LamHorn 1.8 vs k ?

[Dale W]

I'd love to sit in a room boasting a brand new set of k-horns and some lamhorn 1.8 's . Or cource you'd have to have both REPS R-1 and the AER MK1 drivers on hand.

These two brands are fairly close in the price dept, but to bad for me there is olny one dealer in canada and just so happens they are in the oppisite side of the country.

Has anyone here done a side by side comparision or owned both k-horns and lamhorns.

I'm very intrested !!

[mobile homeless]

I have heard both but not at the same time. And I havent heard Klipschorns in YEEEEEEARS. One person that now lives with a set of Klipschorns and was a Lamhorn dealer is Mike82. I know he likes both. The Lamhorns do not have near the bass of the Klipschorns but they are amazingly coherent. They are also very fast and open sounding. They definitely dont need nor want corner placement. I would have to add that the Khorns probably have more soul. Still, the Lamhorn with the AER is a fine speaker. Ultimately, I believe the Lamhorn to be a more HIFI spectacular speaker, which is good and bad. From what I heard, I cant imagine them with the REPS 1.

I am sure Mike will chime in here.

kh

[Dale W]

ya that REPS R-1 is about a $5000.00 option over the AER driver. GEEEZZZ thats a healthy option, from what i've read the lowther will slide right in without any modifications.

Bet you though i'd be getting a little sick of reading by now ?? Thought maybe changing flavours from tubes to speakers might relieve my brain a bit.

DALE

[Mike82]

Good memory, Kelly.

Yes, I had the Lamhorn 1.8 w/AER driver in my shop. Kelly's description is pretty much right on- Klipsch has better bass, more soul, etc.

Based on audition, the Lamhorn is, IMO, far superior to the Beauhorn, Rethm, and Lowther Medallion, etc. A close contender is the Loth Polaris. I haven't heard the Cain designs, but the buzz is they are pretty good.

The Lamhorns are incredibly transparent, therefore they require very good SET, source components, etc., to sound good. I've not heard better coherence in any speaker. If one listened only to string quartets, vocal, small ensemble, acoustic folk, etc. (ie, no rock, large scale classical), I can't think of a finer loudspeaker. They won't play excruciatingly loud and bass drops off a cliff at around 55 Hz (you not find a sub-woofer fast enough to integrate well), but at moderate volumes from 55 Hz up, they are hard to fault. They also excel at providing a full sound at low levels. Finally, they need to be in a smaller room (<250 sq ft) as they won't energize a larger room.

I appreciate Kelly's comment on the "hi-fi-ishness", but if he heard that from the Lamhorns, I'd attribute it to the source or amplification used.

In the end, I have the K-horns in my main system. Res Ipsa Loquitur.

[Dale W]

Thanx mike and kelly .

Not long after i posted this thread i got an e-mail from one of our forum members ( reader not poster ) who knows these lamhorns quite well. Filled me in on some facts, which was very nice of him.

The less expensive driver is suppose to sound better ? what a bonus, but as we all know it depends on your own gear and what your after for sound that makes all the difference.

[Mike82]

Robert Lamarre, the designer of the Lamhorn, also prefers the AER driver to the REPS. The $$$$ you save can be put toward a better amp, source etc.

Art Dudley, editor of Listener, reviewed both the Beauhorn and the Lamhorn. He preferred the Lamhorn. The Lamhorn is quite a bit less expensive than the Beauhorn (about $2K, I think). The Beauhorn importer got greedy- last I read, the price jumped from $7500 (at the time of the review) to $9500 (a rip, IMO)