Jump to content
The Klipsch Audio Community
Sign in to follow this  
Speedy6963

FORTE III as a 2 WAY !!!!

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, richieb said:

 

That would be the ported 396 minus the passive ---? Awesome might already exist ?!

Thinking more of a home style cabinet like the forte III with lower bass response than the 396 with the larger cabinet, I really think there would be a market for such a speaker. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree they are your to do whatever you want, no harm if easily reversible.

Just one question. 

If it is an improvement why was it not done from the factory ? The guy who designed them much prefers a 2 way over a 3 way and it would have been cheaper to produce, making more money. This is what makes me think it's not an improvement to the average ear, which is fine if it's better to you the owner. I know the designer has a anechoic chamber to test so true numbers is not a problem, or are they designed for the average listener ?

Not trying to be a jackass but just wondering if it's a true improvement or personally it just sounds better to your ears? I would tend to think it the latter which is fine. 

 

Good luck either way, hope you find what makes your ears happy. :emotion-21:

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, richieb said:

 

That would be the ported 396 minus the passive ---? Awesome might already exist ?!

Different mid driver in the 396, almost positive:mellow:almost, plus different cabinet volume and shape, port instead of passive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess a question would be if it were designed as a 2-way could it still be marketed as a forte? If so why isn't the Jubilee called a Klipschorn? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, jjptkd said:

Thinking more of a home style cabinet like the forte III with lower bass response than the 396 with the larger cabinet, I really think there would be a market for such a speaker. 

I would guess the 396 cabinet is larger than the Flll.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's no doubt the 396 has a much higher performing mid driver than any Chorus, I was just thinking a modern, compact two-way with the 510. The 396 came to mind. Even if my aim is slightly off, I aim to please?!?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To each ears their own.  The F3 (to my ears) is one of the most UN-fatiguing speaker out there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, jjptkd said:

I guess a question would be if it were designed as a 2-way could it still be marketed as a forte? If so why isn't the Jubilee called a Klipschorn? 

Yes when Roy redesigned the F lll it was his choice as how to do it, I know because I seen the progression halfway through. With some of the different components he was considering, it was his to do what he wanted. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, CECAA850 said:

To each ears their own.  The F3 (to my ears) is one of the most UN-fatiguing speaker out there.

 You might know - probably less so than the 396??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, richieb said:

 You might know - probably less so than the 396??

I said one of the most ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ODS123 said:

 I totally agree that it's pretty cool you customize your speakers and tha you have the skill to do this. We all enjoy the hobby in different ways.

 

But my question remains unanswered. To put it another way:   If you make a speaker incapable of causing listener fatigue aren't you also diminishing its ability to sound lifelike??  

 

Having a speaker that sounds "lifelike" doesn't mean it has to cause Listener Fatigue.

While some frequencies might irritate certain people and the way they hear things,

that is not listener fatigue. Listener fatigue is caused by a speaker that is 

almost impossible to enjoy,  one that sounds bad.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, rebuy said:

 

Having a speaker that sounds "lifelike" doesn't mean it has to cause Listener Fatigue.

While some frequencies might irritate certain people and the way they hear things,

that is not listener fatigue. Listener fatigue is caused by a speaker that is 

almost impossible to enjoy,  one that sounds bad.

 

 

 The OP said in a previous post that the forte  was fatiguing - that it sounded too bright.   Perhaps it would've been helpful in understanding what he meant if he told us what recordings, volume level, and how long it took for the fatigue to set in.   Just wanting to know if he based these conclusions on music that was bright to begin with.   I have been a lot around a lot of live music in my life and a lot of live music is harsh sounding; Almost instantly fatiguing when heard from too close or too loud.   That music heard on an accurate hi-fi rig would also sound harsh and fatiguing 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My dad was a guitar teacher and vocal coach and I play drums. 

I have been around musical instruments since the day I was born.

I have been around "Live" sound longer than I can remember.

Just because you go to a concert and the sound is harsh

doesn't mean it's the equipment's fault--That would fall on the operator.

Any good system can sound bad when operated by a fool.

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 I agree but I wasn't talking about amplified music I'm talking about flutes, clarinets, violins, certainly brass instruments and even voices. Sitting or standing beside these long enough can be grating. Having a system  that attenuates high frequencies will make these sounds softer but will also render them less life like 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, ODS123 said:

 

 The OP said in a previous post that the forte  was fatiguing - that it sounded too bright.   Perhaps it would've been helpful in understanding what he meant if he told us what recordings, volume level, and how long it took for the fatigue to set in.   Just wanting to know if he based these conclusions on music that was bright to begin with.   I have been a lot around a lot of live music in my life and a lot of live music is harsh sounding; Almost instantly fatiguing when heard from too close or too loud.   That music heard on an accurate hi-fi rig would also sound harsh and fatiguing 

 

I was around live (acoustical) music for several hours a day for almost a decade and can think of some examples.  The worst may have been the time a guy  demonstrated his new flute to me -- out in a parking lot, with no walls to reflect -- that was harsh beyond belief (flutes in the orchestra never bothered me).  Some Stravinsky can be harsh, if you are sitting right in front of the brass (not Firebird, but Rite of Spring for a few moments @ fff).  The brass in Archie Shepp's group of the '60s, on occasion was a problem.  Then, of course, some amplified rock that uses distortion deliberately can be shrill.  Jimi Hendricks, live, for instance, and I want it to sound that way at home.

 

At home, the Klipschorns with Audyssey rarely bother me, except with the very occasional string recording.  I love great film score climaxes at about 100 dB + with read peaks above 110 dB.

 

People are different; our extended family screened The Music Man at life-like (high) SPL for the musical passages.  I had it a little too loud at the very beginning; I turned it down right away, and apologized, saying something like, "those damn piccolos."  My daughter said, "The piccolos were fine, it was the brass!"

 

My friends and I noticed that our preferences in speakers was related to where we sat in the orchestra.  Those who tended to be in the percussion or brass (or in front of the brass) sections tended to like Klipsch, JBL, EV, maybe Altec.  People in the string section tended to prefer Bozak, Ohm, some Wharfdale.   Woodwinds, non-conclusive.  Only one person liked the acoustic suspension designs that were then still popular: AR, KLH, and many Knock-offs.  Designs have changed, but the point is "sounding realistic" may well depend on the reality to which you have been exposed.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, wstrickland1 said:

I wonder how high the mid will go in my LaScala Toos?

 

In the older Heritage, it was used out to 6K.  I believe I have seen graphs in which it goes beyond 10K, but not very well, and I seem to recall a glitch at about 9K. 

 

IMO, the K-77( orig, "M", "F" "D") sometimes gets the blame for what the K55 and K400/K401 are doing.

 

I think the change in crossover frequency from 6K to 4.5K, and the steep slope crossover are definite improvements.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Roy got everything right with the Forte III - leave them the hell alone. 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...