what do people think about the "Klipsch sound" ?

[mhardy6647]

You should have kept them.
I would have recommended you try some Russian 5881's in them.
Though most deficiency in the sound was probably due to a cheap output transformer.

Keeping them wasn't really an option -- as I bought them expressly for another hifi fellow traveler.

The OPT was indeed kind of nominal -- but not as nominal as the one used in the original Realist morph.
You cannot see it in the catalog scan because it's mounted under-deck.
Indeed, with the below-decks OPT and octal voltage amps and splitter -- I think (?!) the original version may have been a rebadged Grommes "Little Jewel". The "stereo pair" of Realistics, I suspect (!?!) was a Japanese-made quasi-clone of the original.

Check that: The "Realistics" look like a bona fide Grommes "LJ" clone -- although the OPT is indeed not as beefy as the LJs.

(borrowed Internet photo; not mine)

A little Arkay amp/carcass that passed through some years back.

 

[Sal1950]

A little Arkay amp/carcass that passed through some years back.

Seeing any gear in that condition makes me bummed.

 

[garyrc]

FWIW, as a teen (10th grade) I built a mono 12 watt Arkay amp-preamp from a kit. Since I had a JBL D130 extended range 15 incher at the time (approx 103 dB at 2. 83v at 1m or 54dB EIA), I got sufficient volume at the 1% THD level of 8 watts from this "12 watt" amplifier. That was about 104 dB at 13 feet away. By ear, I could start to hear distortion at about the 9 O'clock position of the volume control. It apparently overheated, and I had to replace a charred restitor and a couple of melty caps. But, I enjoyed it greatly until I "went stereo" about 8 years later, and went over to Dynakit PAS3 and two Dyna 40 watt amps.

 

[Ciobi69]

Ive saw some measurements about the Klipschorn and some people said that are bad,i did buy them,and listened them at the previous owner place,now they are in storage because I have to move from my house,by the way it was one of the best audiophile experience i ever had,the dynamics were huge,they were unbelievable to me

 

[garyrc]

Ive saw some measurements about the Klipschorn and some people said that are bad,i did buy them,and listened them at the previous owner place,now they are in storage because I have to move from my house,by the way it was one of the best audiophile experience i ever had,the dynamics were huge,they were unbelievable to me

Yes, some measurements of the Klipschorn are of highly questionable validity. The Stereophile measurements are flawed (outrageous) in the bass range. Even though the new Klipschorns have closed backs in order to allow users to "toe in" the speakers to put the listener on axis if the Main Listening Position is not at a 45 degree angle to both walls making up the corner (or to fine tune the positions in other ways) they should be as near as possible to a corner, and pushed into a corner if at all practical. Stereophile measured them on a furniture dolly, outside, in a driveway, presumably with a small cavity below them (Paul Klipsch specifically warned against this), and no corner! They need the boundry gain of side walls somewhere nearby, which apparently also smooth out the bass. Slightly older Klipschorns, perhaps yours, do not have closed backs, and must be pushed all the way into a corner, and sealed with pipe insulation on the edges of the tail board.

A French magazine produced a pretty good graph of Klipschorn response. I wish I had retained the magazine's name! It doesn't matter too much, though, low distortion and high dynamics are more important than smooth frequency response, IMO. At least one speaker expert maintains that no set of speaker measurements predicts performance -- speakers sound the way they sound, and only listening will allow you to determine whether a speaker pleases you. You and I both had that experience with Klipschorns. In my case I know of no other speaker that I could afford back when I was in the market that had honest orchestra-like dynamics.

 

[dasdoing]

low distortion and high dynamics are more important than smooth frequency response

it is strange that even the more tecnical tribe of audiphiles still have FR in first place when they all use room EQ. without EQ I actualy agree that smooth FR is most important, at least in the midrange.....but in EQ era this should move more to the background

 

[dlaloum]

it is strange that even the more tecnical tribe of audiphiles still have FR in first place when they all use room EQ. without EQ I actualy agree that smooth FR is most important, at least in the midrange.....but in EQ era this should move more to the background

Sort of - it is best to be cautious here - the areas where you get FR anomalies, tend to be areas where something else is going on - a cross over, a baffle related distortion/refraction, phase shifts... or sometimes just a room reflection.

The point is, the RoomEQ may be able to fix the FR - but won't touch the other symptoms of the problem .

If you have a speaker with a smooth FR, typically it is an indicator that there are no other serious issues - and in that case, you can with confidence use Dirac Target curves to tailor it to whatever voicing you want.... the chameleon system is born.

But with speakers that have anomalies... you may or may not be able to improve things - and a smooth FR may in fact just be covering up a different problem... (or multiple different problems).

 

[Ciobi69]

Yes, some measurements of the Klipschorn are of highly questionable validity. The Stereophile measurements are flawed (outrageous) in the bass range. Even though the new Klipschorns have closed backs in order to allow users to "toe in" the speakers to put the listener on axis if the Main Listening Position is not at a 45 degree angle to both walls making up the corner (or to fine tune the positions in other ways) they should be as near as possible to a corner, and pushed into a corner if at all practical. Stereophile measured them on a furniture dolly, outside, in a driveway, presumably with a small cavity below them (Paul Klipsch specifically warned against this), and no corner! They need the boundry gain of side walls somewhere nearby, which apparently also smooth out the bass. Slightly older Klipschorns,perhaps yours, do not have closed backs, and must be pushed all the way into a corner, and sealed with pipe insulation on the edges of the tail board.

A French magazine produced a pretty good graph of Klipschorn response. I wish I had retained the magazine's name! It doesn't matter too much, though, low distortion and high dynamics are more important than smooth frequency response, IMO. At least one speaker expert maintains that no set of speaker measurements predicts performance -- speakers sound the way they sound, and only listening will allow you to determine whether a speaker pleases you. You and I both had that experience with Klipschorns. In my case I know of no other speaker that I could afford back when I was in the market that had honest orchestra-like dynamics.

Yes ,i agree on everything 100% they are not speakers to measure in an open field. The previous owner in his own house put some orchestral music ,and i was having goosebumps, the dynamics were impressive, i remember i was calm waiting to the song

Yes, some measurements of the Klipschorn are of highly questionable validity. The Stereophile measurements are flawed (outrageous) in the bass range. Even though the new Klipschorns have closed backs in order to allow users to "toe in" the speakers to put the listener on axis if the Main Listening Position is not at a 45 degree angle to both walls making up the corner (or to fine tune the positions in other ways) they should be as near as possible to a corner, and pushed into a corner if at all practical. Stereophile measured them on a furniture dolly, outside, in a driveway, presumably with a small cavity below them (Paul Klipsch specifically warned against this), and no corner! They need the boundry gain of side walls somewhere nearby, which apparently also smooth out the bass. Slightly older Klipschorns,perhaps yours, do not have closed backs, and must be pushed all the way into a corner, and sealed with pipe insulation on the edges of the tail board.

A French magazine produced a pretty good graph of Klipschorn response. I wish I had retained the magazine's name! It doesn't matter too much, though, low distortion and high dynamics are more important than smooth frequency response, IMO. At least one speaker expert maintains that no set of speaker measurements predicts performance -- speakers sound the way they sound, and only listening will allow you to determine whether a speaker pleases you. You and I both had that experience with Klipschorns. In my case I know of no other speaker that I could afford back when I was in the market that had honest orchestra-like dynamics.

i agree with everything, in my case in the future i will build false corners for my klipschorn,they told me they work well..they doesnt look too good sadly,ahha

 

[mhardy6647]

At least one speaker expert maintains that no set of speaker measurements predicts performance -- speakers sound the way they sound, and only listening will allow you to determine whether a speaker pleases you.

Who would that expert be, and where did he/she claim it -- you know, just out of... academic curiosity. Check the name of the forum this was posted to. "We" do try to be a wee bit more rigorous than "a guy at a bar told me his cousin's brother's friend is a hifi expert, and they said..."

The issue of whether one is pleased by a loudspeaker's performance is -- ahem, I would opine -- a very, very different one than is whether or not "[a] set of speaker measurements predicts performance". The first one is true, and relates to psychology as much as audiometry, but...
Measurements certainly predict performance -- even if they don't pedict likeability.

 

[garyrc]

it is strange that even the more tecnical tribe of audiphiles still have FR in first place when they all use room EQ. without EQ I actualy agree that smooth FR is most important, at least in the midrange.....but in EQ era this should move more to the background

Yes, very carefully setting up Audyssey smoothed out my Khorns and Belle (center) quite a bit. They are pretty flat above about 200 Hz. Below that I sometimes do a Harman curve sort of thing in the bass. The best Dirac might be even better. Trinnov may be helpful to the top 1% 5%.

 

[garyrc]

Who would that expert be, and where did he/she claim it -- you know, just out of... academic curiosity. Check the name of the forum this was posted to. "We" do try to be a wee bit more rigorous than "a guy at a bar told me his cousin's brother's friend is a hifi expert, and they said..."

The issue of whether one is pleased by a loudspeaker's performance is -- ahem, I would opine -- a very, very different one than is whether or not "[a] set of speaker measurements predicts performance". The first one is true, and relates to psychology as much as audiometry, but...
Measurements certainly predict performance -- even if they don't pedict likeability.

The expert is Frank Malitz, former partner in the Bob Carver company. I think they have a new company now, not sure. The only reason I didn't cite him is I wasn't sure he would want to be cited, but I'll take the risk.

I was wrong about one thing, he says sensitivity is useful, of course, in predicting how much amp power you might need or want.

I first encountered him on Quora, which is where he made the claim. See also https://www.enjoythemusic.com/magazine/manufacture/1220/10_Questions_Bob_Carver_Corporation.htm FYI, he does not like Klipsch. There we disagree, to say the least.

I agree, it "relates to psychology as much as audiometry." I'm quite aware of the difference between both individual and general likeability and perceptual choice (preference as operationalized by actually selecting a speaker via switching, rather than a verbal response or use of a rating scale, etc.), let alone speaker performance as measured by various kinds of accuracy, and that there is no one measure of accuracy -- not smoothness of response (the classic Consumers Reports mistake of the 1950s through about the 2010, or so), not harmonic distortion, not dynamic range, and not even modulation distortion (though it is a big one!). Some of these issues (likeability, perceptual choice vs ratings, estimates of quality, etc., not audio) are discussed in one of my favorite books, Aesthetics and Psychobiology by D. E. Berlyne.

 

[mhardy6647]

The expert is Frank Malitz, former partner in the Bob Carver company. I think they have a new company now, not sure. The only reason I didn't cite him is I wasn't sure he would want to be cited, but I'll take the risk.

I'd encourage you to read up a little on Mr. Malitz and his legacy with Dr. Carver.

 

[garyrc]

I'd encourage you to read up a little on Mr. Malitz and his legacy with Dr. Carver.

You've got me interested. I googled every way I could think of and did not find the tone I infered you may mean. I noted the sad emoji, and the context of our conversation, so I'm expecting something negative. Did someone rebut or attack one of Frank's presentations? Did Malitz and Carver have a falling out? Do you have a link to more info?

 

[mhardy6647]

He posted some horrible stuff on the Polk forums, but the moderators there subsequently deleted it.
I never thought to snapshot the URLs for the wayback machine at archive.org unfortunately.
Read through the Carver 275 review thread(s) here and at the Polk forums & you should get a sense of him and his... ahhhm... style.
Search those lengthy threads for his name.
He has, from my perspective and as far as I can tell, zero credibility when it comes to any matters pertaining to hifi audio reproduction.
If you find, or have, any evidence to the contrary, I'd certainly be interested to see it.

Have you watched any of his videos on behalf of Carver?

 

[garyrc]

Yes, I saw two of his videos on behalf of Carver. He is not the only audio rep with strong opinions, but he is high tempo, we might (or might not) say glib, and, on Quora often shows great confidence in his opinions, and generally advocates for very expensive equipment. Despite that, he said one Elac speaker was surprisingly good for the money. Another time, he said some who don't have a big budget sometimes seem to do O.K. with Polk or Klipsch (the irony!), even though he really doesn't like either.

I'll continue to look online. Even though I have been a hobbyist even longer than Frank has been in the field, I'm strictly an amateur, and would need quite a bit more info to evaluate credibility. I'm still interested, though.

Update: I actually read 64 pages of the Carver 275 review and aftermath. I could see an inadequate response to the complaints. I've often liked Carver products in the past.

 

[dasdoing]

what are those mains in one of the Paisly Park Studio control rooms?

 

[jkasch]

Westlake, I think.

 

[dasdoing]

Westlake, I think.

o yea. thanks

HR-1

 

[dasdoing]

ok, they kind of mirrored Westlake Studio D where MJ would record

 

[garyrc]

Yes, probably Westlake. They had those at The Record Plant in Sausilito, when we visited in 1974. The engineer said practically everything at the record plant was modified, including the Westlakes. In what way, I don't know.