scoob Posted March 29, 2003 Share Posted March 29, 2003 CAN ANYONE TELL ME THE DIFFERANCE? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckears Posted March 29, 2003 Share Posted March 29, 2003 Dave, The Forte II sports a different midrange horn (The trademarked "Tractrix" horn), which offers wider vertical (is that an oxymoron?) coverage than the original Forte's "exponential" horn. I'm not sure if the crossover network in the Forte II is different, or is just set diferrently; the midrange and tweeter crossover frequencies are slightly different between the two, presumably due to the different midrange drivers. The Forte II also has a larger passive radiator than the original (15" instead of 12"). The frequency response of both are the same, but the Forte II has a higher sensitivity rating (but only by 1 dB). The dimensions of both are also the same, but the II series is listed 11 pounds heavier. I've never had the opportunity to A\B compare the two, but I have read difffering opinions about the two; some claim that the original Forte sounds more natural, and nearer the Klipsch "Heritage" line sound... I have also read that the Forte II is slightly more dynamic... it's assuredly a matter of personal preference. I would have to say that, given the opportunity, either model would be far and away a better-sounding (and -looking, IMHO) speaker than anything currently offered in their price range. Anyone with first-hand experience comparing the two?... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j-malotky Posted March 30, 2003 Share Posted March 30, 2003 Dave Welcome to the Forum. Both speakers are fairly rare. I would get what every model you can find a deal on, either 1 or 2. I have heard both, and both are great speakers. The only reason I have Forte 1's now is that there exponential horns match my older Heritages sound closer than the 2 since they are all part of the same 7.1 system. Again, both speakers are great. JM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatManFever Posted April 8, 2003 Share Posted April 8, 2003 I've talked to a dealer here and he told me they sound different than the Forte I, more harsh, but whatever the difference he seemed to like the Forte I better. Another person also said it sounded much different, and he heard the two. He also wouldn't part with the Forte I. Too bad Mr. Hirsch couldn't review it, but I doubt it could top the review he already had on the Forte I. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jhawk92 Posted April 9, 2003 Share Posted April 9, 2003 Dave- While it has been a while since I have compared the two speakers side-by-side, my parents have both the I and the II. That I remember, the II seemed to be a bit tighter and I liked the Tractrix horn a bit better than the exponential. Sorry I can't get more specific, but it has been about 10 yrs since I have really A-B'ed them. But you can't go wrong with either one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatManFever Posted April 9, 2003 Share Posted April 9, 2003 To me, something about the Klipsch Forte II doesn't look right when compared side by side to the original Klipsch Forte. The size of the rear passive radiator just seems too big for that speaker and it makes it look like a "squish" job from the rear. I think it was a quick fix to get the Forte a little lower. Again, as I said, recent speakers from Klipsch seem to be just "marketing" speakers since Paul let go of the company. Also the midrange horn seems too big and flared. I can't imagine a horn that flares so wide and so soon from the midrange driver can sound right, but I'm no horn expert. But things should kinda of look right. It does seem like it could get a "harsh" sound second guessing people's comments and looking at that horn, but I have never heard the Forte II so I can't really say this is so, the opposite of it could even be true. "Structure discribes action" - Leonardo Da Vince Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatManFever Posted April 9, 2003 Share Posted April 9, 2003 >>The dimensions of both are also the same, I believe they are not the same. The dimension of the Forte II is slightly larger. I think it was the width or depth that got slightly larger. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strabo Posted April 9, 2003 Share Posted April 9, 2003 Ok, pulled up the cut sheets. They share the same tweeter but that is about where it ends. The II is 1/4" deeper, same hight and width. It's also 11 pounds heavier. They are also crossed over differently. Probably attributed to the bigger size, different mid and woofer. I - 700hz, 6000hz II - 650hz, 7000hz (note the extra duty on the mid) Having never heard the I, I have no idea what that means for sound other than the II should go deeper easier by having more internal volumn and the woofer not having to go as high. As for the II being harsh. Ha! Even with my SS and silver IC's they can be silky smooth. It's all in what you feed them. P.S. The II is 1db more effecient at 99db/m/w. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jerohm Posted April 9, 2003 Share Posted April 9, 2003 the depth is about 1/4" larger on the II to make room for the K61-K (it still almost touches the back of the cabinet... no room for bucking magnets on that puppy). Since I own both versions and may sell one of my pairs one day, I am not going to bad mouth either, but I do have 4 pairs of K61-K speakers in the house... so I guess you can draw your own conclusions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatManFever Posted April 9, 2003 Share Posted April 9, 2003 >>Ha! Well, that's what the dealer said. A real Klipsch afficinado, btw. He definitely preferred the Forte I. Well, I can't argue with him, as I have never heard the Forte II play. He also was really convinced that there is no other speaker like the mighty Klipshorn! But, I still say the Forte II doesn't look right, front or back. Radiator and midrange drivers seem too big for the box. Structure describes action - Leonardo Da Vinci Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatManFever Posted April 9, 2003 Share Posted April 9, 2003 What is a K61-K please? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strabo Posted April 9, 2003 Share Posted April 9, 2003 Like I said earlier, not saying anything about the I, never heard it. But the II is smooth enough that I can easily tell the difference between (tonality aside) my entry level SACD and my TT. As a reference I have done SACD vs LP using copies on each medium of Audio Fidelity's Willy and the Poor Boys and Cosmo's Factory. Both mastered the same. The II is smooth enough to be able to show the differences between (entry level) hi-rez and analog. Maybe the I is smoother. I don't know, but I'd say the II is pretty darn smooth too, definately not harsh. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strabo Posted April 9, 2003 Share Posted April 9, 2003 ---------------- On 4/9/2003 9:32:50 PM CatManFever wrote: What is a K61-K please? ---------------- The K61-K is the Tractix mid used in the II The K53-K is the Exponential mid used in the I Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatManFever Posted April 11, 2003 Share Posted April 11, 2003 Thanks Strabo for the explanation. 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.