Klipsch Heresy IV or Revel f226be

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.

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 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  

@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?