"What if" Heresy question

[postjob62]

I'm still yet to buy my first Klipsch speakers, but I'm hot on the trail of a couple of pairs of Heresy's right now. I thought they would be a good jumping-in point for exposure to horns.

I was temporarily sidetracked considering CW's or LaScala's, but I keep coing back to the Heresy as a "beginner's" Klipsch because of relative ease of shipping coupled with what I imagine is the classic horn sound.

Having said that, here's a question that I suspect has been asked before: if I correctly assume that cabinet volume does not impact mid or HF horns, and further assume that the original Heresy has the same mid and HF drivers as the Khorn and LaScala, then wouldn't the only difference sonically between the three be the bass response relative to each other? Seems to me that if that is the case, one could effectively mimic a much larger KH or LS with the smaller Heresy, and then add a carefully chosen and adjusted sub if one found the bass to be lacking. I know opinions vary on this topic so I figure best bet is to try them first in my room, varying placement, and then decide on the sub for myself.

I'm guessing that the spoiler to my theory may be that even though mid and HF drivers are the same, crossover networks may be different. If that is the case, to what extent would that keep an original Heresy from mimicing a KH or LS (excluding the bass of course)?

Thanks,

Ed

[Frzninvt]

Paul Klipsch always stated that the Heresy was 2/3 of a Klipschorn at a 1/3 of the cost. Now that is about 1/6 the cost I think.

Yes for awhile, pre 1983 the Heresy shared the very same HF and MF drivers as all of its bigger brothers.

You could also look into the Forte' think of it as a Heresy II with bass. Similar sized cabinet just made taller.

The Heresy is a great speaker for the money and a good bargain on the used market.

[Malcolm]

The squawker horn has a higher cutoff frequency. So more of

the midrange is reproduced by the woofer in the Heresy. There are

crossover differences. For one thing, the Heresy crossover

network has to significantly attenuate the signal to the squawker and

tweeter because they are much more sensitive than the woofer.

There are other differences that the Klipschorn experts can tell you

about. But the net effect IMHO is that the Heresy sounds very

much like a Klipschorn except for the missing octave or so at the

bottom. And a good subwoofer will make up for that. That is

the route I have taken.

[dr-dezibel]

Had mine two years before adding a sub. (had a small room) They do not dig very deep but have clean tight bass.

Placement in corner and near back wall is recommended for better bass response. Don't put them on lousy stands but on sturdy slanted risers. If you're sitting very far apart from them you can put them directly on the floor. Good electronics is never a mistake!

Sometimes a little help from the bass knob is needed if CDs sound poor.

Good luck!!

[PrestonTom]

Yes, it is a good starting point.

They have a similar tweeter and a roughly similar mid-range. The cabinets are a mangable size and cost.

Similar to their big brothers, they are amazingly efficient. You will not need a big amp or one that delivers a lot of current. However, the amp (and other compents) must deliver a clean signal. Any hiss or hum will become quite audible.

It's a nice journey - welcome!

-Tom

[DrWho]

I'm still yet to buy my first Klipsch speakers,

but I'm hot on the trail of a couple of pairs of Heresy's right now. I

thought they would be a good jumping-in point for exposure to

horns.

I was temporarily sidetracked considering CW's or

LaScala's, but I keep coing back to the Heresy as a "beginner's"

Klipsch because of relative ease of shipping coupled with what I

imagine is the classic horn sound.

Having said that, here's a

question that I suspect has been asked before: if I correctly assume

that cabinet volume does not impact mid or HF horns, and further assume

that the original Heresy has the same mid and HF drivers as the Khorn

and LaScala, then wouldn't the only difference sonically between the

three be the bass response relative to each other? Seems to me

that if that is the case, one could effectively mimic a much larger KH

or LS with the smaller Heresy, and then add a carefully chosen and

adjusted sub if one found the bass to be lacking. I know opinions vary

on this topic so I figure best bet is to try them first in my room,

varying placement, and then decide on the sub for myself.

I'm

guessing that the spoiler to my theory may be that even though mid and

HF drivers are the same, crossover networks may be different. If that

is the case, to what extent would that keep an original Heresy from

mimicing a KH or LS (excluding the bass of course)?

Thanks,

Ed

That's where speakers like the cornscala and cornscala dbb come into

play (A speaker using the tweeter and larger squaker from the lascala,

and then using the cornwall woofer which many prefer over the

hornloaded bass bins). But yes, the biggest difference between all the

speakers is the bass response. There might be minor nuances here and

there with different crossover points and the effects baffle

gain/diffraction. Just about any Klipsch speaker benefits from a

subwoofer (especially for HT use), so you will be on the right track if

you decide to go with hersey mains and then later down the road get

yourself a killer subwoofer. The smaller size of the heresy should make

it easier for you to achieve better imaging compared to the other

models.

[postjob62]

I really appreciate everyone's response on this. It just kind of made sense to me, but I'm nonetheless surprised to find that my thinking is somewhat clear.

I know the Hersesy vs. Heresy II thread has been beaten to death, and I have spent much time in the archives reading up on this subject. I guess the the bass advantage goes to the original, with subjective opinions varying. What has surprised me is that no one has found the ~17K upper reach of the original Heresy (shared with the"big boys" even currently) to be lacking.

Is this due to not much musical information being recorded in this range, or does this FR strain human hearing?

Ed

[greg928gts]

The Heresy is a great starting point for the Klipsch Heritage sound.

The differences between the Heresy and the La Scala or Khorn are numerous. The bigger Klipsch offer a much larger presentation of music. They fill the room much better, and in the case of the Khorn, the way the bass fills the room is unique and impressive. The midrange drivers are the same, but the horn lens on the La Scala and Khorn is much larger and longer, so you will notice a significant difference in the midrange volume, clarity, and imaging with the bigger horns.

I don't believe there is much musical information above 17KHz. Only young ears can hear above that. I haven't had my hearing tested in a while, but I bet I'm down below 15K now.

Greg

[Hardhead]

I'm not trying to rain on your parade or to disparage Heresy speakers. However, while Paul Klipsch did say that a Heresy is 2/3 of a Klipschorn, the real truth is that a Heresy merely shares 2/3 of the same drivers as a Klipschorn. I have both, and I LOVE both, but there's a very big difference in the "size" of the sound. As other posters have said, the Khorn sounds much bigger and clearer, as does the Cornwall (I have a pair of those as well), the Belle, and the La Scala. I have Klipschorns, a Belle, and a pair of Cornwalls upstairs and 5 Heresys and a subwoofer downstairs, and there's a BIG difference in the quality of the sound because more of the midrange comes from the larger mid horn. More sonic compromises went into designing the Heresy than the other Heritage speakers, and it shows, or rather, sounds like it. You can get Heresys and a sub, but you still won't have a Klipschorn or Cornwall or La Scala--no free lunch, and all that. If your decision to get Heresys is based on size, expense, WAF, or some other reason(s), that's fine, but you shouldn't think you're getting the bigger Heritage sound because you really aren't.

You probably don't want to hear this, but my advice would be to be patient and find a pair of Cornwalls or La Scalas or Belles or even Khorns near enough to pick up, even if you have to drive a little--or a lot. If you scour this forum, Audiogon, the local and not-so-local newspapers, and anywhere else you can think of, even eBay, you shouldn't have too much trouble finding what you really want--a pair of Cornwalls or La Scalas if I'm reading between the lines correctly--within a reasonable distance and within a reasonable time frame. You WON'T be sorry you waited; it will be worth the extra time and trouble. Life is so short; why not get what you really want?

If you rationalize yourself into getting the Heresys, I'm predicting you'll just be whetting your appetite. You'll like what you hear so much that you'll want even better sound, and eventually you'll upgrade to the Cornwalls or La Scalas or Klipschorns anyway. Most people do it that way, and to me it seems a waste of time to go through all those steps. I started with Klipschorns and a Belle for the center channel MANY years ago, and I've never been sorry for one second that I went for the gusto.

If you do decide to get the Heresys after all, you'll still like them a lot. They do sound great, and I love mine.

[jheis]

As Greg said, Heresys are a great starting point. You can always add more later.

I started out with a pair of Cornwalls over twenty years ago.

Added a pair of KG2's, then a pair of Heresys, then another pair of

heresys, then another pair of heresys, a RC7, and finally a pair of LaScalas. I'm done for now - at least until I'm in a house with KORNERS.

James

[TBrennan]

Heresys are IMO a very poor speaker as a first exposure to horns. They have very poor tonal balance and are just too shrill.

Maybe a sub would make them sound better, indeed almost anything would make them sound better. But used as is I found them to be unlistenable in the long run.

However I'd go for Cornwalls or Khorns which are much better sounding speakers.

If you need small horn speakers there are better ones out there than Heresys.

Of course all is based on personal preference.

[Daddy Dee]

I think the bass issue with Heresy's is addressed nicely (to my ears)

if powered by a receiver with "loudness" contour. The sub can be nice,

but does take some work to get it dialed in right. By the time you have

that expense of the sub factored in, you're in Cornwall territory.

The tendencies of the Heresy to perform as Tom has described,

underscore the need for a good clean first watt from your amp, whatever

it is. To my ears, this has seemed also true of LaScalas.

I'd also add that I think your instincts are right looking at Heresy first.

[Stovebolt6]

One issue with the Heresy is that the crossover is designed to run the tweeter a little hot. This was done because the Heresy usually sits on the ground. This puts the tweeter well below the listeners ear. All the rest of the heritage line has the tweeter at ear level. The hot tweeter and the poor bass response gives many listeners the impression that the Heresy is harsh. The small mid horn requires that the woofer goes a little higher before the cross point. This means that less music is handled by the horn.

Many have experimented with the Heresy's crossover with reported excellent results. Do a search for "John Albright Heresy". You will find some very interesting reading there.

There are ways to make the Heresy sound a lot more like it's big brothers. I was happy with my Heresys for a long time and will never sell them, however, I ended up going to bigger horns and will never regret that either.

Dan