Jump to content
The Klipsch Audio Community
SiliconTi

Stereophile on the Heresy III

Recommended Posts

Nice to see these guys take a look at Klipsch products for a change in the latest issue. A positive and fair review, IMHO.

 

Sorry, no link on their site yet.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I picked up a copy Friday and read it yesterday. Good piece all in all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll take a good review any day! 

 

But I went to Stereophile.com to see if the article and been posted, yet.  Not there.  I also read a few articles.   Those guys have broken "on through to the other side".  Hearing things no one else hears and they can't measure and then creating a narrative to justify why it can't be measured.  Like saying a usb intermediate device has less jitter than the obscenely expensive DAC used to create the analog signal and thus improves the sound, but you can't measure a change because the DAC's jitter covers it up.  No.  Just No. 

 

The authors were dismayed when commenters said the device needed a blind listening test with a 90% positive ID rate to be believable. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I heard the H 3s in Hope, and was very impressed.  They dug a bit lower than I expected, and the mids and highs were outstanding, as is normal for a good Heresy.  If I didn't already have so many other speakers, I might consider a pair of those.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The review was largely positive which certainly jibes w/ my own impressions of the Heresy III's.  ..Still there's much about the review that annoys.   It seems strange that one reviewer (Guttenberg) would tell another about to review a pair of speakers " (exclaiming) ..Those aren't audiophile speakers.  Those are party speakers!"  For one, what the hell does that that mean and why would "party" and "audiophile" being mutually exclusive?  I'm an audiophile (of sorts) and I like music at parties, so...???    And two, how about one reviewer caring enough about his craft and enough about the reader to NOT taint a fellow reviewer with expectation bias by making such a strong and prejudicing statement?  

 

Wouldn't it be nice if reviewers were forced to share their initial judgements of speakers before knowing what they look like, their size, who makes them, what kind of drivers they employ or what has been said of them by other reviewers??   Perhaps hear them from behind a visually opaque but sonically transparent screen before being allowed to take them home for an extended listen?  Do you think this would affect what we read?  I sure believe so..  ...Hey, an audiophile can dream, can't he??  :)

 

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎5‎/‎30‎/‎2018 at 3:47 PM, ODS123 said:

Wouldn't it be nice if reviewers were forced to share their initial judgements of speakers before knowing what they look like, their size, who makes them, what kind of drivers they employ or what has been said of them by other reviewers??   Perhaps hear them from behind a visually opaque but sonically transparent screen before being allowed to take them home for an extended listen?  Do you think this would affect what we read?  I sure believe so..  ...Hey, an audiophile can dream, can't he??  :)

Ever watch "The Voice"?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think true audiophiles look at anything with a combination of sensitivity above 90dB, a woofer larger than 8", and bass that doesn't extend below 40Hz as a "party speaker" . :wacko2:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When a power cord costs more than your used khorns, true audiophile 

  • Like 4
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since it wasn't a review as normally done by Stereophile, I doubt it will show up in the review section.  It was in one of the columns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good point.  I'd like to see a review with the same approach and outlook of the La Scala II, if possible, for what I think is its enormously coherent and dynamic sound and musical quality.  Perhaps they differ, and probably wanted a smaller speaker like the Heresy.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would like to see their definition of audiophile speaker. What “elusive” quality is it they possess? To me an audiophile is someone who enjoys sound as a hobby and part of life. Therefore a speaker favoured by such a person would be by definition an audiophile speaker.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎5‎/‎30‎/‎2018 at 1:47 PM, ODS123 said:

The review was largely positive which certainly jibes w/ my own impressions of the Heresy III's.  ..Still there's much about the review that annoys.   It seems strange that one reviewer (Guttenberg) would tell another about to review a pair of speakers " (exclaiming) ..Those aren't audiophile speakers.  Those are party speakers!"  For one, what the hell does that that mean and why would "party" and "audiophile" being mutually exclusive?  I'm an audiophile (of sorts) and I like music at parties, so...???    And two, how about one reviewer caring enough about his craft and enough about the reader to NOT taint a fellow reviewer with expectation bias by making such a strong and prejudicing statement?  

 

Wouldn't it be nice if reviewers were forced to share their initial judgements of speakers before knowing what they look like, their size, who makes them, what kind of drivers they employ or what has been said of them by other reviewers??   Perhaps hear them from behind a visually opaque but sonically transparent screen before being allowed to take them home for an extended listen?  Do you think this would affect what we read?  I sure believe so..  ...Hey, an audiophile can dream, can't he??  :)

 

 

 

Annoying is just what it is. What has come about lately in the audiophile community where "we" can finally accept speaker designs such as Klipsch? After decades of disdain and indifference? I hope that that it means that the elements that make reproduced sound seem more real (to paraphrase Guttenburg) have finally cracked through to the top of the list of sonic priorities.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, YK Thom said:

I would like to see their definition of audiophile speaker. What “elusive” quality is it they possess? To me an audiophile is someone who enjoys sound as a hobby and part of life. Therefore a speaker favoured by such a person would be by definition an audiophile speaker.

You will never get a true definition of what an audiophile speaker is.  Closest you will get is truth in timbre because everybody has their own hot buttons.

 

The key is that they called H III fun.  What more could you want.  Do you want to tell your friends that you are an audiophile and get cross-eyed looks when you state you paid as much as a nice Audi for those speakers (and not be able to quantify why they cost that much)  or just listen and enjoy?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I enjoy the opposite scenario.  Rather than trying to justify an extravagant cost, I like to impress my friends with high quality sound from minimalist systems.  The best example of that was at a gathering of old (redundant) friends from college at a friend’s house, where Bose 901s were used for TV sound.

 

I brought a pair of single driver Karlson slot enclosures made of foam board using a plastic framed 3” driver that cost less than $5.  The photo shows it before the final side was hot-glued in place.  The sound was good by my standards, but amazing by their standards. To maximize the impact, I would power the speakers with one of my several class D chip amps powered by batteries.

 

 I would play the same driver in free air then play it in the foam core enclosure. Obviously, the difference was startling.  One friend said, “It’s like turning water into wine.”  Another friend was chagrined to acknowledge the system sounded better than his expensive stereo.

 

We sometimes forget that even Heresys are large speakers by the standards of most.  We also tend to forget that most people who enjoy music do so without speakers that are large or expensive.  One of my most successful DIY projects is the boombox shown.  The drivers are Radio Shack 40-1197 (made by Fostex), the amp is a SURE TPA3110 class D, and powered by a SLA 12v alarm system battery.  I’ll often enjoy music from that unit while outside building tapped horn subs, or refurbishing La Scalas.  The sound from that bass reflex (a single rear port shared by both channels) enclosure is very good.  The diminishing return factor demands much larger speakers and much more money spent to gain a small advantage in the ability to enjoy the music.

 

The last photo shows a TPA3118 “Wiener” class D board powered by 8 AA batteries.

 

post-6832-0-74540000-1433102763_thumb.jpg59a06ea2a77b0_0712141410(Medium).thumb.jpg.13988880b6b77d4971410e69c9570540.jpgIMG_0121.thumb.JPG.4bbf0fe0f2ffcd023598b523b7f1cf1b.JPG

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/30/2018 at 2:47 PM, ODS123 said:

It seems strange that one reviewer (Guttenberg) would tell another about to review a pair of speakers " (exclaiming) ..Those aren't audiophile speakers.  Those are party speakers!"

On Nov. 10, 2017: This same reviewer posted a YouTube video, sincerely asking the question: Do high sensitivity speakers sound better at louder volumes than low sensitivity speakers played at the same volume, given adequate power... ?? (He wasn't just doing this for the camera; he actually did not know). Nobody gets it right all the time, but this is embarr•••ing.

 

Moreover, his "favorite all-around speakers"? Magnapan .7s; with freq. response 45k–22kHz and sensitivity of 86dB/2.83v... ? Would these, then, be "audiophile", I wonder? (whatever that means). And why?

 

"Who is this, that darkens counsel by words without knowledge?" –JOB 38;  Anybody else see the irony?... His words about the Heresy are, uh... heretical.

 

 

   
   
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, DizRotus said:

I enjoy the opposite scenario.  Rather than trying to justify an extravagant cost, I like to impress my friends with high quality sound from minimalist systems.  The best example of that was at a gathering of old (redundant) friends from college at a friend’s house, where Bose 901s were used for TV sound.

 

I brought a pair of single driver Karlson slot enclosures made of foam board using a plastic framed 3” driver that cost less than $5.  The photo shows it before the final side was hot-glued in place.  The sound was good by my standards, but amazing by their standards. To maximize the impact, I would power the speakers with one of my several class D chip amps powered by batteries.

 

 I would play the same driver in free air then play it in the foam core enclosure. Obviously, the difference was startling.  One friend said, “It’s like turning water into wine.”  Another friend was chagrined to acknowledge the system sounded better than his expensive stereo.

 

We sometimes forget that even Heresys are large speakers by the standards of most.  We also tend to forget that most people who enjoy music do so without speakers that are large or expensive.  One of my most successful DIY projects is the boombox shown.  The drivers are Radio Shack 40-1197 (made by Fostex), the amp is a SURE TPA3110 class D, and powered by a SLA 12v alarm system battery.  I’ll often enjoy music from that unit while outside building tapped horn subs, or refurbishing La Scalas.  The sound from that bass reflex (a single rear port shared by both channels) enclosure is very good.  The diminishing return factor demands much larger speakers and much more money spent to gain a small advantage in the ability to enjoy the music.

 

The last photo shows a TPA3118 “Wiener” class D board powered by 8 AA batteries.

 

post-6832-0-74540000-1433102763_thumb.jpg59a06ea2a77b0_0712141410(Medium).thumb.jpg.13988880b6b77d4971410e69c9570540.jpgIMG_0121.thumb.JPG.4bbf0fe0f2ffcd023598b523b7f1cf1b.JPG

Not to go too far off topic but I have to say THANK YOU for actually putting a grill over your drivers on your boombox. 99% of the boombox builds I see on the internet including very expensive ones have exposed drivers with no protection. Its a boombox, which means its going to be thrown in your trunk at some point and exposed woofers are just waiting to be punctured.

 

Nice, clean build btw.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, DizRotus said:

I enjoy the opposite scenario.  Rather than trying to justify an extravagant cost, I like to impress my friends with high quality sound from minimalist systems.  The best example of that was at a gathering of old (redundant) friends from college at a friend’s house, where Bose 901s were used for TV sound.

 

 

 

 

I don't do anything to try impress any idea on any person... I live this lifestyle for myself.

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, DizRotus said:

I enjoy the opposite scenario.  Rather than trying to justify an extravagant cost, I like to impress my friends with high quality sound from minimalist systems.

Maby not the minimalist setup but the parts used are minimalist, as far as what could be spent to do the job. I love the sound I get with lesser than optimal equipment, amazing performance for the dollar. 

 

43 minutes ago, Schu said:

 

I don't do anything to try impress any idea on any person... I live this lifestyle for myself.

100%

 

 

 

 

Those answers are a big part of why I have not read any of these magazines in 30+ years, they tend to have opinions that are adjusted by pre determined ideas and cost , not by performance.

 

 

 

 

.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Endo said:

Moreover, his "favorite all-around speakers"? Magnapan .7s; with freq. response 45k–22kHz and sensitivity of 86dB/2.83v... ?

 

I had a set of Magnapans and loved them too.

 

By "audiophile" standards (whatever that is really) these are NOT audiophile speakers. But, they sound great and are fun to listen to as well.

 

Having returned to audiphilia after being out of it for decades, I am finding that most "audiophiles" look at the price tag first (must be expensive), the looks second (be pretty) and the sound third. 

  • Haha 1

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.


×
×
  • Create New...