KHorn review on AA

[TommyK]

here is a recent review of KHorns on the speaker forum at audioasylum.com

the short link - http://klipschKhorn1.notlong.com

I already gave my two cents.

peace,

TommyK

[D-MAN]

I've been to the place mentioned and heard them for myself...

There are several things not mentioned in the review:

1) the horns are driven off of a 6 channel amp. When asked to listen to the Khorns alone, it was pointed out that the "full" spectrum was not being directed at them due to the 6 channel setup, although we listened to them as 2-channel anyway.

2) the room was adequate to present what I found to be "better than average" imaging. It was quite a bit "deader" than my home listening room.

3) Whereas I thought the electronics involved where "adequate", I do not consider them to be of the quality that I listen to at home.

With these caveats, my impression was that an 5-way all Klipsch (Khorns, Belle, and 2 La Scalas) made a HELL of a HT setup! I couldn't really form an opinion on the Khorns tby themselves due to the electronics involved.

DM

[triceratops]

I pasted my comments below if anyone is interested.

Best in horns,

triceratops

Although this will sound like a cop out, give it some thought anyway:

Mid-fi amplification--especially solid state stuff--will render Khorns virtually unlistenable. Even if you were to haul your beloved Spendors down to the store and A/B the two sets of speakers under similar conditions, the Khorns would still lose big time. That means the Khorns are not as good, right? Well, not exactly.

Here's my story: A few years ago I had a Sony GX-99ES HT receiver that I used in the two-channel mode to listen to rock, jazz, world beat, and a little classical. I had it set up with a Sony ES series CDP and some little Magnepans and it sounded pleasant--especially with vocal music and jazz.

Then some Khorns came up in the local paper. I wasn't looking for Khorns and hadn't even thought about them since I last heard a pair in about 1973. At that time I was very impressed--but this was 2000 and my tastes were obviously much different than in the 1970's.

On an impulse, I bought the Khorns and brought them home. When I hooked them up, I thought I would puke. Harsh, unlistenable, "ice-pick-in-the-ear" kind of sound. I A/B'd them with the Maggies and realized I had made a huge mistake. I found the Klipsch Forum and lurked for a while. People talked about caulking the horns to tame ringing, modifying the crossovers, buying some good tube amplification, etc. I wasn't buying any of it. If one pair of speakers sound good in a set up and the others sound bad and everything else is the same, the speakers must be at fault. End of story. In the past, I've never had to modify speakers or my system to make them listenable. So I sold the Khorns and moved on.

But something funny happened. I thought about the comments on the Klipsch Forum over the next few months and when a pair of Klipsch Cornwalls came up locally, I decided to try horns again (these have all the same drivers as the Klipschorns but the woofer is not horn-loaded). Since then I have owned 5 pairs of Klipsch Cornwalls, 4 pairs of Klipsch Heresys, 2 pairs of Belle Klipsch, 1 pair of Klipsch LaScalas, and a 2nd pair of Klipschorns. I've recently narrowed things down to just one pair of Belle Klipsch and one pair of 1960 Klipschorns.

Why did I accumulate so many? The first Cornwalls I tried were in a different home than my original Klipschorns and with a different amplifier (Eico HF-81 push-pull tube unit). They sounded phenomenal--dynamic, lively, realistic, and NOT harsh. I couldn't understand why there would be such a huge difference, so I started buying up different generations and models of Klipsch Heritage speakers (the older styles that use the same drivers as Khorns) to experiment. Was there something wrong with my earlier Klipschorns, or some variations in sound due to model years?

It turns out that there are variations in the drivers and crossovers over the years. Of course the various Klipsch Heritage models each have their own personalities, too. But in general, there more similarities than differences. What really made the difference was a change in amplification, a change in my listening room, and a change in my attitude.

I slowly realized that horn speakers are like a magnifying glass. They reveal things all along the signal stream that are not apparent with less efficient speakers. You'll hear hum and noise that you never heard before in your system. You'll hear mistakes in recordings like an obnoxious rattle in the studio, or an overloaded microphone in a vocal part. And you'll hear just how dirty and distorted the first watt out of your amplifier sounds. Are these things you want to hear? Of course not--but fix the glitches, use high quality components in a well set up room, select well recorded material, and just maybe you'll discover what is driving the cult following for these speakers.

Here's an analogy: in the 1970s(?) Henry Kloss started Advent and one of his key breakthrough products was the Advent Videobeam--the first big-screen consumer TV. I read a review of the Videobeam in a magazine when the product first was released. Among the reviewers observations were that he could see things that weren't seen with a conventional TV. The sets of some game shows were tattered and soiled, the shadows of boom mikes became obvious, and while watching a soap opera he realized that the actress in an emotional scene had tears that were obviously glued to her face!

Now that big screen high-definition TVs are common, the networks have cleaned things up a lot. But being able to actually see these details on a big screen, is a lot like being able to hear incredible detail on a horn speaker. Horn speakers obviously not for everyone, but I've become a convert mostly due to the lively, dynamic sound that was noted in this review. Under the best conditions they sound like music--real live music.

triceratops

[sunnysal]

ha, ha, ha the guy even comments that he would "no question--my comments only applied to the Khorns. I'd buy a pair of big Avantgardes unheard if they were in my budget!" I think that says it all, here is a guy who would buy speakers on hearsay and rejects k-horns after listening to them under VERY poor circumstances...then PUBLISHES the results....my short comment to him:

"avantgardes sound like crap when placed in a lousy room with mediocre upstream components... - sunnysal - why are you so ready to buy avantgardes without a hearing but have eliminated k-horns from the list after a weak audition uder the very definition of poor conditions? this is why I am baffled by why you wrote a review under such conditions, I would have waited until I could get them in my system, or at least could hear them in a decent environment before deciding (never mind a published "review"). regards, tony"

tony

[cmdridq]

Very perceptive observations, triceratops. Excellent post!

[triceratops]

Thanks cmdridq--

Others here have defended Klipschorns more eloquently and with greater technical knowledge, but I thought my experience might help the reviewer understand the shortcomings of his listening test. Welcome to the best audio forum on the planet!

Best regards,

triceratops

[Deang]

Typical reviewer tripe.

The more something sounds like a review the less it tells you about the sound. Al K. has it right -- "It either sounds good or sounds bad."