garyrc Posted December 30, 2010 Share Posted December 30, 2010 I would love someone to put up a nearly acoustically transparent fabric (like Acoustone used to make) with, say, Jubs, modern K-horns, Palladiums, the best WIlson's, YGs (who claim to be the "best"), and other highly reputed speakers rotated into their design specified positions behind it, with highly dynamic material, so we could compare, without knowing which was playing. I am aware that YG does something like this, but I think the participants (raters) know which speaker is playing.. It is very unlikely that Klipsch would be included in such a comparison (unless the Palladium sneaks in someday), partly because Klipsch doesn't advertize in high end magazines (still true?), and partly because Klipsch maintains relatively low prices. The SPLs would have to be equal, which is a problem in itself (pink noise? at some frequency band in the midrange?). Those of us who are familiar with the sound of any of these speakers (probably) would be able to identify them, so that might be a place bias could come in. It would be interesting to run a similar test with musically oriented people who are not familiar with the sounds of any of these speakers. If something like this ever happened, I suspect that we would find that we gained something and lost something whenever we switched to the next speaker. I'm betting that no speaker, even the "best of the best" would be the best at everything. In the past there were recorded v.s live tests done by Klipsch and the old AR. Both were judged to sound like live music in a direct comparison to live, even though these speakers were as different as night and day. It should have been a 3-way test ... in those days AR v.s. Klipschorns v.s.a live orchestra would have been O.K.. There was one comparison of about 7 or 8 speakers (in Europe, I think) and live music, and reality did not come in first!! That's another factor underlying what is "the best" -- preference and accuracy may yield a different rank order in some or most listeners. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edwinr Posted December 31, 2010 Share Posted December 31, 2010 I have never owned Maggies, but I have listened to them a lot. During the last few years I have been trying to find the sound that I like and I have owned lots of loudspeakers, including the following; a 1986 pair of well used Klipschorns; Martin Logan Summits; ATC SCM50 active monitors, and my current 'speakers; a 2005 pair of walnut Belle Klipsch (which I actually bought brand new just after the Klipschorns but I kept them in boxes). Which is 'better?' Answer... None really. They all sounded great in their own way. BUT, there's one thing the Klipschorns do that no other can - that is they can fill the whole room with sound so that the room becomes the loudspeaker, and you're sitting in the middle. Not even the electrostatics can do this. When you factor in the cost of amplification then only ATC (which come with built in ampliification), and Klipsch standout. The ATC's had HUGE punch and clarity - very similar to Klipsch's full horn designs. I love 'em both! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edwinr Posted December 31, 2010 Share Posted December 31, 2010 P.S. Don't ask why I sold the Klipschorns and didn't restore them instead. It was a moment of madness... Actually I will tell you. I intended buying a brand new pair of K'horns and I had no room for two pairs, plus the unpacked Belles! So I sold them (stupid, stupid, stupid!). Then I got sucked into the electrostatic thing, first with Martin Logan Vantages which lacked punch, then the Summits which were better when driven by a Mark Levinson monster amp that cost me many $$$$$$$... but that's another story. So I tried the other speakers before throwing my hands up in disgust. In the end I unpacked my poor lonely old Belles. I have never looked back. [] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLSamuel Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 Klipsch and Magnepan offer tremendous value, new or used. I would agree though I've not really listened to Magnepans my understanding is the things they do well they do very well. That low and moderate volume presence is probably what really sets them apart. Another thing that is interesting is that both companyies,still follow the same basic design principles. Many others seem to be more about marketing and compromise where Klipsch and Magnepan seem to be about best sound for the money. I'd give the nod to Klipsch but would still love to own a nice set of Maggies some day. I suspect they're very good to chill out to and probably magical with the right source. Obviously compromised in the efficiency department compared to Klipsch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLSamuel Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 Then there is the already mentioned snob appeal. Way back, someone at Stereophile or The Absolute Sound interviewed a celebrity who had K-horns in his house, and the interviewer said something like "Why don't you have audiophile speakers?" Years later, in the 2,000s, when Stereophile gave the Klipsch LaScala IIs a near rave review it did my heart good..Yes, it is one's subjective opinion of what a speaker sounds like that counts, but try to find a store that has any of the so-called "High End" speakers in the same showroon as Klipschorns, Jubs, or Palladium? Oh, ****, I forgot that some of the "High Enders" don't like speakers to be compared directly! I'm guessing that's most of it. The markup may not be as high on Klipsch and they sound "right" enough to most Klipsch owners that they don't upgrade except to better Klipsch. Still doesn't get much better than Klipschorns. Besides. If Klipsch compared directly to other brands in same or even higher price range guess which would win most of the time ... especially since louder often sounds better ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
russ69 Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 I've not really listened to Magnepans my understanding is the things they do well they do very well. That low and moderate volume presence is probably what really sets them apart. Nope, that's not it. They are similar to Klipsch in that regard, they need a little juice to jump. What they do best is image and detail. FYI. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLSamuel Posted January 2, 2011 Share Posted January 2, 2011 I've not really listened to Magnepans my understanding is the things they do well they do very well. That low and moderate volume presence is probably what really sets them apart. Nope, that's not it. They are similar to Klipsch in that regard, they need a little juice to jump. What they do best is image and detail. FYI. Thanks for the extra info. I really meant that the low and moderate volume presence sets them apart from most but is something in common with Klipsch. Naturally the power requirements are a downer. Would consider a score to find any Maggies in good shape for cheap. Probably not gonna happen but a few have found Cornwalls for $40 or less.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris A Posted January 2, 2011 Share Posted January 2, 2011 I've not really listened to Magnepans my understanding is the things they do well they do very well. That low and moderate volume presence is probably what really sets them apart. Nope, that's not it. They are similar to Klipsch in that regard, they need a little juice to jump. What they do best is image and detail. FYI. FYI: My Magnepan MG-IIIAs never imaged like the mains that I have now. The MG-IIIAs have what I would call "transparency" which isn't necessarily something that I desire (personally) in a speaker. I prefer a "seamless and present soundstage" instead. That's probably the biggest reason why the MG-IIIAs are stored away. Another issue is that the the Magnepans really require placement ~6 feet (1.8 meters) away from any wall, and that is a really big problem in terms of usable room space. In my previous home, the room could support this but they ate up our living area, and I was constantly moving them out to listen to them, then moving them back into the corners when I wasn't. Another issue is lack of dynamic response - drums/percussion just never sounded right. Another issue is the inability to toe-in the speakers for greater imaging performance. Toeing-in the Magnepans (and I would think any planar dipole speaker type) apparently causes too much disruption in the dipolar pattern--the soundstage just never sounded right. Chris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JBryan Posted January 2, 2011 Share Posted January 2, 2011 Comparing speakers with similar designs is fairly straight-forward but different designs can be difficult as each comes with its own benefits and compromises. Maggies fill the room with authoritative, detailed sound and they can disappear in a well setup system. Planar speakers, and most electrostatics offer a similar sound but they also tend to congest and distort at high volumes and the bottom-end is less visceral than other designs. That doesn't make them a bad speaker and to some folks, the benefits far out weight the compromises. Horns are known for low distortion and super-fast transients but are very room and system dependent, require a lot of space to set up, come with a large footprint to achieve the lower octaves and lack depth in their soundstage. To my ears, horns offer one of the best values in sound reproduction and I can accept their short-comings but there is a larger group of audio enthusiasts that won't. After listening to horn set ups for years, I was somehow intrigued by the glowing reviews regarding the Zu Definition and when the opportunity arouse, I picked up a pair with their 2 full-range drivers, 4 rear-firing woofers and a single horn tweeter per cabinet. The positives were their small footprint, capabilities to be dialed in to almost any space, ability to seamlessly pump out sub-20Hz bass as well as over 30kHz highs in a design that emphasizes the imaging and depth that a full-range driver can provide. When I finally put together a system around them, set the parameters to factory spec for the Definitions and switched on the power, my first reaction was disappointment. After all the hype and my own expectations, the sound was no where near what I was hoping for. I didn't perceive as much detail and the image was more laid back compared to my modded Khorn system and the bass... simply overwhelming! I thought I'd made a big mistake..HUGE mistake but after a few hours of listening, my horn bias subsided and I began to understand the speakers' capabilities. I realized my failure was in trying to make them sound like horn speakers and once I was able to reset my listening criteria (not an easy task after listening to an all-horn system for +15 years), dialing them in became much easier and the sound has become exceptional and very satisfying. I'm still 'working' the set up and the sound is still getting better but I am already delighted with the outcome - the Definitions are indeed special in my book. My point is that with both systems optimized, if I were to compare them side-by-side, I'm not sure which I would prefer. The Zu's really shine at what they do well as do the Khorns and both offer a very distinct, yet very satisfying sound. There are so many choices in audio and for good reason - everyone's taste and preferences are evolving at a different pace and in different directions and there seems to be more diversity now than ever. The possibility of someone putting together the same system as someone else is miniscule so comparisons - even with similar speaker designs is difficult. As an aside, 'Hi-end' is a relative term and falls into the category of "someone's trash is someone else's treasure". Have fun Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quadklipsh Posted January 2, 2011 Author Share Posted January 2, 2011 jbryan your experience speaks for itself that there is nothing like an ultimate speaker system. every one of em out there has its pros and cons . people would buy what they find best to their ears . advertisement and input of ideas and experiences from peers do matter ,but theres no ultimacy . silk domes sound soft and non tiring or imposing ,yet very musical. horns may be more accurate and efficient . hence all have their own virtues and demerits . its the end user to find out whats best for him . to me klipsch is the best bang for the bucks spent . period Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris A Posted January 2, 2011 Share Posted January 2, 2011 Horns...are very room...dependent...I find that planar dipole speakers and other floor-standers actually have more issues in terms of room placement, at least IMHO. If you're willing to live with the higher bass distortion, then you can place Klipsch corner horns, e.g., Khorns with enclosed backs, and La Scalas/Belles, anywhere in the room that you wish--and people do. I find that corner placement gives me back a lot of room over floor-standing speakers. Horns...are very...system dependent... I find that a lot of folks here attempt to fix speaker issues with non-linear electronics (e.g., SET amplifiers in particular). I recommend first fixing the issues at their source--by fixing crossover issues (using steep-slope filters) and driver issues (particularly the K77 tweeter) in Klipsch Heritage speakers. I also find that it's cheaper, too. ...and lack depth in their soundstage...nt. In fact, I believe the opposite to be true - I've never heard a pair of speakers that can reproduce the depth and width of soundstage that I've got now (including Polk SDA monitors). I'd recommend that you try moving your modified Khorns forward out of their corners slightly to achieve a clear space between the left and right speakers (and provide something to fill the space behind them). This technique increased imaging by a great deal in my room. Chris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Audible Nectar Posted January 2, 2011 Share Posted January 2, 2011 I cannot imagine ever stepping out of horn/compression driver based setups, and wouldn't even think about anything other than that without "ultrarich" income/wealth. I have rarely seen anything appealing in the highest end speaker markets that "grabbed me" like the best of Altec/Klipsch/JBL/TAD drivers etc. do. Any additional funds that could theoretically be spent on five and six figure cost setups would be spent on the rooms instead, to make the best of the aforementioned compression driver/horn setups. Maybe play with some field coil too..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
russ69 Posted January 2, 2011 Share Posted January 2, 2011 ...Another issue is that the the Magnepans really require placement ~6 feet (1.8 meters) away from any wall, and that is a really big problem in terms of usable room space. In my previous home, the room could support this but they ate up our living area... They make pretty good room dividers if nothing else, that's for sure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quadklipsh Posted January 2, 2011 Author Share Posted January 2, 2011 room dividers , lolz ... way to go russ.... im in no way in favour of so many bucks spent on a pair of electrostats , esp the ones i heard at a friends place . they were martin logans about as tall as my shoulders , and attached was a krell amp kav 300 i guess , and the cd player was a meridian. but the jackass had it all placed in a room that was hardly the size of a small toilet . perhaps 8x10 feet . and he said if id shift em to a bigger room id need extra amp power . i cant afford that.. well the sound was okay . but not mouth watering . he spent around 4 lac rupees . thats around 5grands . and i bet i could beat or atleast equal that kindof sound in less than 500 dollars spent on musical fidelity a1 , using my only RF3s . theyd rather surprise me more than his things Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quadklipsh Posted January 2, 2011 Author Share Posted January 2, 2011 but electros and maggnetos are different in their design , aint they ?[] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.