Menu_ServerPopulatedPopupMenu.ContextMenuClosed()&#092;')')],['ClientSideOnContextMenuShow',null],['ClientSideOnItemSelect',null],['ClientSideOnItemMouseOut',null],['ClientSideOnItemMouseOver',null],['CssClass','CommonContextMenuGroup'],['CollapseDelay',500],['CollapseDuration',200],['CollapseSlide',2],['CollapseTransition',0],['CollapseTransitionCustomFilter',null],['ContextControlId',null],['ContextData',null],['ContextMenu',3],['ControlId','ctl00$ctl01$bcr$ctl00$_$PostRepeater$ctl01$FavoritePopupMenu$_$Menu'],['DefaultTarget',''],['ExpandDelay',0],['ExpandDuration',200],['ExpandOnClick',false],['ExpandSlide',2],['ExpandTransition',0],['ExpandTransitionCustomFilter',null],['Height',null],['HideSelectElements',cart_browser_hideselects && true],['HighlightExpandedPath',true],['MultiPageId',null],['Orientation',0],['OverlayWindowedElements',cart_browser_overlays && true],['PlaceHolderId','ctl00_ctl01_bcr_ctl00___PostRepeater_ctl01_FavoritePopupMenu___Menu_div'],['ScrollingEnabled',false],['ShadowColor','#8D8F95'],['ShadowEnabled',true],['ShadowOffset',2],['TopGroupItemSpacing',null],['TopGroupExpandDirection',2],['Width',null],];</p><p>ComponentArt_SetProperties(ctl00_ctl01_bcr_ctl00___PostRepeater_ctl01_FavoritePopupMenu___Menu, properties);</p><p>ComponentArt_Menu_RenderMenu(ctl00_ctl01_bcr_ctl00___PostRepeater_ctl01_FavoritePopupMenu___Menu);</p><p>ComponentArt_Menu_InitKeyboard(ctl00_ctl01_bcr_ctl00___PostRepeater_ctl01_FavoritePopupMenu___Menu);</p><p>window.ctl00_ctl01_bcr_ctl00___PostRepeater_ctl01_FavoritePopupMenu___Menu_loaded = true;</p><p>}</p><p>ComponentArt_Init_ctl00_ctl01_bcr_ctl00___PostRepeater_ctl01_FavoritePopupMenu___Menu();</p><p>// //</p><p>window.ComponentArt_Init_ctl00_ctl01_bcr_ctl00___PostRepeater_ctl01_FavoritePopupMenu___Callback = function() {</p><p>if(!window.ComponentArt_Callback_Loaded)</p><p> {setTimeout('ComponentArt_Init_ctl00_ctl01_bcr_ctl00___PostRepeater_ctl01_FavoritePopupMenu___Callback()', 50); return; }</p><p>window.ctl00_ctl01_bcr_ctl00___PostRepeater_ctl01_FavoritePopupMenu___Callback = new ComponentArt_Callback('ctl00_ctl01_bcr_ctl00___PostRepeater_ctl01_FavoritePopupMenu___Callback');</p><p>ctl00_ctl01_bcr_ctl00___PostRepeater_ctl01_FavoritePopupMenu___Callback.CallbackPrefix = 'http://forums.klipsch.com/forums/3/731481/ShowThread.aspx';</p><p>ctl00_ctl01_bcr_ctl00___PostRepeater_ctl01_FavoritePopupMenu___Callback.CallbackParamDelimiter = '&';</p><p>ctl00_ctl01_bcr_ctl00___PostRepeater_ctl01_FavoritePopupMenu___Callback.ClientSideOnCallbackComplete = new Function('eval(&#092;'window.ctl00_ctl01_bcr_ctl00___PostRepeater_ctl01_FavoritePopupMenu___Menu_ServerPopulatedPopupMenu.ShowContextMenu(0);&#092;');');</p><p>ctl00_ctl01_bcr_ctl00___PostRepeater_ctl01_FavoritePopupMenu___Callback.LoadingPanelClientTemplate = ' ';</p><p>ctl00_ctl01_bcr_ctl00___PostRepeater_ctl01_FavoritePopupMenu___Callback.Parameter = '';</p><p>ctl00_ctl01_bcr_ctl00___PostRepeater_ctl01_FavoritePopupMenu___Callback.Postback = function() { __doPostBack('ctl00$ctl01$bcr$ctl00$_$PostRepeater$ctl01$FavoritePopupMenu$_$Callback','') };</p><p>}</p><p>ComponentArt_Init_ctl00_ctl01_bcr_ctl00___PostRepeater_ctl01_FavoritePopupMenu___Callback();</p><p>// Contact I've been running my Heresy IIs with my KG4s for some time now. I did a post on this awhile ago. Both speakers compliment each other very well. When I listen solely to the Heresys, they have great mids and highs but weak bass (what can you really expect from a 63hz cutoff). When I listen solely to the KG4s, they have great bass and great highs but weak mids. When I run them together, they fill in the others audible "holes" and make for a very nice, well-rounded sound that goes from around 38hz all the way up to 20khz...and with a great, heritage-sounding midrange to boot thanks to the Heresys midrange horn. Of course, you could simply buy Khorns, Cornwalls, Fortes, KLF30s/20s, Quartets, etc..., and get that great, full-range, horn-loaded midrange sound without having to resort to buying and running a second set of speakers or a subwoofer. I bought the KG4s a year or two ago simply because a guy who lived about 10 minutes away was selling them for $200 and they looked practically brand new. For that price, I figured I couldn't go wrong. For the record, I bought the Heresy IIs brand new around 1990 or 91. I've got them set up like this: HII KG4 TV KG4 HII The HIIs are tucked into the corners, toed-in, and are on small stands that bring the tweeters up to the KG4s' tweeter height. Report abuse Quick Reply

I understand what you're saying, Tony. PWK did many experiments on many things and his feeling, based upon my reading, was that a measurable improvement needed to be taken into consideration with the cost associated to implement it. One of the DFH articles mentions tri-amping as something that could produce measureable improvements, but questions whether or not said improvements could be easily discernible by the naked ear...particularly with respect to it's additional cost. Many people are now paying premium prices for en vogue hybrid vehicles (Toyota Prius comes to mind) but fail to realize that they might have to drive a hundred-thousand plus miles just to recoup their original, premium sticker price via their fuel savings.

Gotcha, Dean...I know what you're saying - there's no dip in the midrange requency, per se, but its appears that way when you listen (at least to me) due to the difference in the way the midrange is presented (horns vs. cones). To me, the 2-ways (KG or Reference) crossed at around 2khz always sound "weak" in the midrange due to their strong bass and the strong highs. When I listen to well-rounded 3-ways (Cornwalls or Fortes, for instance), everything seems "strong". This is just a good example, I guess, on how frequency response measurements can't tell the whole story. -H2G

I've been running my Heresy IIs with my KG4s for some time now. I did a post on this awhile ago. Both speakers compliment each other very well. When I listen solely to the Heresys, they have great mids and highs but weak bass (what can you really expect from a 63hz cutoff). When I listen solely to the KG4s, they have great bass and great highs but weak mids. When I run them together, they fill in the others audible "holes" and make for a very nice, well-rounded sound that goes from around 38hz all the way up to 20khz...and with a great, heritage-sounding midrange to boot thanks to the Heresys midrange horn. Of course, you could simply buy Khorns, Cornwalls, Fortes, KLF30s/20s, Quartets, etc..., and get that great, full-range, horn-loaded midrange sound without having to resort to buying and running a second set of speakers or a subwoofer. I bought the KG4s a year or two ago simply because a guy who lived about 10 minutes away was selling them for $200 and they looked practically brand new. For that price, I figured I couldn't go wrong. For the record, I bought the Heresy IIs brand new around 1990 or 91. I've got them set up like this: HII KG4 TV KG4 HII The HIIs are tucked into the corners, toed-in, and are on small stands that bring the tweeters up to the KG4s' tweeter height.

My 3960 acts a bit squirrelly at times - I'll throw a new CD in it and it'll spin and spin and spin and not read it so I'll take it out and then reinsert it and it'll work fine (for the record, I check all discs to ensure they're clean before playing them, i.e. no smudges or fingerprints to obstruct the laser). In addition, there are times when the 3960 is pretty noisy when it's reading the first few tracks, but quiets down when it gets to the middle and end ones. I guess this is because the CD needs to spin quicker during the beginning tracks since a CD is read from the inside out and it stresses the machine somehow. The above issues don;t happen all the time, but they do happen some of the time. I simply chalk it up to the cheap build quality of the unit (I think I paid 49 or 59 bucks for it on sale at Best Buy a year or two ago). The stellar, on-board 24/196 DAC sure sounds sweet though! -H2G Not to hijack the thread, but the Toshiba 3950 morphed into the 3960 and now the 3990. The 3990 I bought at Bestbuy goes for $59.00 and there's simply very little to say bad about the way they sound. I wonder if there's any other manufacture that makes a 24/196 upsampled CD player for under five hundred bucks. It took me a year and a half of almost daily use to before the first 3950 lost a transport. It took me about thirty munites to diagnose the problem and about fifteen seconds to toss it in the dumpster! Regards,