Klipsch Heresy IV or Revel f226be

Wait for the NEW KLH Model 7's....I am.

Revel please ....

Hmmm, @james633 , I guess that could be part of the reason that I am finding the 126s more interesting with my amp switched to the ultralinear mode (versus triode).  And what you typed just makes me wish even more that the 226s would have been marked down at the time I bought the 126s.  However, I am in a small room and the thing that mostly sold me on the 126s was that all the reviews i read said they play well in small rooms, and that does seem to be the case with mine.

It's always interesting reading your posts--you have a lot of knowledge.  

Immathewj,

Both revels need a real amp to play well. All revels need power. The big difference for me is the 226be has a dedicated mid. It is not just a smaller bass driver but a designed midrange. It has a lighter surround and the driver has very little travel with steep crossovers above and below it. It just makes for a very fleshed out detailed mid. Those advantage probably mostly show up when played loud. My experience with revel is they play very loud. I always gave up before they did. 

Trivema,

yes the revels are similar to focal. Generally the revels are a little softer in the highs maybe a touch less detailed in the upper bass but very similar. The 226be is a total steal next to something like the Sopra at 3 times the price. I would argue the sound quality is within 5%. 
 

I don’t disagree with your Klipsch assessment either. They just lack a bit of refinement. If you ever get a chance try the higher end JBLs. I think they will keep all the things you like about your Klipsch but add refinement. There are some good deals from time to time. 

KLIPSCH! It depends, depends on your room, your amp, type of music you listen to, and the sound you are seeking, etc. I’ve never heard the Revel, but I have a pair of Klipsch Forte IIIs and Focal Aria 926 in my main rig.  Based on what I’ve read about the Revel, my guess is they’d have a similar sound signature of my Focals based on their similar builds.

i run both with a 20 wpc 300b 845 tube amp in a wide room with 12 foot ceiling streaming Qobuz through an IRIS DDC and Pontus II DAC. Pretty resolving system. I bounce back and forth between the two speakers depending on mood, music, and even time of day.  Listen to jazz, folk, Americana, country, pop, rock, some classical. I love the way both set of speakers sound, different but both excellent. 

I always return to the Klipsch as “reference” for what I like, HUGH soundstage, deep, wide, tall, very dynamic, superb vocal midrange presentation. Not forgiving of poor recordings however. The Focals are warmer, yes warmer with more mid and lower bass, smaller more narrow soundstage, more “intimate” sound presentation, more forgiving of poor recordings.  

But when I want big sound, lifelike presentation, even at low volume, it’s always the Klipsch! Just my preference. 
 

@james633 , not that it’s applicable to this discussion, but from comparing the specs, I was thinking that MAYBE the Revel 126 is a 226 with only one low range bass driver (instead of two as in the 226) and no 51/4 " midrange driver like the 226 has. Going from what Erinscorner was saying about the 226, I was THINKING that the 126 might actually be the easier load to drive. (However Revel is recommending 50 to 150 wpc for both speakers.)

However I frequently am mistaken about my over simplified assumptions.

What I would say though for almost sure, is that at 4k the 226 is marked almost hald off and looks like a terrific bargain. I really wish that they would have been listing them for that last spring when I gave 3k for my 126s.

I bought a pair of dealer owned Forte speakers and enjoyed them for 6 months. They're a little more hifi IMO than the Cornwall but not quite as fun. I wouldn't ship these the boxes are not rated for multiple use and the speakers are not terribly sturdy either. Not s good value new. I sold mine locally for $2600. Took a loss on them.

Immathewj,

yes having 2 drivers wired in parallel will cut the impedance of those drivers in half. So if they are 8 ohms each the result will be 4 ohm. Then there are added changes with the crossover. But the multiple drivers will generally increase efficiency. 
 

I have not heard the 126be but based on the measurements the 226be is an all around better speakers. Hard to say how that translates to real world enjoyment. I would not worry about it as there are then again better speakers than the 226be too… a slippery slope lol. 

Well, you're dealing with two totally different animals here; box/cone vs horns.  However, I would most definitely run with the Revel f226be speakers (with a pair of  quality subs), which would be totally killer.  Although I've owned and enjoyed horn, electrostatic, and ribbon speakers down through the years, ultimately, I always returned to standard box dynamic speaker, which I will retain for the duration.  Happy listening.    

@james633 , on another bookshelf thread, someone recently recommended the Revel 226 over the 126 the OP had mentioned, because the 226 was not a whole lot more $ and the footprint/floor space is arguably practically the sam.

I am constantly second guessing what I have done and what i should have done, so I started looking into the 226, and whoooaaaa--they are down to 4k a pair depending upon whose selling them.  The 126s that I bought were 3k a pair, and for the physical similar size of the 226 to the 126 on stands, I think I would have spent another 1k and got the 226s.

Then I started reading the specs and although the 226 is listed as 90 (someone on a site said 88) for sensitivity and the 126 is rated at 86, I noted that Erin's Corner was saying that the impedance would dip as low as into the 3s and might not be suitable for certain AV receivers (which isn't what I am using anyway) but is that lower impedance coming from the two woofers per speaker?

I have heard both, owned the 228be and currently use horns (JBL 4367). Really the revel is on another level. The 226be with a good pair of subs (highpassed) could be a final speaker. It has no real flaw but lacks exotic cabinet material and deep bass under 60hz. I would not enjoy them without subs

the forte also lacks some deep bass (under 40hz) and really needs rear wall enforcement to get that kick. With a close wall placement it would be ok. The mids and highs are not near as refined as the revels. The hash kind of worn on my ears. the sound stage shifts with frequency in width and I felt the box was noisy. But if you are new to horns they might sound existing/different and interesting.

if you want a more refined horn speaker a few (not all!) of the JBLs might do the trick. The JBL 4349 used is about $4000ish and would split the difference. The JBL 3800 is also on sale now in brown and grey ($2500 pair) which is a crazy deal. Worth looking at too.

I personally am not interested in box speakers after owning good horns but the Klispch are not refined enough IMO. Horns just get the dynamics more correct and sound less reproduced to me  

Two very different speakers.    I own Forte IV and have owned Revel M106 .  I recently listened to a Rega P3 through the Revel 226 and thought it was a little tipped up on the top end.   

The problem with the Revel in my opinion is support.   Waited  months for them to send out a replacement grill under warranty and it was only a grill, not a driver ....   

I then bought Heresy III after the Revel, my daughter cranked it up and took out a midrange driver.   Klipsch sent a driver to my dealer a few days later and I installed it.    More and more companies are selling stuff without a gameplan for support , Revel told my dealer they had to open a new pair for a grill.   Not very reassuring if I needed a driver down the road. 

I cannot answer your question, but I can throw a couple of thoughts out there as I was thinking of making a speaker upgrade myself last spring (and I actually did buy a new pair).

The Revel 226 and the Forte IVs seem to be similar in thhe floor space they take up.

The sensitivities are quite different, so I suppose  alot of what you decide to do may be predicated on what amp you are going to use.

As far as price and dealers, due to another thread I was following I did some looking at the Revel 226 and I did see that MD had two pair that were both marked down, one pair was marked all the way down to 4k.  Which looked like a pretty good deal.  But then I saw that both Uncle Kevin and Crutchfield are selling them for 4k.  I believe that all three of these dealers offer an audition period; MDs is 60 days, and I am not positive about Kevin and Crutchfield, but it would be easy to find out.

The speakers I actually bought from MD last spring were the smaller Revels (126be) that were marked down (which had a lot to do with my purchase) to 3k.  But then I saw that for quite a while Uncle Kevin was selling them for 3k also.  Anyway, after reading up on the Revel 226, I was kind of wishing that the 226s were up for 4k when I bought my 126s, as footprint wise, there really is not a whole lot of difference, and with the two woofers per speaker, the 226 should be a lot more speaker(s) for another 1K?

However, one reason I went with the Revel m126be was that all the reviewers said that they were relatively easy loads to drive (sensitivity 86 but impedance only dips to 4.7 ohms) and that they were not finicky to place in a small room, such as the room I am putting them in.  (I don't believe everything reviewers write, but I cannot see a reason to mislead a potential consumer about those two factors.  As a matter of fact,.I have read reviewers write about certain speakers that they require judicious placement and that they are power hungry.)

When I read a few different reviews on the Revel 226 I saw that sensitivity was rated by Revel as 90; another reviewer, who must have done his or her own measurement, put them as 88.  "Erin's Corner" said that the impedance dropped into the 3s and I got the impression that "Erin's Corner" was saying that they would actually need more power than the 126.  One of the reviewers said that placement of the 226 can take some work to get them to really perform.

The Forte IV is slightly shorter than the 226 but wider and deeper and heavier.  I did do some reading on several speakers, including the Forte iV, and at the time MD has a couple oif pair marked down to where I wanted to be, but what I read, and some of the responses to questions I asked here on A'gon, made me think that they might not work well in the small room I needed to put them in, and due to that small room, I went with the smaller Revels (the 126s) supplemented by my old subwoofer.