Jump to content
The Klipsch Audio Community
angelaudio

Klipsch Heresy IV vs Heresy II

Recommended Posts

11 minutes ago, ODS123 said:

Sorry, but I find any listening comparison where there isn't a good-faithed effort to control biases to be rather uncompelling.


Your funny ūüėĄ¬†

 

You have never heard the Cornwall lV and yet you claim any differences reported as ‚Äúhyperbole‚ÄĚ and ‚Äúsubtle‚ÄĚ...!

 

Could it be your¬†‚Äúowners bias‚Äú is showing..? ¬†ūü§≠

 

I would like to say something to all the owners/fans¬†of Cornwall loudspeakers that whatever previous version you have that they have many excellent sound reproduction qualities IMHO and that fact hasn‚Äôt changed..! ¬†What I hope is that many of you owners of the previous models¬†will get a chance to experience¬†the ‚Äúfact‚Äú that Klipsch has come out with a Cornwall lV with several real advancements that when they are all added up has really created a new version that I believe anyone would perceive ‚Äúwhen given a good demonstration‚ÄĚ as a significant improvement that is very obvious and isn‚Äôt ‚Äúsubtle‚Ä̬†to those of us who value accurate reproduction of sound.

 

miketn

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, mikebse2a3 said:

You have never heard the Cornwall lV and yet you claim any differences reported as ‚Äúhyperbole‚ÄĚ and ‚Äúsubtle‚ÄĚ...!

 

To be clear, I think MOST claims about improvements from one generation of speaker to another end up being more subtle than not.  I'm merely suggesting that people not be overly impressed with anecdotal, and possibly bias-laden,  accounts.

 

Anyway, I think it would be helpful if you answered my  questions as it would provide context and possibly help substantiate your observations about the IV.  

 

Thank you.

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ODS123 said:

 

Curious to know...  When you compared the III's to the IV's:

 

Did Roy tell you what was improved on the IV?

  • If Yes, then listeners are predisposed to hearing the differences AND considering them to be¬†improvements - BIAS!

Were they carefully volume matched? 

  • If no, then the louder speaker is likely to be perceived as¬†more open, dynamic, basically "better". ¬†- BIAS!

Did you know which you were hearing at any given time?  ..Was this a blinded or sighted comparison?

  • If "sighted" there would be a strong tendency to pick Roy's version IV¬†as sounding better. ¬†Afterall, you were his invited guest - would be kinda hard to say "nope, not hearing a difference." ¬†Kinda like a friend who says, "isn't my baby the most precious you've ever seen?" ¬†Plus, having been invited to preview the speakers confers a bit of prestige and pride on those invited. ¬†..I see lot's of opportunity for confirmation bias here. ¬†BIAS!

Did everyone hear everyone else's comments and observations?

  • If yes, then much opportunity for each persons opinion to be affected by the opinions expressed by the others. ¬†Would be better if everyone just took notes on what they thought was better about them - then shared (or better, pass them to someone else to be read).¬†¬† BIAS!

Sorry, but I find any listening comparison where there isn't a good-faithed effort to control biases to be rather uncompelling.

Sounds like a problem for the legendary ABX box!! BUT even when matched to 0.1 db STANDARD for level, you will CLEARLY differentiate different speaker VOICING so easily, even before the first trial is over. So NO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, mikebse2a3 said:


Your funny ūüėĄ¬†

 

You have never heard the Cornwall lV and yet you claim any differences reported as ‚Äúhyperbole‚ÄĚ and ‚Äúsubtle‚ÄĚ...!

 

Could it be your¬†‚Äúowners bias‚Äú is showing..? ¬†ūü§≠

 

I would like to say something to all the owners/fans¬†of Cornwall loudspeakers that whatever previous version you have that they have many excellent sound reproduction qualities IMHO and that fact hasn‚Äôt changed..! ¬†What I hope is that many of you owners of the previous models¬†will get a chance to experience¬†the ‚Äúfact‚Äú that Klipsch has come out with a Cornwall lV with several real advancements that when they are all added up has really created a new version that I believe anyone would perceive ‚Äúwhen given a good demonstration‚ÄĚ as a significant improvement that is very obvious and isn‚Äôt ‚Äúsubtle‚Ä̬†to those of us who value accurate reproduction of sound.

 

miketn

I like the way you help bring things down a clear form of sanity with your posts, Mike!!

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

 

I think what you're saying makes sense.  ..And as the owner of Cornwall III's, who has been reading lot's of similar hyperbole about how "the Cornwall IV's crush the III's! (by probably the same group of posters) I can relate to your comments.  ..While I haven't had the occasion to hear the Cornwall IV's, let alone compare them side-by-side with the III's, I'm quite certain if I got the chance, the difference would be FAR more subtle than what people here would have you believe.  After all, they were designed, engineered, and manufactured with the same guiding principles - so why would there be a night & day difference between them? 

 

When I bought my previous 2 speakers - Vandersteen 3A Sigs, and Paradigm S8 v2's, I had the occasion to compare them directly with their predecessors AND they too had their fanboys who claimed that they new model absolutely trounced the outgoing.  What did I find??  ..In blinded tests it was VERY difficult telling them apart.  ..And even when I succeeded, it wasn't entirely clear which sounded MORE like music.  ..Just slightly different.  ..And so I bet it  goes with the version IV Cornwall And Heresy. ..That the differences are much more subtle than what you read here

That's what curves and listening tests are for. The ROOM is a BIG playground of variables, and is, BY FAR, the most EXPENSIVE of all the components, with the EXCEPTION of some Super High PRICED speakers, of which Klipsch is clearly NOT a part of.

 

To be clear, I'm saying there are speakers that are $100,00 to OVER $1 Million, which Quarter Million $$$ Amplifiers to driver them (Magico, Wilson, Dan D'Agostino,etc).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, ODS123 said:

Anyway, I think it would be helpful if you answered my  questions as it would provide context and possibly help substantiate your observations about the IV.


I think it would be much more helpful if you listen to the Cornwall lV then come back to discuss my observations and biases versus yours if you still feel the need.  
 

Until then I believe we are just wasting each other’s time.

 

Thanks,

miketn
 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, ClaudeJ1 said:

Sounds like a problem for the legendary ABX box!! BUT even when matched to 0.1 db STANDARD for level, you will CLEARLY differentiate different speaker VOICING so easily, even before the first trial is over. So NO.

 

I have no idea what you're saying here, please expand.  Volume matching was just ONE issue I raised - what about the others?  ..Not the least of which is how being invited to Klipsch HQ is going to predispose someone to praise what they hear.  Do you not agree?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, mikebse2a3 said:


I think it would be much more helpful if you listen to the Cornwall lV then come back to discuss my observations and biases versus yours if you still feel the need.  
 

Until then I believe we are just wasting each other’s time.

 

Thanks,

miketn
 

 

 

It's a shame you feel this way.  I do think think those who read your comparative remarks about the III v. IV would find your answers to my questions to be helpful.  ..And I'm not saying it's not a fine speaker, by the way.  

 

By and By, I find it so disappointing that people don't approach this hobby with greater scientific curiosity, which would included an interest in reducing bias, validity testing, etc..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, ODS123 said:

 

I have no idea what you're saying here, please expand.  Volume matching was just ONE issue I raised - what about the others?  ..Not the least of which is how being invited to Klipsch HQ is going to predispose someone to praise whatever they hear. 

 they were Guests of the Klipsch Corporation , and they were given a sample of the New Speakers sound versus the previous Generation and the  sound improvements were discussed in long and large in this thread --------and the break-in of 40 hours was noted as a factor by so many  new owners of these speakers to be a reality  ,  for the H4 and the CW4  ,  and until you buy a H4 or a CW4  -you cannot say the contrary -

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, ODS123 said:

By and By, I find it so disappointing that people don't approach this hobby with greater scientific curiosity, which would included an interest in reducing bias, validity testing, etc..

 

You show an obvious bias against opinion. How often has it been said that a component that measured "good" sounded "bad", and vice-versa? I'm all in favor of objective measurements of what we know how to measure (I'm an engineer, so I am familiar with the process). When it comes to opinion, though, there are aspects that we do not know how to measure. Maybe we don't need to know -- that's part of what makes the hobby fun.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

 

You show an obvious bias against opinion. 

 

This is NOT true.  ..And I haven't made ANY mention of measurements in this thread.

 

I DO want to hear peoples' opinions BUT find them be much much more valuable when efforts are made to minimize bias.  And as I see it, a group of people being invited to Klipsch HQ, and then told what to listen for are NOT apt to offer anything but their approval that "Yes!  ..That speaker (v. IV) does sound better.  And as an engineer, I'm surprised you don't see my point.  ..I'm not an engineer (I work in Pharma sales) but I am surrounded by them in my personal life and ALL of them agree with my belief that audio is bereft of any sensible bias controlling or validity testing.

 

Share this post


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

 

Curious to know...  When you compared the III's to the IV's:

 

Did Roy tell you what was improved on the IV?

  • If Yes, then listeners are predisposed to hearing the differences AND considering them to be¬†improvements - BIAS!

Were they carefully volume matched? 

  • If no, then the louder speaker is likely to be perceived as¬†more open, dynamic, basically "better". ¬†- BIAS!

Did you know which you were hearing at any given time?  ..Was this a blinded or sighted comparison?

  • If "sighted" there would be a strong tendency to pick Roy's version IV¬†as sounding better. ¬†Afterall, you were his invited guest - would be kinda hard to say "nope, not hearing a difference." ¬†Kinda like a friend who says, "isn't my baby the most precious you've ever seen?" ¬†Plus, having been invited to preview the speakers confers a bit of prestige and pride on those invited. ¬†..I see lot's of opportunity for confirmation bias here. ¬†BIAS!

Did everyone hear everyone else's comments and observations?

  • If yes, then much opportunity for each persons opinion to be affected by the opinions expressed by the others. ¬†Would be better if everyone just took notes on what they thought was better about them - then shared (or better, pass them to someone else to be read).¬†¬† BIAS!

Sorry, but I find any listening comparison where there isn't a good-faithed effort to control biases to be rather uncompelling.

You seriously mean that when the guy over Klipsch tech plugged all these into the same amp, same volume, same room and same music and then tell us we are having audible halucinations when we hear large differences between them?  You are a very amusing individual in your smug assurance of being the only one with a valid opinion which easily supercedes those who have actually heard these under controlled conditions. I was one of those and all I can advise you is open mouth and insert foot on something you have NOT heard is not a good look.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ODS123 said:

 

I have no idea what you're saying here, please expand.  Volume matching was just ONE issue I raised - what about the others?  ..Not the least of which is how being invited to Klipsch HQ is going to predispose someone to praise what they hear.  Do you not agree?

The small group in attendance PAID to be there to learn and listen to what Roy was willing to teach us. I would say every one there has owned high end Klipsch gear, which you have never even heard yet by the way, and most were builders of systems in addition to that  so it would have been impossible to fool  these guys.  You would be hard pressed to find a more knowledgeable group of audiophiles with valid opinions than those in attendance there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, ODS123 said:

And as I see it, a group of people being invited to Klipsch HQ, and then told what to listen for are NOT apt to offer anything but their approval that "Yes!  ..That speaker (v. IV) does sound better.

 

You see nothing...!!!
 

The facts are you have had zero personal experience at this event or with the Cornwall lV but none the less we are supposed to find value in your presumptions and opinions.
 

You should be more worried about how you make assumptions and post them as facts as you are about others possible biases influencing their opinions. 

Again I find your thinking very funny and sad at the same time.  
 

By the way just to be clear for anyone interested in the facts no one was told ‚Äúwhat to listen for‚ÄĚ .

 

miketn

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ODS123 said:

..And I haven't made ANY mention of measurements in this thread.

 

You haven't used the word "measurement", but you insist that opinions be rigidly constructed like objective measurements.

 

Quote

And as I see it, a group of people being invited to Klipsch HQ, and then told what to listen for are NOT apt to offer anything but their approval that "Yes! 

 

Do you actually think that I am, and everybody in that group is, that gullible? I can assure you that opinions were well-aired during the discussions. Nobody was told "what to praise".

 

I have expressed my positive opinion here. Others have done the same. There may be some with negative opinions, too. They are welcome to express them. Would you reject those negative opinions the same way that you have rejected the positive?

 

Positive or negative, good or bad; these are opinions. They don't need your stamp of approval, or anyone else's.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ūü§Ē

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, billybob said:

ūü§Ē

I saw what was up here :lol:

Yep another off the rails and I haven't even been here.

Hesery guys, the op has Heresy!

OP this happens every now and then, don't fret and they got to work out some of their frustration with not being able to work and stuff for so long now!

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know about you, guys, but comparing or A/B-ing as it is sometimes called around here, messes with my brain big time, so I gave up on that a while ago and now just enjoy listening to the music instead, and depending on the situation/moment, I use a different setup:

 

I have two listening rooms: my living space, where I placed my RP160Ms with the Denon microsystem, and what I call my 'den', where my 1972 Hs are. In my den, I have the marantz 5005 amp and my 3.5 watt TubeCube upgraded with Sovtek EL84M tubes.

 

My living room is quite large (for European standards), but the RP160Ms fill the volume nicely, even with only a 35W Denon amp. I can play it loud,  like when I'm doing the dishes (!) or I can play it soft when 'nearby listening', like when I'm working on my laptop.

 

In my den, upstairs, I use the tube amp for delicate late evening sessions at low volume and I use the Marantz for loud music (turning volume to 35% is like an earthquake).

 

I've learned to accept that the same recording can sound very different, depending on the place, moment and setup I listen to it.

I've learned to accept that some music must be played loud, and some can be played soft.

I've also learned to accept that my only 'frame of reference' is my own enjoyment.

 

Last year, I was at a friend's bbq and he'd put a small Bose table speaker on the table, I think it was mono, but I'm not sure. It sounded amazing, with great lows in the open air. For that place and moment in time, it was the best speaker to put there on that table. Going into an argument about Klipsch being much better than Bose, would have been completely ridiculous...

Boys and their toys... mine is bigger/better/whatever than yours...

I say: live and let live...

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


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

For that place and moment in time, it was the best speaker to put there on that table.

 

Couldn’t agree more.  At a neighbor’s BBQ, his Sonos speaker sounded great.  My mother-in-law’s Bose Wave Radio CD player was perfect for her in her small living room.  At times, my DIY boom box with Radio Shack 40-1197 (FE 103) drivers sounds unbeatable, especially outdoors.

 

I’d rather listen to good music on a clock radio than a bad recording of crappy music on a superb system.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Edgar said:

 

Do you actually think that I am, and everybody in that group is, that gullible? I can assure you that opinions were well-aired during the discussions. Nobody was told "what to praise".

 

Positive or negative, good or bad; these are opinions. They don't need your stamp of approval, or anyone else's.

 

I did not say or suggest that Roy TOLD people what to praise.  I AM saying that if someone who is regarded as an authority (such as Ray) say's something like "listen to how much tighter the bass is" (just a possible example) that it is predictable that people will hear tighter bass.  This does not make you gullible, it makes you human.  This is why when patients participate in clinical trial they are (generally) NOT told whether they are being given the control or study medication.

 

And I'm not suggesting anyone needs my stamp of approval.  I AM suggesting to those who visit this website (or other such)  to research a purchase (such as IV CW or Heresy's) that they consider the environment in which others' observations were made.  ..That there is a gross lack of validity testing in MUCH of what you read here AND other audio websites.  That one should ALWAYS consider the context.  

 

  • Like 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...