etc6849 Posted July 9, 2015 Share Posted July 9, 2015 I tend to agree. I've seen pictures of the demo and the Khorns likely had the best spot in the room as far as corner loading is concerned. We all know moving a speaker 1 foot can greatly impact it's low end, reflections and impulse response. The most scientific way to compare speakers would be with conveyer belts like harmon-kardon does in their double blind setup; with the speakers hid behind curtains and tested in the same room location, level match (very important), fast control switching, acoustically treated room, etc... Having lived with the La Scala II's for a long time, and then the P-39f's for a long time, I can tell you the P-39f's have more detail and sound more real to me (and my wife too) in my room by a noticeable margin. I'm not going to compare the low-end, but the Khorns have the same horns in the upper range as the La Scala II's, so I'd expect no difference in the high-end. I'm not saying you couldn't make the LS II's and Khorns sound better by time aligning the horns and swapping out the drivers. The La Scala II's just never produced sound that was as real and clear the way they come from the factory. They had a great sound to them though. I heard the Jubilee's with TAD drivers, and they did have a very real and clear sound. I just couldn't fit them in my home, and used TAD drivers pushed them higher than what I paid for the used P-39f's. The KHorns are no joke. Anybody here think I could convince Klipsch to ship out a pair to me for review? Bhaha. Now THAT is a joke. Anyhoo, I confess that I've participated in numerous 'side by side' comparisons throughout my Hi-Fi journey; be it at my abode, at different abodes, or at manufacturer facilities. My general take away from these events is that they are a fun way to get a round-about idea as to how each product performs. Is this demo methodology good enough to draw up definitive conclusions? Hell naw. That's OK though. If you have a good time and walk away from the experience with a greater sense of knowledge, then that's all that matters. I'm glad that some of you had a chance to rock out in Hope. It looked like a whole bunch of fun. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zero Posted July 10, 2015 Share Posted July 10, 2015 Dtel - You're right. Some products just stand out. It's almost like a sirens song - drawing you closer to ****** the cash outta your wallet. :D As an aside, I think it's awesome how you involved the fam. with the speaker auditioning process. etc - It's good to see a P-39f's owner. As for Harman International: Their methodology isn't much better. Sure, they level match, use a better switching interface, and hire employees who are trained to pick up on non-linear frequency behavior - but when you get right down to it - their conveyer belt is nothing more than a line of speakers that are connected to a singular component system. Now, if you're looking to design a fantastic all-around loudspeaker, then this is a great way to help you achieve that goal. But that testing methodology won't give you a true understanding of what the competition brings to the table. Don't get me wrong, I'm sure those Revel speakers sound way better than everything else on their conveyer belt. A fact that Harman proudly demonstrates every time somebody drops by for a listen. But... what do you think would happen if they took those Martin Logans, B&W's, and Maggies off of that conveyor belt and put them in a proper listening space? Heck... let's up the ante and find the best position for those speakers within a room and then connect them to equipment that best suits their character. Hmm. Methinks those Revels will no longer be a unanimous visitor favorite. Anyway, maybe I'm bias. I've put a lot of time into reviewing Hi-Fi gear, and one of the first things I've learned is that you should never purposefully disadvantage anything when comparing one product to another. I firmly believe that before you pass supreme judgement on a Hi-Fi component, you should get to know it's idiosyncrasies and then cater to it's needs to the best of your ability. Then, and only then, will you get a solid idea of what it, and other components like it, bring to the table. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garyrc Posted July 10, 2015 Share Posted July 10, 2015 (edited) I tend to agree. I've seen pictures of the demo and the Khorns likely had the best spot in the room as far as corner loading is concerned. We all know moving a speaker 1 foot can greatly impact it's low end, reflections and impulse response. The most scientific way to compare speakers would be with conveyer belts like harmon-kardon does in their double blind setup; with the speakers hid behind curtains and tested in the same room location, level match (very important), fast control switching, acoustically treated room, etc... Having lived with the La Scala II's for a long time, and then the P-39f's for a long time, I can tell you the P-39f's have more detail and sound more real to me (and my wife too) in my room by a noticeable margin. I'm not going to compare the low-end, but the Khorns have the same horns in the upper range as the La Scala II's, so I'd expect no difference in the high-end. I'm not saying you couldn't make the LS II's and Khorns sound better by time aligning the horns and swapping out the drivers. The La Scala II's just never produced sound that was as real and clear the way they come from the factory. They had a great sound to them though. I heard the Jubilee's with TAD drivers, and they did have a very real and clear sound. I just couldn't fit them in my home, and used TAD drivers pushed them higher than what I paid for the used P-39f's. The KHorns are no joke. Anybody here think I could convince Klipsch to ship out a pair to me for review? Bhaha. Now THAT is a joke. Anyhoo, I confess that I've participated in numerous 'side by side' comparisons throughout my Hi-Fi journey; be it at my abode, at different abodes, or at manufacturer facilities. My general take away from these events is that they are a fun way to get a round-about idea as to how each product performs. Is this demo methodology good enough to draw up definitive conclusions? Hell naw. That's OK though. If you have a good time and walk away from the experience with a greater sense of knowledge, then that's all that matters. I'm glad that some of you had a chance to rock out in Hope. It looked like a whole bunch of fun. If you think the corners are the best spots in the room (PWK did, with any speaker), it would be interesting to compare the all these speakers with a "revolving door" setup with very large artificial corners, like those in Klipsch's special anechoic chamber at Hope. Of course, the revolving door should face into a real room, since anechoic chambers are lousy for listening. The big corners should probably have some absorbant material to either side of the mid horns, as Chris recommends in his corner horn thread. My guess is since the Khorns are designed to have corner loading, even the ones with closed backs probably need and benefit greatly from the corner loading of the places the bass comes out on each side, the corners (real or artificial) are the only place to put them, even today... I think this would be a better way than on Harmon's conveyer belt. Edited July 10, 2015 by garyrc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twistedcrankcammer Posted July 10, 2015 Share Posted July 10, 2015 The Khorns that were demonstrated at the factory probably had closed backs -- did they? Probably what Seadog said one post up they were probably 60 th Anniversary with the closed in backs. Out of all the rooms I have heard khorns in every time for me the best sounding room was that room. Elden, Agree with you but I have heard one setup that would compare which is my brother in laws K-Horn setup! They need 20-24 feet between them to really shine, that has been my experience anyhow... Roger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twistedcrankcammer Posted July 10, 2015 Share Posted July 10, 2015 Based on the photo, that does look like the 60th Anniversary version with the closed backs. That certainly helps when away from the corners, but Khorns are supposed to need 4' of wall on each side to complete the bass horn. So there should be some sort of degradation in the lowest bass frequencies I would think. Of course maybe the tradeoff in bass response is exceeded by the benefit from having the mids/highs pointed in "the right direction" resulting in an better overall sound. Sorry, you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink.... We have clearly stated that the difference was so big as not to be explained away so easily as room acoustics etc. It really was a no brainer period! You nor Klipsch can beat physics, and those small speakers just can't compete with the bigger speakers sound! I have stated in other past posts, this is exactly why the K-402 / K-69 setup sounds better than the Klipschorn, and exactly why Christy, Elden, Eldens daughter, Coytee, and Kevin Harmon found the sound of the K-402 / K-69 sitting on top of an MWM bin sounded superior to the Jubilee and that is exactly what Elden has!!! I can see that you cannot just accept the word of those who were there. No excuses, drag your butt to Hope in April, and then tell us you have a dissenting opinion! The challenge has been made, do you accept the responsibility to come find out for yourself??? Roger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twistedcrankcammer Posted July 10, 2015 Share Posted July 10, 2015 I tend to agree. I've seen pictures of the demo and the Khorns likely had the best spot in the room as far as corner loading is concerned. We all know moving a speaker 1 foot can greatly impact it's low end, reflections and impulse response. The most scientific way to compare speakers would be with conveyer belts like harmon-kardon does in their double blind setup; with the speakers hid behind curtains and tested in the same room location, level match (very important), fast control switching, acoustically treated room, etc... Having lived with the La Scala II's for a long time, and then the P-39f's for a long time, I can tell you the P-39f's have more detail and sound more real to me (and my wife too) in my room by a noticeable margin. I'm not going to compare the low-end, but the Khorns have the same horns in the upper range as the La Scala II's, so I'd expect no difference in the high-end. I'm not saying you couldn't make the LS II's and Khorns sound better by time aligning the horns and swapping out the drivers. The La Scala II's just never produced sound that was as real and clear the way they come from the factory. They had a great sound to them though. I heard the Jubilee's with TAD drivers, and they did have a very real and clear sound. I just couldn't fit them in my home, and used TAD drivers pushed them higher than what I paid for the used P-39f's. The KHorns are no joke. Anybody here think I could convince Klipsch to ship out a pair to me for review? Bhaha. Now THAT is a joke. Anyhoo, I confess that I've participated in numerous 'side by side' comparisons throughout my Hi-Fi journey; be it at my abode, at different abodes, or at manufacturer facilities. My general take away from these events is that they are a fun way to get a round-about idea as to how each product performs. Is this demo methodology good enough to draw up definitive conclusions? Hell naw. That's OK though. If you have a good time and walk away from the experience with a greater sense of knowledge, then that's all that matters. I'm glad that some of you had a chance to rock out in Hope. It looked like a whole bunch of fun. Sorry, but you are the first person that I have ever hear say they thought the PF-39 sounds better than the Klipschorn, let alone Jubilee. That not only includes all of those present at the Hope demonstration, but other friends I have that have had a similar Demo at Indy... Roger 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twistedcrankcammer Posted July 10, 2015 Share Posted July 10, 2015 (edited) Dtel - You're right. Some products just stand out. It's almost like a sirens song - drawing you closer to ****** the cash outta your wallet. :D As an aside, I think it's awesome how you involved the fam. with the speaker auditioning process. etc - It's good to see a P-39f's owner. As for Harman International: Their methodology isn't much better. Sure, they level match, use a better switching interface, and hire employees who are trained to pick up on non-linear frequency behavior - but when you get right down to it - their conveyer belt is nothing more than a line of speakers that are connected to a singular component system. Now, if you're looking to design a fantastic all-around loudspeaker, then this is a great way to help you achieve that goal. But that testing methodology won't give you a true understanding of what the competition brings to the table. Don't get me wrong, I'm sure those Revel speakers sound way better than everything else on their conveyer belt. A fact that Harman proudly demonstrates every time somebody drops by for a listen. But... what do you think would happen if they took those Martin Logans, B&W's, and Maggies off of that conveyor belt and put them in a proper listening space? Heck... let's up the ante and find the best position for those speakers within a room and then connect them to equipment that best suits their character. Hmm. Methinks those Revels will no longer be a unanimous visitor favorite. Anyway, maybe I'm bias. I've put a lot of time into reviewing Hi-Fi gear, and one of the first things I've learned is that you should never purposefully disadvantage anything when comparing one product to another. I firmly believe that before you pass supreme judgement on a Hi-Fi component, you should get to know it's idiosyncrasies and then cater to it's needs to the best of your ability. Then, and only then, will you get a solid idea of what it, and other components like it, bring to the table. Sorry, but all this crap that it isn't a fair test unless each speaker has it's optimum environment just smacks to me of a Bose 901 owner saying his speaker isn't fairly judged without it's personal equalizer to make it sound right! Ummm, that is kind of the point, if it needs equalization via the electronic variety or room treatments, then there are design flaws that we are compensating for and the speaker does not have fidelity to begin with. I know that a proper room can definitely enhance sound and a bad one can kill it. The same goes for room treatments. Look, you can what if this to death. I'll make you the same challenge, don't mince words and therories, get your butt to Hope next April, NO EXCUSES!!! Excuses are like WAF to me! Roger Edited July 10, 2015 by twistedcrankcammer 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zero Posted July 10, 2015 Share Posted July 10, 2015 I'm sorry Twisted but what I said is not crap. Every single loudspeaker is compromised in one way or another. That's the nature of transducers as we humans currently understand and subsequently design them. So with that in mind, the only fair way to evaluate a product is to facilitate it's idiosyncrasies. To help you better understand what I'm talking about, let's use the K-Horn as an example... I think most of us here will agree that the K-Horns are fantastic loudspeakers. I'm also sure that most of us will agree that these speakers were designed to fit into the corners of the room, or at the very least have some kind of wall re-enforcement. They also tend to respond well to being positioned far from one another, and also respond positively to generous amounts of toe-in. So what does this mean? It means that the K-Horns, like most other loudspeakers, have specific needs that should be appropriately facilitated *if* you want to get an idea as to what they are capable of. There isn't anything BS about this approach. To hammer that fact home, here's a follow up to my example: What do you think will happen if we took those coveted K-Horns and pulled them far away a wall, positioned them close together, and gave them absolutely no toe-in? Do you really think that's a fair way to evaluate a K-Horn? Now what if we suddenly brought in 3 or so other loudspeakers that were designed to work in that kind of open environment? Odds are, the K-Horns are going to get absolutely wrecked (or rekt) in that comparison. Now does that suddenly mean that the K-Horns are a "flawed" design and boast of "no fidelity" because they have more specific needs than other design? Remember, this is EXACTLY what you're saying. You can write this post off as nothing more than "theory" and a case of "what if's", but in all reality, it stems from both common sense and a WHOLE bunch of experience. Disregarding it won't make it any less true. Oh, and by the way... spoiler alert: I've actually done the comparison listed above. As an aside, I'd love to get to Hope and meet the fine folks at Klipsch, but it certainly wouldn't be to gather definitive conclusions on their product line. I'd be in it for the people experience. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twistedcrankcammer Posted July 10, 2015 Share Posted July 10, 2015 I'm sorry Twisted but what I said is not crap. Every single loudspeaker is compromised in one way or another. That's the nature of transducers as we humans currently understand and subsequently design them. So with that in mind, the only fair way to evaluate a product is to facilitate it's idiosyncrasies. To help you better understand what I'm talking about, let's use the K-Horn as an example... I think most of us here will agree that the K-Horns are fantastic loudspeakers. I'm also sure that most of us will agree that these speakers were designed to fit into the corners of the room, or at the very least have some kind of wall re-enforcement. They also tend to respond well to being positioned far from one another, and also respond positively to generous amounts of toe-in. So what does this mean? It means that the K-Horns, like most other loudspeakers, have specific needs that should be appropriately facilitated *if* you want to get an idea as to what they are capable of. There isn't anything BS about this approach. To hammer that fact home, here's a follow up to my example: What do you think will happen if we took those coveted K-Horns and pulled them far away a wall, positioned them close together, and gave them absolutely no toe-in? Do you really think that's a fair way to evaluate a K-Horn? Now what if we suddenly brought in 3 or so other loudspeakers that were designed to work in that kind of open environment? Odds are, the K-Horns are going to get absolutely wrecked (or rekt) in that comparison. Now does that suddenly mean that the K-Horns are a "flawed" design and boast of "no fidelity" because they have more specific needs than other design? Remember, this is EXACTLY what you're saying. You can write this post off as nothing more than "theory" and a case of "what if's", but in all reality, it stems from both common sense and a WHOLE bunch of experience. Disregarding it won't make it any less true. Oh, and by the way... spoiler alert: I've actually done the comparison listed above. As an aside, I'd love to get to Hope and meet the fine folks at Klipsch, but it certainly wouldn't be to gather definitive conclusions on their product line. I'd be in it for the people experience. I get what you are saying but must agree to disagree. I fully believe you have a belief based on what you have. I do not own the RF-7II, but I do own RF-7s and they cannot compete in ANY setting period! I have owned multiple pairs of Klipschorn and LaScalas, presently own 7 examples of the Pro Version of the Klipschorn (TSCM), have owned a bunch of MCM-1900 stuff, own KP-600s, KP-450s and have spent months listening to every big speaker of any note that Klipsch has ever made and I have owned a lot of smaller Klipsch speakers that have been made that I will not even go into. Suffice it to say that I truly believe in physics and the speakers get better sounding the large they are, it is as simple as that. Not trying to be a jerk, but I totally think you are full of it, but will agree to just disagree... Roger 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zero Posted July 11, 2015 Share Posted July 11, 2015 (edited) "Not to be a jerk, but I think you are full of it". Haha Wonderful. Edited July 11, 2015 by Zero 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J M O N Posted July 11, 2015 Share Posted July 11, 2015 Based on the photo, that does look like the 60th Anniversary version with the closed backs. That certainly helps when away from the corners, but Khorns are supposed to need 4' of wall on each side to complete the bass horn. So there should be some sort of degradation in the lowest bass frequencies I would think. Of course maybe the tradeoff in bass response is exceeded by the benefit from having the mids/highs pointed in "the right direction" resulting in an better overall sound. Sorry, you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink.... We have clearly stated that the difference was so big as not to be explained away so easily as room acoustics etc. It really was a no brainer period! You nor Klipsch can beat physics, and those small speakers just can't compete with the bigger speakers sound! I have stated in other past posts, this is exactly why the K-402 / K-69 setup sounds better than the Klipschorn, and exactly why Christy, Elden, Eldens daughter, Coytee, and Kevin Harmon found the sound of the K-402 / K-69 sitting on top of an MWM bin sounded superior to the Jubilee and that is exactly what Elden has!!! I can see that you cannot just accept the word of those who were there. No excuses, drag your butt to Hope in April, and then tell us you have a dissenting opinion! The challenge has been made, do you accept the responsibility to come find out for yourself??? Roger I think you've completely misunderstood my post(s). I never once said I did not believe what those that were there said when they stated the Klipschorn were superior to the others. Although I don't believe I ever stated it, but those comments do not surprise me. My post that you quoted simply meant to imply that the Klipschorns may have had the potential to sound even better. But if Klipsch set them up that way intentionally, then I'd have to think they were optimally placed. As an owner of many, many different models of Klipsch speakers over the years, the Khorns are my favorite. However, I have yet to hear Jubilees, Palladiums, or any of the pro setups. In fact, I'm a potential future Jubilee owner, but I really would like to hear them first. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twistedcrankcammer Posted July 12, 2015 Share Posted July 12, 2015 (edited) Based on the photo, that does look like the 60th Anniversary version with the closed backs. That certainly helps when away from the corners, but Khorns are supposed to need 4' of wall on each side to complete the bass horn. So there should be some sort of degradation in the lowest bass frequencies I would think. Of course maybe the tradeoff in bass response is exceeded by the benefit from having the mids/highs pointed in "the right direction" resulting in an better overall sound. Sorry, you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink.... We have clearly stated that the difference was so big as not to be explained away so easily as room acoustics etc. It really was a no brainer period! You nor Klipsch can beat physics, and those small speakers just can't compete with the bigger speakers sound! I have stated in other past posts, this is exactly why the K-402 / K-69 setup sounds better than the Klipschorn, and exactly why Christy, Elden, Eldens daughter, Coytee, and Kevin Harmon found the sound of the K-402 / K-69 sitting on top of an MWM bin sounded superior to the Jubilee and that is exactly what Elden has!!! I can see that you cannot just accept the word of those who were there. No excuses, drag your butt to Hope in April, and then tell us you have a dissenting opinion! The challenge has been made, do you accept the responsibility to come find out for yourself??? Roger I think you've completely misunderstood my post(s). I never once said I did not believe what those that were there said when they stated the Klipschorn were superior to the others. Although I don't believe I ever stated it, but those comments do not surprise me. My post that you quoted simply meant to imply that the Klipschorns may have had the potential to sound even better. But if Klipsch set them up that way intentionally, then I'd have to think they were optimally placed. As an owner of many, many different models of Klipsch speakers over the years, the Khorns are my favorite. However, I have yet to hear Jubilees, Palladiums, or any of the pro setups. In fact, I'm a potential future Jubilee owner, but I really would like to hear them first. Come to Hope next April, and talk to Roy Delgado about the Jubilee yourself and maybe with enough notice ahead of time, he can arrange an audition for you with the Jubes. Or, where are you located, and are you willing to travel how far to listen to them??? Roger Edited July 12, 2015 by twistedcrankcammer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
etc6849 Posted July 12, 2015 Share Posted July 12, 2015 (edited) Please go back and read my post. No where did I say a Jubilee can't be as good or maybe even beat a P-39f?!? I heard the Jubilee's with the TAD drivers and was ready to buy, but didn't have the space and no way were they going in my living room/great room (said my wife). I'm glad for you that you have a 20 foot wide room or whatever to accommodate them, some folks don't. Like I said, I wanted a Jubilee and couldn't fit one, I thought my post was clear on this?!? I stand by my statement about the khorns though. The La Scala II's have the same drivers and horns on top as the Khorns. In the same room, with the same equipment, with the speakers in the same spot, even using Audyssey pro kit to level the response to be flat, the P-39f's beat them. You are welcome to your opinion, but I've lived with both and listened to both for hundreds of hours, so... The difference in clarity is especially noticeable at low volumes and easy to hear. I have an MS in EE so I'm pretty objective. I don't spout nonsense after hearing speakers for one session in a non-ideal environment. I do believe if I'd have changed the compression drivers and/or added a larger horn, and then also added an active crossover, the LS II's I sold could have sounded very close, if not as great. I got a good deal on the used P-39f's though and wanted 7 channels and plan to add more channels (something I couldn't do with heritage stuff due to space limitations). Comparing out of the box products, the P-39f's sound more real and have additional clarity I didn't hear from the LS II's. Also, who wants speakers where the midrange is so close to the floor (I'm pretty sure the khorns are taller though)? I like having my midrange horn at ear height. Folks really need to try speakers in their home for a few weeks (in place of their former speakers) before attempting to compare them. One absolutely needs to have well recorded test tracks to compare with, that they've heard hundreds of times too. Listening to tracks a demonstrator or salesman picks isn't going to cut it. You must be intimately familiar with whatever tracks you are using for the comparison. I'd like to know how many of these users you speak of have actually owned the speakers they're comparing. I know the guy who ran the klipsch corner website still loves his P-39f's, just saying I'm not alone... I tend to agree. I've seen pictures of the demo and the Khorns likely had the best spot in the room as far as corner loading is concerned. We all know moving a speaker 1 foot can greatly impact it's low end, reflections and impulse response. The most scientific way to compare speakers would be with conveyer belts like harmon-kardon does in their double blind setup; with the speakers hid behind curtains and tested in the same room location, level match (very important), fast control switching, acoustically treated room, etc... Having lived with the La Scala II's for a long time, and then the P-39f's for a long time, I can tell you the P-39f's have more detail and sound more real to me (and my wife too) in my room by a noticeable margin. I'm not going to compare the low-end, but the Khorns have the same horns in the upper range as the La Scala II's, so I'd expect no difference in the high-end. I'm not saying you couldn't make the LS II's and Khorns sound better by time aligning the horns and swapping out the drivers. The La Scala II's just never produced sound that was as real and clear the way they come from the factory. They had a great sound to them though. I heard the Jubilee's with TAD drivers, and they did have a very real and clear sound. I just couldn't fit them in my home, and used TAD drivers pushed them higher than what I paid for the used P-39f's. The KHorns are no joke. Anybody here think I could convince Klipsch to ship out a pair to me for review? Bhaha. Now THAT is a joke. Anyhoo, I confess that I've participated in numerous 'side by side' comparisons throughout my Hi-Fi journey; be it at my abode, at different abodes, or at manufacturer facilities. My general take away from these events is that they are a fun way to get a round-about idea as to how each product performs. Is this demo methodology good enough to draw up definitive conclusions? Hell naw. That's OK though. If you have a good time and walk away from the experience with a greater sense of knowledge, then that's all that matters. I'm glad that some of you had a chance to rock out in Hope. It looked like a whole bunch of fun. Sorry, but you are the first person that I have ever hear say they thought the PF-39 sounds better than the Klipschorn, let alone Jubilee. That not only includes all of those present at the Hope demonstration, but other friends I have that have had a similar Demo at Indy...Roger Edited July 12, 2015 by etc6849 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J M O N Posted July 13, 2015 Share Posted July 13, 2015 I was thinking about going to Hope this year with the primary purpose of hearing a Jubilee but other things came up and I couldn't make it. Next year might be a possibility. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lost240 Posted July 11, 2017 Share Posted July 11, 2017 I am going to bring this topic back to life. Having owned all 3 of the speakers I rank them in this order. 1. Khorn (still own) Hands down my favorite for 2 channel music. No other speaker comes close in my opinion to the wide open sound. 2. CF-4 V1 (still own) The CF-4s just get everything right for home theater and image like no other. 3. RF-7II (Sold) These were too bright to my ears. My ears would always be bothering me after a good movie. For fun I will throw a few others into the ranking that I have also owned. 1. Khorn 2. Palladium P-37 3. CF-4 4. La Scala II 5. Forte 6. Chorus 7. La Scala 8. RF-7II 9. CF-3 V1 10. The Sixes 11. KG 4.2 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.