Stereophile Reviews New Klipsch Forte, Klipschorn

[Sal1950]

I can't think of any other modern speakers that look like these.

Really? Have you ever heard of JBL? How about the M2 or 4367 or many others from that line, many of the finest sounding speakers made today. That's only one companies product design, there are hundreds more, what are you thinking?
Is it just the look of a big horn that so offends you. Of course these can't be any good, only PROFESSIONALS use them.
Don't go into any recording studios if you don't want to see-hear them.

Give me some nice Thiels if you wanna go vintage!

Yep, and you can have them. along with the other flat FR God, the LS3/5A. BLAH
Oh wait, they can't do bass at all.
Or play loud, distortion is high even at moderate levels.

and not liking accuracy is perfectly fine.

"Accuracy" is not defined by the single factor of a flat FR. Although very important there are many other factors involved.
Many in this industry have followed that rabbit down the hole to boring reproduction till their product no longer sounded like real music.

It just amazes me how some folks can be so arrogant to believe that only their taste in the balance of speaker strengths, or
the music they listen to, is the defining term of High Fidelity.

 

[tuga]

Really? Have you ever heard of JBL? How about the M2 or 4367 or many others from that line, many of the finest sounding speakers made today. That's only one companies product design, there are hundreds more, what are you thinking?
Is it just the look of a big horn that so offends you. Of course these can't be any good, only PROFESSIONALS use them.
Don't go into any recording studios if you don't want to see-hear them.

Yep, and you can have them. along with the other flat FR God, the LS3/5A. BLAH
Oh wait, they can't do bass at all.
Or play loud, distortion is high even at moderate levels.

"Accuracy" is not defined by the single factor of a flat FR. Although very important there are many other factors involved.
Many in this industry have followed that rabbit down the hole to boring reproduction till their product no longer sounded like real music.

It just amazes me how some folks can be so arrogant to believe that only their taste in the balance of speaker strengths, or
the music they listen to, is the defining term of High Fidelity.

If you look at Stereophile’s measurements you will find issues in all measured parameters.

 

[Sal1950]

f you look at Stereophile’s measurements you will find issues in all measured parameters

So what's your point, that the speaker isn't perfect?
Who's is?

 

[dlaloum]

I've given horns several tries (including owning a pair) - and a number of auditions at various events and showrooms.... they have never "done it" for me.

 

[garbulky]

Really? Have you ever heard of JBL? How about the M2 or 4367 or many others from that line, many of the finest sounding speakers made today. That's only one companies product design, there are hundreds more, what are you thinking?
Is it just the look of a big horn that so offends you. Of course these can't be any good, only PROFESSIONALS use them.
Don't go into any recording studios if you don't want to see-hear them.

Yep, and you can have them. along with the other flat FR God, the LS3/5A. BLAH
Oh wait, they can't do bass at all.
Or play loud, distortion is high even at moderate levels.

"Accuracy" is not defined by the single factor of a flat FR. Although very important there are many other factors involved.
Many in this industry have followed that rabbit down the hole to boring reproduction till their product no longer sounded like real music.

It just amazes me how some folks can be so arrogant to believe that only their taste in the balance of speaker strengths, or
the music they listen to, is the defining term of High Fidelity.

I don't think I've heard the M2s or the 4367. I've heard the L100 and a few other (cheaper) JBL's. I don't think the M2 or the 4367 have the same appeal of the vintage Klipsch's. Similar - umm kind of if you stretch it. I think you misunderstand. I think the Klipsch looks fabulous. Big horns dont offend me at all. I love the look of the Volti Vittoras and Tyler Acoustic PD-10's. Yummy! Klipsch looks are a positive not a negative. The LS3/5A, I have heard and they weren't to my liking. Their treble sounded off to me and yes agreed their bass was very anemic.

I am what most people would call a subjectivist. So, yeah, my main worry is not FR Charts but how the things sounds. And unfortunately the Klipsch don't sound natural. But I wouldn't say people won't like it. But yes, I think their sound is below mediocre. With all that money they could have done better and they should have. There's no reason for muddy bass, limited bass extension, and glaring treble. They could have still kept the magic of the horn sound, their large soundstage and worked on the rest. I think with their resources, they could have done it!

 

[MakeMineVinyl]

With all that money they could have done better and they should have. There's no reason for muddy bass, limited bass extension, and glaring treble. They could have still kept the magic of the horn sound, their large soundstage and worked on the rest. I think with their resources, they could have done it!

They sound the way they do because that is their signature sound. If they sounded different, they wouldn't be Klipsch. JBL also has their signature sound, and all their speakers tend to have the same basic sound.

 

[Angsty]

I was reading bound back issues in the Johns Hopkins University's Milton S. Eisenhower library (when I should have been studying) nigh on forty-five years ago now.

I had to pause when I read that. I was doing the same 35 years ago in Boston. 1986 was a wee bit before my subscription days, but I probably still have a photocopy from bound back issues.

 

[Robin L]

His audio knowledge was shallow (and, surprisingly, so was his musical knowledge) but his commitment was genuine.

Edward Tatnall Canby made at least one record as a choral director for Nonesuch. Which reminds me of the Bernard Jacobson recording [as speaker] of Schoenberg's "Ode to Napoleon Buonaparte", also on Nonesuch, from their early days. Both recordings struck me as amateur. Perhaps the label was making nice with well-known music critics as a calculated move. I always found ETA's florid writing style amusing. There is something suspect in writing than depends on obscure language to impress, where it seems as though the writer is assuming that the reader will not have as large a vocabulary as the writer. But when taken to the extremes of some reviewers of Classical music, it becomes farcical.

 

[MakeMineVinyl]

Edward Tatnall Canby made at least one record as a choral director for Nonesuch. Which reminds me of the Bernard Jacobson recording [as speaker] of Schoenberg's "Ode to Napoleon Buonaparte", also on Nonesuch, from their early days. Both recordings struck me as amateur. Perhaps the label was making nice with well-known music critics as a calculated move. I always found ETA's florid writing style amusing. There is something suspect in writing than depends on obscure language to impress, where it seems as though the writer is assuming that the reader will not have as large a vocabulary as the writer. But when taken to the extremes of some reviewers of Classical music, it becomes farcical.

I've found that a lot of writing these days gives the impression that the writer has Thesaurus.com open on their computer, at the ready to insert a high-falutin word where a less pretentious one would do just fine.

 

[Sal1950]

I am what most people would call a subjectivist. So, yeah, my main worry is not FR Charts but how the things sounds. And unfortunately the Klipsch don't sound natural. But I wouldn't say people won't like it. But yes, I think their sound is below mediocre.

As with all subjective positions they are simply opinions, to which all are entitled.
But here we're discussing a speaker that's been in production and continuously updated and improved since 1963.
So obviously there are hoards of folks who haven't agreed with you, and as I posted earlier some of who were professional reviewers that gave it rave reviews..
No speaker is perfect, the La Scala's just happen to be some very good ones IMHO.

 

[mhardy6647]

I had to pause when I read that. I was doing the same 35 years ago in Boston. 1986 was a wee bit before my subscription days, but I probably still have a photocopy from bound back issues.

I remember copying some of the Lirpa Labs component tests. Funny that they always seemed to be in the April issues.

 

[dlaloum]

They sound the way they do because that is their signature sound. If they sounded different, they wouldn't be Klipsch. JBL also has their signature sound, and all their speakers tend to have the same basic sound.

In this day and age, any speaker making a claim to High Fidelity, should not have a "signature sound" - the target is neutrality, otherwise it isn't high fidelity!

Having said that, different designs, respond differently to rooms - so something that will be perfectly Neutral in one room type, won't be in a different room.

Typically, American speakers are designed for larger rooms than European and Japanese designs (as one example of simple room differences)

Most other "signature" aspects are flaws... those who like me have spent years listening to "boxless" speakers - can develop quite a sensitivity to the typical signature of a "box" - yeah almost all of them have a resonance... and to my ears that "boxyness" is always annoying! (it's a "signature" sound... and having said that, there are "box speakers" that I have really enjoyed!) - Also the boxyness is there on some quite expensive (US$10k+) designs, and absent from quite a few relatively economical speakers.... (bookshelves tend to fare better than floor standers... - and I find the lack of bass less offensive than the presence of resonance)

In a well designed speaker, the flaws (signature!) - can be eliminated with modern DSP, electronic crossovers, etc... - unless the signature is a fundamental flaw like enclosure / box resonance.

The sound radiation pattern is another aspect that cannot be changed via DSP - and affects quite dramatically how the speaker interacts with the room.... but I would not call that an aspect of "signature sound".

 

[MakeMineVinyl]

In this day and age, any speaker making a claim to High Fidelity, should not have a "signature sound" - the target is neutrality, otherwise it isn't high fidelity!

Having said that, different designs, respond differently to rooms - so something that will be perfectly Neutral in one room type, won't be in a different room.

Typically, American speakers are designed for larger rooms than European and Japanese designs (as one example of simple room differences)

Most other "signature" aspects are flaws... those who like me have spent years listening to "boxless" speakers - can develop quite a sensitivity to the typical signature of a "box" - yeah almost all of them have a resonance... and to my ears that "boxyness" is always annoying! (it's a "signature" sound... and having said that, there are "box speakers" that I have really enjoyed!) - Also the boxyness is there on some quite expensive (US$10k+) designs, and absent from quite a few relatively economical speakers.... (bookshelves tend to fare better than floor standers... - and I find the lack of bass less offensive than the presence of resonance)

In a well designed speaker, the flaws (signature!) - can be eliminated with modern DSP, electronic crossovers, etc... - unless the signature is a fundamental flaw like enclosure / box resonance.

The sound radiation pattern is another aspect that cannot be changed via DSP - and affects quite dramatically how the speaker interacts with the room.... but I would not call that an aspect of "signature sound".

Every speaker manufacturer will swear that their speakers are 'neutral', and yet all of them are 'neutral' according to a philosophy established by their manufacturers. It isn't right and it isn't arguably 'high fidelity' but it is the state of things. What were you expecting in audio marketing - integrity?

 

[andyc56]

I remember copying some of the Lirpa Labs component tests. Funny that they always seemed to be in the April issues.

I also liked the occasional appearances by Neknnaml Hop.

 

[mhardy6647]

I've found that a lot of writing these days gives the impression that the writer has Thesaurus.com open on their computer, at the ready to insert a high-falutin word where a less pretentious one would do just fine.

I like big words and I cannot lie...

 

[Robin L]

I like big words and I cannot lie...

I wish they all could be callipygian girls . . .

 

[mhardy6647]

I wish they all could be callipygian girls . . .

ooh... big points on the Scoreboard of Life for you from that bon mot, sir!

 

[Robin L]

ooh... big points on the Scoreboard of Life for you from that bon mot, sir!

Garsh!

 

[tuga]

As with all subjective positions they are simply opinions, to which all are entitled.
But here we're discussing a speaker that's been in production and continuously updated and improved since 1963.
So obviously there are hoards of folks who haven't agreed with you, and as I posted earlier some of who were professional reviewers that gave it rave reviews..
No speaker is perfect, the La Scala's just happen to be some very good ones IMHO.

No speaker is perfect but Klipschs are more imperfect than many.

 

[Angsty]

No speaker is perfect but Klipschs are more imperfect than many.

I guess we all have to choose a set of imperfections we are most comfortable with, like choosing a spouse.

My original, few encounters with Klipsch many years ago weren’t amazing. However, my tastes and preferences have changed such that I’m open to a new impression.

What I do find amazing though is how many people keep their big Klipschs for decades without switching. In that respect, choosing a K-horn, La Scala, or Cornwall may be more like choosing a spouse than I originally intended.