why the Heritage line has faded?

[Heritage_Head]

I really think the cd vs lp is a different debate. It’s my

fault I brought it up. Statistic facts are cds have much more detail capabilities

than lps. I’m not sure how anyone would even try and argue different but it’s

not the first time I have read that in a forum. (Misinformation)

[Islander]

CDs have the potential for much greater dynamic range than LPs, but for the last decade or so, many engineers have been mixing recordings for maximum loudness and not making use of that range. I've read that '80s CDs weren't that good and current ones aren't as good as they could be either. That "Perfect Sound Forever" tagline that was used when CDs first came out is nearly forgotten now.

Every music medium has advantages and disadvantages. None are the magical medium that does everything for every listener.

You're right, it's a different debate.

[DizRotus]

I doubt the size of the pits in a CD versus the size of the undulations on a vinyle record are in any way comparable; they serve different purposes. CDs are binary. The pits on a CD are read as either a "1" or a "0". I believe the sampling rate, not the size of the pits, would affect detail; not the same as the grooves of a record.

FWIW, IMHO digital recording and reproduction are inherently superior to dragging a stylus across a bumpy surface. The performances and recordings can be better or worse irrespective of the format. An excellent recording of an excellent performance will sound better in an optimal digital format than the same in the best vinyl format, if the dynamic range is equal in both formats.

Excellent vinyl sounds the way it does because the original performance and recording (usually onto a master tape) were excellent. The result is many times better than a poor performance that's poorly recorded (no dynamic range) onto a cheap CD, or as a compressed mp3 file. Since it's unlikely that anyone will--or could--get the masters of all the great vinyl recordings and preserve them digitally, the best way to reproduce those performances is with the best vinyl, turntable, cartridge, etc. available, and to then play it back through large efficient horn loaded speakers. []

It reminds me of the last iteration of the Lotus Elan. Lotus employed its considerable engineering skills to make the Elan one of the best--if not the best--handling front wheel drive cars on the planet. Nevertheless, many rear wheel drive cars with lesser pedigrees could easily out-handle the Elan.

The Elan is great vinyl. A Chevy Aveo is a cheap CD. A Camaro (or Mustang) is an excellent CD. An all wheel drive Porsche is an optimal digital recording. Inherent differences between cars (formats) can be offset by the skill of the drivers (performances and recordings). But, put the the best driver (performance/recording) in each car (format) and the differences between cars (formats) will be dramatic.

[Quiet_Hollow]

But, put the the best driver (performance/recording) in each car (format) and the differences between cars (formats) will be dramatic.

TELARC and Eric Records

[garyrc]

Although the Heritage line is still selling fairly well, the following factors have prevented it from selling even better:

• A concerted PROPAGANDA CAMPAIGN against horns, starting in about 1980, on the part of high end stores and magazines. This started, and gained ground, before more moderately priced partly horn loaded speakers (like Reference) established that horns were not so bad.
• Heritage speakers became almost impossible to find in stores, and fairly hard to find in nearby homes or theaters.. In 1980, there was a store in Oakland and two others 15 minutes away in Berkeley that carried AND demonstrated the complete Heritage line, including Klipschorns, and two more in San Francisco (30 minutes away in those days before the trafic became impossible). There were a bunch of Heresys in a local record store, where people could hear them about 12 hours a day. Students were exposed to them; at SFSU there were a pair of Belles, a pair of Heresys, and two sets of home brew imitations (using T35/K77s). One trolly stop away there was a hooked-up pair of Klipschorns on display and demonstrated in an audio store. Whenever a student told me about these, they tended to rave about them, and I only heard one negative comment which was about horrible 16mm optical movie soundtracks being played over the Belles on campus. The 35mm optical tracks played through La Scalas in a Berkeley Art House sounded good, considering the low quality of optical, and people takled about how clear and articulate the sound was, compared to the sound in the other four Art Houses in the area. In my neighborhood in Oakland, homeowners within a radius of four blocks had three pairs of Cornwalls, one pair of Heresys, and one pair of Khorns (mine!). Considering all of these venues, people had a good chance of hearing Heritage.
• No advertising or reviewing of Heritage (that I'm aware of) in Home Theater and just one (positive) review, and no Heritage ads, in Stereophile ... a stark contrast to the days of High Fidelity, Audio, and Stereo Review
• Vast dealer ignorance of the Heritage line.
• Failure to point out that the dynamics available in good movie theaters are more available in the home with most Heritage speakers than with many other speakers

[cornfedksboy]

I did some late night reading of Stereophile magazine and various other online rags last night. I read multiple reviews for speakers costing $2000.00-$200000.00 a pair (no Heritage) and compared what was said throughout the reviews with the different types of speakers. Here's some of what I learned:

Japan, as opposed to the rest of the audiophile world, is crazy about horns!

Horn loaded speakers were the only way to go until some time in the 1980s when solid state amps were improved and able to produce a ton of power. Once they became "the standard," people didn't require a horn loaded speaker to produce great sound, and in fact, the ss amps contributed to many of the negative factors people associate with horn-loaded speakers, i.e. honkiness and brightness. In order to combat this, Klipsch came out with the new technology of Tractix horns and other companies followed with similar redesigns to make the speakers sound better with SS amps. None the less, the market had already started to change. Of course another cure was to simply use tubes (also down in popularity).

The market changed to the "new tech" smaller speakers which were less sensative to placement, then came the big TVs and WAF, etc. Now we are at a point that for similar price, similar sound can be reporduced using smaller more convenient speakers and amps w/o as much hastle (tubes and placement). So why make horns at all?

The reviews did reveal some very interesting thoughts...the reviewers, who were almost always admitidly biased against horns, LOVED the way they sounded in auditions! In fact, The Stereophile review of the Palladium P-39Fs pits these $20000.00 horns against some $100000.00 direct radiating speakers and the reviewer had to go so far as to state that the room dynamics must have just "agreed" with the Klipsch speakers because he thought they were too good to be true. He was practically apologizing for liking them so much. The reviewers continually spoke about how the horns were "suprisingly neutral, had magically overcome the brightness, had exceptional detail, and were emotionally charged." There was also always a mention about how no other speaker (read non-horn) can produce an orchestral soundstage like Brand X horn can!

Enter the more realistically priced Klipsch Reference series. The RF-3 is still the best selling tower speaker of all time! It was marketed toward the budget concious young consumer that didn't have multiple family rooms, let alone one that could be dedicated to huge horn loaded speakers. People loved it! It produced great sound in 2-channel and had huge thumping bass that captured the rap/rock/punk/R&B genres beautifullly. As it turns out, the dynamics were also perfect for the new 5.1 surround HT usage. Notice that while many of us use our Reference series speakers for stereo, few of us don't also have them hooked up to a TV. The same can not be said for Heritage owners. So then, why doesn't everyone own Klipsch Reference? Well, It's aggressive, in both looks and sound. The casual music/movie fan doesn't necessarily want huge dynamics playing as "background music" during diner. They much prefer the more laid back Bose or Paradigm speakers that fade into the background. The second trade-off is that the serious stereo enthusiast that wants to listen to jazz and classical, but still need a double-duty HT system will want a three-way speaker. The Reference speakers aren't, and as a result the mid-bass muddies up. It's a matter of musical taste, and it just so happens that it's what the stereo magazines love to audition.

In the end we love our horns (specifically Klipsch) for what they are as much as for what they are not. Reference or Heritage, Palladium or Synergy, there is no substitue for Power, Detail, and Emotion!

[Heritage_Head]

Great post corn I read that review as well and the reviewer

seemed blown away by the speakers. Some of your points are spot on to what I was

trying to say in a lot of my posts. Technology changes so much that 30 years

ago to get amazing sound they built speakers like Heritage. And even though Heritage

speakers still sound just as amazing as they did 35 years ago. Today we can go

other directions and not lose much of anything. I think the 4 keys when buying

speakers is sound, price, looks, and size. In that order for me but I’m sure everyone’s

order is a little different. If I was

buying speakers in the 70s I bet I would have owned speakers like Heritage or

the closest thing I could get to it (price permitted).

[JJkizak]

After reading the bell labs report on the K-horns and Cornwall center channel I never bothered to listen to them I just ordered them.

JJK

[garyrc]

So then, why doesn't everyone own Klipsch Reference? Well, It's aggressive, in both looks and sound. The casual music/movie fan doesn't necessarily want huge dynamics playing as "background music" during diner. They much prefer the more laid back Bose or Paradigm speakers that fade into the background. The second trade-off is that the serious stereo enthusiast that wants to listen to jazz and classical, but still need a double-duty HT system will want a three-way speaker. The Reference speakers aren't, and as a result the mid-bass muddies up. It's a matter of musical taste, and it just so happens that it's what the stereo magazines love to audition.

I don't know about Reference, but my Klipschorns provide quiet, beautiful, and articulate dinner music. They are located on the other side of the kitchen from the dining room (with large wall openings, so the music can flow through). They seem to sound better than other speakers I've tried when all are heard from a room other than the one the listeners are sitting in. Heyser said the same thing in his review of Klipschorns in Audio. I usually play quiet classical or jazz at dinner. The sound is so clear that when the conversation of guests at the table sinks into annoying invalidity, hostility, or occasionally warranted misanthropy, my attention can easily flow into the music. It's better than Buspar.

[cornfedksboy]

So then, why doesn't everyone own Klipsch Reference? Well, It's aggressive, in both looks and sound. The casual music/movie fan doesn't necessarily want huge dynamics playing as "background music" during diner. They much prefer the more laid back Bose or Paradigm speakers that fade into the background. The second trade-off is that the serious stereo enthusiast that wants to listen to jazz and classical, but still need a double-duty HT system will want a three-way speaker. The Reference speakers aren't, and as a result the mid-bass muddies up. It's a matter of musical taste, and it just so happens that it's what the stereo magazines love to audition.

I don't know about Reference, but my Klipschorns provide quiet, beautiful, and articulate dinner music. They are located on the other side of the kitchen from the dining room (with large wall openings, so the music can flow through). They seem to sound better than other speakers I've tried when all are heard from a room other than the one the listeners are sitting in. Heyser said the same thing in his review of Klipschorns in Audio. I usually play quiet classical or jazz at dinner. The sound is so clear that when the conversation of guests at the table sinks into annoying invalidity, hostility, or occasionally warranted misanthropy, my attention can easily flow into the music. It's better than Buspar.

Klipsch Horns are far superb to Reference speakers in both filling large spaces and playing classical or jazz music...I would imagine.

[DillonW]

After reading through the contributions on this topic there

are many valid points. I think

reference_head hit on the key areas of Sound, Price, Looks, and Size. Of course each of those areas are subject to

the personal perspectives and tastes of each individual. What sounds best to me may not be the same to

the next person. There are a lot of

differing opinions out there. Personally

I love the Heritage line. I will never

forget the first time I auditioned a pair of La Scalas. They “moved” me. That was the first time I auditioned a

speaker where I actually felt connected to the music. I can only imagine what

the K-Horns must be like. Unfortunately

the La Scalas were over my budget. I was

so impressed by Klipsch that I did take home a very nice new pair of Chorus

IIs. A few years later I bought my first

set of La Scalas. They were just as good

as I remembered. I think the longevity

of Heritage line is a testament to their sound quality which, in my opinion, is

undisputable. I eventually bought a

second set of La Scalas and and a pair of Belles to complete a full Heritage

surround system. Awesome sound!!!

Price is always a big determining factor for me. All of my Heritage speakers were bought

used. No way I could afford them

otherwise… not that they were available in stores anyway. If I hadn’t seen them years earlier I would

not have know they even existed.

Everybody wants good looking speakers. Another item driven by personal taste. I would say the Belle looks the most dated of

the all horn-loaded Heritage line. I

personally like the look of the La Scala and K-Horn. The main problem with the K-Horn is

placement. You don’t always have a

corner where you need one. As mentioned

in earlier posts the Heritage look is driven by their functional design. You like it, or you don’t.

Size is their greatest asset and worst enemy. A 15” woofer and folded horn requires a big

box. It allows the Heritage line to do

things a speaker with 8” drivers cannot.

But space is often a precious commodity.

I have moved since building my Heritage system and have fallen victim to

space constraints. I have had to invest

in an RF-7II set-up, which I bought new, to replace my Heritage HT system. I’ve had this in place for almost a month. It

is a very good system but not as dynamic as the Heritage.

My $0.02… Pure sound quality unquestionably goes to the Heritage

line. Their design allows them to do

things the Reference cannot. Price is a

major issue. For me I was able to buy a

new set of the Reference line which was not possible with the Heritage. A major setback to Heritage is their lack of versatility. You need to be careful about what equipment

you pair with them. You have to have ample

space and/or corners available. Where do

you put your center channel if, like mine, your TV needs to sit on a lower

stand? I had a Belle mounted upside-down

over my TV for awhile. Not too aesthetically

pleasing… but I do miss that Heritage sound.

Now I have to force myself to post them on Craigslist.

[tragusa3]

DillonW, thanks so much for your input! It not only supports my thinking, but was an interesting read even if it hadn't!

Listen, I feel like I tip toed around earlier partly in effort to not insult. There is no comparison of the two lines in my room. Referencehead, your comment about giving up little if anything is not accurate to my experience. It isn't a competition though. As mentioned, there are many reasons one makes there choice, and Reference speakers are better at some of those variables. My room allowed me to pull aesthetics and size out of the equation. Once that's removed, I don't know who would pick anything Reference over a Khorn or LaScala? It's a world of compromises, and all of my own choices have compromise of some fashion. I will admit that I had far fewer than most folks.

[Heritage_Head]

So then, why doesn't everyone own Klipsch Reference? Well, It's aggressive, in both looks and sound. The casual music/movie fan doesn't necessarily want huge dynamics playing as "background music" during diner. They much prefer the more laid back Bose or Paradigm speakers that fade into the background. The second trade-off is that the serious stereo enthusiast that wants to listen to jazz and classical, but still need a double-duty HT system will want a three-way speaker. The Reference speakers aren't, and as a result the mid-bass muddies up. It's a matter of musical taste, and it just so happens that it's what the stereo magazines love to audition.

I don't know about Reference, but my Klipschorns provide quiet, beautiful, and articulate dinner music. They are located on the other side of the kitchen from the dining room (with large wall openings, so the music can flow through). They seem to sound better than other speakers I've tried when all are heard from a room other than the one the listeners are sitting in. Heyser said the same thing in his review of Klipschorns in Audio. I usually play quiet classical or jazz at dinner. The sound is so clear that when the conversation of guests at the table sinks into annoying invalidity, hostility, or occasionally warranted misanthropy, my attention can easily flow into the music. It's better than Buspar.

Klipsch Horns are far superb to Reference speakers in both filling large spaces and playing classical or jazz music...I would imagine.

I think khorns look awesome

and are by far my favorite Heritage speakers. When I used to go to audio king

in the 90s I would sit in there and listen to the khorns all the time. Them and

the old polk speakers rti12 (not the new style but the big ones with (4) domes,

(8) 6 ½ s and a 15”

radiator) also great speakers. Biggest problem with khorns is they cost 8k new and

are one of the biggest placement slaves( They have to be set up right) speakers

I have seen. They also have almost doubled

in cost if I remember right. I would probably go Palladium P-37Fs for that kind

of money before khorns. (Same cost and also have a voice matched center) as far

as the khorns vs reference imo if you gave me my choice for ht I wouldn’t trade

the rf-7ii for khorns(cause then I would lose the rc-64ii voice match and my 2

subs up front wouldn’t fit) . But for 2 channel only khorns are the better

speaker. (But they cost 5k more and are twice as big)

[Heritage_Head]

DillonW, thanks so much for your input! It not only supports my thinking, but was an interesting read even if it hadn't!

Listen, I feel like I tip toed around earlier partly in effort to not insult. There is no comparison of the two lines in my room. Referencehead, your comment about giving up little if anything is not accurate to my experience. It isn't a competition though. As mentioned, there are many reasons one makes there choice, and Reference speakers are better at some of those variables. My room allowed me to pull aesthetics and size out of the equation. Once that's removed, I don't know who would pick anything Reference over a Khorn or LaScala? It's a world of compromises, and all of my own choices have compromise of some fashion. I will admit that I had far fewer than most folks.

If I made it sound like I was comparing reference to Heritage

in that post I’m sorry (cause I know I have in other posts). When I said you

can go in other directions to get amazing sound today I wasn’t referring to any

one speaker line or brand. I meant you don’t need that older style design today

to get that sound. You could go with Palladium for example. (Not the 20k ones).

Heritage price point has a ton of competition from a lot of speakers out there

and I was using that as a rebuttal to why Heritage is fading. I know it sounds

like I have grudge against Heritage and I apologize to everyone that owns Heritage

if you took it that way. If it wasn’t for Heritage I wouldn’t have the speakers

I have today. I’m just giving my opinion on why they have faded from

popularity.

[dtel]

Dillon please tell me that's your girlfriend in your avatar. []

[dtel]

OH look they never faded........someone just played with the volume knob !

[DillonW]

Dillon please tell me that's your girlfriend in your avatar.

Lol! That would be yes... if your referring to the sweet cherry one on the right with matching copper cones. She also comes with a twin sister! The other girl on the left is a professional model, also with a nice copper-tone!

[Youthman]

the sweet cherry one on the right with matching copper cones.

This forum has gotten out of hand and surely isn't for children with twins running around topless. []