Klipsch RP600M VS GR-Research Modified 600M (Sound Clips) 

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... ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-riXAOTRdTNA.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 RU-vid'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.

@@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

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.

Those upgrades were done to tame the brightness of the klipsch, any brighter speaker would sound livelier but that doesnt make it accurate.

@@-MarkWinston- yeah, it basically comes down to preference. But that sums up everything audio related

@@-MarkWinston- 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.

@@-MarkWinston- sorry but your “accurate” speakers are boring as hell

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.

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 RU-vid. 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

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.😀

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.)

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.

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!

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)

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 RU-vid there is a huge difference.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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 RU-vid's compression has removed the difference. So I'll hold my judgement till I do the upgrade.

Thanks man!

Try Shazam.

I totally agree. I would appreciate to know if we are rightand If New records day could answer too.

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'm the Peter Ron refers to. ru-vid.com/show-UC0JRqE7rQT0g3SutYuBWBsg contact info in descriptions

I guess I walked right into that question didn’t I? The XLS is a better choice for somebody that wants a more balanced sounding speaker. For someone that wants a little more excitement and a little more presence, I would say the 530s are the winner.

Everything was running through my Vinnie Rossi LIO. Thanks!

@@Newrecordday2013 thank you keep up your channel

I’d personally go with the kefs

@@Newrecordday2013 thanks I do love the sound of the kefs plus a lot cheaper what av receiver would you recommend it people are saying denon 3600h or a marantz 6014 sound good with kef speakers but I really like Yamaha I was thinking of 2080

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

I hesitate to self-promote but you asked and this is a subtle as I can be: ru-vid.com/show-UC0JRqE7rQT0g3SutYuBWBsg

Thank you. The way that he worded it I thought that it was something different from the speaker. I guess that I got confused.

Yes

Mdf with a hardwood shell. I believe it’s figured maple.

@@Newrecordday2013 So when you say "hardwood shell", how thick of hardwood and how is it applied? I been trying to learn how the fancier speakers are made thinking they use hard woods but everyone says MDF is best... I have the plans for the X-LS Encore cabinets and been tossing around the idea of replacing my factory ones with nicer built ones.

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 RU-vid video format.

I couldn't tell any difference either but I'm listening on my MacBook Pro speakers. I'll try it with headphones.

192