Klipsch RP600M VS GR-Research Modified 600M (Sound Clips)
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 26 авг 2024
- In this video, Ron breaks down the differences between the Klipsch RP-600M VS the GR-Research Upgraded RP-600M while offering up high quality sound clips!
+++
XLS Encore: gr-research.com...
JBL 530: bit.ly/2R0pHkm
Flat packs for Encores: contact Peter, toolie@cableone.net
+++
Subscribe! / newrecordday
Patreon: / newrecordday
Podcast: anchor.fm/newr...
Hey folks! A good amount of detail and differences were lost once this was uploaded to RUclips. The original recording was 24/192 and obviously YT compresses everything. Anyhow, let me know what you all think in the comments section.
so with the detail loss and the compression, plus people trying to "listen" to the difference on anything from a phone to some multi thousand dollar setup with elevated and warmed cables. why not a frequency sweep put on a graph?
i just feel the only way to prove the difference is something on a graph. but i do really appreciate that you added the tube connector comparison(also wish it was on a graph) mostly thanks though!
Like I’m taking earplug out of my ears! Soo much more details and space!
Could you upload the uncompressed soundclips somewhere?
It took a few changes to reveal the much smoother and less "shouty" nature of the stock speaker. Once my ears had adjusted to the levels, the modified speaker was clearly more refined. Thanks for the great video!
@New Record Day
Ron, I wish you had included a recording of the Original Source (level-matched) that you used for playback via line level into the Zoom F8 so all 3 files go through the same DAC, á la the SonicSenseProAudio studio monitor comparisons...
ruclips.net/video/riXAOTRdTNA/видео.html
The Original Source gives us a "baseline reference" for what the original signal contains so as to compare against what the stock and modified Klipsch speakers get wrong or right in comparison.
Also wish you had a Zaxcom or Sound Devices field recorder. :-P Much cleaner/accurate Mic Preamps, Analog Input Stage, and ADC/DAC compared to the Zoom (for those nice Earthworks QTC40 mics)! But yeah, $$$$!
Finally, make the lossless, full-resolution comparison files available to download via Google Drive, Drop Box, OneDrive, etc so we can bypass the limitations of RUclips's Lossy compression. It would be nice to have all of the files separate (source, stock speaker, & modified speaker) so we can listen to them in Foobar2000 using the ABX Comparator Plug-In.
Excellent effort nonetheless. There was a clear difference between the stock & modified Klipsch RP600Ms.
Most people should easily hear the tonality/spectral balance differences even with an average playback system or headphones. What they might miss, though, is moreso the differences in the soundstage and imaging, unless they are listening through a "reference" type system capable of discerning these differences.
Thanks for the tip on the JBL speakers as well. :) You can get a lot of great "trickle down'' technology via many of JBL's more affordable options.
And they often have really good sales on their speakers and active studio monitors. i.e. I picked up a brand new PAIR of the awesome little *JBL 306P MKII* studio monitors for my den/office setup for just $168 Shipped from B&H just before Christmas. :) They are normally $199 EACH. www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1381121-REG/jbl_306p_mkii_powered.html?fromDisList=y
These are awesome for a small, "quick & dirty" nearfield reference system. Just plug in your line-level source and you're ready to go.
I dont know all the terminology or how to describe certain things but A seemed flatter and B seemed brighter and a little more detailed in the mids and highs
@@kohnfutner9637 well trying to understand what people are describing sometimes gives me a headache...
If, like me, you watched or should I say listened to this on YT, then your comment is nothing less than delusional.
100% agree and that is what Klipsch's goal seems to be. Essentially, "GR took the Klipsch out of this Klipsch speaker." I went through about 5 different tracks and knew which was the modded set and which was the sound that Klipsch produced. Our ears like different things. I happened to like B better, but I also like the Klipsch sound.
B
B
First off, thank you for your hard work setting this up. That being said, my earbud headphones are the best I have for revealing a difference between the speakers. conclusion? I was shocked when you said B was stock because all the way through I preferred B. The high hats decay, instrument separation, and overall tonality seemed "better". Restored my faith in the multi million dollar r&d budget and crossover gurus at Klipsch.
Nothing wrong with that man! Glad you enjoyed the show!
I heard everything you wrote out. I instantly heard the high hat decay. That’s what stuck out to me I also felt the bass on the stock was much more accurate. Perhaps accurate is to aggressive of a word but the bass had much more depth. I could hear different levels of bass in just the one bass note where the other was a consistent bass note/tone but not as accurate/ natural.
You simply like the original Klipsch sound, with V curve (enhanced bass and treble) recessed mids, 'in your face' voicing...
There are lots of speakers with V curves. Some, because they sound better in showrooms and people are more attracted to them.
Tiny speakers frequently try to prove they can hold their own against bigger boxes, both in treble and bass: (tiddlers such as B&W 707, Wharfedale Diamond 12 and many others)
Others because they are designed for low volume listening and "Fletcher Mumford" curves come into play. You must enhance bass and treble if we are to hear them in that setting because our hearing is most sensitive in the mid range.
Other speakers are V curve because many people like the energy of bass and the sparkle of treble (when I was a kid I liked Cream, Blind Faith...remember the 'male soprano' voice of Steve Winwood, also Janis Joplin and others)
Now I want my speakers balanced. If I want to fiddle and tweak response I retouch EQ, which in this digital age is easy peasy, but it's best to have neutral speakers as a starting point
It's like the difference between Sennheiser headphones: HD600 ('flat', that is, very balanced, smooth and relaxed) and HD650 (enhanced bass and treble. More 'Klipsch like' sound, though not as extreme.)
I use one or the other headphone depending on the genre, but also on my mood. Sometimes the HD650 can be like a jolt of Red Bull. The HD600 can be like meditation music after my kids have driven me up the wall (among many other things) :-) Same with speakers.
@@juanmillaruelo7647 I am with you here, I prefer neutral. I want to hear what the music is supposed to sound like and if I want to color it later its my choice. The entire mood of a song can be changed with artificial curves and I want to make that choice, not have the speakers color it for me.
Just listening on a pair of AirPod pros, speaker B sounds like a door was opened. Just more present and alive. Not going to say the mod was a bad idea but I’m glad I liked the stock more because I’ll be getting these speakers in the future when I upgrade my set up. Thanks for the comparison!
The weak link is, and will always be, the last mile. In this case RUclips and final conversion within device being used for playback. If my ears can hear differences through all that, there are certainly audible differences. It's too bad we couldn't be sitting in your listening chair, Ron. I think that would tell the story in a far more definitive way. We're all coming over next week for a listening session...snacks would be nice.
Wonderful choice of clips, by the way, and as good a RUclips reproduction as I've heard. I was listening while surfing elsewhere so I didn't jade my thoughts. For most, including me, I think your analysis and commentary are as valuable as the clips themselves.
I think as guests we should be provided Lobster and Prime Rib at this listening session.
@@progressiveguy9959 I didn't want to seem presumptive, but certainly OK with me. Ron, what say you? A week from today, say 6:30? FWIW, kids usually like me too.
This is proof you must trust your ears and your own taste. Absolutely hilarious when he said "B" is stock version. "A" version was muffled even through youtube and sounded dull. Oh man ! Thank you for saving our hard earned money.
Taste in anything is completely subjective. For the most part I also enjoyed B more, but there were a few clips I preferred A. Tube connector was interesting as well but I didn't hear a mind blowing difference.
I am a believer of quality making a difference. So the XLS ENCORES is on my to-do list.
@@crazyprayingmantis5596 you are correct, I wouldn't do the upgrade. But I would build a fresh pair of XLS Encores instead... But... There's always a but right?... For a bit more I could simply get a pair of LRS Maggie's
He really shouldnt have done the test, the brighter version is going to sound better to the untrained ear particularly with inexpensive equipment.
He might drop that boring tech talk guy now👀
The moral of the story is sometimes using better parts is not audible. But redoing crossover to a flatter in room response should be more accurate. But always use double blind testing to see if all changes done is worth it. In this case is simple you have two sets of speakers and you can't tell them apart visually. You get a friend to switch the two sets while listening to your reference system with your music. The one you prefer is the best one.😀
B has quite a bit more detail. More of live band feel.
I expected a lot from the upgrade but I liked the stock better. It sounded a lot cleaner and "alive". Pretty weird, considering the upgraded versions has some better quality components.
Those upgrades were done to tame the brightness of the klipsch, any brighter speaker would sound livelier but that doesnt make it accurate.
@@AbsoluteFidelity yeah, it basically comes down to preference. But that sums up everything audio related
@@AbsoluteFidelity accurate doesn’t make it enjoyable
@@Sloimer if you dont enjoy accurate, that just means you dont enjoy what the track is originally. Simple. Ive heard excuses like these before, mostly from klipsch fanboys. If you cant get the most basic thing right like FR, your 'enjoyable' can go fly kites. But if you like excessive highs, by all means.
@@AbsoluteFidelity sorry but your “accurate” speakers are boring as hell
i feel like some of the clips soun better on A some better on B , but i think this must be done live to realy get a good opinion.I feel that the modified pair is more of an audiophile speaker now, especialy women voices sound more natural .The standard pair is more of a party speaker and it could get a bit fatigue on long listening sessions.
Thank you Ronn for your efforts.Also a big Thanks to Danny for doing this
I absolutely love my Klipsch RP600M's, Paired with a Nad C388! I did hear a difference here and speaker B sounded like the upgraded one. I wouldnt know exactly how to tell them apart, but i feel the midrange on the upgraded is a bit better. Its also sounds a little more laid back. Nice sound anyways, but I will keep mine stock :D
Unfortunately, My 70 year old ears could hear no difference. I guess this could be a blessing or a curse.
Agree. Ceiling is about 12kHz or below these days.
Don't feel bad. No one can hear a difference.
@@gramblor1 Check Joe N Tell's Elac vs Wharfedale review. You should hear a distinct difference.
I'm 36, no difference...
If like most normal people you lose high frequency sensitivity the original brighter highs will help. The last thing you need is dampened highs.
Hearing evolves with age and speakers are designed for the Harman curve of human hearing. You can use EQ in your sound system to hear music as you used to. Use headphones or IED. (The speakers will sound terrible to everybody else.)
How much money did I save by "not" doing this upgrade?
Retired at 49 i think it was just over $200
Plus a lot of your time and labor.
Around 250 usd
Sometimes a “flawed” frequency response is preferable to the ear. Simply making a speaker neutral doesn’t always mean better. I was skeptic all of this whole thing. Plus, the claims made for those connectors is BS.
@@crazyprayingmantis5596 Exactly. I was actually shocked that "A" was the upgrade. Even though crappy RUclips there is a huge difference.
Listening the comparison on my unmodified RP660M's, the spacial separation and super subtle definition in all frequencies on these GR speakers still speaks volumes. I'm now definitely getting the GR-Research mod now
Did you ever end up doing the mod? Any findings?
@@asplmn Not yet. Spending the weekends learning new JS frameworks and researching SDLC during the week mostly, so haven't gotten 'round to it. Maybe after XMass...
@@justinmaccreery2490 ahh. I know that life. Best of luck, and let me know if you end up performing the mod please!
With all the mixed comments here, it just goes to show there wasn't a clear winner or a night 'n day difference between the 2 speakers.
If the "modified" speaker sounded noticeably better, then there would've been more of a consensus.
Personally, I think I'll save $299 and just stick to the stock version but with the modifications noted below.
Even though you'll still have the dip around 1.5Khz, you can easily pad down the tweeter by changing the 9 ohm resistor with a higher value Mills resistor. That'll set you back a whooping $8 for two resistors.
The 3.9uF MKT in series with the tweeter can easily be changed out to the MKP cap of your choice. I don't believe in using expensive caps but some people do.
If cabinet vibrations are something that keep you up at night, then you could purchase the No Rez from Danny or use whatever flavor of dampening material you prefer.
I also have the RP-600M and Studio 530.
I respectfully disagree with Ron about the JBL sounding better than the Klipsch.
The JBL sounds pretty good with strong bass(especially from a 5 1/4" woofer), but mids sound somewhat veiled compared to the Klipsch.
Thank you New Record Day for all the time and work you put into making this video!
You are most welcome
It sounds night and day to me.
Use some common sense, man. Everyone is listening through different speakers, apps, systems, headphones etc and RUclips. Perhaps the consensus you seek would be there if you even the playing field and everyone was in the same room as the speakers. SMH
You need to publish the lossless sound clips to a web hosting service for download, for serious comparison.
I just want to share my experience of hearing these in person. I did this GR Research upgrade to my own RP600M speakers. After listening to those original speakers for a couple months, I was not that thrilled. There was a clear sound of the box- it was like listening down a hallway. There was also a harshness, even tinkering after the bass mid and treble settings.
I did the upgrade on one speaker first.
Now I’m listening to the same music in the same room, and the difference is clearer than it sounds on these RUclips tracks.
I find the changes make this into a really nice warm speaker. Better clarity without any harshness, and a tight clean bass.
Is it worth the cost? If you already own those Klipsch speakers, and like to tinker, definitely yes.
I've only had mine for a month and am struggling with some of the characteristics, with certain source material.
I'm concerned the upgrade may sanitize some of the more fun aspects from the speaker. Did you find that at all?
@@erics.4113 I have the same concern.
@@NeilDuly I've mostly moved on to other pairs since my comment but still have the Klipsch. I've since come to the conclusion that instead of physically modifying the crossover, I would instead employ minidsp and tweak them that way first. If I really get ambitious, I'll look into better bracing for the cabinet to try to tame some of the resonance.
What a difference of night and day despite the limitations of you tube compression etc. ! To hear a lot of difference I think it is important to listen on a reasonable good stereo installation, not television or computer sound. My television is coupled to my 100 watt rotel stereo unit.
The stock speakers sound messy, hollow, harsh, shouty and uncontrolled, and the voices were negatively affected by the speaker. I cannot believe people buy this. The upgraded speaker was a revelation, still a Klipsch sound, but composed and controlled, not messy anymore and a great improvement of male and female voices. Shouty and hollow is not to be confounded “with more space” ! Listen to the voices! My compliments to New Record Day for the good work, till now I believed that it was not possible to hear meaningful speaker sound differences on you tube, and a lot of reviewers will not let you hear the sound op speakers, but you can! I also saw Danny Ritchie with his improvement kits for speaker on you tube. My reaction was always, yes yes I’ m sure the components are better but can you hear it? And: why not just buy a better speakers? From now on I’m a believer of the good work of Danny from GR research and of the 4 dollar parts the manufacturer put in speakers to meet their pricepoint. Also the speakers ar made for a big market of people who listen to the sound of their phones, the soundbar of the tv …why bother to use better parts?
Sounds like some of the clips have been mixed up to me. I prefer B until 6:10, then A appears better for a while, then back to B.
I'm hearing the exact same thing. Also usually the B track is overt bright and sharp and sybilant I own the rp600m and i have never heard them get even close to bright and sybilant.
Same here. A sounded absolutely terrible in the first clip. B sounded a tad to mull for my liking, but that can be down to the awul youtube sound quality. After 6:10 it sounded like they got switched.
It’s the different types of music. Overly bright or overly bassy speakers can sound perfect if given the right track.
Try the capacitor test from impulse audio. That one I could not tell for crap what the difference was lol
@@cardiobroker But what I'm hearing is that to start with B sounds like it's "brighter". This then changes at 6:10 and A sounds brighter. It's quite a clear change to my ears and I don't see how the type of music being played can cause that. I think they need to repeat this test but keep a close eye on how they label the clips because I'm pretty sure they got switched here. Also, does anyone know why there are some duplicate clips being played?? All a bit confusing.
100% agree. Right at the 6:10 mark the sound seemed to have switched to the preferred being the A. Prior I would have said that the B was preferred.
I'm on my work pc and listening through my Sennheiser MB Pro 1 via bluetooth headset. Keep in mind this only has one ear piece. I can hear a distinct difference between A and B. With B being a lot better and clearer and more defined.
But until I can try this on my setup at home tonight, I can give you a better evaluation.
Yeah I hear the same as you.... B is brighter and clearer to me
Update. Now that I'm listening on my main rig which is a WooAudio WA5LE, Schiit MB Gungnir and Focal Clear. I can definitely say that A has more body, B sounds too thin compared to A. However on some tracks I can't hear too much difference, that could be because the track isn't a good track to listen to the differences. That means some tracks will reveal more of the differences than the others.
But overall I do like the differences with the upgrade and I can't wait to modify my speakers.
And I completely agree with Ron's opinions about the upgrade. He's spot on as usual.
After listening to the differences in connectors, I can't hear a difference, But that could also mean RUclips's compression has removed the difference. So I'll hold my judgement till I do the upgrade.
On my setup the B speakers sounds the best. The A speakers was to boring and sounded like there was a blanket hanging in front of the speaker.
Same to me with my Sennheiser 800s headphones. In B there is more live and a little bit wider stage.
Besides, tube connectors sounds better that post´s….
@@MrFlextor I agree.. on the Senheiser HD6xx.. the B sounded wider and a bit more open. but as said above... I would really have to hear in real life... I could discern a difference however.
You said it right. System B sounded compressed and less natural...in my system too
Klipsch sound is a reference. It's a question of taste. Many people expect it like it and prefer it: V shape FR curve, lots of bass (at the price of bloom), very bright highs (at the price of sibilance), forwardness (at the cost of nasality), recessed mids, the whole shebang of the Klipsch sound experience..
What these guys have achieved is to make a Klipsch 'for the rest of us'. Kudos and respect! :-)
I initially thought the signature sound was so baked into its basic design that it wouldn't be possible to change it.
I was wrong. It IS possible, and that's fantastic! :-)
I'll look for a good, used pair and give it a shot.
These speakers look a bit like Darth Vader on the outside, but when you strip them down they are more like 'The Wizard of Oz'
I wonder if the quite basic, skimpy, thin and resonant cabinet will handle well the 'wham bang' er...acoustic energy inputs (ahem) of more demanding music.
Bracing and stouter wood might help. (must be careful when bracing internally: you can put wood where it shouldn't be and acoustically wreck the speaker)
This is actually a great experiment that proves youtube can't be used for judging sound quality on speakers! I couldn't hear much difference. Good recordings though- my headphones sound great! :)
While it's not ideal, the difference is clearly audible, as many including myself can attest to. Whether the difference we hear is exactly the same difference as in real life... Well clearly it's not. But since all other factors between the clips are equal, we are hearing a completely useful relative difference in frequency response. We cannot properly judge the factors such as spectral decay, impulse response, phase, or soundstage because the lossy compression will affect those things too much, but the changes in frequency response, which are the most substantial change to begin with, are more than adequately retained in this audio format. The changes weren't huge but they weren't difficult to spot either, except that he didn't switch between a and b nearly fast/often enough. Obviously decent headphones and a decent dac/amp will work best by far for judging the differences.
Get some studio monitors, you can hear a big difference!
@@sturdyvw I could easily tell a difference on my monitors, but I cinda liked the bright version ;)
@@Artcore103 Difference was obviously modified is more balanced, original has a chirpiness and detail I admire more since Subwoofers are better handling low end.
@@PMVault if you like the brightness id still rather have the modified ones and then shelf everything above 8 to 10k at plus 3db. They are objectively better period, and smoother in the highs. Originals have a little peakiness up there that isn't ideal. Flat speakers + EQ is better than speakers with a bumpy response. Plus their differences go beyond just frequency response. Zero people should prefer the original, if you like more treble then add it via dsp.
Ok, just installed the upgrade, and now I can hear for myself with songs I am familiar with. The truth here is that it maintains the klipsch sound, but all the music gets through. And it is more plesant to listen to for long periods, and I dont get listening fatigue anymore.
When people hear this klipsch for the first time, the reaction is that it is so bright and clear. NO, It is not. It,s just what it sounds like because of a dip in the crossover and some parts of the full soundspectre drown in the highs and lows. Now I can hear much more details and everything sounds balanced. I dont even feel like kringing when I turn up the volume. AND, it packs a mightier punch than before. It still sounds a bit distorted to me on sybals from drums, but I guess the drivers are at their limit now. Anyway, I am definetly going for the xls, if it is twice as good as this sound, cause the sound I am getting from the klipsches now is pretty darn good. I do have clearer sound in my JBL 4312, but they are a step up though. But they dont sound as deep as the klipsches do now.
It doesent matter one likes the squikie distorted highs from klipsch. If thecrossover is not balanced you will feel tired in your ears after some dedicated hours of listening.
I just got the JBL 530s in for a review on my channel , I have 40 hours of actual listing time in the last 2 and a half weeks and yes i got them for $299.00 I broke them in quickly by playinflg them while i was at work i just pushed repeat on me cd player 😆 but after about a week 60 hours of break in time the horns smoothed out even more !! Crazy good bass for a small driver also !
A sounded better on most tracks. Some of the female vocals sounded like the A/B was mixed up? As far as the tube connectors go, I'd have to hear it in person, I didn't hear much of a difference in these sound clips. Consider linking to the 24/192 originals so we can listen with a better sample.
Yes I had the same thought.
yes otherwise YT killed this A to B
Headphones or not there isn’t much in it and completely agree. And sometimes prefers the B, A sounded muffled. BUT this brings me to this sort of review and sound clips are just waste of time. It’s like a game of Chinese whispers. Passing through all Ron’s equipment and then passing through you tube and then passing through my dac and amp coming out my speakers and apart from the obvious differences mostly the vocals in this vid. They sound the same.
Speaker "A" sounded like it was down in the mud (muddled) and was boring. Speaker "B" sounded more realistic and livelier. If I didn't know which speaker was modified, I would have chosen Speaker "B".
I agree
I agree too. I thought B was the modified speaker.🙄
I agree as well. However there was one song in particular that A sounded so much better on I could have sworn he accidentally swapped the two recordings.
I enjoyed the Klipsch RP600 series very much. Old ears (75) & damaged hearing so I couldn't tell much difference between A & B but correctly id'd A as a bit better and no difference on connectors. Appreciated the recommendations at end.
Ron,
I want to thank you for your excellent advice on the JBL Studio 530 speakers. After watching your video I checked around and you're not going to believe the amazing sale in just got. A brand new set of the JBL speakers for $249, with free shipping included! Direct from JBL to my front door!!!
Before I made the purchase I checked out several other videos and reviews of the speakers and everybody, including you, says they are fantastic. I could not be more pleased, I was going to buy the Klipsch RP-600M and modify them, or consider the Klipsch RP-500M, but instead I got this amazing deal. Honestly, at $249, I just don't see how I can go wrong!
Thanks again for your awesome video and fantastic advice.
I think youve reversed the A/B on the first female vocal track..?
I totally agree. I would appreciate to know if we are rightand If New records day could answer too.
I found this comparison great. If I didn't hear them both side by side I would have been happy with both. I personally don't think I would spend the money or the time for what seems to me as very little gain. Klipsch should be very happy with this test as they have a great speaker straight out of the box.
I’ve heard both of these sets in person in Ron’s listening room, through headphones like all of you smart people who used headphones to listen to them here, and also compared the unmodded version to my own speakers in my room with an AB test as well (I built my speakers for about the same price of the modded version). In person the differences are more noticeable than what you’re hearing here, albeit I still hear the main gist of the differences on RUclips. The reality is this for me - I don’t really like this speaker in either option at all when you look at the price point. Ron is right that the GR encores walk circles around them, but so do the Elac Unifi’s, and the JBL’s Ron shared. I’m biased for sure but my set handily beat up the unmodded terribly so for you DIY guys out there, don’t bother here. The Klipsch sound so forward and bright, coupled with a thin midrange, that I just couldn’t enjoy them as much as I wanted to. Danny’s mod‘s definitely improved that forward top end and he did provide a bit more richness to the mids, but the reality is the weakest links of that speaker have not been fully addressed - the flimsy cheap box needs bracing, and the less than stellar woofer. I don’t want to make Ron’s head swell too much, but he is right on the money with his final thoughts...if you have these speakers already and you want to make them sound better (again - subjective word but the reality is the mods do improve the speaker), get Danny’s kit. However, my opinion? The hype around these speakers this past year was way over the top from the other reviewers out there! They must own stock in Klipsch, or have broken ears. ;) 🤘🏻
Interesting comment. Having seen the craze over this Klipsch in the past year and never having heard it I remained skeptical they were capable of making a speaker that didn't sound like an ice pick being driven in to your ear. I guess that is what they have and always will shoot for.
modeste nomad I didn’t defame anyone in particular. I’m just calling out my opinion around the BS that I feel happens generally in this industry, where reviewers/publications give subpar products the highest praises, when the said product isn’t really worth such praise. I have to question their motivation when that happens. To be clear, my opinion on this matter is mine only, and is not influenced by NRD, GR, or anyone else. If you don’t like it or agree, a simple, I disagree with you on this point is perfectly fine, rather than a broad brushed dismissal of my total impression.
@@thunderpooch it's not that we have broken ears. We just like music to be more exciting and open. To have it be livelier and more dynamic with eq boosts. Just because that isn't your listening preference doesnt mean we don't enjoy our speakers. You can go listen to your more tamed and boring speakers. You also need to remember that these speakers pair better with some Amps/receivers than others too and tend to smooth out the sound alot too. They can be harsh but not if they're paired with decent hardware
@@thunderpooch I'll be honest with you. I'm only 24 and I listen primarily to rock, metal, jazz, classical, and orchestral music. I rip CDs to flac. I had an ldac Bluetooth adapter or my headphone jack and I listen nowhere close to reference due to my hereditary tinnitus, so I don't usually get ear fatigue. I found Yamaha receivers smooth out the 600s and rp 160s that I have extremely well. I primarily listen in stereo surround as well. I mean I'm younger and I really do like the Klipsch sound personally and I cannot wait to get into the heritage line personally. I actually don't like bass unless it is smooth and coincides with the music. I like detail over bass anyday and prefer the dynamics over anything. I found on the 600s, the mid-range opens up A TON with a subwoofer. I'd be curious to see those graph readings
@@thunderpooch haha I'm just trying to be fair about my opinions. I really do like the Klipsch brand. I've heard nothing but praise for the Cornwall 4s. I want some of those so bad haha
I really looked forward to this video and appreciate both Danny and Ron’s great work! I clearly heard the differences, I knew immediately that A’s were the mods, not bad, but am not going to pursue a full mod since I like a bit more brightness of the originals but would like to either add to the bottom and mids or bring the top end in, perhaps I will just change to the tube connectors and the norez mod instead of changing the entire cross over too?
B all the way
Can we get a playlist for this? There are definitely some songs I'd love to hear in its entirety in their original hi-res form
Try Shazam.
Super interesting as I just grabbed a pair of these for a second small 2-channel system for crazy cheap.
I can absolutely hear difference all over the place but different doesn’t always equal improvement.
Some tracks I preferred “A” while on others I preferred “B”
so it was a bit of a wash for me.
I would imagine the differences would be even more pronounced during an in-person demo.
However, after initially being interested in the upgrade, I now can’t see spending what is now over $300 for the kit.
To your point, the better move is to buy the kit from the get-go and build your own which would be far more rewarding imo.
Replacing electrolytic caps in a stock crossover has always had benefits for me. Swapping them out with Polypropylenes always got rid of grit in almost all crossover mods I do, However, as controversial as it may be, they do require break in, also called "forming". I swapped out the cheap crossover on my Maggies with foil inductors and Poly's and I found it too behaved at first play. Using some dummy loads and running a bass heavy CD for 2 days straight, the highs opened up and it wasn't as polite and restrained, it was now open and smooth. I' ve moded NHTS as well with the same results. Worthwhile in my opinion and fun!
Remember guys the thing that makes Danny’s upgrade so phenomenal is how it affects the in room presentation, something that’s harder to get than just the tone, through a recording.
That Being Said...
I personally think the bass and lower midrange sounds way better with the upgrade. I think B sounds "peakier", like there's a peak at 150hz and sounds blurry at 60hz.
Despite having less tweeter amplitude the Top End actually sounds less choked at the very very top on B, like 16-20khz, which I found more pleasing. "A" had a louder decay sound, but it kinda "covers up" that super super top end.
B just sounds more like a tweeter + a woofer. While A sounded like single point sources (again sort of harder to hear through a recording but still very noticeable) which I found a lot less fatiguing and when listening to this at a high volume rather than hearing 4 separate sound sources.
B appeared to make a taller sound stage while A sounded slightly wider than B and balances out to an overall much more realistic scale. While B was all over the map as far as scale.
Bass instruments sounds like the real instrument. I think the upgrade is a no brainer for people planning to use these for mixing in ANY capacity.
I listened without looking at the screen. Really subtle difference but when I thought it sounded better to me I would check and A was definitely my pick. You describe the differences very well. The modified sound more effortless and clear.
Thank you for this video! So much to choose from nowadays. Amazing channel content! Keep up the good work, Cheers!
I see why people call the stock 600m live, vibrant and dynamic! Its coloured for sure, but I think it has cool style. The mod opens up the soundstage huge and smooths everything out, presenting itself as a more high end audiophile speaker.
Wouldn't it be a better option to buy a Schiit Loki Mini and (at least in part) tailor the sound that way? Considering the differences in recordings, it gives nearely endless possibilities and you can always turn the knobs back to flat or flick the bypass switch for comparisons.
Both make me appreciate my current GR upgraded Carnegie CST-1'S 😎
It appears that Klipsch ear burners 👂
improve RUclips audio.
Nice work 🙏
The "B" speaker seems to be a tad brighter and having some sibilants. Hard to say.
It's called sibilance, it's not the plural of sibilant, it's the quality of being sibilant.
@@Artcore103 Thanks! I thought that "sibilants" = "sibilant sounds". www.macmillanthesaurus.com/sibilant#sibilant__5
I was gonna say A sounds darker, but yeah same diff
Ya differences over RUclips into my headphones is very very subtle at Best, if I was to be very honest I'd say the entire experiment is a wash due to technical limitations of the platform.....once again proving sound clips are a waste of time on RUclips.. Ron, in my opinion you are putting in great effort on a platform that is not all all suited to your desired outcome. That being said, speaking about sound is like dancing about architecture and sound clips on RUclips are always a failure so I'm not certain where that leaves us in the end. Good job though, even if the outcome is not great your work ethic and passion is appreciated!!
Great list of song clips for this comparison, Ron. They pretty much cover a full range of instruments and therefore frequencies. Some make it easier to hear the differences and others not so much. Good job with that selection, man.
Thanks man!
I normally don't comment on videos like this but after reading some comments I decided I would (bourbon might have had an influence). Anyway, sorry if I offend anyone but I cant understand. Well. wait.... Dang Ron, wish you wouldn't have told us which speaker was A or B in this video since it's going to make my comment invalid.
Back to where I started my comment. I don't understand the people complaining about this being on youtube and not being able to hear the difference. I started my comment thinking Ron wasn't going to say which speaker was playing since I was still in the middle of it and started reading comments. Anyway, I'm listening through my htpc, Marantz SA14 (as dac), virtue 901 amp, and diy speakers. I easily heard the difference. At least enough to tell which speaker was right and had a sound as though it was closer to the recording. To me the brightness that is heard in the clips isn't rising response in high frequencies for detail. I hear distortion that is like sibilance which is masking the low to high mids and ruining the detail of each recording. Of course my own speakers are flawed but I built them in 05 when I was 24. Maybe I wouldn't have heard a difference if I had listened through headphones and reduced the number of my own sound reproduction components.
Thanks for the video and the entertainment Ron. May you and your family have a new year full of blessings.
I recently helped a friend upgrade his RP-600Ms, and we noticed all the same improvements you did.
Except, we also noticed and increase in bass detail, too.
As I've commented before, your recordings are probably the best I've ever heard on RUclips -- for a start, the stereo is very apparent and I could almost be listening to recordings on my own nearfield gear in that respect. No Idea how you do this -- so much better than any other reviewer I can think of.
I hear slight differences between the stock and modded pairs, and of the two prefer the stock versions -- but not sure whether I would if I listened to full tracks for an appreciable period in a live situtation. Listening fatigue might be a factor, and the vid is too short to assess that. But as I said, a very enjoyable review which I greatly enjoyed. 🙂
I think its important to listen with a good installation, not computer or television sound. I listened to my tv coupled to my rotel stereo system. What a difference of night and day! So it is possible to hear meaningful sound differences between speakers with the you tube sound! The stock speakers sounded messy, hollow and shouting. The voices of the male and female singer suffered a lot on the stock speakers. The upgrades speakers were more composed and balanced, great improvement of the voices but they dit not loose the Klipsch sound signature. Before I was very skeptical of the work of Danny from GR research, yes yes better parts, but can you hear it? And why not just buy a better speaker? From now on I’m a great believer in the work of GR research and of the 4 dollar parts the manufacturer puts in speakers. And also the confidence in my ears got a boost…
Also my compliments to New Record Day to take the trouble to let you hear sound from speakers on you tube with a good recording system, most reviewers don’t and said it cant’ be done. I listened to his review of a 7000 dollar Revel? speaker and I concluded it was not for me. At the end of the video New Record Day had the same comments as me expressed in a much more polite way…
You can acheive this by running multiband eq then to speakers. My home theater I eq the rp35s towers and center all reference and it sounds amazing. My speakers are eq to a laminate flooring over old wood floor and low freq is eq to smooth strong hit but no blurry. I have old Denon amp run 7.1 PC Asus Max hero motherboard with excellent outputs in 7.1 ins to amp. Room correction is done via tape measure and db levels via sound meter at 70db test tone for each channel. Sub volume is set to 3. I like to feel movie then stop. Crossover is 100hz so all my speakers including dipolars on rear no bass is missed. My Denon amp was last to allow 8 channels in. Most have pre amp out. Current is 4.3 amps which equals 85w per channel. But at 100 db sensitivity per speaker at 5 db below reference it's loud! And my room is 24feert wide by 34 feet long . My rears and sides are mounted ceiling. Sorry but I like the horn. Klipsch had a sound that duplicates horns, hits on hi hats. Trumpets, crashes and strings. I'm more movies person. Klipsch is ok for music but these speakers are more for movie sound tracks!
I hear no difference between tube connectors and binding posts. Which makes sense, electrons really should just follow path of least resistance.
If you heard no difference then your system is not capable of allowing the differences to be heard. The differences are very clear even in the compressed RUclips video format.
I couldn't tell any difference either but I'm listening on my MacBook Pro speakers. I'll try it with headphones.
Overall I liked B but some songs sounded better on A....my "guess" is if the recording was "bright" A sounded better and if the recording was more "neutral" B sounded better. Being a frugal person I would be very happy with the stock version.
It seems that Elac has taken a page from Danny's playbook. They recently modified their value-oriented Debut 2.0 and are receiving rave reviews on the results that they now call Debut Reference. Basically, the same drivers in a new box and improved xover. Pretty much the same game plan that Danny performed on the Klipsch 600 pair.
*A* is the clear winner for me. It's much more listenable than the overly bright *B.* I listened in 1440p on a pair of cheap Definitive Technology Inclines and the difference in the cymbal tones was very easy to detect.
Without going into a bunch of audiophile descriptive words, the B sound clips sound more detailed and seem to have tighter bass, where the A example sounds a bit muffled and bloated. I’m just listening to em on the speakers on my iPad though, and not even through headphones. I’ll have to give another listen with my headphones when I get home, or even put the audio through my system. This is kind of a mind f#*k, cuz I was sure the upgraded version would sound obviously better. Maybe too much high end is playing it’s quick trick on me.
This seems to be an example of where the “RUclips filter” when trying to hear finer details really kinda messes things up.
Thanks for doing this, Ron. It’s much appreciated, and I know a lot of us were curious to hear the results.
I regards to the B clip - I did notice some sibilance nasties in the high end especially with vocals and electric guitars though, and I can see with certain music listening fatigue seems like it would set in pretty quickly. Again, gotta give this a proper listen when I get home tonight.
Did I miss something A was stock? and b Modified? you never specified....
A was modified. I thought that depending on the song I could go with either one.
I use a Klipsch RSW-12 dual fire subwoofer with these with the Marantz mm9000 and a equalizer to get the sound I need to get happy set of ears. It works for me.
I feel like I left a comment on this video shortly after it came out a few months back, but I decided to come back to it, to get 2nd impressions.
Listened via Bluetooth to my Sprout 100 & Sennheiser HD6XX headphones.
Modded vs Stock:
A has a richer & fuller mid-range and the treble is tamed to a reasonable level, and whenever it shifts to B it feels like there a sudden hole in the midrange, while the treble becomes bright & almost metallic in nature. The places where the differences are most noticable is when a lot is happening across the whole spectrum. When it's just one instrument or one vocalist, there's not enough information to really be able to pinpoint any difference at all. But when there's a full array of instruments, and it switches back & forth, you can hear the slope change from flat to V shaped.
Stock vs Tube Connectors:
It's really quite subtle. But For me, the biggest tell was in the vocals. They had a just little more presence & clarity with the tube connectors. Binding posts gave vocals a gritty, almost "noisy" texture to them. It also feels like there's a slight smear in the trailing edge of the vocals too, which is where most of that gritty-ness appears for me. It's very subtle, it's 95% identical. Best way to describe it like getting a new pair of glasses, & only increasing the prescription by one notch. You could still see just fine with the old pair, but now there's just that little extra crispness to everything. Something you don't really notice until you to swap back to your old pair.
Listening on my headphones, I really preferred version A, not much at the beginning, but more and more so as the minutes passed by.
Gonna take that 250 I saved on this and put it toward toward a SVS Sub..... Also I got my piano black 600m for $472 shipped free.
Where did you buy them from? Congratulations!
That is the best idea I've read yet in the comment section. I have the RP-600Ms as well and was just thinking maybe a subwoofer?
A is by far a cleaner and fuller sound. I felt like it was a realistic representation of the sound and balanced highs, mids, and lows smoothly. B sounded muffled and "tin canny" to me.
Thanks for the review!
David Gregg Exactly right. Your ears work.
To me it was entirely dependent on the song. For some songs the A sounded better, for others B did, and for some neither was preferable to the other. I think I'll save my money and buy a subwoofer.
Great review! Love the Pedal Show t-shirt. Now I want new speakers and new D&M getup..
Very interesting comparison. Thanks for posting this. I agree with you regarding the midrange on the modified version, and the dynamic presentation of the stock version. I have a stock pair, and do not feel inclined to mod them. However, I have to wonder if I can get the best of both worlds by adding a REL, to not only preserve the dynamics of the original design, but potentially improve upon both the midrange and the bass performance. My curiosity is piqued. A REL/600M paring might, theoretically, be the golden ticket (along with some cabinet deadening). I happen to already own a few REL’s, so the cost to me is $0. That said, I probably wouldn’t go out and buy a REL if I didn’t already own one ( or two or three). If you are also inclined to try this, I’d be interested in your experience. That’s the great thing about this hobby; so many possibilities...
I listened to this through my 600ms and the clips all sounded like A to me. So I'll stick with my stock setup!
yeah A would be my choice
No sonic difference listening on my high end 2 channel system. Don't know what you are hearing in your room, but they both sounded identical in every way in my room. I would conclude that these must be heard in person to make any decision.
@@crazyprayingmantis5596 - How about...
C. You are a clueless asshole.
I was listening to the Sound clips on a Sonos sound bar.
The difference is obvious and apparent. The tubes just open up the soundstage. There is more airiness and openness with the tubes.
The binding posts constrict the sound and make it sound constricted. Almost compressed in comparison.
B is the winner, all around.
That fact that I could actually hear a difference (On most of the tracks) while listening on an iPad is astounding. I did not expect to hear a difference without using the appropriate listening equipment. Wow!
I really appreciate this video. I was about to click on the purchase button for the crossover kit, but decided to follow through in the video series and hear the test as well as read the comments. As a result I've decided not to waste my time and money on the upgrade. Given that it's a youtube audio format and even though I used my best headphones I could not hear much if any difference between A and B, and where I could hear it, I preferred A. Yes, I may very well be a caveman with the hifi perception of a slug, but in the end it's me I have to please, not some elite audiophiles or sound engineers. I like the sound from my stock RP600Ms the same as, or in some instances slightly better than the modified versions.
Regarding data graphs, the human hearing scale as far as sound levels is logarithmic so even though a graph might show a 2-3 db shift in signal variations over the audio frequency range which of course represents a doubling or halving of power (3db) the human ear can barely notice this or not notice it at all. Especially with the fast dynamic changes in the music signal. Point is that the graphs are more sensitive than our ears are. I don't argue that the charts are wrong. I totally believe them. However that doesn't mean I'm going to hear those differences because of how tiny they are to the human ear.
A sounds more "dead" and neutral. B is definitely brighter and more in your face, and more raspy and shouty on the vocals. I felt like A had more focus, but B had a little more space in between everything.
However, the quality of the recording made a big difference. For example, the song at 11:18 is a great example of how much brighter and raspier B sounds with vocals, but I felt the opposite with the female pop song right before, at 10m or so.
You guys did a good job of putting a little Dynaudio into a klipsch. Personally I like the warmer neutral sound it sounds more Hi-Fi to me. It's really easy to EQ the top end up if you want a little more but that mid-range has noticeably improved you don't have the random notes that just kind of hit you wrong or at least I didn't hear any of that did
Through an HP Pro 600G1 Desktop w/SSD hd--> Audioquest Jitterbug--> Dragonfly Red DAC-->Audioquest Goldengate interconnects--> Vista Spark Integrated--> doubled 4 (something? I forget!) Kimber cable speaker wires--> R-51M Klipsch Speakers "A" sounded more enjoyable to me. I downloaded the video with 4K Video Downloader, and played it back with JRiver 25. :) I chose "A" before the reveal.
Wow that’s a big difference, thank you for doing this!
I know there's a lot going on with the capture gear and RUclips, but I ripped the audio from this video to do an experiment. I threw it into Audacity, applied basic graphic EQ (which simulates room correction/calibration) and I got the waveforms and spectrograms to be nearly identical for the two songs that start at 3:09 and 4:09. I can't be exactly sure because they're not the exact same parts of the song, but trust me when I say they're indistinguishable at that point both visually and by ear. So basically, you can achieve nearly identical results by just applying some EQ. Some people in the audiophile community seem to be allergic to EQ, but home theater people seem to be more progressive with technology and welcome digital EQ with open arms. So if you're okay with applying some EQ (which you should), this mod is entirely irrelevant.
I cant hear much difference which one is modified a or b
"A"has a wider soundstage ! Fuller.
I couldn’t hear any significant differences with my eyes closed listening through RUclips on $100 budget powered speakers. Also with the differences, I couldn’t determine which was better. I’m sure the differences scale upward and are more noticeable as the quality of the overall system increases. Thanks for doing the tests and uploading for us to hear.
This is like when you drive and someone keeps messing with your equalizer:))
Thanks for putting this demo together, absolutely awesome:) B sounded so much better, brighter yes, but more emotionally involving. Better presentation overall.
Despite RUclips’s quality limitations, I normally have absolutely no difficulty in hearing SQ differences but. I can only do it on a true A/B/A. comparison , using a repeat of exactly the same excerpt ( i.e. stopping and starting in the exact same place, not in a spliced linear run
Am I alone in this?
That would be much better, as well as faster switching between a and b.
Wow all I can say is that even though I heard the comparison over my phone speakers I could hear a difference. On my phone with its crappy sound I think I preferred the stock speaker. However if I was there in person that might change.
I wear hearing aids digital ones and I picked the A for the modified ones was really hard due to my hearing loss but could defiantly hear the difference good in some songs and not as much in others. Already bought for $299 which is good but now want the upgrade.
Need to record the tests through an A/B switch instead of going through and re-recording everything. Who knows what may have changed with the room in the two different recordings. It should be one recording with the edits via a switch.
Both are very nice! Modified sounds a lot more well rounded in all frequencies and even. Like you said stock is a little crispier better for movies and TV. Modified tons better for music centric listener! Great job Ron! Keep it up!
I actually have a decent Cambridge Audio sound system on my computer when I was listening and I was surprised to learn that I preferred the sound of speakers "B", it was more open and airy on the top and had better imaging. The mids were more fuller on "A", but it was at the expense of the top end, which I didn't like. I am very well aware that this speaker is far from flat sounding, and generally most Klipsch speakers are like that. However, I know that this speaker is very deficient in the midrange area around 1.5k to 2k. This was what I was hoping to correct. However, after listening to these clips, I doubt I would do any mods outside of the one on the crossover that improves the midrange. As for the Binding Posts vs Tube Connectors, I don't detect any noticeable difference. So I doubt I would change the binding posts either. Thus, I think the only mod I would do is the crossover one that helps bring the midrange up more in that critical area, but I certainly would leave the highs where they are.
My first thought is that I prefer "B"....the fact that it's the stock speaker is a little disconcerting.....but, I think in truth, without being there and hearing them "live", there's no real way to judge......on youtube you're hearing the room, the coloration of the mics, the compression that youtube adds......hearing them in person and in your own room would really be the only accurate way.
I had a friend (now deceased) who owned a hi-fi shop and also designed and built speakers and crossovers for people....he always used to tell me "You design a speaker to be accurate, and then you have to f*ck it up a little so that it sounds good" ...he always said it with a laugh, but he was dead serious about it....and his speakers sounded great.
I'm considering this upgrade, and as I can tell from the comments that A is the modified version? Well, I can clearly hear a difference between A and B here. Sometimes the B sounds louder, and that sounds correct for the Klipsch sound I already have here. It is fun with some music, but the more I listen to them, and especially while listening to power metal where a lot is going on all the time, it becomes too much for my ears. It sounds like mush at certain points, and some instrumental parts are almost impossible to hear, but if I play it on my JBL speakers it is much better and more comfortable even while turning up the volume. I am not sure if this upgrade will fix the parts that I cant hear, but it would still be great to be able to listen to metal on them for longer periods. Sometimes when I listen to B here it sounds like cotton suddenly covers my ears. So if A is the modified version, I think it would definitely be worth it, and even excited to hear a proper sound version on this.
Years old, but B is the obvious upgrade. Much more transparent and detailed.
Huge differences! A is way more tamed in the top end. Less fake sounding. I'd like to hear the soundstage difference. Let's face it, these are pretendo 'reference' speakers. They're okay but hardly 'all that'. They're built with cheap everything. Also, I do own them and crank 'em up to play drums to. I knew right away they weren't 98db. Either way, I got a smokin' deal on them.
Great channel BTW.
I just did the upgradea week ago and your video definitely helped in the decision to get it. Here's my experience of it, the upgrade was not hard but definitely tedious+little bit of thinking as it's my first time doing this. You definitely feel satisfied after completing the full upgrade and hearing both speakers play perfectly. Now in terms of sound, I have the Klipsch RP-160M (yes I did check the crossover network and checked with Danny if it could be done to the RP-160M and he replied yes, as many others have done). Had the RP-160M for nearly 2.5 years now and enjoyed it until I got the Magnepan LRS , Atohm GT1 and other speakers to play with. Then the V-curve of the Klipsch became extremely apparent in the original design, the highs were too extended and lows extended but no controlled enough with a very lacking midbass/vocals. It does however play extremely loud for a bookshelf, filling up a large room easily when a sub is added. But ,since I stopped enjoying the Klipsch for Music in favour of the LRS and wanted to keep it for movies. I thought the $210 upgrade should be worth it if tames the highs, provides a better midbass punch and tighter bass. I didn't need an extended low end as I always planned of using subs for the sub 50hz notes. This is exactly what the modifications did for me and would be happy to recommend it if the above if what you are looking for. The frequency response curve showed by Danny fully explains what to expect with speaker. So don't think just because Speaker B appears brighter/louder/more detailed in a video, that Speaker A will sound muffled in real life. It is the complete opposite, the brighter sound of Stock Speaker B can be fatiguing if you have other more neutral speakers to compare it with, then you will enjoy the more balanced sound from the upgrade. Also putting your ears next to the bass port when playing bass heavy songs, the No Rez effect on cabinet resonance can definitely be heard(from boxy sound to a much tighter bass, you may lose some low end kick, in favour of more controlled/tighter mid-bass and bass). I would not recommend buying a new Klipsch + the upgrade, get another speaker that is already more balanced. Do it if like me, you have enjoyed the speakers for years, like the looks and overall power of the klipsch but keeps on wanting more, instead of selling it for cheap to buy a $1000 speaker, just get the upgrade, it's well worth it.
I actually prefer B 😂 Sounded rounder and airier to me. Save your money.
Definitely prefer B
You are a true Klipschhead. :-)
Maybe so! I do have 11 speakers in this series lol(not this one though).
I talked to Danny the other day. It would cost about $120 to ship one of my rp6000fs to Texas, then he would do the testing and design a crossover for free, return that one installed plus one with parts for my other speaker. With return shipping we are at roughly 220. If im not mistaken, the crossover parts, norez and all that go for about $210 a speaker. That would put me at $640 to have this done on my mains.
Id love to do it, and it would be cool to have him documenting the process, but I think ill wait for someone else to he the sacrificial lamb. The rp8000fs are more popular and will probably get the treatment first.
Regardless though, I will be taking apart these cabinets and applying norez or more likely an adequate substitute.
When you knock on these floorstanders, they sound extremely hollow. Its noticeable and contributes to the overbearing reverb and...unwanted noise in the highest frequencies, and will improve some in the woofers as well.
I'd like to make improvements to the XO while I'm in there, so I'm trying to learn as much as I can about a subject of which I know relatively little.
I heard a big difference with the tube connectors. A wider, more natural sound. The crossover upgrade really improved the bass and three dimensionality. The stock crossover had a narrower, more shrill sound, especially in the highs.
😂😂
Speaker A sounded cleaner with less haze and sibilance in the highs. Also, bass is more impactful.
Late to the game, but I'll add my "2 cents". I liked both speakers. Both were enjoyable yet distinctly different. I believe the pursuit of audio-nirvana is a fruitless endeavor that can only lead to frustration and dissatisfaction. Fortunately for me, as a life-long bachelor, I have the flexibility to be, um, flexible. I solved my own personal audio dilemma by purchasing three pairs of standmount speakers with 3 different sound signatures, a small pair of semi-omnidirectional towers, and driving the lot (not simultaneously) with a vintage Marantz 2325 and an Outlaw 2150. The speakers: JBL studio 530s (neutral), RP 600Ms (warm, lively), Warfdale Denton 80ths (Warm, smooth), & Ohm Microwalsh talls. Subwoofer is SVS SB 1000 pro. I also have provision for a "guest amp", and I freely admit this setup is strictly in "budget audiophile" territory. What I've learned from this journey is that no combination of amp & speaker I tried sounded "bad". Some combos sounded better than others, but none really got in the way of enjoying the music. If you know what sound signature you like, do your due dilligence in researching your gear to get the result you're looking for, you'll probably be satisfied. Some will say don't mix bright speakers with bright amps (not my personal preference), but for some it might sound great. Likewise for dark/dark & neutral/ neutral combos. It's tougher for noobs who haven't found their "sound" to chase and is trying to get it right the first time. I do wish them luck. Back to the demo, if you know you like and prefer the "Klipsch Sound", you'll probably prefer the stock speaker. The modifications are probably for those who bought the RP600Ms not understanding the basic Klipsch sound and find they prefer a more neutral sound signature. My thought is we should be happy with all the choices we have rather then shame those with different tastes or hearing. Think about it, if the loudspeaker "world" was "flat", I bet a LOT of us would be rushing out to purchase equalizers for our systems! Obviously this is my opinion - everyone should follow their own path to "nirvana". Congrats to anyone who made it through this comment, I hope everyone finds the gear to bring them the joy that music offers!
What would happen if you made a comparison with the XLS Encore?
I was really looking forward to this review after watching Danny's upgrade video.
But, now that it's here, I was underwhelmed.
Maybe it's youtube, or the fact that I was listening on my laptop. I had my Sennheiser HD650s and the settings on 1440p for better audio, but it didn't seem to make much difference.
The speakers sounded so much alike, with the unmodded actually sounding better some times.
Maybe if I could hear them in person, but from what i heard in this video, it just doesn't seem to justify the cost and effort for the upgrade.
Like you said, I would put the total cost toward another speaker.
The B speakers give me way more fatigue because of the high ringing tones. Eesh, my ears. The A was much more relaxing.
That's the idea. The modified version is much better, particularly for extended listening.
Some samples sounded better on A, some better on B. Great material and cool upgrade DIY guys! Keep it up :)
I really could tell the difference on almost all tracks and that surprised me. over all B was better than A. the clean midrange of b was more enjoyable. i really do appreciate a speaker comparrison video where i can tell the difference between the 2 speakers in my opinion Ron is the winner.-- thanx 4 a gr8 vid NRD.
Im looking for an upgrade for the RP-160M. Can you help
I'm listening to this on the SVS SoundBase and a pair of Klipsh R51M speakers, I could hear quite a big difference in a few tracks. I cannot wait to do this upgrade to my SVS Ultra's. I like the sound difference, at least what I heard. Then we will look at getting a kit from Danny and build one of his Encore sets. Also going to head over to CSS and bag a pair of those too.