Jump to content

Need Advice re: Forte II vs. CF-2


RDK

Recommended Posts

Howdy! Newcomer here at the forum, but I can't think of anyone better to help me with some advice..

I'm currently using a 2-watt Decware Zen amp along with a pair of Polk RT800s (about 90 dB) - I know that the amp is either underpowered for the speakers or that the speakers aren't efficient enough for the amp. Hate to give up the amp, so I'm considering higher efficiency speakers and I like the Klipsch for their relatively low cost and high sensitivity.

I'm considering a couple of different Klipsch speakers that I may be able to pick up used, both in good shape: a pair of Forte II's (maybe $450-500) or a pair of CF-2's (around $200-250). They both seem fairly comparable re: specs (bass extension, sensitivity, etc,) but I'm smart enough to know that they probably don't sound anything alike. I won't be able to compare the speakers against one another, but I thought that someone here might have some suggestons as to which is "better" and/or which speaker might be better suited to being driven with 2-watt tube amp. Are they, in fact, comparable in terms of sound or are there any concerns that I should be aware of.

Many thanks,

Ray

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll join the pile-up for the Forte II, as a Forte II owner. And like others, I've never heard the CF-2, so take that with a grain of salt.

I also own Quartets, which is the little brother to the Forte II. The Chorus II is the big brother.

My problem with the Quartets is that the mid and tweeter are below ear level at normal seating level. I've put them on risers. The Forte II is a bit taller and maybe just enough.

But, looking at the CF-2, the treble horn is situated between the two woofers. This is a variation on the MTM (mid-tweeter-mid) D'Appalito (?) design. This placement is designed to give a smooth crossover and a controlled pattern. Still, I wonder just how good the pattern is compared to the Forte II which has the mid and tweeter at a higher elevation. Maybe they're comparable if you're seated at some distance.

OTOH, if you're running only 2 watts I'd think you will have to sit fairly close regardless of the high efficiency. Maybe tilting up the CF-2 will solve the pattern problem which I'm thinking about. But again, I have absolutely no experience with the CF-2.

In any event, the Forte II is a marvelous speaker and you can't go wrong.

Gil

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One other thing to consider is that the CF-2 has its reflex port in the front of the cabinet. So if you absolutely have to put the back up against a wall, or enclose it, it will work well. Of course this is might prevent tipping up.

The Forte (I and II) and its brothers have a passive radiator in the back. Six or seven inch clearance in the back is necessary to allow it to work. I have the Forte II's in corners with the edges almost touching the walls.

I do think that you should avoid a situation where the backs must be up against a wall. Folks generally find that one must experiment with placement. I've never read any report where square against a wall facing forward works as the optimal. Some sort of toe-in is usually a first step.

Gil

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since the efficiency is very close at 98 & 99, that is kind of a wash, but the Forte does go down lower, 32 to 36 hz.

Size wise, about the same, but I think I'd be more apt to spring for the CF-2's. I have Heresy 2's, Forte 2's, &

and CF-4's, and they all have the same type of signature sound. The only other caution of getting the CF-2's is you may

want a subwoofer to plumb the depths. I think the CF is the better buy at the cost difference.

Dale

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I bought a pair of CF-2's new in 1996 and enjoyed them very much. They were my first Klipsch speaker, and I have since bought many a pair including Chorus II's, but have never heard Forte II's. From my experience you can't go wrong with either, but I would venture to say the mids/highs might be smoother in the CF-2's (2-way), but the Forte II's (3-way) will go lower and louder.

Mike

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hah. Well you guys are no help - I was hoping someone would say that one of them sucks! [:D] Decision's still out and I may miss out on both of them just because I won't be able to pull the trigger for a couple of weeks. Glad to hear that there's no real tonality differences in the two pair, though, or that neither of them suck. I'm probably leaning toward the Forte's just because they seem a bit "classier" and more vintage-looking, plus more people seem to have them and have expressed positive opinions about them. Meanwhile, I'll keep researching both... and probably come to the conclusion that I *need* expensive K-horns! lol

(Sorry, Phil, but I'm out in California!)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've never heard the CF-2's, but I have Forte II's and love them. I would go with the Forte II's just because I like passive radiators better than tuned ports (in this case, the Forte II's do go lower) and also because the 3 way Forte II is most likely going to have a better mid-range than the 2 way CF-2's. I own several Klipsch 2 way speakers and the 3 way speakers just blow them away in the mid-range. As was mentioned, the low height of the horn on the CF-2 could be a problem too.

- d

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A follow up question:

How much do i need to worry about buying 15 year old speakers - about the woofer cones disintegrating or anything like that? And how hard is it to find replacement drivers after so long?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From what I understand these cone drivers are not like your ordinary cone drivers. As far as I know these never desintegrate over time. Just so you know, everyone of my speakers is over 20 years old and I haven't had to replace anything except the caps in the networks.

Mike

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i would definitely go with the forte ii. yep that would be the one i would choose.....................unless.....................i would definitely go with the cf-2. yep that would be the one i would choose........................

i had the pleasure of working on both.

have a blessed night,

roy delgado

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...