KG 5.5 over Older Heritage ?

[Lance A.]

I've had three Heritage series and three in the KG line. I find that I prefer the latter significantly and especially the KG 5.5's, which to me sound clearer with better imaging and and a superior soundstage.

I was wondering what other KG 5.5 listeners thought about the speaker. To me they sound significantly "better". Could the capacitors just be older in my current comparison with Forte I's? (they both have poly for inline caps, though).

My other Heritage speakers in the past (Crites upgraded Heresy II's and Dayton Audio recapped La Scala's ( I know, I know, why the hell did I use Dayton's in the La Scala....). But back on point, while they did sound superior to the Fortes, they still didn't satisfy me like the KG 5.5's have.

Do any others have thoughts?

 

[tomlinmgt]

My opinion of the 5.5's after owning a pair for several years and using them in a system in my living room for TV audio and background music (they couldn't make the cut in my main/critical listening rig) is that they are a slightly more hifi version of Cerwin Vegas (I've owned D-3 and D-8-E). With the four 10" LF drivers and ported cabinets, they have serious bass slam with a bit of a hole in the mid range and crisp (to a fault) highs...which I improved with the Crites Ti diaphragm. I've also owned Chorus II which replaced the 5.5's in the living room system and the 5.5's can't touch them in terms of fidelity. Music and dialogue in movies had noticeably improved clarity and balance. I had a set of Forte I for a few weeks and though I wouldn't say they are significantly better than the 5.5 (like the Chorus II are), they did have a more balanced sound since the presence of a mid range driver filled in that hole in the mid range that I hear with the 5.5's. There's a definite smiley face EQ voicing to the 5.5's and a lot of people like that sound. It may be that you're part of that camp. They have deeper, more pronounced bass reproduction than the Chorus and Forte I, and all the Heritage models you mentioned tend to be a little lean in the very low end, as well....so if slamming bass is high priority to you, the 5.5's will outshine most in the Klipsch models line up. As far as imaging and sound stage, I never found their imaging or ability to create a multi-dimensional sound stage particularly noteworthy compared to speakers I've owned or heard that that do those things well.

 

[zebra03]

I had 2 pair of 5.5's for 20 years . Loved them . I also had a pair Forte II's but the 5.5's were clearly better sounding.

 

[Lance A.]

There's a definite smiley face EQ voicing to the 5.5's and a lot of people like that sound. It may be that you're part of that camp.

Yeah I am in that camp and that's likely it. I do prefer a scooped response.

 

[automojo]

Old thread-but still pertinent.......
I don’t think they have a scoop response at all
The squawker on many of the Heritage speakers dominates the sound.
In my opinion, they are less balanced than the KG5.5’s.
Lots of people like that mid range forward sound.
The KLF 20’s are in some ways a 3 way KG 5.5,
Although they do use a different woofer, and I think their cabinet has some bracing.
But their sound is sooo forward, it’s hard to really figure out what they sound like because you need a fairly large room. They are right in your face right off the dial.
I know this is an old thread.
Currently doing a restoration on my long lost pair I sold years ago and I came across.
Nothing too drastic getting the cabinets up par, and a recap.
And reinstalling the TI diaphragms that I took out when I sold them.
I do no they are pretty sensitive to the equipment you’re driving with, and they deserve better than your typical receiver in my opinion.
My first time around with these purchasing a Harmon Kardon PA 2400 really woke up the bass, as well as giving them a much more bounce response across the spectrum.
But regardless, I don’t understand the mid hole.
I have three way infinity Rsiiia’s…. And while they sound different, I’m not missing any mid range details.
Same with my Tekton Lores.
They have a very dynamic response like Klipsch-2 ways-with no mids missing.
Again, I go back to the equipment you’re driving them with.
They’re sensitive, and you’re gonna hear what your equipment sounds like through them, but they aren’t like my infinity if you drive them with say a Technics SA-600 like I did when I first got them-they sounded horrible. Little bass, thin sounding.

 

[automojo]

"October 28, 2019
its personal preference really as to which is better, some like a 3 way & "hot" mids, some like a more toned down 2 way. i know lots of the bigger 3 way klipsch can be very unbalanced with overpowering mids & people do all kinds of "upgrades" & mods to adress that issue.



& dont forget, some of the best speakers klipsch makes are 2 ways... epics, jubilee, & some of the pro & KPT models. for many speakers, a 2 way will be a higher quality mid/tweet because they put more of the budget into the 2 speakers vs dividing it up into 3 speakers/drivers/horns. that really applies to car audio too, a 2 way 6.5" or 6x9" speaker is usually better than a 3 or 4 way, at the same price point of course.



i dont know the difference in the drivers or diaphram materials between the klf & kg so the 2 way vs 3 way comments i made may not apply here, just something to consider".

Quote from Klipsch Community
In my experience with the Heritage-100% agree....
Your getting a emphasis with the 3-ways-nothing is "missing" as far as detail and program information.
What's different is the 3 ways specific voicing.
And you either like it, or you don't.
Compare it to other non-Klipsch speakers, and that will give you a much better idea.......
And I bet if you measure the frequency response, the myth of "missing", or "mid hole" would be confirmed.
And just as a FIY, they don't have any "new" 3 way speakers.......just the old Heritage line...