Not really sure which side you're landing on here, as the Escalade has a certain snob appeal by itself, but there are significant performance differences between a Cadillac and a Land Rover. At least, the Range Rover. Which might have something to do with this conversation, and might not. The thing with the Range Rover, it can back up everything it says. I've taken the Land Rover off-road qualification training, in a Range Rover (wasn't mine, I did their ads), and it's almost hard to believe what that vehicle is actually capable of, at least in its 2004 guise. The Cadillac, on the other hand, is a sheep in wolf's clothing. Try to cross a river in it with water up to the windshield, or descend a 45 degree rocky slope, or whatever, and you will likely either break an axle at best or drawn at worst. Which is to say that sometimes, in both automobiles and audio, there are reasons that one person carries themselves like their **** is a bit better. Because, well..it is. The Range Rover is an awesome piece of machinery that BMW (used to own LR) spent nearly a billion dollars getting right. The Escalade is....a facade. It will leave you stranded. But I'm sure there is somebody somewhere who is an unabashed "Detroit metal!!!" fan who will swear otherwise, but it doesn't change reality. Some stuff is better than other stuff. And its not because its more expensive, its because it does what its supposed to do, in a superior manner. The Range Rover is an $80,000 vehicle. And it will, in no uncertain terms, pretty muck kick the ass of any other vehicle when asked to leave the highway. I've seen Land Rover Discovery's pulling jacked up Jeeps and raised Ford pick-ups with giant off-road tires out of mud, and the Discovery wasn't nearly the vehicle the Range Rover. Sorry for the somewhat metaphorical tangent but it seems a perfectly apt parallel to the idea that some stuff that costs money, really is THAT much better.
Not really sure which side you're landing on here, as the Escalade has a certain snob appeal by itself, but there are significant performance differences between a Cadillac and a Land Rover. At least, the Range Rover. Which might have something to do with this conversation, and might not. The thing with the Range Rover, it can back up everything it says. I've taken the Land Rover off-road qualification training, in a Range Rover (wasn't mine, I did their ads), and it's almost hard to believe what that vehicle is actually capable of, at least in its 2004 guise. The Cadillac, on the other hand, is a sheep in wolf's clothing. Try to cross a river in it with water up to the windshield, or descend a 45 degree rocky slope, or whatever, and you will likely either break an axle at best or drawn at worst. Which is to say that sometimes, in both automobiles and audio, there are reasons that one person carries themselves like their **** is a bit better. Because, well..it is. The Range Rover is an awesome piece of machinery that BMW (used to own LR) spent nearly a billion dollars getting right. The Escalade is....a facade. It will leave you stranded. But I'm sure there is somebody somewhere who is an unabashed "Detroit metal!!!" fan who will swear otherwise, but it doesn't change reality. Some stuff is better than other stuff. And its not because its more expensive, its because it does what its supposed to do, in a superior manner. The Range Rover is an $80,000 vehicle. And it will, in no uncertain terms, pretty muck kick the ass of any other vehicle when asked to leave the highway. I've seen Land Rover Discovery's pulling jacked up Jeeps and raised Ford pick-ups with giant off-road tires out of mud, and the Discovery wasn't nearly the vehicle the Range Rover. Sorry for the somewhat metaphorical tangent but it seems a perfectly apt parallel to the idea that some stuff that costs money, really is THAT much better.
Sorry if that post rubbed anybody the wrong way, just saying that sometimes there are things that are more expensive, that are better (I wouldn't spend that much on any vehicle).Either would myself, I am careful with budgets. It was a company car for upper management. All of us had one. They said it's about image. Something like 'this is Manhattan, we're not squeezing oranges here'......(My previous job was in Florida).
I have a pair of Forte (originals) and they sound great. They also have Ciites x-over & tweeter upgrades. Far better sound than my Pro Ac 2.5 Response I owned.
I notice some dislike the Forte speaker. Too low cost on market to be a prestige item? Or?
do your crossovers stay outside the cabinet? they look big.
I've got a great pair of chorus and a rougher pair of forte II. I think the forte sounds better. Have the ti tweet diaphragms. Getting a pair of stands built for them. Next is the network. I'd love something like what you have SET12, but i need it to go in the cab.
The deal with the forte is, to my ears you'd have to spend a lot of cash to get a better sound. of course there are people that don't like them, just like anything, but the basis isn't always objective(just like those of us who love them).
I am also using the Klipsch Titanium Mid which was a subjectively a huge improvement even over Bob Crites very nice mid that I ran for a year.
The ti mid is only available from Klipsch they cost about $186.00 a pair plus shipping
Part number for the dia kit is 163514 and in stock Best regards Moray James
FYI - When I ordered mine back in December, they said they were out of stock until mid-January. As of now they still have not shipped. Parts department said they still haven't received a batch that passed inspection. They hoped their new supplier would do better but no word yet. They will be happy to take your order but no telling when they will ship.
Brought mine home from the seller today, hooked them up to Quicksilver mini-mites running EL34's at 25 watts and, for now, the Quickie full function tubed preamp.
These are stock. I have zero chance of "extreme" tweaking them like SET12 has and if that's what one has to do to get a passing grade on these, I'd say it's pretty much hopeless for the masses, I mean me. One might as well become a speaker designer and market the product.
My initial impressions reflect both the positive and negative comments I've read on this thread. JohnVF's criticisms have some validity as there is a "boxiness" to the stock sound, at least compared to my ribbon hybrids with the ribbon unit sitting baffleless atop the bass box. On the other hand, there's a life to them that contrasts with maybe a bit more analytical sound from my ribbons. I've got some Johnny Otis on right now and the Forte's are doing a fine some of recreating a blues club atmosphere. They definitely sound better slouching down on the couch (mid-horn at ear level) than standing up.
Apparently the modifications are almost limitless, but as someone who is not really a DIY'er, I'm not exactly sure how much I can do. Just being practical. I've ordered the ALK crossovers and may get the Crites tweeter diaphrams. Beyond that, it's going to take reading posts here over and over to figure out how to brace a cabinet, build 12" stands, perform various damping procedures, and it seems endless other tweaks to "get the sound right". Perhaps it's a learning experience, perhaps a mistake.
On the other hand, Dave at Fastlane Audio has this bitchin' looking Monoco horn set-up and he's selling a demo for 3K, which I just can't put my hands on this moment. However, I probably wouldn't have to "tweak" them.
Could be that much depends on what music one listens to and how.
Boxiness reference. I do not hear that. However my Klipsch Forte was purchased with an added brace from side to side. Is that brace a 'standard known mod' to remove the boxiness sound? Anyone?