Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'comparison'.
Found 4 results
I was wondering which speaker system is the better overall setup for casual music listening and the occasional college party. Thanks for the help guys if you could compare the two of them it would be great as they are similar price range speaker systems.
So I have ~$1000 to spend on upgrading the fronts on my AV setup. I decided on four speakers to compare. The ELACs arrived on a Friday, the KEF on a Saturday, and the Klipsch on a Monday. The UPS guy knocked on my apartment door and told me he had to meet me at the elevator in the underground garage because the boxes were too big and heavy to lug up the stairs. This didn't happen with the ELACs. Though those were delivered by USPS rather than UPS. Interpret that as you will. These things. Are. Huge. And very, very handsome. I'd provide pictures but my dinky iPhone and terrible lighting wouldn't really do them justice. It's a great mix of form and function. The wood finish on the enclosure is fine, and the front face has a nice bevel around the edge. But what I love about them is how clean they look. My GF prefers to have the grille on, but when she's not around I take them off, and when I do I can't help but take a close look at the silicone tweeter horn and run my fingers over it. The copper-colored woofers look great and (unlike the SVSs) there's no exposed hardware anywhere. Even the grilles are magnetic so there are no holes to ruin the face of the speaker. They're just so clean. I invited some friends over to help me audition the three pairs. As you can see from the photo in the original post the ELACs were most inboard with the KEFs placed on top. The Klipsch were placed on the outside. All speakers were given a small amount of toe in. We were seated on the couch about 11' away from the plane of the speakers (in the dreaded couch against the wall setup so often seen in small apartments). The very first track we tested was Die Young by Sylvan Esso. Unfortunately I was kind of running around trying to get things set up while my friends listened from the hot seat. If you haven't heard this track I envy you, because you get to hear it for the first time. It's a great track. It starts out simply with some vocal samples and Amelia Meath singing in her somewhat slurred kind of way. When the synth and saxophone comes in... holy cow. The KEFs sounded good, of course. But like I mentioned before, the ELACs had that same quality in the mid-high and treble but would fill out the middle and bass so much better. I reconfigured my AB switcher to compare the ELACs to the Klipsch for this track, since the ELACs won the first comparo. The Klipsch blew us away. First of all, these things are LOUD. Klipsch claims they have 98dB of sensitivity, and while that's probably overstated a bit, they are still much louder than the ELAC and the KEF. It became a tricky, two person job to switch from the ELAC to the Klipsch: one person switched the speakers and the other changed the volume on the AVR. If the Klipsch were at a 22, the ELAC would have to go to 30. In my research I learned that Klipsch speakers aren't really neutral. They're trying to achieve a specific Klipsch "sound". Mark Casavant, Sr. Vp of Global Product Development at Klipsch explained that I can say that I get what they're trying to achieve. During Die Young whenever we switched from the ELAC to the Klipsch it sounded like Sylvan Esso transported into the room with us. Imaging was fantastic, the clarity in the mids and highs that was already there with the ELACs became even clearer on the Klipsch. And that fuller feeling that the ELACs had over the KEF? The Klipsch did the same to the ELAC. I decided that trying to AB test all three speakers against each other for every track was going to be too much of a pain, so we kept the comparison to the ELACs and the Klipsch for the rest of the night. At one point my friend made the observation that the ELACs sounded like they were playing a recording while the Klipsch sounded like they were playing a live performance. And I think that really captures the difference (and is a testament to the effectiveness of the goal Klipsch is trying to achieve). The highs especially had crystal clarity. All of a sudden you could tell that the saxophone in Die Young wasn't just another instrument, but a reed instrument made of brass being played by a real person. We turned on my Pro-Ject Tube Box S and switched the AVR to the TT input and spun up Death Cab for Cutie's I Will Possess Your Heart. Again, the ELACs sounded good, but the Klipsch sounded like a live performance. You could hear every pluck of the bass guitar. And just like with the saxes on Die Young, the bass guitar became a steel string instrument with coiled steel strings. Ben Gibbard's vocals -- for better or for worse -- became much more distinct and present. We went back to streaming Spotify and switched styles. Deadmau5's Ghosts 'n' Stuff was next. The clarity of the Klipsch was less important on this track which didn't really feature any vocals or have any real instruments. The fullness from the big 8" drivers on the Klipsch did give it the advantage though. Pairing the ELACs with a decent sub may make this a more even fight, though. Rodrigo y Gabriela's Hora Zero was next, and again the Klipsch ran away with it. We tried Yosi Horikawa's track Bubbles after that. The imaging, clarity, and precision of the Klipsch made it the clear winner. "Well now they're just showing off" one of my friends said during the opening measures of the track. My favorite band is Pink Floyd so of course we tried some of their tracks. Surprisingly, the Klipsch didn't have a clear advantage on a lot of tracks like Wish You Were Here or Great Gig in the Sky. I think the ELACs actually had a slight advantage due to their warmer, more subdued nature. That said, if the ELACs outperformed it was only infinitesimally so. Or perhaps it was just that I had such high expectations of the Klipsch. The ELACS also clawed back some ground on Rage Against the Machine's Take the Power Back. It seems that on crunchy rock tracks tracks or tracks where clarity isn't key the ELACs could catch up to the Klipsch. But what was happening was that the Klipsch were coming down to meet the consistently decent ELACs. On tracks like Die Young or Bubbles the Klipsch would just run away with the win. The Klipsch had more variance but on average was higher. One of my friends made an Excel spreadsheet to try and objectively asses all speakers. But there wasn't really a need to analyze it. The Klipsch were the clear favorites of the night.
Hello everyone, I am considering an upgrade for my Energy esw-8. Now I am considering buying the R-112SW, however I have not been able to find many reviews on it. I have heard the Sub 12 in action which I liked a lot in terms of power, and they seem to be pretty similar to me (Keep in mind that I am not an expert in this field, so if I'm missing something please forgive me). Looking at the specs sheets (Sub 12) (R-112SW) it seems that the main differences between the two are: 650 watts vs 600 watts dynamic power in favor of the sub 12 24Hz-120Hz vs 24Hz-125Hz frequency response in favor of the R-112SW Bash vs All digital amplifier for the sub 12 and the R-112SW respectively Output: Max continuous output sub 12: 117 dB @30 Hz 1/8 space 1 meter Max acoustic output R-112SW: 118 dB (Down-fire vs Front-fire for the sub 12 and the R-112SW respectively) (Copper Cerametalic woofer for the R-112SW) My sub-questions are: How important is the dynamic power for the overall performance? Same for the frequency response (especially considering that the difference in frequency is in the higher end) What is the difference between Bash and All Digital and which performs better? Is the output information given on both spec sheets comparable? and if yes, which one has a higher significance (and thus gives the edge to the respective subwoofer)? Does the material of the woofer make a difference in sound/performance and then my main question is of course: In terms of performance, which of the two is better? The Receiver I am using is the Denon AVR-1912 (will probably upgrade in the future, but I don't know within what time-frame) I am aware of the fact that the Sub 12 has been discontinued, but in the case that the Sub 12 is significantly better buying second hand would be an option or saving up for the R-115SW and upgrading the Receiver proportionally(The latter not being preferred in terms of financial resource management but if the upgrade isn't worth it and the sub 12 not available it's better to save up and wait as to me this is a long-term investment). Thanks in advance! (Tldr; see main question )
Several years ago, I had the opportunity to hear Jeff Hoak's LaScalas and they were beautiful sounding speakers. I had the chance to pick up a pair recently and had TOTALLY forgot how large they were. LOL. These have an absolutely beautiful finish. Other than a few small nicks near the bottom of the cabinets, they are in amazing condition for a 34 year old speaker. Everything looks original and they have AA Crossovers. Serial Numbers are Sequential. Based on the serial number, they are Vintage 1980. There weren't any stickers on the back so I'm not sure of the style these (not even sure what different variety LaScalas came in. I have no idea what finish these are in or if they were stained at one time. Feel free to help educate me on these because I know little to nothing about them. I've been listening to a variety of source material. Youtube and streaming and Airplay from my cell phone sound like garbage on them. Haha. I think it's because they are just very revealing? Once I hooked up Dave Matthews, Eagles and a few other concert DVD's, they sounded very nice. I've always heard guys speak of how the 3-way heritage speakers have better midrange. I've owned Forte II and Chorus II and I thought those were "heritage" but later found out they weren't part of the heritage series. I never felt they blew away my RF-83's in the midrange department. The LaScalas definitely have a better midrange though. That midrange horn is HUGE! The throat on the horn is 2ft deep. It's very smooth and vocals sound amazingly natural. Bass from the LaScalas in my HT is extremely weak. I even turned the crossover for my mains to Full and they were still weak. I've always heard guys say that about the LaScalas and there are a few that "claim" the LaScalas have plenty of bass. Sorry, that's just not the case in my room. Over the next week, I want to move them into my living room (wife has to leave for a few hours to do that). I want to see how bass sounds with hardwood floor and how they sound in a very open floorplan layout. No worries as long as you have a capable sub. My RSW-15 provided plenty of low end to allow the LaScalas to really shine. Movies sounded amazingly clear and precise. Very detailed. My next step is to do some A/B comparison between the LaScalas and the RF-83's to see how they directly compare to each other. Because the LaScalas do not have banana plugs, I have a set of speaker cables hooked up to the RF-83's and a second set hooked up to the LaScalas and will have to change the cables on the back of the amp. It should be another fun comparison. Here are some pics I took of them tonight.