• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

Stereophile Reviews New Klipsch Forte, Klipschorn

OP
watchnerd

watchnerd

Grand Contributor
Joined
Dec 8, 2016
Messages
12,449
Likes
10,408
Location
Seattle Area, USA
Mainly, blues, country, and pre 90s rock/pop.

As to the rest I don't really have the background to speak to equating the numbers to what's heard. I can only state my experience.

Have you listened to the active JBLs, 30X 70X M2's, what do you think?

Yes, I have a pair of the LSR305s which I use as direct-in monitors for my reel to reel decks.

They're competent workhouses, good value for money. I don't notice the 305s being any more lifelike than the similar-sized Dynaudio LYD 5's I use as my main DAW monitors.

I haven't heard the big ones.
 

Wombat

Master Contributor
Joined
Nov 5, 2017
Messages
6,722
Likes
6,459
Location
Australia
Thanks, Sal.

There seem to be a lot of folks who feel the same as you do.

I'm curious what type of music you listen to the most?

Two things I hear a lot from horn advocates are:

1. They're good for [classic/guitar] rock, especially.
1a. If that's true, what makes it seem that way, subjectively?
1b. What, measurement-wise, might cause that perception?
2. They're good for horns [brass, but also sax], making them sound the most realistic.
2a. If that's true, what makes it seem that way, subjectively?
2b. What, measurement-wise, might cause that perception?

Open-ended other questions:

1. Do DSP-corrected horns, designed to smoothe out the FR, sound less "horny"?
2. If the liveliness isn't due to FR variations, what would explain it? [for example, I haven't seen better impulse responses from horns, and it's often worse than average] Low distortion?


Why Horns?
 
Last edited:
OP
watchnerd

watchnerd

Grand Contributor
Joined
Dec 8, 2016
Messages
12,449
Likes
10,408
Location
Seattle Area, USA

Okay, impulse response at the individual drivers can look nice.

But when combined in a speaker, we see things like this for the Klipschorn:

819Klipfig08.jpg


That doesn't look like an awesome impulse step response response to me. That looks like a hot mess of drivers that aren't well-integrated in the time domain.
 
Last edited:

mitchco

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Audio Company
Joined
May 24, 2016
Messages
640
Likes
2,397
That's a step response... Using liner phase digital XO with digital delays per driver, one can attain a near perfect step (i.e. time domain) responses whether using horns or not. The one attached is my 3 way triamped system, with subs and horn on top.

Left and Right Step.jpg


Personally, I love horn loaded systems, the bigger the better. Would love to see/hear the Klipschorn triamped and time aligned...
 
OP
watchnerd

watchnerd

Grand Contributor
Joined
Dec 8, 2016
Messages
12,449
Likes
10,408
Location
Seattle Area, USA
Last edited:
OP
watchnerd

watchnerd

Grand Contributor
Joined
Dec 8, 2016
Messages
12,449
Likes
10,408
Location
Seattle Area, USA
Interesting comment in the above thread about how time delays inducing Haas Effect may affect horn sound:

"The folded horn leading the mids and the tweeters by about 20ms will give a more visceral feeling due to the Haas effect."
 

oohlou

Member
Joined
Aug 9, 2019
Messages
47
Likes
46
I have the original Forte. I have an office setup where I use the Forte for loud / sitting back ~9 ft listening and I use JBL LSR305 for nearfield desktop listening.

Here are the results with a calibrated UMIK-1 at position A (~9 ft away) and position B (~1-2 ft away) for both speakers, 1/12 smoothing. Klipsch in red and orange. JBL in blue and light blue. This test was targeting 80dB (though it seems for most frequencies for both speakers it is closer to 83dB).

My non technical comparison: subjectively the bass on the Klipsch is better but obviously this isn't a fair comparison given speaker size. Subjectively the Klipsch sound better in both positions even when the bass differences is taking into account. However, I prefer the JBL in the nearfield position (B) because I can get seemingly better sound quality at low volumes.

I'll leave it to you guys to dissect.

KvJ.jpg
 
OP
watchnerd

watchnerd

Grand Contributor
Joined
Dec 8, 2016
Messages
12,449
Likes
10,408
Location
Seattle Area, USA
I have the original Forte. I have an office setup where I use the Forte for loud / sitting back ~9 ft listening and I use JBL LSR305 for nearfield desktop listening.

Here are the results with a calibrated UMIK-1 at position A (~9 ft away) and position B (~1-2 ft away) for both speakers, 1/12 smoothing. Klipsch in red and orange. JBL in blue and light blue. This test was targeting 80dB (though it seems for most frequencies for both speakers it is closer to 83dB).

My non technical comparison: subjectively the bass on the Klipsch is better but obviously this isn't a fair comparison given speaker size. Subjectively the Klipsch sound better in both positions even when the bass differences is taking into account. However, I prefer the JBL in the nearfield position (B) because I can get seemingly better sound quality at low volumes.

I'll leave it to you guys to dissect.

View attachment 32550

What's going on with the big blue tail 10 dB above everything else in top octave....including the light blue line?
 
OP
watchnerd

watchnerd

Grand Contributor
Joined
Dec 8, 2016
Messages
12,449
Likes
10,408
Location
Seattle Area, USA
I have the original Forte. I have an office setup where I use the Forte for loud / sitting back ~9 ft listening and I use JBL LSR305 for nearfield desktop listening.

Here are the results with a calibrated UMIK-1 at position A (~9 ft away) and position B (~1-2 ft away) for both speakers, 1/12 smoothing. Klipsch in red and orange. JBL in blue and light blue. This test was targeting 80dB (though it seems for most frequencies for both speakers it is closer to 83dB).

My non technical comparison: subjectively the bass on the Klipsch is better but obviously this isn't a fair comparison given speaker size. Subjectively the Klipsch sound better in both positions even when the bass differences is taking into account. However, I prefer the JBL in the nearfield position (B) because I can get seemingly better sound quality at low volumes.

I'll leave it to you guys to dissect.

View attachment 32550

Also:

Do you think the LSR305 sounds like a horn?

[As mentioned above, it just sounds like a normal speaker of its size and purpose, to me...different than others, sure, but it sounds like another variation on a direct radiator to me]
 

g29

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
May 1, 2019
Messages
520
Likes
318
At that price range there are D&D's, Kii III, JBL and high end Revel speakers not to mention other choices rarely mentioned around here.

Ouch, the USD hasn't held up very well. I had a new pair of the original Chorus II's and didn't pay anywhere near that retail.
 

Wombat

Master Contributor
Joined
Nov 5, 2017
Messages
6,722
Likes
6,459
Location
Australia
OP
watchnerd

watchnerd

Grand Contributor
Joined
Dec 8, 2016
Messages
12,449
Likes
10,408
Location
Seattle Area, USA
Also:

Do you think the LSR305 sounds like a horn?

[As mentioned above, it just sounds like a normal speaker of its size and purpose, to me...different than others, sure, but it sounds like another variation on a direct radiator to me]

Well this bit certainly throws the "horns are great because of efficiency" idea under the bus:

"Even more modern “constant directivity” waveguides. These are the result of a radical re-thinking of the purpose of having horns in the first place. Basically, their rationale is that today power is cheap and we don’t really need efficiency and loading any more; all we should aim for is directivity control, AND the least possible amounts of diffraction."

One could interpret this to mean that the JBL M2, 3XX, 7XX, and probably the 4367, at a minimum, are not horns primarily for the sake of efficiency...and just comes with the directivity control as icing on the cake.

Which, at that point, starts to remind me of Dynaudio's DDC [dyn directivity control system, or something

like that]:

dynaudio_confidence_60___midnight_high_gloss.jpg



...but nobody is calling that sculptured waveguide a horn or thinks of Dynaudio is a horn maker.


Are the lines blurring?
 
Last edited:

Wombat

Master Contributor
Joined
Nov 5, 2017
Messages
6,722
Likes
6,459
Location
Australia
Well this bit certainly throws the "horns are great because of efficiency" idea under the bus:

"Even more modern “constant directivity” waveguides. These are the result of a radical re-thinking of the purpose of having horns in the first place. Basically, their rationale is that today power is cheap and we don’t really need efficiency and loading any more; all we should aim for is directivity control, AND the least possible amounts of diffraction."

One could interpret this to mean that the JBL M2, 3XX, 7XX, and probably the 4367, at a minimum, are not horns primarily for the sake of efficiency...and just comes with the directivity control as icing on the cake.

Which, at that point, starts to remind me of Dynaudio's DDC [dyn directivity control system, or something

like that]:

dynaudio_confidence_60___midnight_high_gloss.jpg



...but nobody is calling that sculptured waveguide a horn of thinks of Dynaudio is a horn maker.


Are the lines blurring?


JBL's various waveguides listed/described here: In the black pane.

The term 'waveguide' is usually used to describe horns with low acoustic loading.
 
Last edited:
OP
watchnerd

watchnerd

Grand Contributor
Joined
Dec 8, 2016
Messages
12,449
Likes
10,408
Location
Seattle Area, USA
JBL's various waveguides listed/described here: In the black pane.

The term 'waveguide' is usually used to describe horns with low acoustic loading.

Very familiar, owning an LSR305.

But it doesn't sound like a horn to me; it's hard to know it's efficiency, given its power.

But if the waveguide school of thought is correct, is the 'more efficiency is the main reason to have horns' moot in the era of modern power?
 

Wombat

Master Contributor
Joined
Nov 5, 2017
Messages
6,722
Likes
6,459
Location
Australia
Very familiar, owning an LSR305.

But it doesn't sound like a horn to me; it's hard to know it's efficiency, given its power.

But if the waveguide school of thought is correct, is the 'more efficiency is the main reason to have horns' moot in the era of modern power?

The loudspeaker designer has to decide what best suits the overall design aims. Size constraints in many modern speaker systems will tend to preclude horns other than High-mid waveguides and HF application.
 
Last edited:
OP
watchnerd

watchnerd

Grand Contributor
Joined
Dec 8, 2016
Messages
12,449
Likes
10,408
Location
Seattle Area, USA
The designer has to decide what best fits the overall design aims.

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?

Where does that leave us, other than "all designs are compromises....pick your poison."
 

Wombat

Master Contributor
Joined
Nov 5, 2017
Messages
6,722
Likes
6,459
Location
Australia
As an engineer, I can say that all designs are compromises. Some more or less than others.
 
OP
watchnerd

watchnerd

Grand Contributor
Joined
Dec 8, 2016
Messages
12,449
Likes
10,408
Location
Seattle Area, USA

This contrast from the DIY post above:

"3) Tractrix horns. These tend to be very similar to n. 1), but with reduced mouth reflections, and poorer driver loading towards the lower end of their bandwidth. The main problem I have with these is that the theory on which they are based is very shaky. In simple terms, the tractrix profile “looks” nice but there is no sound physical justification for it whatsoever. So I don’t consider it a very credible contender, especially given that the JMLC horns (see 1) tend to solve the same issues and offer improved loading"

versus

This blurb from Klipsch about the new Cornwall IV:

"New features in the refreshed Cornwall IV speakers include the use of an all new K-702 midrange compression mated to a modified proprietary Tractrix horn with patented Klipsch Mumps technology for even mid frequencies and consistent sound throughout the listening area. A new high-fidelity, steep slope network, was also integrated to improve sound reproduction with best in class efficiency and power handling. New ports with Tractrix flares deliver the most efficient, fastest air transfer in their class, resulting in reduced port noise and clean, more powerful, punchy bass."

So Klipsch is all-in on Tractrix, but the DIY guys are 'meh', at best?
 
OP
watchnerd

watchnerd

Grand Contributor
Joined
Dec 8, 2016
Messages
12,449
Likes
10,408
Location
Seattle Area, USA
By the way, if it seems like I'm giving Klipsch a bad time, it's not mean spirited in any way.

I actually want to like them, for all sorts of subjective reasons.

I'm just having a hard time finding an objective reason to do so.
 
Top Bottom