bdc Posted February 16, 2004 Share Posted February 16, 2004 I know that, for some reason, people like to look down on Klipsch as an 'audiophile' company even if they've never heard any Klipsch speakers and, while going through some newsgroup posts, I came across a person who made some comments about the Klipschorn. I'll paste part of his message here. I agree 100% with everything you said. However, you did miss something - a big advantage that Klipshorns have over all other reasonably priced speakers, that is "largeness" of the sound, for lack of a real way to describe it. An orchestra played through those things sounds so huge when compared to other speakers that most other speakers when played on real world amps just fall flat. Granted, it is not an audiophile-type sound, and phases are all over the place, but they do a real good job of the "you are there" sound. Besides that, you can find them for reasonable prices (used, of course). What does he mean by "phases are all over the place"? And also, why does it not have an "audiophile-type sound"? From reading all the good things about the Klipschorn (though I've never heard it myself) it's hard to believe that so many people can bash it. I'm not specifically talking about this guy, as he does praise the K-horn a little bit, but there are others who simply call it a horrible speaker. Why is this? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frzninvt Posted February 16, 2004 Share Posted February 16, 2004 Jealousy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike stehr Posted February 16, 2004 Share Posted February 16, 2004 Who cares! It's a subjective hobby. Self-proclaimed "audiopiles" that don't know much of jack. With big wads of cash, ready to flock like sheep to the latest hype. To each his own....... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3dzapper Posted February 16, 2004 Share Posted February 16, 2004 Some audiopiles would rather hear a speaker and imagine what a live performance might sound like. With Klipschorns you hear exactly what was recorded, no imagination required. They sound live, no bass coloration, no laid back mellow midrange, no soft highs. Real live music. Some of them just can't handle the truth! I used to believe all those magazine reviews once. But then again I used to believe in Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny! I became convinced a long time ago that there is payola and biased corruption in the audio publication industry. I now only believe my ears and those I trust who are not out to just make a buck! Rick Rick Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HDBRbuilder Posted February 16, 2004 Share Posted February 16, 2004 If the individual who said that about K-horns had ever heard K-horns with properly matched upstream componentry, he would have had MUCH more praise for them...it also depends on how well the seal into the corners is on them! It never seems to sink into many self-proclaimed audiophiles that you MUST match your UPSTREAM components to your speakers, NOT your speakers to those upstream components...the speakers are the HEART of the sound system. Too many folks knock horns when they have no idea that the upstream components that they have driven them with are a sorry match for horns, even though those upstream components get all kinds of praise in magazine reviews and such! Magazine reviews, by and large, are leaned in favor of the companies who pay big bucks in advertising in those magazines...plain and simple! Given specs for equipment are worthless...it is what your ears say to you that counts! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jtice Posted February 16, 2004 Share Posted February 16, 2004 ---------------- On 2/16/2004 2:32:56 PM bdc wrote: I know that, for some reason, people like to look down on Klipsch as an 'audiophile' company even if they've never heard any Klipsch speakersWhy is this? ---------------- It has more to do with people than it does speakers. They have the P&P Syndrome. They acquire it by reading audiophile magazines, believing everything they read, and believing that spendng copious moolah on a stereo is the key to happiness. And music doesn't really fit in that equation. (100 posts and no more newbiea Crazy Poster! That's half right anyway.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cut-Throat Posted February 16, 2004 Share Posted February 16, 2004 This comment probably came from a guy that had dropped $20K on a pair of speakers, $20K on electronics and spent another $5K on speaker cables. He then listened to pair of Khorns hooked up to Lampcord and a Welborne Kit amp - Total system price of about $3500. What was he supposed to say? His old system is probably up on Audiogon by now, while he is shopping for a pair of Khorns. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Piranha Posted February 16, 2004 Share Posted February 16, 2004 Hopefully he and others will continue on with this type of mentality and their quest to "keep up with the Jones's". This will help to keep the prices reasonable for Heritage Klipsch speakers. I say to him, good luck finding a speaker in the price range that can perform as well as a Khorn. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrWho Posted February 16, 2004 Share Posted February 16, 2004 for a discussion like this, we have to ignore cost of a system...we gotta talk pure sound of the speaker. we should also point out that there are speakers built for different reasons. again, ignoring price points and all other factors, a studio monitor, a home speaker, a movie theater speaker, a PA speaker, stage monitors, etc etc all are striving for a different sound. the "perfect" PA speaker will sound way entirely different than a "perfect" studio monitor. all that to say, the khorn doesn't satisfy what would be considered the "perfect audiophile sound." I've had many opportunities to hear the audiophile sound and it is completely amazing. i don't know how to describe it, so im not going to even try. it's just the "right" sound. so why doesn't the khorn satisfy this sound? i've never heard one but im always hearing about how huge and "lifelike" they sound (my 2 favorite ingredients in a speaker). but based only on hearing other opinions, i can totally see where this guy is coming from. for starters, "huge and lifelike" aren't the only key ingredients to the audiophile sound. Nothing compares to the khorn in clarity, sheer dynamics and all those silly terms, but i can imagine that there is a certain lack in smoothness (is silkiness a better word?)...just a smooth flowing that cannot be created with horns. ahhhhhh, bashing horns on the klipsch forum! run away, run away! don't get me wrong, i love horns and they sound great, but they just don't sound audiophile. looking at the specs of the speaker, this guy probably noticed the crazy phase issues that the khorn must deal with and satisfies his logic with that being the reason (and yes, the phase issue does exist). man, im getting lost for words this is a hard thing to talk about because the vocabulary is so limited. but after listening to plenty of speakers, you can always tell the difference between the different types of speakers (hornloaded, electrostatic, etc etc). yes, there's lots of cool tricks to minimize these differences, but they always fall short of that delicate sound that's called audiophile. anyways, back to the logic i presented at the beginning. the khorn is a home speaker. it is voiced to make things sound good. but but, they're always claimed to be the most revealing speakers around! this is both true and false at the same time due to it's insane sensitivity, it is true that a lot of flaws in equipment would be most awfully present when listening. but i would never in my life choose a khorn to be used in the studio (even in a room totally built for them). there are different kinds of flaws that a studio monitor (aka audiophile sound) would bring out that the khorn wouldn't. there's different types of "revealing" and the khorn only has the one. since there are other audiophile speakers out there with sensitivities close to that of the khorn, it only makes sense that they would be claimed as better. it's at this point that people bring up price points and all that other crap that has no relation to pure sound. however, in the real world pure sound is impossible and price point is a huge important annoying factor. what was my point again? oh right, the khorn sucks. ok, maybe not. actually my point is this: what we all need to do is take a visit to artto's krazy khorn room and listen to probably one of the most tweaked out environments for that speaker. and then we all need to visit steve walker's insane super tweaked out studio built around the most expensive tannoys out there (this guy is from audio designs and his studio is acoustically accurate to 1/32 of an inch). what we'll find here is the difference between huge super big lifelike awesome i love it speakers and audiophile oh so smooth accurate flowing ahhhh i want more of this speakers. niether design is perfect, and both are lacking more than the other in different areas. which speaker would i choose at home? the khorn all the way (and way more so when you take into account the low price!) ya, i think im done now. sorry for a long rambling wierd post. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cwm Posted February 17, 2004 Share Posted February 17, 2004 "since there are other audiophile speakers out there with sensitivities close to that of the khorn, it only makes sense" Name them and how do you define close----I hear people say that 95-98db sensitivity is close and, of course, it isn't. Very few of the "audiophile" types ever address the issue of IM distortion (FMing). Attempt anything approaching lifelike levels with (unamplified music not "bumped" rock e.g. a good 4 or 5 piece dixieland group) most direct radiators and they fail miserably......!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray Garrison Posted February 17, 2004 Share Posted February 17, 2004 AvantGarde 107dB/watt/1 meter Carfrae 109dB/watt/meter Beauhorn 106dB/watt/meter and on and on... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TBrennan Posted February 17, 2004 Share Posted February 17, 2004 Who---I dunno, your arguement didn't make much sense to me, in so far as I could understand what you were saying. For one thing the most popular studio monitors were horns until very recently and horns are still popular in that role. The Altec A7 was a popular monitor AND a popular theater and PA speaker. Those big Tannoys you talked about, those are horns too. Not to mention horn monitors made by Genelec, JBL, Urei, Westlake and TAD. Wendy Carlos is keen on Cornwalls as studio monitors. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ben. Posted February 17, 2004 Share Posted February 17, 2004 ---------------- On 2/16/2004 9:21:43 PM DrWho wrote: but i would never in my life choose a khorn to be used in the studio (even in a room totally built for them). there are different kinds of flaws that a studio monitor (aka audiophile sound) would bring out that the khorn wouldn't. there's different types of "revealing" and the khorn only has the one. ---------------- Studio monitor (aka audiophile sound)?? Oh right, like those NS-10!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrWho Posted February 17, 2004 Share Posted February 17, 2004 Tannoy System 215 DMT II - http://www.tannoy.com/frame.cfm?ID=3&D=2 (104db 35Hz-25kHz 500 watts) Mackie HR824 - http://www.mackie.com/products/hr824/Specifications.html (100db 39Hz-20kHz self powered) Event Studio Precision 8 I could list plenty more, but don't feel like wasting time hunting down random specs and crap (as they really don't tell enough about performance anyway). Btw, I know that I only listed studio monitors, but that's because those are the only types of speakers I come into contact with in my line of work. I am not too familiar with the whole home speaker high effeciency direct radiator world (but i do know it exists). Also, I'd like to mention that I've heard an older version of the Tannoys in an HT application that was far from ideal and they were still amazing. My point here is that a direct radiator with the same sensitivity as a horn will sound "better." Don't get me wrong here, I love horn loaded speakers. I've been surrounded by them my whole life and I very much enjoy their sound. Klipsch as a company has some fricken amazing stuff out there. But after having visited some really nice studios and dedicated HT environments using high sensitivity direct radiators, I've realized that there is a lot more that I've been missing. However, the price point difference is almost ridiculous and I doubt I will ever have the option to having such systems in my own home. So I challenge everyone to do the same and listen for yourself. There is science behind this as well, but I couldn't explain it well enough and don't have any resources readily available. as a sidenote, a lot of tannoy speakers use a concentric design that allows the HF and mids to come from a "single point." the extra woofer handles the lows which are generally more non-directional. all that to say, it's cool when all the sound seems like it's coming from one point...you have to sit pretty far back and have a huge room to hear that with the khorn. there are benefits, disadvantages and corresponding tweaks to every design out there. it seems like nobody can say anything negative about the khorn because supposedly it's the "best speaker ever built". but it certainly does have plenty of negatives and im hoping im not destroying any credibility i might have...just get outta the "klipsch bubble". i have a friend with a really good CD for comparing systems...with it comes a book that describes a lot of the key ingredients to the "audiophile" sound and all that crap. I'll see if i can't find it as this is something used all over the industry for comparisons and referencing. one thing i find ironic is that the goal of most recordings (certainly the older ones) is to replicate as real as possible the sonic event as it happened in real life. A lot of the music we listen to is supposed to be a representation of what the band performs live. The irony is that just about all PA systems use horn loaded speakers...sometimes it'd almost make sense to have horns at home. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ben. Posted February 17, 2004 Share Posted February 17, 2004 ---------------- On 2/17/2004 4:58:41 PM DrWho wrote: My point here is that a direct radiator with the same sensitivity as a horn will sound "better." ---------------- Why is that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mobile homeless Posted February 17, 2004 Share Posted February 17, 2004 Having been through the "audiophile" phase and out the other side, I would say "the current audiophile sound" as mentioned above is pretty FAR from the music. It is detail oriented and stresses things that have VERY little to do with music. It's a audio dead end that many get stuck in, never to emerge. Count the "Audiophile recordings" in your collection to see how far you have sunk. Listening "to the system" is a big symptom that unfortunately is addictive as chips and salsa.... kh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Painful Reality Posted February 17, 2004 Share Posted February 17, 2004 Nothing like a Three Blind Mice Record to make you feel like if your head is stuck in the piano lid. Oh! Man! You really hear those key hitting the strings... My system never sound soooooooo good! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TBrennan Posted February 17, 2004 Share Posted February 17, 2004 Who---That Tannoy is a direct-radiator only below 1500hz, above that it's horn loaded. I'm not sure you knew that given your statements. Check out the Tannoy picture attached, that one's horn-loaded all the way down. Gorgeous speaker eh? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sprocket Posted February 17, 2004 Share Posted February 17, 2004 Is it not true that many audiophile reviewers are confused when trying to review tube amps. They measure all that distortion and yet it sounds good. They search for a way to make sense of the poor test findings and the findings their ears are reporting to the pleasure center in their brain. They seem reluctant to say they realy like the equipment they review without leaving some escape hatch to justify the oscilloscope. Could it be a similar event when they talk about Klipsch speakers. Maybe the phase is shifting allover. Maybe that's what ALK networks are correcting. What I'm saying (be it poorly) is it may be difficult for them to integrate the pleasent sound of the Klipsch speaker and the confusing test readings. Just my $.02 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mobile homeless Posted February 17, 2004 Share Posted February 17, 2004 These days, even journeyman audio reviewers of the most pedestrian levels understand the positive qualities of tube amps or at least are smart enough to pay lip service whether they can hear it or not. While they may be confused by other things such as whether to put on Sarah K or some other Audiophile Dreck, at least they know enough to recognize the positive things about tube gear. On the other hand, the dreaded "Audiophile" syndrome can run deep. Many wouldnt know music even after courtship, marriage, honeymoon, and divorce... kh 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.