 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
| Model: | Klipsch CF 3 |
| Category: | Speakers |
| Suggested Retail Price: | $2500.00 |
| Description: | Dual 10%22 Neo Magnet Woofers With 2%22 Throat Neo Compresion Driver And Tractrix Horn |
| Manufacturer URL: | Klipsch |
| Review by ka7niq on March 18, 2008 at 23:00:37 IP Address: 72.64.158.90 | Add Your Review for the Klipsch CF 3 |
The Klipsch Epic Series speakers were Klipsch's attempt at a "high end" sound.
There are several models in the Epic Series, the CF 2, an dual 8" with a Horn, the CF 3 - A dual 10" speaker with a horn in the center, and the CF 4, a dual 12" with a horn.
The cone drivers are of very high quality, and use Neodym Magnets.
The compression driver has a 2" throat, and also uses Neo Magnets in the CF 3 and CF 4.
The CF 2 uses a phenolic diaphragm compression driver, not sure of it's magnets.
The CF 3 and CF 4 use an aluminum dome compression driver with Neodym magnets coupled to a Tractrix horn centered between the cone drivers.
The crossover provides for easy bi wiring AND Passive Biamp, more on that later.
The Epic series did not sell very well, and was not well received by the Klipsch dealers.
It did not have that typical Klipsch sound {Thank God}, and was not as efficient as other Klipsch speakers.
Being a quasi D'Appolito type array meant you had to sit down to really hear it, unlike the other Klipsch speakers that sounded "good" standing up.
As a result of the dealers slow sales of the Epic Series, Klipsch Marketing Salesmen demanded a re design of the speaker.
The re design was called series 2, and this is what they did to the speakers.
Port tuning was raised by using 3 inch ports instead of the originals 6 inch ports, and a crossover change was also done.
The Epic series 3 speakers had a lighter woofer for even more efficiency, but with a huge loss of sound quality.
Many of you will probably want to try a pair of these marvelous speakers after reading this review, just stay away from the series 3's.
The series ones are the most desirable, series two second.
Series two can ALMOST be "restored" to series one performance by simply pulling the old 3 inch ports out, and replacing with 6 inch ports{They pull right out, easily}
In stock form, the Horn runs too hot.
These crossover to the Horn driver at around 1000 hz.
Unless you place these on a wall or almost in a corner, the horn overwhelms the other drivers.
And once on a wall, kiss your imaging bye bye too.
Even on a wall/corner, the horns level is still too hot, making the speaker ruthless of equipment/source.
The solution ?
Remove the metal jumpers on the back of the speaker, and use two amps, and one MUST have level controls.
Use one amp to power the woofers, and one to power the horn.
About amplifiers, these seem to like high current big solid state amps best.
Currently, I am using a GVD Audio on the woofers, and a little Parasound HCA 500 on the horn.
My preamp is a Tube Dared with used GE NOS 12AT7 tubes I got from Jim McShane.
I am using dual runs of Radio Shack flat speaker wire that Albert Von Schweikert turned me on to.
These speakers are SUPER amp critical like many horns.
That first 10 watts gotta be clean, or you will hear it.
The GVD Audio P6500 has been a total surprise.
It is a "pro sound" type amp with balanced connectors and cooling fans instead of heat sinks.
My tech looked inside it, and flipped out. He said "This amp is a current mirror".
I said WTF is a current mirror ?
He told me it is an advanced amp design that cancels out distortion and allows for lower feedback.
Ho hum, but HOW does it SOUND ? In this case, excellent.
I have another GVD Audio p 6500 amp, but it sounds so good the way I have it, I am afraid to touch anything.
I have B&W matrix 801's, they are my reference.
Do the CF 3's sound like the Matrix 801's, not quite, but when I listen to the CF 3's, I dont miss my 801's.
Does that make any sense ?
The CF 3's are imaging Mo Fo's, and will cast a 3d sound field in a heartbeat.
Do NOT "assume" a big box will not image.
Imaging is very very good, almost single driver like.
MAYBE it is because the 10 inch drivers are both in operation up to 1K and are becoming directional like a single driver speaker would ?
The CF 3 also has a coherence about it, once the level on the horn is reduced.
BTW,, once you are passively bi amped, you simply adjust the level of the amp that has level controls. You want to reduce the horns level relative to its woofers.
Once you get it adjusted, you can also make "settings" on the amps level controls.
We all know a bright speaker can sound great on the best recordings, but sound like shit on all else. The CF 3's, used in passive bi amp mode with level adjustment will allow you to have both an
impress your audio buddies with detail speaker, and a speaker you can listen to ANYTHING on, all by simply turning a level control 6 clicks each way.
Hey, I listen to audiophile stuff, sure, but I like Rock like Styx and REO and Scandal and Rick Springfield.
I also like Tom Petty and Judas Priest and AC/ DC and Mary Chapin Carpenter and Dixie Chicks.
The CF 3 will get "audiophile's", not QUITE like a Matrix 801, but few speakers will.
In the last 4 years, I have went through many sets of speakers.
VMPS RM 40's, Magnepan MG 3A's, Von Schweikert VR 4 Jr's, Magnepan SMGA's and Polk SRS 2's among others.
All are gone except the Big Polks, only because I have gotten around to selling them.
I kept my Matrix 801's.
But the Matrix 801's just can't REALLY Rock like the CF 3's can.
If anyone remembers Inmate Layman, he used to talk of a "warmth curve" some designers built into speakers.
This is a gradually sloping response from around 1K downward to 20K.
Maybe because the crossover point in the CF 3 is around 1K what the level adjustment of the amps is doing is simulating a warmth curve.
Whatever - all I know is I can listen to ANYTHING, and easily make it sound good.
It is amazing that Cd's we THOUGHT were "bad recordings" really are not that bad at all.
Many of our so called "high end" speakers are little more then thin, bright speakers, tone controls we cant turn off.
We give up on music we WANTED to listen to, and now only listen to audiophile stuff.
Screw that, I want it ALL, and the CF 3, set up with amps it likes, comes pretty darn close to giving you what you want in a speaker.
The BEST part of this whole review I saved for last.
There are plenty of CF 3's and CF 4's around for under a grand.
I bought my CF 3's version ones for 800.00, but version 2's go for around 600.00.
Did they make me Tap My Toes ? No, I got up and started "conducting"
They have a rich, full lower midrange, singers have chests, guitars have Body, Piano's have weight.
Yes, they are a LITTLE colored, but in a musical way.
They lack the extreme highs of the B&W Matrix 801 tweeter, but that is nitpicking.
And the 801 has a better midrange, but you would be surprised how close the CF 3 comes to the 801.
I was listening to Blackmore's Night, and the strings and trumpets were faithfully reproduced by the 801 and the CF 3.
On Rock, it is no contest, the CF 3 kicks the 801's ass.
If you like Rock, you will LOVE the Klipsch CF 3.
My review only applies to a CF 3 run as I describe.
A stock, non passively biamped CF 3 is hard to get sounding right
| Product Weakness: | Extreme Highs not as good as best, amp fussy, big, need careful placement to sound best. |
| Product Strengths: | Powerful, efficient, musical, great imaging, low distortion, can be easily adjusted to be forgiving/Detailed/Transparent/Musical |
| Amplifier: | GVD Audio P6500 - Parasound HCA 500 |
| Preamplifier (or None if Integrated): | Dared Tube |
| Sources (CDP/Turntable): | CD Changer |
| Speakers: | B&W 801's - Polk SRS 2's - Von Schweikert Vortex Screens |
| Cables/Interconnects: | Radio Shack Flat speaker wire in true bi wire |
| Music Used (Genre/Selections): | all kinds |
| Room Size (LxWxH): | 20 x 24 x 8 |
| Room Comments/Treatments: | suspended sloped ceiling, my fat ass |
| Time Period/Length of Audition: | 2 years |
| Other (Power Conditioner etc.): | PowerVar |
| Type of Audition/Review: | Product Owner |
But sold it because my room was just too small. Even the CF2s are BIG. Got them cheap and sold them cheap. WAF on these BTW is dreadful.
The idea that these speakers are more "refined" than historical and current Klipsch offerings is dead on accurate. I could not believe how well behaved the midrange and upper frequency's were- that alone doesnt mean much- but when you consider how dynamic these speakers can be the paring of these traits really sets them apart.
They imaged extremely well- were extraordinarily clean on vocals and played loud, unrestrained with huge impact and deep bass.
If you can find a pair resonably priced (I got mine for $250) you can add an afforable amp (I ran a 3wpc SET, a 10wpc PP, and a SS 200wpc) and be off and running for under $1k.
Highly reccomended.
-Rob
Let them believe that since they are a Klipsch, they suck ?
Their designer, Roy Delgado, is Klipsch head engineer.
He has CF 4's at home, interesting, huh ?
Well, that was 5 years ago, and since he helped design the flagship new Klipsch Jubilee, he may have that instead of CF 4's ?
But when I talked to him once on the phone, he told me about the CF 4.
I had CF 3's, version 2's at the time.
Roy told me to look for version ones, CF 4's if possible.
Had em, but guy made offer I couldnt refuse, so they are gone.
I find it interesting that Klipsch head engineer had CF 4's at home ?
He could have Cornwalls, Klipschorns, La Screecha's, I mean La Scala's, etc, etc, etc.
I point blank told Roy at Klipsch that I felt the CF 3's were better sounding to me then any Klipsch I ever owned.
To my suprise, Roy agreed with me, saying only a Klipsch Jubilee would be better, and it was not for sale at that time, 5 years ago.
DJK suggested Original Forte's, and I did like them.
He also suggests Cornwall 2's, and I am on lookout for a local pair.
I will buy them based on DJK's recommendation.
I HAD original Cornwalls but found them hard to live with for long, just like Klipschorns.
But the Cornwalls boogie, and I do like their bass better then the CF speakers.
But bass and efficiency are not everything, there is imaging, fatigue free listening, and sounding like music.
I prefer the CF series speakers.
I do have high hopes for the Cornwall 2's.
If I can get that Cornwall bass and kick ass ability, and a smooth midrange/top end, it may be interesting !
I believe you got a pair one or two years ago, i am interested in getting a low price speaker that can rock and image/soundstage, and still be musical.
Will be on the lookout for the Klipsch CF-3
Mike
The reviewer must be deaf ??
The midrange is not good on the Cerwin Vegas, way too foreward and colored, and you CAN hear that GD Plastic Waveguide.
Bass IS awesome.
Maybe with the reviewers OTL amps, it sounded different ?
But the mid and highs still are flawed to my ears,that is why I gave up on them ...
The CF 3's image better, and are more efficient it seems.
Get the CF 3 or CF 4's, biamp them with amp having level controls, enjoy!
I purchased a pair of these new, maybe 10 years ago. Bought mailorder, sight unseen from on of th discounters.
Damped the horn and bi-wired them. Helped a little.
I had the original CF-3. But even after my butchery, they were a disapointment.
I had a pair of Vortex then, and purchased these as a high efficiency speaker for 10 - 25 watt tube amps. They were not any more efficient than the Vortex and did not go nearly as low or as tight.
Sold them after a year or two. Kept the Vortex.
And today, my usual speakers are a pair of B&W 801 Matrix II. Big, ugly, and can overload a room. But are really good at everything. Just deliver the current to control the woofers.
George
Wow, we do have a lot of speaker in common!
The CF 3's do NOT like any tube amps I have tried.
Actually, a LOT of the harshness when they are non biamped I find to be due to amp clipping, or dirty output power.
They need a big, smooth, high current solid state on the 4 ohm woofers, even though efficiency is high, and the amp MUST have the first 10 watts clean.
I tried rope caulk on the horns stock, but never biamped.
I took it off, but I might try it again.
I use two GVD Audio P6500 amps, one on each 801.
They have fans that are LOUD, and when you lean into the 801's, it sounds like a helicopter.
Gotta fix that with quieter fan.
The amps are a current mirror design, really powerful, like 600 plus watts into 4 ohms per channel.
I bought em off Ebay brand new for under 200 dollars EACH, delivered, and they sound nice on the 801's.
They have like a 600 damping factor, and really control the 801's woofers.
Did you have Alberts Original Vortex Screens ?
The screens I had were purchased factory direct, but after they tried to go public. They even had ads. I think they were a little different than the originals. The drivers used were fairly cheap looking. But the results were great.
I never tried the CF3 with a solid state amp, did not have one back then. It was not harsh with a tube amp, just rolled off and had one note bass. I tried a small AR amp and a pair of Quicksilver Silver Mono amps. Both handled 4 ohm loads, the Vortex should have been tougher to drive to reasonable levels. Had a several high power tube amps (150 - 350 watt) but they were downstairs powering a pair of Acoustat III.
Wrote it off as a mistake, buying the CF3 sight unseen, off published specs. Today I would try to listen to something like that prior to buying.
That likely was more than 10 years ago, maybe 12 or 13 thinking back. I moved 15 years ago, and this was a couple years after moving.
Makes a big difference ?
The CF 3 version 1 I own are the originals with the dual 6 inch ports.
The version 2 and 3 have dual 3 inch ports, and they can be boomy and one note.
Easy enough to simply replace the short ports with the correct size, boomy goes away, speaker sounds a LOT better because woofer is properly tuned.
The marketing idiots at Klipsch wanted more efficiency, so they forced their engineers to raise the port tuning, essentially turning the CF 3 version 2 and 3 into a Boom Box.
BTW, I have owned Acoustat 1+1 2+2 and Acoustst Model 8's !!!
1+1's were my favorites, man what an imaging speaker, 3d as all hell.
I donated the Acoustat Model 8's to the Seattle Audio Society.
Owned Acoustat TNT amps, etc, etc.
Acoustats sound best IMHO with OLD Conrad Johnson Tube Amps.
Acoustat 3's were what CJ used to demo with at shows.
Conrad Johnson and Acoustat were close friends.
Just thought you needed to know that ?
Purchased them when first released. With a 50 -100 watt tube amp, the bass was boomy on these also. Must have been related to the high output impedance not damping the twin woofers.
Though pretty Efficient, I find the CF 3's to sound better with some of my big, high current Solid State amps.
The K63 high frequency driver has a 2" aluminum diaphragm, not a 2" throat (a 2" throat driver usually has a 4" diaphragm), and is crossed at a relatively high 1.6Khz.
Thank You Dennis!
I get throat and diaphragm size confused sometimes, and I wrote the review at 2.30 am.
And yes, like ALL two way speakers, there is some "gurgling" at times.
Maybe because there are two drivers handling midrange I don't find it to be a great problem.
I like the smoothness of a two way speaker.
As far as crossover point goes, a 10 inch driver starts to beam around 1K I think ?
This driver has a huge dome for a dust cap, perhaps that dome is "taking over" like a whizzer cone at higher frequencies ?
Is that possible ?
The CF 3's and CF 4's really image well.
I have my pair out 4 feet from back wall, and 4 to 6 feet from sidewalls.
Images stretching the width of the room and way back behind the speakers are common.
Oh, thank you for the suggestion of the Original Forte's.
I liked them very much, but they were kinda small, and looked "funny" in my room.
In my room, I found they needed back wall reinforcement for proper tonal balance.
This killed image depth.
The Forte's bass went way low in my room, lower then the CF 3's subjectively.
Sound between Forte's and the CF 3's is different, but I like both.
Forte's are more detailed and transparent, but tonal balance was a BIT too thin and "on the edge" for my liking.
Maybe a different amp would have helped, but no image depth due to rear wall placement requirements doomed the Forte's.
The CF 3's have that "Wurlitzer Sound" with a heavy lower midrange emphasis that I like.
And, just like a good sounding old juke box, you want to listen to them.
BTW, I TRIED to reduce the horns level passively, but found an autoformer!
Even worse, only ONE tap!
So, I decided to do it electrically with dual amps with level controls.
I was JUST in there listening to Old Disco, doing some curls with dumbells.
Listening to The Village People, Cool and The Gang, and Donna Summer was a stunning experience.
All I had to do to make the Disco sound wonderful was dial down the Horns level a tad.
I plan to tweak the CF 3's a bit too Dennis.
There is very little damping material in them, maybe some Dacron pads behind the woofers, just a little ?
Not sure I want to rope caulk plastic Tractrix horn ?
My audio snob friends Laugh at my "Pro Sound" amp, until they hear it.
I am always on the lookout for a BGW 750.
BTW, why the 801s for a reference? They're getting to be a pretty old design by now. There must be something out there better for the money by now, eh?
Very informative review, just the same. Thanks!!
Otis
Because it is a wonderful speaker, even by today's standards.
John Atkinson in Stereophile actually did a re review of the Matrix 801 after 15 years.
He said the 801's waterfall plot was among the best ever measured.
He felt, as I do, that the old Matrix 801 is still competitive with most anything out there today.
Like I said in the review, many speakers have come and gone in my home, but the Matrix 801's remain.
I find few speakers that will survive comparaison, top to bottom, with a well fed, properly set up Matrix 801.
Let me put it like this.
I owned JBL L 7's, and met the designer of my speakers on the Lansing Heritage forum.
I talked with him on the phone, and complained about the JBL L7's tweeter.
He agreed, and asked me if I owned any other speakers ?
When I told him I own Matrix 801's, he said "Holy Shit".
He told me they had them at the JBL/Infinity Lab in Northridge, and he spent many hours listening to them !
He considered them very close to perfection, and a "masterpiece of the speaker engineers art".
This is coming from an Ex JBL Engineer.
DB Keele used them as a reference too back in his Audio Magazine days.
Yes, there are better speakers then the old Matrix 801, and you will pay dearly for them.
And many speakers that are SUPPOSED to "blow away" an 801 I have found to be a Joke.
Been there, Done That, Paid the Money, Was Disappointed.
If ALL I listened to was audiophile stuff at moderate levels, the 801 could make me plenty happy.
It gets timber right, and sounds like music,, IF it is well recorded.
But sometimes I like it LOUD, and wanna Rock.
And a LOT of the music I LIKE is not recorded very well.
The CF 3, set up as described, can be an incredibly revealing, OR an incredibly FORGIVING speaker, all with the twist of a level control dial !
The Cf 3 speaks with power and authority, with a slight lower midrange emphasis that gives chest to singers, and body to music.
I still have my 801's, but I am very much enjoying the Klipsch CF 3's.
The CF 4 is even better, 2 12's, and 3 db better efficiency.
My advice, audiophile to audiophile ?
Buy some CF 3's or CF 4's if you see them local.
They are big and heavy, and shipping will eat you alive.
Be SURE they are at least series ones or two's, and Absolutely AVOID the series 3's.
Klipsch changed the woofers, no more neo magnets in series 3, and a lighter cone.
I bet you will love the speakers, and being a Klipsch product, many were made.
They are out there used, you just gotta look.
Don Keele tested the Infinity Intermezzo 4.1 and found it to sound very similar to the Matrix 801.
Do you still have the Interlude 40's? I'm using them with a Sherwood tube amp;I'm still amazed at the soundstage width, even too close together and a tube amp that shouldn't be a good match.
I'm thinking that the closest equivalent to the IL-40 today is the Primus 362, and it's really cheap! Why do fools buy Bose or White Van when these are so cheap?
Hello, long time no see ?
The IL 40 is an excellent speaker, but I never tried one with a tube amp.
The Intermezzo's I never heard, but I did read the review.
Yes, the IL 40 is amazingly low in coloration, and images pretty good.
It does not image quite as well as either the Klipsch CF 3, or the 801's.
I sold the IL 40's mainly because I needed the room.
nt
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
