Klipsch vs. Dynaco A25

Putting together a vintage system with an Marantz 2230 receiver or possibly a McIntosh MC2505/MX113 amp/preamp. I'm wondering which speakers, Klipsch Heresy or Dynaco A25 would be the best way to go without a sub, though I'd like some decent bass. I listen to classic rock, 70s R&B and Cat Stevens-type stuff in a small to midsize living room. I'm open to other speaker suggestions, but I'd like to buy used and under $800.
I have a friend who's a bit of a vintage enthusiast. He has a stack of restored Dynaco tube electronics including an ST-70 amp, whose power rating would be similar to your Marantz. He has pairs of both the Dynaco A-25s and the Klipsch Heresies. He switches back and forth from time to time because the Heresies have the sensitivity, transparency, and dynamic jump, but they're bass-weak. When he plays through the A-25s, he gets more bass and more top-to-bottom smoothness, but he then misses the dynamics and transparency of the Klipsches.

The Heresies were created to provide center fill for a pair of corner-loaded Klipschorns. Paul Klipsch named them the "Heresy" because it was his first speaker design not to use a horn-loaded woofer. Bass extension was not a design priority.

I'm trying to get my friend to go for a pair of Klipsch Fortes, as they provide the Klipsch strengths of sensitivity, transparency, and dynamic range, plus the bass extension lacking in the Heresies.

A modern-day possibility might be the Cerwin-Vega CLS-12 or CLS-10.
A British magazine called (I think) Hi-Fi World has been doing an ongoing series on building a modern version of the A 25. The writer's been using an original A25 as his ongoing A-B reference. The magazine also has ads for someone selling a kit version of this "modern" A25. You might want to get the latest issue and e-mail the author of the article. He's certainly worked with the design enough to have a feel for its strengths and weaknesses.

Good Luck

If you like Klipsch, look at the Forte or Chorous, or, if you have room, the Cornwall. Much more bass from each of these. FYI, the Forte II has an improved midrange horn.
Last night I was able to pick up a local pair of New Large Advents. Surprisingly, they didn't sound great with my push/pull 60wpc tube amp. The bass was bumpy and not integrated. The midrange was weak. Maybe I should have tried the 4ohm speaker connectors. Looking back, could they have been out of phase? It bothered me, so at 2am I got up and hooked up dad's old Marantz 2235b. Things fell into place and came together. Smooth with a bottom end. Only got a few songs in, but it was enough to get me smiling. More tonight with a Marantz 2230 and a McIntosh MC2505.
The acoustic suspension design, and all the damping-and-current-hungry
large "bookshelf" designs that followed, probably had about as
much to do the with transition from tubes to transistors as anything. Tubes
were ideal with high-sensitivity horns and big, floorstanding ported
enclosures. Smaller, 84dB sensitive sealed enclosures demanded more power,
more current, lower output impedance, and higher damping factor.

Definitely you should have tried the 4-ohm taps. Having sold audio
equipment when Advent and Marantz (solid state made by SuperScope) made
for a very popular combination.

As for bass response, the Stereophile measurements indicate that even the Smaller Advent was down only 5 dB at 30 Hz in a quasi-anechoic measurement (i.e., close-miked to keep room boundary reinforcement out of the measurements).

Either the Marantz 2230 or Mac 2505 should be a good match, though
something more modern with lower output impedance, more speed, and
higher damping factor might make the speakers come alive even more. But
then would lose some of that retro vibe, especially in the looks department. If
you have access to both units, by all means experiment. My money's on the
McIntosh for bringing the Advents alive more. It's a handbuilt amp with more
power and higher parts quality vs. a well-built but mass-produced receiver
from the Far East.