3DsoundSurge Reviews: Klipsch 2.1


	Mikael Hagén puts Altec Lansing's ATP3 to the test

Please support 3DsoundSurge by visiting our sponsors

reviews.gif (6840 bytes)

Klipsch ProMedia 2.1

Mark Muschett - Last updated April 20, 2001

Performance (Continued):

Sound Quality

The Holy Grail of Sound Reproduction

Perfect neutrality is the goal of every speaker manufacturer. Achieving this goal would mean that without the impact of any consumer-added equalization and DSP effects you would hear exactly what the musician or sound-designer intended you to hear. In some cases you may want to change it using an equalizer (preferably by subtracting rather than adding), but this should be up to you, the end user and not imposed upon you by the system design. This goal is something of a quest for the Holy Grail as no system perfectly reaches absolute neutrality, something that is more apparent on lower priced systems, but its none-the-less an important goal to strive for. Systems with more neutral/uncolored sound, that is more flat frequency response, are generally considered more pleasing to listen to. A system that colors audio in a certain way may sound a bit exciting at first, but typically the more you listen to it, the more likely you are to get irritated/annoyed by some aspect of the sound reproduction. This is especially true if you listen to a lot of music with the system.

While for some people shop on the basis of the loudness that the Klipsch 2.1 delivers in good quantity, it’s not really hard to get cheap loud systems with high (and useless) PMPO ratings that can make a lot of noise (but sound terrible). What Klipsch has aimed to deliver is excellent quality at an affordable price. As such, when we look at the Klipsch 2.1 the important thing to look for is that quality, especially in terms of stereo imaging for music but also for 3D audio, gaming and DVD playback.

As reference systems to help determine quality I used the originally much more expensive Diamond Audio Technology HPM-4100, the VideoLogic Sirocco Crossfire and Boston Acoustics BA4800. As you may note, both the BA4800 and the Crossfire are 4.1 systems. However the Crossfire is in the same quality realm that Klipsch is targeting with their updated product line and particularly their revised 4.1 system and the BA4800, while not of the exact same quality does have some similarities to the Media Theater system 2.1 system. When we do a review of the updated ProMedia 4.1 system we will cover more aspects of how it compares to the Crossfire than in this review.

If you have been following our coverage of the original Klipsch v.2-400 you will know that I have been fairly critical of the v2-400's midrange. These impressions changed over time to the point where I really came to dislike what I perceived as a midrange hole (where some midrange frequencies were perceived as being very subdued) that was delivered by the original v.2-400. The reason I want to make a point of emphasizing those past impressions is not to frustrate the many happy v.2-400 owners. Rather, it is to offer some context that might help to allay the fears of those of you with similar opinions when I say that the reworked crossover network, using an otherwise identical satellite design, has much to my surprise addressed the midrange flaw!

That is the Klipsch ProMedia 2.1 midrange is now very good for a system in this price range and a real pleasure to listen to. With that out of the way let's get to the normal order of events. When it comes to a breakdown of the individual components of the Klipsch 2.1's sound reproduction I can offer the following.

The high frequency clarity is excellent, above what you can get from systems that don’t use a separate tweeter without being overbearing which was something some listeners complained about in the original v.2-400 series. As I noted before, Klipsch in keeping with their home and professional speaker design has used a horn mounted design for the tweeter, something that allows for more controlled and focused high frequency radiation. Perhaps this is why I found the vertical off-axis performance slightly behind the Crossfire and 4100 satellites that don't have horn loaded tweeters (but still better than single driver systems in this respect). On-axis high-frequency performance on the other hand was on par with the Crossfire and 4100 satellite, perhaps a bit more pronounced (but not overemphasized) and as a desktop based speaker system with appropriately angled stands (towards the ears) most listeners will be taking advantage of the excellent on-axis performance. Now treble is certainly far less important than good midrange when it comes to delivering a pleasing sound quality but good treble gives a sense of much better clarity, especially for orchestral music. Treble is also more noticeable since it’s a less common frequency in nature so it's worth noting that I think people sometime get a bit too hung up on high frequency performance in evaluating systems.

When it comes to midrange, the Klipsch 2.1 quality is again excellent, slightly behind in smoothness at higher volumes to my ears, but in the same general league as the VideoLogic Sirocco Crossfire. Looking at 2.1 systems it’s as good or better than every other system I have heard with the exception of the HPM-4100, a system that offers overall better detail in the lower midrange / upper bass than the ProMedia 2.1 (and the Crossfire). The Klipsch 2.1 midrange response is bit smoother than the Boston Acoustics BA4800 4.1 system, a system that should in turn be somewhat behind the midrange quality offered by Boston Acoustics' 2.1 Media Theater system (now discontinued). The other 2.1 system that I have tested with overall midrange quality in the same realm would be the Monsoon MM-1000 but unfortunately, as with the Media Theater system, I don't have access to it for actual head-to-head comparisons so I am just going on memory. I also noticed in testing with ETFAcoustic that off-axis midrange performance while still quite good was not quite as smooth as the HPM-4100 or Crossfire. However, just as I noted for high-frequency response, you will be getting optimum on-axis performance in the typical desktop configuration.

As noted in the overview, I found that the ProMedia satellites are producing notably more low frequencies from the satellite than all other PC focused subwoofer based systems that I have listened to with the exception of the HPM-4100. That is the ProMedia 2.1 sats are extending to 140 dB before going beyond 2-3 dB rolloff and about 120 dB before rolling off more than 5 dB. This kind of performance is more in line of systems with larger satellites or at least larger drivers and is quite impressive.

The result is a much fuller sound from the satellites than the other systems including the Crossfire with greater presence and detail in the 120 Hz to 180 Hz than any other 3" driver based system I have heard. I would guess that both the Sirocco original and of course the Sirocco Spirit that use 4" mid/bass drivers will also exhibit above average performance in this area. That of course is not important in it self since 2.1 systems are meant to be use with the subwoofer active. However, this design decision by Klipsch might impact overall performance in a couple of areas relative to other comparable systems. The obvious result of this design, even with the subwoofer active, is a different, somewhat darker, sound compared to the systems producing less bass from the satellite. To be clear, I don't mean darker in a bad way, it's just the best word I can find to describe the difference. A benefit of the ProMedia satellites very good low frequency response is a subtle improvement in the overall stereo imaging in that upper bass range. While these frequencies are not the easiest to localize, it still possible and this is something the ProMedia 2.1 does better than any other 2.1 system I have heard with the exception of the HPM-4100.

Another important aspect of a speaker is the transient response and this is something I am guessing may be affected at least to a small extent by the Klipsch satellite's above average low frequency response. Transient response refers to how the speaker handles the beginning of a tone and its reverb tails. For example the initial pluck of an acoustic guitar or crack of a snare drum should be handled with speed and accuracy without sounding slow or lethargic or overly defined or overly energetic. Sounds should also offer a natural decay. This quality can be apparent for cymbals and voices where the sounds should fade gradually not abruptly.

In general the Klipsch 2.1 transient response is strong, in the same general area as the MM1000 and Crossfire, both of which are clearly above average in the multimedia speaker realm. However, I perceive it to be slightly behind the Sirocco Crossfire (4.1 system) and the originally much more expensive HPM-4100 for some midrange / upper bass frequencies. In the case of the HPM-4100 it’s most noticeable in that upper bass area that I have referenced above. Like the ProMedia 2.1 the 4100 system is keeping that range with the satellites that use a midrange/bass driver that is an inch larger than the ProMedia midrange driver in a similar sized cabinet.

In the case of the Crossfire it’s a more subtle difference in the upper midrange frequencies that seem to come of just a little smoother. This might be a result of the Crossfire satellites not covering the same low frequency range as the ProMedia 2.1 with the Crossfire’s very tight subwoofer extending into higher frequencies than the ProMedia subwoofer. The trade off with the Crossfire is in isolation (no sats) it's somewhat easier to pinpoint music coming from the Crossfire sub than the ProMedia 2.1 sub and as noted above the subtle lack of stereo imaging for those upper bass notes compared to the ProMedia satellites. To save myself some time answer emails I will note that overall I would have to give the edge to the ProMedia in all aspects of upper bass range reproduction vs the Crossfire and the edge to the Crossfire in the mid to upper midrange realm. It's worth noting here that while I have not recently heard the Boston Acoustics Media Theater I do find the ProMedia 2.1 ahead of the BA4800's overall transient response.

Transient response is obviously not something that even the most trained ear is likely to take notice of when they blast away their friends in Unreal Tournament or watch Bruce Willis blow up the bad guys in the fifth element. However, if you listen carefully to music it makes a difference and I think most people will be very pleased with what Klipsch has been able to deliver for $179.

The subwoofer delivers very good quality bass (that is relatively tight, solid, no obvious port noise or rattle until the very highest levels of exaggeration and volume) doing single tone testing right to 45 Hz before rolling off 3 dB and down a total of 5 dB at 41 Hz before tailing off fairly sharply (about -8 dB at 40 Hz, - 12 at 35 Hz and –24 dB at the 31 Hz point listed in the system specifications. The subwoofer control and bass boost, as noted earlier, does allow you to exaggerate the bass by approximately +8 dB (measured at 100 Hz starting at 80 and 90 dB). Even when the system is pushed to higher levels the exaggeration ability is still good (6 dB over a 100 dB start point before rattling/buzzing) which means there is plenty of extra punch for gaming. The exaggeration is also fairly even right across the subwoofer’s range.

Now we don’t usually listen to single notes and just as with most if not all of the other subwoofers we have tested, music with more complex and constant heavy bass and some extended bass heavy effects in games and movies can drive the subwoofer to distortion at higher volume levels and normal subwoofer settings or at moderate volume levels with high subwoofer levels. When it comes to the high volumes at normal sub levels I am talking about very loud overall volumes for the satellites so it’s not an issue for most people.

The Klipsch 2.1 is also producing fairly accurate bass response (i.e. it is putting out 50 Hz when I ask it to play a 50 Hz test file. For most games the good bass response down to 41 Hz is actually more than adequate and the same is true for most music and movies (most of the time). The 41 Hz – 5 dB rolloff point is in the same range as the Crossfire and HPM-4100 and somewhat better than the Monsoon MM-1000. Looking at rolloff in the other direction shows that the Klipsch 2.1 sub has a relatively fairly sharp rolloff as frequencies increase (down 20 dB from 125 Hz to 250 Hz, down another 10 dB from 250 Hz to 500 Hz and a down a further 23 dB from 500 Hz to 1,000 Hz ). Some people used to multimedia subs extending further into the upper bass / lower midrange might say it lacks definition due to the very sharp rolloff. However, the reason is, as noted above that more of those upper bass/lower midrange frequencies are being produced by the ProMedia 2.1 satellite's long throw mid/bass drivers with good impact and with overall better definition than on most other multimedia speaker systems at that.

Taking the different reproductive ranges of the subwoofers into account there are no night and day differences. However, I would put the Klipsch 2.1 sub clearly ahead of the MM-1000 sub, somewhat ahead of the BA4800 sub (which will serve as a rough indication of the Media Theater sub) and slightly behind both the HPM-4100 and Crossfire subs for overall definition. The ProMedia 2.1 sub is very slightly ahead of the Crossfire sub in ability to exaggerate at high volumes (the Crossfire sub is more likely to hit the end-stops at high volume, high exaggeration).

For a little bit of context I do find this subwoofer to be somewhat tighter than the v2-400 subwoofer (based on recollection, but I will be updating this section once I have tested the new 4.1 system in a few days. but I was never displeased with the v.2-400's musical performance either at its Klipsch specified default levels. I suspect that most people who found the v.2-400 subwoofer overly boomy were pushing it beyond the Klipsch recommended optimum tuned point marked on the control module. The other possibility is the effect of room acoustics that can have a great impact on the lower subwoofer range. For example, in the location that I usually have the subwoofer located in my test room there is a hump (boost) in the Klipsch 2.1 subwoofer output in the 60-80 Hz range, something that many listeners will actually enjoy. While all the subs were tested quantitatively in the same location, different subs act in different ways and this hump is something that can altered to a large extent by final subwoofer positioning in your own room even without any equalization.

One other point worth noting for people considering combining two 2.1 systems to make a 4.2 system is the dual side firing sub that comes with the 4.1 system is rated by Klipsch to 29 Hz where as the single driver 2.1 sub is rated by Klipsch to 31 Hz. My recollection is the v.2-400 subwoofer also has a bit more exaggeration range, not so much in the single tone testing but in the ability to maintain good quality at higher output levels (either through outright exaggeration or just high volumes). What we don’t yet know is just how combining two subwoofers in one room will affect the real world performance but we plan to offer those details in the future as well as hands on comparisons to the Klipsch 4.1 system n some other areas.

Now we don’t usually just listen to high frequency, mid-range and bass on an individual basis and an important aspect of a system like the Klipsch 2.1 is how well it is all blended together. This is the third area of impact of the ProMedia satellite’s fuller sound. That is I found that the greater bass extension of the satellites allows for above average smoothness in the transition between the Klipsch ProMedia 2.1 satellite and subwoofer. In this aspect the system was right up with the HMP-4100 and slightly ahead of the VideoLogic Sirocco Crossfire as well as my recollection of the Boston Acoustics Media Theater system and MM-1000.

So how does all of this apply to normal use? Let's start with the taking a more in-depth look how it performs for various types of music, which is generally the most demanding medium and also the main target market for the system.

Back to the sound level tests

On to the music tests