Tractrix sound

[1MIND]

Hello Everyone, Was hoping for twp pieces of information. Firstly ,on other speaker manufacturer forums they keep referring to this specific type of sound generated by the Tractix horns, mostly negative. they dont say its bad just words like "not my cup of tea"etc. Never much about the other mid/bass drivers.

Is this just a "My speaker manufacturer is better than your speaker manufacturer " type of thing or is there a type of sound which is different that is generated by the Tractix.

I have a very hard time believing that Klipsch would use a component that sounded strange throughout a large section of their lines and for so long.

Second part Rf-82 or Rf-62 II.

I will being buying three pairs of floor standing two for HT setups and one at a latter date for 2ch.

If any one has opinions on these that I have narrowed it down too ,please tell me what you think. klipsch Rf-82 or RF-62 II, Polk RTiA7 ,KEF iQ90BL.

Unfortunately cant demo any because of certain situation ,so buying these on the reviews and help of others

[seti]

Every horn has some sort of coloration some more than others. Exponential, Le Cleach, conical and tractrix just to name a few. Best thing to do is listen to a few and decide for yourself. Klipsch uses Tractrix and modified tractrix on newer models because they believe it has less coloration.

[John Chi-town]

Agreed. The best way I can explain the difference in sound on exponenetial vs.tractrix horn is that the tractrix is more "Live" sounding. In the sense that the mid's on a forte II vs. forte are just ever so slightly more pronounced. You could not go wrong with either speaker. It is extremely subjective in nature, just like everyting else in this hobby.

[cornfedksboy]

Horns are more dynamic and less subtle than the dome tweeters that many audiophiles prefer. This makes them GREAT for Home theater, rock, and electronic music. There is power and detail in a horn tweeter that just can't be replicated by a dome. To the contrast, classical piano and strings tend to "hang in the air" while using a dome tweeter which can imitate the resonating sound you might get from sitting in an amphitheater. Horn tweeters don't replicate the gracefullness of this type of music.

I think you'll be pleased with either the 62 or 82. For use without a sub, you'd likely prefer the 82. The 62 is probably a little better in the mid-range. The horn loaded tweeter is the same, and while there isn't significant differences in foot print, the 62s can sit a little closer to the wall without muddying the bass.

[1MIND]

the 62-II or the 82's not the 82-II or is that what you meant. . Can you tell me if theres a noticeable difference between the newer II's or is it the standard manufacturers new model time

Klipsch Reference Series RF62 $349.00

Klipsch RF-62 II $449.00

Klipsch Reference Series RF-82 $475.00

Klipsch Reference Series RF-82 II $599.00

[Islander]

Can you tell me if theres a noticeable difference between the newer II's or is it the standard manufacturers new model time

I can't speak about those models, but most Klipsch speakers only get a new model designation when there's a significant improvement, which often means years. Minor tweaks don't seem to merit a new model name or number.

For example, the La Scala was produced from 1963 until 2005, then the La Scala II was released in 2006 and is still in production.

The production years are listed with most models on klipsch.com

[tube fanatic]

I have recently obtained a pair of RF-82IIs. Based on initial testing, they will need to be around 24" from the back wall to get proper bass response, which is extremely potent and goes very low in frequency (to be measured at a later date). Right out of the box the highs are a bit prominent, but begin settling down after 10-12 hours use. They are capable of throwing a huge soundstage and can produce very high sound pressure levels with minimal power. I only use tube amps, including some SET designs with less than 1 wpc, and that's more than enough to generate levels which are beyond my level of tolerance. I'm anxious to experience the sound after 100+ hours. I can't speak for the differences between the RF-82s and the series II, but imagine that they aren't enormously different.

[DrWho]

What kind of music do you listen to and how loud and how big is your room? Also, what is it that you're looking for out of an ideal set of speakers?

[cornfedksboy]

Yeah, I really don't think there is a huge difference between the 82s and the 82 IIs. Likely slight changes to the cabinet, cross-overs, and drivers, but should produce similar sound.

By the way, my 62s should be sat at about 16 inches from the wall, at least in my room for my preferred listening.

[1MIND]

Room size is about 21' x 25' . Listening preferences are all over the place ,same goes for volume. I would say at the moment my AVR is the weak link its a Yamahaha HTR-6150 rated at 100 wpc.

Do not understand this Watts equation thing . How can people run speakers rated at 150+ Watts with amps at 1-5wpc and my receiver runs at 100wpc and isnt all that loud. I know I missing something and is irritating me because how else do I tell the power ability of an amp. My current speakers are 90db should I not get a noticeable increase in volume with the REF series as there all about 6-7db higher?

[seti]

Room size is about 21' x 25' . Listening preferences are all over the place ,same goes for volume. I would say at the moment my AVR is the weak link its a Yamahaha HTR-6150 rated at 100 wpc.
Do not understand this Watts equation thing . How can people run speakers rated at 150+ Watts with amps at 1-5wpc and my receiver runs at 100wpc and isnt all that loud. I know I missing something and is irritating me because how else do I tell the power ability of an amp. My current speakers are 90db should I not get a noticeable increase in volume with the REF series as there all about 6-7db higher?

If you look at the Klipschorn it is about 104db at 1 watt at 3 feet. That means it can acheive 104db with about 1 watt. Don't look at the power handling of the speakers but rather how much power to acheive a certain loudness. If you do a search on the forum for the Dope From Hope articles these will have lots of explanations regarding speakers and amps. I've run 104db speakers with 8wpc amps and relaly enjoyed them as well as with 30wpc amps. I wasn't running these amps full power but around 95-100db.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audio_power

[tube fanatic]

Room size is about 21' x 25' . Listening preferences are all over the place ,same goes for volume. I would say at the moment my AVR is the weak link its a Yamahaha HTR-6150 rated at 100 wpc.
Do not understand this Watts equation thing . How can people run speakers rated at 150+ Watts with amps at 1-5wpc and my receiver runs at 100wpc and isnt all that loud. I know I missing something and is irritating me because how else do I tell the power ability of an amp. My current speakers are 90db should I not get a noticeable increase in volume with the REF series as there all about 6-7db higher?

You need to be careful not to put too much dependence on the specified voltage sensitivity of a speaker; one must also consider the efficiency (i.e. the amount of acoustic output power for a given amount of applied power). If you put both of those topics into Google, you will find many informative articles which can give you some insight into these issues. Yes, in the case of the RF-62 vs RF-82, you can draw some comparisons since both have "basically" the same impedance (as opposed to a comparison between an 8 ohm vs 4 ohm speaker, each having the same specified voltage sensitivity), and are of similar design. As stated above, the maximum power rating of a speaker means nothing in most applications. You also need to consider the characteristics of the listening room- i.e. how much sound absorbing materials are present (book cases, carpets, area rugs, furniture, etc.), and how far from the speakers your listening position is located. It's unlikely that your receiver will be inadequate unless you want to attain enormously high sound pressure levels.