Stereophile Reviews New Klipsch Forte, Klipschorn

[anmpr1]

So Paul Klipsch was right to massively emphasize efficiency because he thought it's the best overall design?

And Dahlquist was equally right to massively emphasize time alignment because he thought it's the best overall design?

When Paul Klipsch was working it out, watts were low, hard to come by, and expensive. Also, it was the era of monophonic. So you didn't have people talking about soundstage, imaging, and things like that. At least like they do with stereo. [As an aside, I believe Klipsch was using the Brook amplifier (designed by Lincoln Walsh of speaker fame) as a reference.] His 'what the world needs is a good 5 watt amp' quip reflected the times. It was not a tweako argument for expensive SETs, like many could see it, today.

By the time Saul Marantz and Jon Dahlquist devised their speaker, power amps sporting two to three hundred watts per channel were not uncommon. I think these facts alone led to a major shift in design criteria.

All that said, it is interesting to ponder how the DQ-10 is long gone, while Paul Klipsch's creations are still bought and sold.

 

[watchnerd]

When Paul Klipsch was working it out, watts were low, hard to come by, and expensive. Also, it was the era of monophonic. So you didn't have people talking about soundstage, imaging, and things like that. At least like they do with stereo. [As an aside, I believe Klipsch was using the Brook amplifier (designed by Lincoln Walsh of speaker fame) as a reference.] His 'what the world needs is a good 5 watt amp' quip reflected the times. It was not a tweako argument for expensive SETs, like many could see it, today.

The evolution of this pragmatic approach might be:

In the 21st century, with abundant cheap watts, we don't need horns for efficiency, but we might need waveguides for directivity.

 

[Ron Texas]

The use of waveguides is widespread. Now, enough of horn makers and on to horn players...

 

[mitchco]

Going back in time, a 1986 review of the Klipschorn from the late Richard C. Heyser. Note the price. Attached is a review of the Klipsch Cornwall from 1999.

Owned the Cornwall, Heresy and La Scala's over the years (plus CornSacala) and remember dynamic punchy sound with few watts.

Some may be interested in the history of the low frequency section of the Kilpschorn, a paper from PWK from 1941 attached. Also attached was the next revision by Roy Delgado and PWK called the Jubilee. While they still make them for cinema duty, the combination of the new bass horn and the KPT 402 HF section as a large two way is still sought after by enthusiasts that feel this was the pinnacle of Klipsch design.

For fun, if one wants to get a feel for PWK, a great read is his "Dope from Hope" series of articles attached.

Personally, I prefer constant directivity waveguides as brought to the forefront by Earl Geddes. A good paper on loudspeaker directivity from Earl. I don't like "head in vice" horns that have narrowing directivity (think pencil light beam at 10 kHz) with frequency. I must admit, I do miss the sound of the Heritage line of Klipsch speakers.

 

[Tom C]

Well, no one else has said this yet, so I thought I’d chime in.
There are some people (myself included) who think that when it comes to music reproduction, less is more. Everyone is familiar with making a photo copy of a document, then making a copy of the copy, and repeating the process until the copies become illegible. The loss of fidelity from one generation to the next may be so small as to be undetectable to the eye, but as the errors accumulate over multiple generations, they become quite objectionable.
All stages of music reproduction involve copying. The output of each active stage of a preamp and each active stage of a power amp are copies of the input. I’m not an engineer, so please forgive me if this is not correct, but I believe the measurement for this type of fidelity loss is “intermodulation distortion.”
It has been my personal experience that eliminating active gain stages increases fidelity. I think that is one reason headphones can sound more clear than loud speakers: the power amp is not utilized with headphones (at least not typically). If I connect my phono stage directly to the power amp, without using a preamp in between, the sound is better. No, I never measured it. I don’t have the tools. I leave measurements to experts, people who really know what they’re doing. In the audio and entertainment world, I’m just a consumer.
Individual active components have limited gain. In order to get high gain, like 500 or 1000 watts output, multiple active components have to be used together, whether parallel or push-pull. That’s why some people prefer SET’s.
So the two settings in which high efficiency horns make sense even today is where the user wants to use a low output amp, or addressing a crowd such as in a movie theater or outdoors.

 

[anmpr1]

The evolution of this pragmatic approach might be:

In the 21st century, with abundant cheap watts, we don't need horns for efficiency, but we might need waveguides for directivity.

One of the more pleasing speakers I've heard was a B&O product using wave guides (flying saucer-like cylindrical discs) for the mid and highs. It was self-powered using ICE modules, I believe. LF room adjustments were made utilizing a small mic that popped out of the bottom of the speaker. I looked on their Website, but didn't find it mentioned, so I presume it's not in production anymore. As I recall it was quite expensive, but that's Bang and Olufsen for you. Even so, it sounded great to me.

 

[Ilkless]

One of the more pleasing speakers I've heard was a B&O product using wave guides (flying saucer-like cylindrical discs) for the mid and highs. It was self-powered using ICE modules, I believe. LF room adjustments were made utilizing a small mic that popped out of the bottom of the speaker. I looked on their Website, but didn't find it mentioned, so I presume it's not in production anymore. As I recall it was quite expensive, but that's Bang and Olufsen for you. Even so, it sounded great to me.

The Beolab 5 is what you're looking for.

 

[peanuts]

Beolab 90 is the greatest speaker on the market, few comes close. atleast when we are talking finished plug n play ones.

 

[Julf]

There are some people (myself included) who think that when it comes to music reproduction, less is more.

I’m not an engineer

Quite.

so please forgive me if this is not correct, but I believe the measurement for this type of fidelity loss is “intermodulation distortion.”

It isn't.

 

[watchnerd]

Well, no one else has said this yet, so I thought I’d chime in.
There are some people (myself included) who think that when it comes to music reproduction, less is more. Everyone is familiar with making a photo copy of a document, then making a copy of the copy, and repeating the process until the copies become illegible. The loss of fidelity from one generation to the next may be so small as to be undetectable to the eye, but as the errors accumulate over multiple generations, they become quite objectionable.
All stages of music reproduction involve copying. The output of each active stage of a preamp and each active stage of a power amp are copies of the input. I’m not an engineer, so please forgive me if this is not correct, but I believe the measurement for this type of fidelity loss is “intermodulation distortion.”
It has been my personal experience that eliminating active gain stages increases fidelity. I think that is one reason headphones can sound more clear than loud speakers: the power amp is not utilized with headphones (at least not typically). If I connect my phono stage directly to the power amp, without using a preamp in between, the sound is better. No, I never measured it. I don’t have the tools. I leave measurements to experts, people who really know what they’re doing. In the audio and entertainment world, I’m just a consumer.
Individual active components have limited gain. In order to get high gain, like 500 or 1000 watts output, multiple active components have to be used together, whether parallel or push-pull. That’s why some people prefer SET’s.
So the two settings in which high efficiency horns make sense even today is where the user wants to use a low output amp, or addressing a crowd such as in a movie theater or outdoors.

I don't think the copying metaphor is a good one as it's not really analogous and, in the digital world isn't even an issue (copyability is infinite).

That being said, I think the signal degradation you're perhaps thinking of that can come with active circuits is simply noise.

Yes, this is an issue, yes, we can measure it, yes active devices do add noise, no it's not as simple as less devices = less noise as quality and implementation matter.

For example, a SET may be a simple circuit, but that doesn't mean a tube-based design is going to be low noise.

Even the idea that simplicity necessarily equates to a shorter signal is a fallacy....my passive set-up transformer is simpler and lower noise than an active MC stage....but it also adds literally *miles* of wire to the signal path.

And if you're thinking of something other than noise that comes with more active stages.......well, I don't know what that would be.

 

[watchnerd]

Beolab 90 is the greatest speaker on the market, few comes close. atleast when we are talking finished plug n play ones.

But it looks like a Dalek

Smart speakers are scary enough, but a speaker that looks like a cyborg human extermination machine is probably not something I could handle during under-the-influence listening sessions....

 

[Kal Rubinson]

But it looks like a Dalek
..............................
Smart speakers are scary enough, but a speaker that looks like a cyborg human extermination machine is probably not something I could handle during under-the-influence listening sessions....

You mean this?

 

[watchnerd]

You mean this?

I know what's behind that mask...

 

[Juhazi]

^the beauty is in the eyes of the beholder!

 

[Frank Dernie]

You mean this?

Personally I prefer the look of the version with dark brown fabric and rosewood veneer on the bottom. My house is old not modern.
I have so far managed to resist every temptation to buy some sine they are far more expensive that I should consider at my age, given I already have too much, probably too big and heavy to be saleable, amps and speakers.

 

[Cosmik]

A great deal is made of "efficiency" which, to me, seems like a concern from the 1950s - or from the future when the law says we have to pedal to power our systems.

For high efficiency, I read "resonance" and "coloration", whether that's deliberate use of Helmholtz resonators, overly flimsy components, or the weird interactions that happen in horns.

 

[Wombat]

FWIW:

Loudspeaker Power Handling vs Efficiency

 

[graz_lag]

The well respected speaker designer Troels Gravesen uses to say :

"... please do not ask about the sonic differences between two speakers. What I hear is unlikely to be what you will hear.
Designing loudspeakers is not necessarily rocket science. Designing loudspeaker drivers is another thing, but picking 2-3 drivers and making a suitable cabinet and crossover is basically a matter of handling fairly simple measuring equipment, simulation software - and experience. Some call the voicing of speakers an art. I don't think so. Voicing a speakers is a matter of taste like adding spices to a stew. Some like it hot, creamy or crunchy - some don't. BTW: The ancient Greeks didn't distinguish between art and craftsmanship. Art is art if enough people think it is ..."

 

[Cosmik]

Voicing a speakers is a matter of taste like adding spices to a stew. Some like it hot, creamy or crunchy - some don't. BTW: The ancient Greeks didn't distinguish between art and craftsmanship. Art is art if enough people think it is ..."

I don't think I have seen it written down before: audiophiles think that sound is a "stew" (I have alluded to them thinking it was "soup" before). This is exactly it: audiophiles think that there is no notion of 'correct', nor of 'integral' sounds (rather than there sometimes being separate ingredients placed carefully on the plate, they think of it as just bunged together in a big pot).

They make no distinction between an orchestra's violins playing louder and 'turning up the midrange'. In either case, they think you're just adding some 'spice'. But there *is* a difference. Turning up the midrange turns up everything in that range, thereby blurring it all together (you get an identical bump in the violins and also in the piano and the woodwind and the percussion, etc. as they pass through that band), and for that 'turning up' there is no corresponding natural boost in the treble as the violins are played 'harder'.

Only the neutral speaker can approach a natural sound. Real world speakers may not be truly neutral, but some are closer than others.

 

[Wombat]

I don't think I have seen it written down before: audiophiles think that sound is a "stew" (I have alluded to them thinking it was "soup" before). This is exactly it: audiophiles think that there is no notion of 'correct', nor of 'integral' sounds (rather than there sometimes being separate ingredients placed carefully on the plate, they think of it as just bunged together in a big pot).

They make no distinction between an orchestra's violins playing louder and 'turning up the midrange'. In either case, they think you're just adding some 'spice'. But there *is* a difference. Turning up the midrange turns up everything in that range, thereby blurring it all together (you get an identical bump in the violins and also in the piano and the woodwind and the percussion, etc. as they pass through that band), and for that 'turning up' there is no corresponding natural boost in the treble as the violins are played 'harder'.

Only the neutral speaker can approach a natural sound. Real world speakers may not be truly neutral, but some are closer than others.

How do we define 'neutral' in a measurable and perceptive way that translates to practise.

We all hear differently, and in our different environments.

In the end go with what pleases you.