Klipsch - Old vs New

[aldrindl]

Hi everyone, I'm of course just newly signed up to audio review and I would love to hear your thoughts/advice on the dilemma I'm facing.

For over 10 years, I've had a system with an Onkyo Receiver, (1st the 575x and last year the 608), Klipsch KG 3.5 fronts, Klipsch KSCC1 center and a BIC D1010r sub. (I also have BIC 52si for surrounds however those are only used for movies) It’s a relatively small room, 13 x 18.5. So I don't suffer from a lack of volume with this setup. But though I like what I have, I thought I was ready to upgrade to something better.

I am off course considerably budget constrained, as are most people these days. Over the years I have sampled/auditioned a bunch of different speakers and brands, some at home (none came close to the KG3.5s, they were not high end stuff, anyway) and some in dealer setups.

Last year, I had heard the Klipsch Reference Series 52s at 2 different dealers driven by the same 608 receiver - listening to a selection of my music including PF, Classical (Chopin, Debussy, etc.), Jazz (Stan Getz, Duke, Coltrane, Miles Davis) and I had loved the sound, feeling it to be quite superior to the KG3.5's. I had again listened to a variety of other speakers (Paradigm, Definitive Tech, KEF) as comparisons and also the Klipsch 82s & 62s. The 82 was great and the 62 was also good, but the only real difference I seemed to feel between them and the 52s was loudness / power. They were both just too big and much too expensive. I felt I would be very happy with the 52s (if I could get a good price)

I guess I missed the closing out of these, however, as they have been replaced with a new "II" series . The few reviews on the series I came across were positive saying it was an improvement on the older 52s. So when I saw a recent deal (at Vanns), I jumped on it and picked up a couple of fronts. The sales guy told me I should try out my existing center, before picking up the 42 equivalent (the 52 center will just not fit into my entertainment center).

I just received these yesterday and hooked them up and tried it out (no burn in yet). My initial impression was shock. I didn’t have the ability to play these loud as it was late at night. I listened to some piano solos and some pop and compared the 2 side by side (disconnecting the sub and Audyssey).

On the high end, while the RF-52s II were clearly playing the same notes, they didn’t have the same crystal “ching/clink” for want of a better word. The 52s were overall “colder” (and I was prepared and ready to overlook that). However I could not believe how far off they were in presenting the beauty of high notes when compared to the ancient KG3.5’s. I tend to love high notes, especially on the piano/bells used in classical. Also to my knowledge the KG 3.5s were lower end speakers in Klipschs line-up.

On the low end, bass/base? was tight but obviously could not compare to the presence of the 8” woofers in the KG3.5s. This I am hoping will be compensated when the Sub is added back (I tend to keep the starting point high at 100hz)
So my question is will this get better after burn-in? I am really concerned with the beauty of the highs… I know there is considerable debate/dismissal about burn-ins, having read some threads on this and other forums.

And is this really the case that the entire reference series is not as good as the oldies from Klipsch? :confused5:
If I have to save up for a higher end line (of Klipsch :smile5:), I guess that might have to be many more years.
It’s also going to hurt, if I have to return these, though my only cost would be shipping, - these heavy speakers are quite expensive to ship via UPS/Fedex.

Looking forward to hear your views

[bfalls]

I grew up owning Klipsch. However I find the more current lines not as musical as the older. I have Kg4s I use as mains in one system. I love them and wouldn't part with them. In general I find the new lines less warm and more sterile. I've listened to many of the new "main" speakers, but the ones I do find appealing cost way more than I plan to ever pay. Their Palladiums are excellent, but I find considerable "diminishing returns" at their price point. I'll keep with my current Kg4, KV3, RS-3 5.1 system. They're very warm and detailed, sound excellent together, and most importantly they're paid for.

[harley .guy07]

Most of my friends that are klipsch lovers seem to like their classic lines better than their slimmer tower reference series that they have now and I am pretty sure that is why they still make some of the classic series even today. I do have one friend who likes the new series better but his musical tastes are very set on one type of music and it seems the reference series sounds better to him but it seems like the newer reference series seems to lean toward the theater end of things more than the music and the classic obviously is more towards 2 channel which might be part of what you are hearing. I have heard several models in the Klipsch lineup and with what I have heard you would have to step up in the Klipsch series to get an all musical based speaker like you are used to. Plus the horns on the classic lines are much bigger and seem to give a more pronounced high end which it sounds like you are a fan of. Burn in can be a factor when getting new speakers but after hours of listening if you are not hearing what you like then it is either the speakers just aren't for you, the receiver is not mating well with the speakers or in your listening room the acoustics just plain sound better with your classic Klipsch speakers. I would just listen close and go with what your ears tell you and if they tell you that your present speakers sound better than your new ones then that is that and the only place to go there is to move up the Klipsch line until you find something that rivals what you have but also keeps what you liked with you current speakers.

[harley .guy07]

Just to add when I see a company that offers a classic line of their products in the current lineup that to me would let me know that they know the same thing that you are facing right now. that for some people their classic speaker lines seem to work for them better. If they didn't they would not be still making them.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

I just received these yesterday and hooked them up and tried it out (no burn in yet). My initial impression was shock. I didn’t have the ability to play these loud as it was late at night. I listened to some piano solos and some pop and compared the 2 side by side (disconnecting the sub and Audyssey).

On the high end, while the RF-52s II were clearly playing the same notes, they didn’t have the same crystal “ching/clink” for want of a better word. The 52s were overall “colder” (and I was prepared and ready to overlook that). However I could not believe how far off they were in presenting the beauty of high notes when compared to the ancient KG3.5’s. I tend to love high notes, especially on the piano/bells used in classical. Also to my knowledge the KG 3.5s were lower end speakers in Klipschs line-up.

I would say before you make any impression about any speaker, let them burn in(or better yet, let your ears get use to them) before making any conclusions. No speaker coming out of a box is going to sound its best.

[Enochrome]

Was looking into some Klipsch Forte's. I am now intrigued by the JBL and Klipsch seventies sound cause of this thread.

[rightaway]

i heard a pair at best buy and really didnt like the sound that much.

[bfalls]

I've seen the selection at Best Buy. They seem to carry only the most affordable models. I'm a big fan of the Kg and Reference Series. The newer speakers don't have near the sound, engineering or build quality of their classics.
A few years ago I purchased their unique looking GMX-D5.1 multi-media surround set. Upon first listen I was surprised by the level of noise with no input. I liked the speakers, so immediately dumped the control pod and sub/amp and drove them with a 6ch NAD I had lying around.
I later went to a Klipsch Pilgrimage at their Engineering facility in Indianapolis. I asked one of the reps about the excessive noise level of the GMX. I had done some research and found the noise was a common complaint in the forums. I was told it was a design decision. That the consumer wanted more output, so they increased the gain and increased noise was the result.
I'm sure they could have redesigned the module, but more likely just changed a few components to increase the output. Bad decision in my opinion. I see the same types of compromises in their more current speaker series. They are, in my opinion, also starting to price themselves out of the market. They're not the value they used to be. I love my classic Klipsch'

[2low2rl]

I like the new

[aldrindl]

Thank you to both Harley.guy07 & bfalls. I actually had compared the horns side by side, the KGs (while rectangular in shape vs. the square 52s) are clearly bigger in area. And thank you to Sir Terrence, I was not expecting perceptible difference after burn-in, but fortunately that was not the case.

I wanted to report my findings after a decent length of burn-in (when I wasn’t present listening to them). I was under the impression that you should not listen during the burn-in… For the comparison, I had my better half handle the toggling between speakers for the same pieces of music and compared my impressions vs. the actual speakers playing to remove any bias I may have from knowing which speaker was on. Hats off to her for her patience with my foibles. The 52 IIs clearly seemed improved, ie the gap between 52s & the KGs has narrowed substantially (all my perceptions of course).

So to break it up a bit - In classical piano, there is still a small gap on the highs, where the KGs are better, but you do need to pay close attention to get the difference. On the other hand, listening to something like PF – Time (loud clocks with piercing highs) there was no difference. Looking at the mids, in pop, jazz and rock there is almost no discernible difference between the two. I would say, though, that listening to live recordings (eg. Diana Krall), the KGs had more “airiness” to them and so sounded just slightly better/truer. In the lows, while the KGs were overall better, the 52 IIs performed remarkably close to the KG’s 8” woofers. Nice tight base appearing to go lower than the KGs.

To conclude - To me the RF-52 IIs are not an overall improvement over the KG3.5s. They are however very close and as Harley.guy07 mentioned seem more tuned to theatre than music. They are also able to play louder at a given volume level on the receiver. And I am less concerned about blowing them out at higher volumes (100W) than the KGs (65W) and so will also better handle a move to a home from an apartment, if and when that happens. In addition, to get better music reproduction, it appears I might have to move beyond the reference series and would have to shell out a whole lot more $$$, which would be way outside what I could hope to spend on speakers. To all of the above, if you add that 52 IIs had much higher WAF (than the KGs) being narrower and so better looking (and of course new), then you might understand why I decided to keep the 52 IIs.

And though its going to be really hard to part with these, I now have a pair of, very well cared for, KG3.5s for sale.

[bobsticks]

Unless you've got the dosh to grab the newer Palladium (http://gearcrave.com/2008-07-29/klipsch-palladium-p39f-home-theater-speakers/) series it's a no-brainer...go with the old.

[aldrindl]

Unless you've got the dosh to grab the newer Palladium series it's a no-brainer...go with the old.

Your post forced me to reconsider, thanks. I even reran the comparisons again to make sure I wasn't fooling myself. My 7 yr old daughter also came up with almost identical results as me! :lol: I found the difference in volume/output was surprisingly not as significant as I initially believed. Sadly, I am now resigned to the idea that I would have to shell out a whole lot more moolah (more than my means) to better my current sound. I stuck with my KG3.5s and have returned the RF-52 IIs.

[Enochrome]

I don't have any experience with the older Klipsch lines of speakers, in fact I have never heard a horn speaker. I would love to hear a forte or La Scala. So easy to drive these speakers and they present a "classic" sound (would like to know what that is?). I also heard that they are good with acoustic music, which is my favorite.

In somewhat related fashion, I just picked up a pair of Original Large Advents and I'm impressed how "modern" they sound; gobs of detail all locked in to a neutral/flat frequency that is easy on the ears. I can't believe how uncolored they are. It is a head scratcher that these are 40 years old. Goes to show, it's all about the design. Henry Kloss was a genius, and with no computer no less, just ears.:out:

I am not hesitant of older designs anymore, as long the parts are reconditioned.

[obinGilchrist]

I am now intrigued by the JBL and Klipsch seventies sound cause of this thread.

[bfalls]

I don't have any experience with the older Klipsch lines of speakers, in fact I have never heard a horn speaker. I would love to hear a forte or La Scala. So easy to drive these speakers and they present a "classic" sound (would like to know what that is?). I also heard that they are good with acoustic music, which is my favorite.

In somewhat related fashion, I just picked up a pair of Original Large Advents and I'm impressed how "modern" they sound; gobs of detail all locked in to a neutral/flat frequency that is easy on the ears. I can't believe how uncolored they are. It is a head scratcher that these are 40 years old. Goes to show, it's all about the design. Henry Kloss was a genius, and with no computer no less, just ears.:out:

I am not hesitant of older designs anymore, as long the parts are reconditioned.

I had a pair of the large Advents with the bull-nose trim. They were my first serious speaker. I bought them as a system with a Kenwood 4070 receiver (40W/ch) and a Sharp RT3388 computer-controlled cassette deck. I loved the sound, but when I heard the Kg4s they fell out of favor quickly.

I gave the Advents to a friend. The foam surrounds eventually rotted. I'm not sure what he did with them. I eventually purchased another pair of Kg4s and then a pair of Kg2s to start an early surround sound system. The Kgs sounded as good in this system as with the two ch system. I haven't heard the 3.5s, but have all the others. For vintage speakers the Klipsch' and Advents are very respectable.

I've upgraded tweeters with the Crites titanium versions. Excellent improvement and well worth the $60. I haven't upgraded the xovers yet, but plan to.

[Tarheel_]

Recently listened to their new Reference line...pair were floor standers and about $10k retail or somewhere in that range.
Short story, even after the guy working there raving about this 'new' Klipsch sound, i didn't like 1 thing about them..well build quality was there, but not the sound for me.
Also, listened to a full 5.1 setup of Klipsch floor standers in a home theaters..all running full range (except the center) and again, not my cup of tea....they made my head hurt.

Long story short, i could not hear any difference in the new / old speakers, they just sounded too bright and treble-high for my ears.

[michaelhigh]

Was looking into some Klipsch Forte's. I am now intrigued by the JBL and Klipsch seventies sound cause of this thread.

Good choice. If that's your desire you either know someone with Fortes or you've read up on how desirable they are, or both. My listening changed for the better when I discovered my Heritage Fortes when purchasing a Harman Kardon 430 Twin Powered receiver off St. Louis Craigslist. I have KG2's as well, and I run both pairs separately and together with a Sansui 8080DB. Trust me, as time goes on you'll have a more difficult time locating a pair in good shape. I gave $300 for mine, rarely do I see them go for less than $600. Get 'em while they're still somewhat available, as thay are quickly getting snapped up and they're finally getting the recognition in the vintage market that they deserve. Any Heritage Klipsch are worth your time if you have cash to spend.

[cherk001]

i've heard great things about the older mid 90s klipsch lines

[old geezer]

I have some of those Best Buy Klipsh Icon 5.1 speaker systems and I love em. I tend to listen to vinyl and I think they sound warm with a tube pre amp,(Belari with a Telefunkin 12AX7 smooth plate). I think its a mistake to judge a speaker in the store but I realize its the only option some time. Horns convey emotion but they can hurt the ears if you dont have em the right spot and sit in the right place to hear em.

I have what I call a redneck stereo,two of them actually. One is the top of the line Polk speakers from Best Buy and the other Is their best Klipsh speakers. I live in a small town and thats all we have.
The Klipsh Speakers need to have their crossover set at 200 to get the best sound. I have them Bi amped and I send everything under 80hz to the subwoofers. They sound kinda grizzled otherwise. I used to get a bland sound untill I started using a AT150 MLX cart on my MM5 TT now the sound is crystal clear and every note resonates inside my body. I can feel my guts wiggle in harmony with the instruments. Its downright therapeutic.

One thing about Klipsh is that they are loud as hell. You will probably hurt your ears or fry your amp before you hear them distort. The Bass is a little weak and that causes people to raise the volume to the point of pain in many cases.

[Mr Peabody]

I haven't heard the 2nd series of Reference yet, I thought the 1st was decent. The new series is supposed to have trickle down technology from the Palladium series, I suspect Klipsch is trying to attempt a smoother horn sound. I wonder if the OP is confusing brightness with better sound, either way what you like is what you should use.

The Forte are good, more balanced and smooth than many models and you can't beat the price used.

The JBL LS series are good if you want a smooth horn sound, not nearly as in your face as with Klipsch and more bass.

[aldrindl]

I haven't heard the 2nd series of Reference yet, I thought the 1st was decent. The new series is supposed to have trickle down technology from the Palladium series, I suspect Klipsch is trying to attempt a smoother horn sound. I wonder if the OP is confusing brightness with better sound, either way what you like is what you should use.

I am curious how you would define "brightness"

If your definition is "A bright sound is one containing strong high frequencies" then brightness would be part of a better sound to me.

I believe I am very particularly sensitive to harshness on higher notes, but I really don't like them to be muffled either. Think of listening to a Grand live - no sound system, just the player and the piano. I love the upper range of the keyboard (though maybe not the topmost octave, unless combined well in the piece though) , essentially classical piano solos. Another eg - the clink of a crystal glass - or if you've heard pieces of music played just on different crystal glasses - its beautiful. That's what sounds the sweetest to me.
If you are just listening to pop/rock you will almost never come across those sounds. In movies however you can, but those tend to be harsher, part of jarring action sequences.

So to get back to the RF-52 IIs, its in the reproducing these higher notes, it seemed to be the most lacking (vs the KG3.5s) - The notes were there, but the beauty was lost or much lessened.

But on the other hand, RF-52 IIs, did not seem to do other parts of the sound spectrum better either, except for a slightly higher output at a given volume level on the receiver dial.

Of course this is only in comparison, when I listened to Klipsch Reference series (1st, not the IIs) in the store, they sounded quite fine, definitively the best sound the dealers had to offer me in my price range. And most reviews seem to say the IIs are an improvement ...

[Mr Peabody]

That's pretty much what I'd say for "brightness". It could be the KG's are more extended on the high end as well. When comparing the older Reference I noticed the RF63 sounded better than the RF82, so I suspect Klipsch puts more in the expensive speakers than just different driver arrangement. You used your ears and went with what you liked, that's the way to do it. :).

[BMWM5]

Charlton Heston once said "You haven't seen Ben Hur until you've seen it on the big screen. You haven't heard Klipsch until you've heard a pair of K-Horns, Belles, Cornwalls, Heresy's or Chorus's.

[Jack in Wilmington]

I do like Ben Hur, but I don't care for Klipsch. Heard a pair of Cornwalls and just didn't care for the presentation. Found them fatiguing with the highs too overblown and unnatural. It could have been other factors like cabling or source or material.

[harley .guy07]

I do like Ben Hur, but I don't care for Klipsch. Heard a pair of Cornwalls and just didn't care for the presentation. Found them fatiguing with the highs too overblown and unnatural. It could have been other factors like cabling or source or material.

I have also noticed that the big Klipsch are very sensitive to preamps and amps IMHO. Since they are some of the most sensitive speakers out there it would make sense that small changes in amplifier or preamp would show with these speakers or cabling for that matter. I have seen a lot of people running all tube systems with them and when people run SS amps they tend to choose a warmer presentation product which might put some validity to the fact that they are a brighter speaker on more live or bright amps or preamps.

[mjennings909]

I had a pair of KG3.2 and since a long time ago upgrade to the RF3's. I like the horn on the RF's and sounds good on rock. I have a Velodyne sub that helps on the lows. I drive them with a Musical fidelity A3.2cr amp and a NAD AVT163 pre, I always liked Klipsch speakers since the70's. I was bummed when they got in to Best Buy. All in all you cant beat the old Klipsch, I am now looking at a good deal for some Aerial 7T's has to b e a great deal because of their original cost

[Jack in Wilmington]

The $4500 that you quoted before is a great price. If I had the money I'd be on that deal real fast. With well recorded classical and jazz the 7t's shine. With rock music, there is probably a wider range of speakers because of the nature of the recordings.

[BMWM5]

Speakers are purely a matter of personal taste. I've been involved as an amature in the world of symphonic wind ensembles & drum corps my entire life. The sharpness/crispness of brass, bass & percussion are keen to my ears. I also like the live symphonic stage concert feeling the older Klipsch present. I've listened to high end JBL's, and have played my favorite CD's in various high end audio stores. I have not been impressed with the newer products especially at the prices they command.

[Mr Peabody]

Speakers are purely a matter of personal taste. I've been involved as an amature in the world of symphonic wind ensembles & drum corps my entire life. The sharpness/crispness of brass, bass & percussion are keen to my ears. I also like the live symphonic stage concert feeling the older Klipsch present. I've listened to high end JBL's, and have played my favorite CD's in various high end audio stores. I have not been impressed with the newer products especially at the prices they command.



If speaking of "newer products" in general that's a pretty broad statement. Although we all wish for lower prices there are some fine newer products. Even the newer Klipsch Reference and Paladium series have a much more refined horn that sounds smoother, less offensive. I do agree the Klipsch certain models are a lot of fun and have a live appeal to the sound.

[Del]

I recently reignited my lifelong love of music with a pair of 77 Cornwalls. From the moment I wired them to the source, I've been as happy as can be. Like an earlier poster to this thread, I've also recently refoamed a pair of Advent Legacy's. They don't get much respect, but I'd put them up against the majority of speakers I've heard. After the reform, I have all of $80.00 in them from Estate sale to bedroom.

[Mr Peabody]

I'm envious, I wish I had some space to have a set of Cornies for a 2nd system. Maybe down the road when some kids move out :) If Klipsch are taken care of they can nearly last a life time.

We have a couple members who don't show up much any more who have Advent.

[BMWM5]

I recently reignited my lifelong love of music with a pair of 77 Cornwalls. From the moment I wired them to the source, I've been as happy as can be. Like an earlier poster to this thread, I've also recently refoamed a pair of Advent Legacy's. They don't get much respect, but I'd put them up against the majority of speakers I've heard. After the reform, I have all of $80.00 in them from Estate sale to bedroom.


Del,
If your Cornwall's are vintage 77, the capacitors are LONG overdue for replacement. Depending how handy you are , Bob Crites offers a completely rebuilt crossover, or kit. I highly recommend them. While you have the backs off, it might be a good idea to replace the wires going from the binding post to the crossover and crossover to the tweeter, mid-range & woofer. I'd also use gold plated terminals w/12ga oxygen free copper wire. I replaced the wires & crossovers in my 86 K-Horns & Chorus II's. The sound improvement was like night & day.