S-Man
StrivingON
No idea what those two speakers sound like. But if the choice was between Heresy IVs and Nines, it would have to be the Nines.
Finally some high performance Klipsch speakers
- Thread starter tuga
- Start date
martin clark
pinko bodger
tuga
Legal Alien
Based on measurements or having listened to both speakers? Or looks?
Or maybe you consulted with the Oracle of the People. Before it was shut down.
Joe P
Memory Alpha incarnate | mod; Shatner number = 2
tuga,
I have listened to the Klipschorns a few times over the years, as well as to the Klipsch Belles, La Scalas and Heresys, but not The Nines. Without a recent dem I can't say with certainty, but I have heard Klipschorns enough that they would likely be my choice out of the current Klipsch heritage line up.
That said, I had a chance to hear the Belles some years ago when I was contemplating buying a pair of Monitor Red-era Tannoy GRFs. I listened to both quite a bit and bought the GRFs, which I have been running since. I guess I'm more of a Tannoy man than a Klipsch man. The Klipsch are dynamic in a way I've rarely heard in any other speaker but on balance I preferred the Tannoy presentation. It's also horn-loaded and very dynamic but a bit more even-handed.
(I did measure the GRFs. Height: 42.5 inches. Depth: 19 inches. Width: 24 inches. I wanted to make sure I could get them through the door and down the stairs into the basement.)
But I didn’t measure their audio performance. I simply listened. This method works perfectly for me because my criterion is simply do I like the way the component sounds. Don't take this as my embracing foo or disregarding science. I have the utmost respect for what scientists do. I just don't see the point in measuring something to see if I would like it when listening has been foolproof for that purpose. I’ve run the Tannoys since 2008 so whatever their flaws, their strengths more than compensate. I have no interest in changing to something else.
Joe
P.S. My comment about knowing which one I'd choose is a bit of a joke about a comment fishies often make: I know which one I'd choose.
Well, of course you would know which one you would choose. How could you not know the thoughts within your head?
I have listened to the Klipschorns a few times over the years, as well as to the Klipsch Belles, La Scalas and Heresys, but not The Nines. Without a recent dem I can't say with certainty, but I have heard Klipschorns enough that they would likely be my choice out of the current Klipsch heritage line up.
That said, I had a chance to hear the Belles some years ago when I was contemplating buying a pair of Monitor Red-era Tannoy GRFs. I listened to both quite a bit and bought the GRFs, which I have been running since. I guess I'm more of a Tannoy man than a Klipsch man. The Klipsch are dynamic in a way I've rarely heard in any other speaker but on balance I preferred the Tannoy presentation. It's also horn-loaded and very dynamic but a bit more even-handed.
(I did measure the GRFs. Height: 42.5 inches. Depth: 19 inches. Width: 24 inches. I wanted to make sure I could get them through the door and down the stairs into the basement.)
But I didn’t measure their audio performance. I simply listened. This method works perfectly for me because my criterion is simply do I like the way the component sounds. Don't take this as my embracing foo or disregarding science. I have the utmost respect for what scientists do. I just don't see the point in measuring something to see if I would like it when listening has been foolproof for that purpose. I’ve run the Tannoys since 2008 so whatever their flaws, their strengths more than compensate. I have no interest in changing to something else.
Joe
P.S. My comment about knowing which one I'd choose is a bit of a joke about a comment fishies often make: I know which one I'd choose.
Well, of course you would know which one you would choose. How could you not know the thoughts within your head?
John Phillips
pfm Member
The long-established and long-applied mathematics of Fourier analysis disagrees with you in principle.
An audio signal (one channel) is a well-behaved function of amplitude (usually voltage) versus time. Fourier analysis shows that over any period you want to choose such a function (audio signal) can be re-created by summing steady state sine waves.
If the argument here is that Joseph Fourier (and those who developed his fundamental work on functions into Fourier Analysis) and Wolfgang Klippel have got it wrong it would be interesting to hear exactly how. I assume you are objecting on the basis of the limited number of tones used in the Klippel test. But actually the Klippel test does not have to re-create an arbitrary piece of music - it just has to be enough to reveal problems in a system that may need to be addressed - if they are significant enough.
The multi-tone test is a big step forward in revealing (undesirable to me - I won't speak for others) non-linear behaviour (including poor dynamics) in systems like loudspeakers, DACs and amplifiers. The idea may have emerged in a 1970s paper I have from BBC Research on audio systems. Nowadays we have the means to easily generate the test signal so the test is practical and IMHO useful.
Let's not throw the baby out with the bath water. Modern measurements including multi-tone distortion tests are excellent at showing up defects from a conventional standard of perfection. IMHO the chase for needless perfection should be avoided, but when I understand where to draw the line, to me they are excellent at showing up kit I would not spend my time on auditioning. Yes, the tests might still be improved, and yes, if someone prefers equipment that doesn't meet the conventional standard that's OK - and I do have issues with some loudspeaker evaluations. But some of us do like the conventional ideas of low distortion in audio systems. The test that doesn't seem to please someone might please others.
John Phillips
pfm Member
Broadly I agree. Multiple phemomena come under "dynamics". That always makes for interesting discussion.
I think the "Dynamic Range (Instantaneous Compression Test)" tests from Erin's Audio Corner (some were posted earlier) are potentially very useful in weeding out performers that don't reach a desired standard. These tests show that as audio level goes up not only does a loudspeaker "run out of steam" at some point but the frequency response changes. Sometimes a lot. It should not do this but if it does, an instrument playing loud will have a different timbre compared to when it is played softly. And, IMHO worse, an instrument playing loud will change the timbre of any accompanying instrument.
I applaud these tests but I have not yet found a good way to answer "how good does the result need to be so that it's good enough to audition?".
And maybe think of this. If the test above shows the loudspeaker just won't get to the desired audio level when you want it to, then it's no good thinking about how fast it responds. It has to be capable of reaching the desired level, steady-state, in the first place. Then one can usefully look at other aspects of "dynamics".
And @Tony L is right that a well-recorded piano can really test a system's dynamics.
Tony L
Administrator
Absolutely. This is something I’m very conscious of. I’ve some studio/music experience and learned many decades ago exactly what overload distortion, clipping etc sounds like, plus I’ve spent many hours playing with studio compressors, limiters etc, so I do tend to recognise what I’m hearing. I hear it so often at shows and in dealer dems.
There is a phenomenon I call ‘small speaker fist punch’ where a certain listener with a certain taste thinks a speaker ‘wakes up’ when pushed too hard. The effect to my ears is it starts behaving like a rather crude compressor; it starts to sound subjectively ‘punchy’ as drum envelope peaks are reduced and gains a little hardness which can be interpreted as more ‘smack’ to the snare, ‘slam’ to the kick, ‘bite’ to guitars etc. It is just distortion, and that is exactly what I hear it as.
Compression can sound great. It is why people spend £thousands on studio compressors. I just don’t want it in a speaker. I’m sure it is a reason why I end up with a headache so fast at hi-fi shows as around 75-80% of rooms seem in this category to my ears. The industry as a whole seems either not to hear it, or maybe even use it as a sales tool for rock fans who want that band in a pub sound. Ugh. Just no.
I’m certainly of the view that if you want to listen at a median level of more than about 75-80db in a non-nearfield scenario then you need genuinely big speakers to really get the required headroom cleanly. A little driver bobbing about wildly in a little box will never ever do it. Basic physics.
The flat lines on graphs people always post don’t seem to show this. They should as it is far more important than simple response flatness IMHO. The odd db here and there from flat really doesn’t matter, neither does dispersion if you are sitting in a sensible place, but compression and distortion does. I‘ll always hear that, and it gives me a headache real fast.
Sue Pertwee-Tyr
Accuphase all the way down
Thank you and yes, I do understand the Fourier analysis argument but, as you surmise, my supposition here is that the number of tones deployed are insufficient to provide the summation necessary to recreate a complex, rapidly changing piece of music. I recognise that they may show up potential issues during the development stages and are undoubtedly a very useful tool, but I think it is important to keep in mind that there will be a limiting point at which issues remain but won't be picked up by the test, for the reason above. We're then into the usual arguments about thresholds for negligibility. I'd liken it, perhaps, to those show dems using girl and guitar, that don't tell you whether the system will float your boat on The Bad Plus, or Prokofiev's Second Piano Concerto. And reliance on test results in lieu of listening is analogous to that, I think.
you are wasting your time with this guy ,how can someone be taken serious when he never listen this speakers but can say how good or bad they are? its ridiculous.
Sue Pertwee-Tyr
Accuphase all the way down
I think you'd like the FinkTeam speakers Joe, not least because mine are named after Ensign Kim, and they have a bigger model, the Borg (which, sadly, is not cube shaped).
John Phillips
pfm Member
Sure, but discussion may be in danger of getting into the territory of "the perfect is the enemy of the good". Yes - a non-linearity needs to be exercised by the test signal to show up. And I could probably design a non-linearity that would be difficult to find. But it would be a very un-natural non-linearity.
Modern multi-tone tests like the ones we are discussing for sure pick up natural non-linearities much better than older tests. I refuse to be one of the ultra-objectivists who goes down the rabbit hole chasing a DAC with a 123 dB SNR because its better than one measuring at 122 dB. So, I will happily take the information from a multi-tone test and make use of it in selecting gear to audition and be confident that the test may not be perfect but will be much better at weeding out poor performers than previously. To me, this is not about a perfect destination. It's about a good step on an continuing journey.
Tony L
Administrator
They look really interesting. I like the idea of being able to adjust bass damping, though I’m not quite clear how they’ve achieved that. Look cool.
Sue Pertwee-Tyr
Accuphase all the way down
Thank you, and I think we're in danger of being in violent agreement!
I suppose I might summarise my position as recognising that I don't know enough about measurements to be confident that I could or would interpret them appropriately, and I have my suspicions that some that believe they do are a little misguided. This leads to the risk that some people who set great store by such things, dismiss, or embrace, products on the basis of information they haven't fully assimilated. That's their lookout and their choice, and is up to them of course, and it's none of my business if they do, unless or until they urge others to follow their lead in which case, I think that gives me licence to have my say.
Joe P
Memory Alpha incarnate | mod; Shatner number = 2
Steve,
Wow, just wow. I’ve never heard FinkTeam but based on what you wrote I’ve sold my Tannoys and placed an order for a Borg cube. How could anyone resist that?
Man, I hope they’re planning to release other models — the planet eater, the Fesarius, Vger ... not to mention the various constitution and galaxy-class vessels.
Joe
Wow, just wow. I’ve never heard FinkTeam but based on what you wrote I’ve sold my Tannoys and placed an order for a Borg cube. How could anyone resist that?
Man, I hope they’re planning to release other models — the planet eater, the Fesarius, Vger ... not to mention the various constitution and galaxy-class vessels.
Joe
gez
pfm Member
My post wasn't an attempt to stifle discussion. But only that discussion from totally diametrically opposed positions is fruitless and leads to nothing positive. If people disagree with nuance, then fine go ahead and have a debate about it. But there's zero to be gained by an apple lover telling an orange lover that they're wrong to dislike apples and like oranges (or a motorbike lover telling a car lover cars are crap, and all such totally pointless conversations). That's just expressing an opinion because you like the sound of your own voice (yes I'm fully aware that I've done this myself, and I'm aiming to try my best to stop), it's not driven by anything more than ego (yes I am also throwing that accusation at myself).
gez
pfm Member
And you'd be entirely correct of course. I mean we only have to hear people say things like " my headphones go from 20hz to 20khz, they're better than yours because they only go down to 30hz" or similar comments that are clearly founded on a misunderstanding of measurements, or at least are being mislead by what they've been told is important when it comes to measurements. Your comments regarding speaker dynamics are completely on point, in the sense that at least you're thinking about "what are dynamics and how best can we determine them?". A lot of people (I'd go as far as to say the vast majority, if we're including the general population), just look at the frequency response and that's their limit as far as their understanding of measurements is concerned, and as you've stated they are very likely making bad choices because of their use of measurements.
Sue Pertwee-Tyr
Accuphase all the way down
I suspect they are less efficient than your Tannoys (what isn't?) but shouldn't overtax the coolant capabilities of your Stingray like that.