Calling all Horn lovers

I made the jump to horns about 7 or so years ago, after 3 decades of electrostats. Great dynamics, and 'jump' (as mentioned) with the same level of openness and transparency as the stats. Getting the associated equipment right was key to making them work, partly because of the noise level of some of the components I used with less efficient speakers, and partly due to gear synergies. With the Lamm ML2, my Avantgardes really started to make music. Improving/changing gear further upstream also seemed to improve the integration between the horn mid and dynamic self-powered woofers, which was originally one of the shortcomings, at least in my set-up.(I would love to have a full-on horn system, with horn woofers.) One of the things I like about the Avantgarde is that is no crossover between the amp and the midrange horn.

With everything 'just so' the performers are much more 'in the room' and the issue of 'imaging' or 'soundstage' is less of a factor, so this is a huge plus, overall; system or AC noise and sorting out associated equipment, at least for my rig, was the negative, as was integration between bass and mids, but I've managed to get the system to a level that is now extremely enjoyable, very vivid, tonally rich and not strident. Of course, part of that also depends on the source material, but as the system has improved, I'm able to enjoy a wider range of material- some of it isn't 'demo' quality, but I'm far more engaged in the music, which is what it is ultimately about.
PS I still have all my old electrostats, ribbon tweets, and other vintage stuff, and will probably get all that restored at some point for a vintage system or two.
PPS I've heard people snark about how nasty horns can sound, and they can, if not set up right and used with the gear that brings out their best.

Kiddman: perhaps you were being politic by not lumping the Avantgarde in
with the Klipsch in terms of proper design, but over the years of improving
associated equipment, the overall performance has markedly improved. I
also find that the source material itself plays a role. For example, Chris
Bellman's remaster for Classic Records of Neil Young's Greatest Hits has
some tracks from the album Harvest. Those tend toward the strident at
times, but a first pressing of Harvest doesn't 'bite' the way the Classic
remastered version does (which sounds 'fiddled with' in other respects,
bumped up bass and splashy highs, but a certain ''thinness" in the
mids). Perhaps I'm just hearing coloration on coloration (i.e., some
complain that the original Harvest sounds 'congested') but much sonic
improvement resulted from changes in associated equipment and it wasn't
simply a matter of going from a mediocre line stage or phono stage to a
great one- more of a 'lateral' change, but one that seemed to bring out the
best in the Avantgarde. (Not being defensive about those in the least,
would love to make room at some point for some vintage WE, or at least
the big Tannoys). I did hear the JBL K2 with a small Viva amp some years
ago, using my turntable, and it was marvelous.
Are you in the industry? You said you don't sell any horns, but I could read
your statement to suggest that you do sell other products. BTW, no garage
pontification on my part- I don't pretend to know more than my actual
experience. FWIW, i think you came off a bit harsh, but part of that may
simply be the nature of the written statement.
Best,
bill hart
PS: Shakey- thanks for the kudos- what's nice is that I'm not as caught up
in the gear at the moment and having great fun listening to music. I've been
spending a huge amount of time tracking down old pressings- and learning
a lot.

Sad- I think we come out the same way, I would just express it differently. I find that there is a 'natural' loudness level for each recording (at least recordings that aren't overly compressed throughout), where, because of the recording, the system and room, everything just 'gels.' At that point, the system can still handle dynamic swings effortlessly, and as you said, you don't need to crank up the system to get full measure of what is on the recording.
The other benefit is that I can get that 'open' quality of electostats that I grew to love over the decades, but can achieve something approximating a full-bandwidth system without having a GIANT speaker, like the big Soundlab.
And since the horns are tres efficient, I can get away with a very musical SET amp to power the mids and tweets.
So, on balance, I'm far less focused on 'audiophile' attributes, like soundstage and image, because the horn based system has an immediacy that goes beyond creating a 'faux' image; it sounds very 'vivid' and 'in the room' (which may turn into 'forward' and harsh, unless addressed by the associated equipment). Perhaps this is a band-aid to an inherent flaw in mine, but after many, many years of 'audiophilia,' I am listening to the music, not the system. (Not suggesting that the illusion will 'fool' you all the time, but on great recordings it is spectacular, and even on less well recorded material, I can enjoy what's there to hear). I do find that the horns are more ruthless in exposing the gimmicks of the recording- something that might be spectacular sounding on my old system because of detail, imagery, or the like, is revealed for what it is. When I compare different pressings/masterings of the same recording, the differences are not subtle.

Thnx Rox!