Talk:Klipsch Audio Technologies

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

↓    Skip to table of contents    ↓

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Klipsch Audio Technologies article.
Article policies
This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:
To-do: edit · history · watch · refresh

Here are some tasks you can do:

    Contents

    [edit] Neutrality

    The amount of fanboyism that has been on this page is astonishing. (see history for details).

    Examples:

    4 november 2004 | Nuclear writes: Reputation has long had it that Klipsch speakers are the best speakers in the world.

    27 January 2005 | H4ze writes: One of Klipsch's most successful endeavours has been it's ProMedia line of high end computer speakers. The ProMedias impressed reviewers with their power and sound quality at a time when computer speakers were associated with anemic and lackluster sound.

    21 May 2005: 67.166.141.110 writes: It was one of the greatest speakers of its time and, even today, can hold its own against many newly designed high end speakers.

    09 Sep 2006: I purchased my Klipschorns in 1977 ($675US each). Best investment I've ever made. Plus....I've lived "inside" their dynamic sound for all these years.

    I myself have sometimes fallen into this, putting comments on the ProMedia's amplifier problems that had no place in Wikipedia.

    Toh has done a good job removing the tone introduced by 67.78.145.234, who used words like "staggering efficiency" or "amazing efficiency".

    But, as he/she says, the page "still needs cleanup to read less like audiophile ad copy".

    24.203.30.227

    I've tried to clean up the page, but I ended up making it shorter. Perhaps Vesther or some other audio-watching Wikipedians could help me neutrally expand this page.MetraB 03:39, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

    Shorter isn't necessarily a bad thing. I made some changes attempting to make it more neutral. Also fixed a couple factual problems, did some copyediting. It still needs work, could probably be fleshed out a little more here and there. What about at least a mention of the various wood-finish and grille options they used to provide? Rivertorch 09:50, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

    26 March 2006: I am employed by Klipsch at their Indianapolis HQ. I updated one thing: Mike Klipsch is not the company's president, Paul Jacobs is. Fred Klipsch is still the majority owner and is the Chairman of the Board.

    [edit] Pro speakers

    I reverted today's addition by an unknown user because it refers to a single model in the Klipsch Professional line, which otherwise isn't covered in the article, and because it had at least one factual error and was strangely worded. Would anyone care to have a go at writing a paragraph (or more) about Klipsch Professional speakers? Rivertorch 04:01, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

    [edit] It has been suggested that Klipschorn be merged into this article or section.

    Indeed, perhaps a better question might be, "Why should the Klipschorn be at all held out as being separate? Paul Klipsch (who this writer had the pleasure of knowing since 1954) considered this unitary cabinet array to represent the foundation product of his loudspeaker engineering, design and manufacturing philosophy. Peegee53 21:49, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

    Oh, usually duplicate articles like this get created when somebody doesn't search first to see if there is already an article on the topic. I'll probably merge it soon, but it's always polite and leads to less trouble to add the merge tags first, in case somebody feels strongly about it is is better to discuss first. GlassFET 22:33, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

    It seems to me that the Klipschorn article is a bit too lengthy and detailed to be successfully incorporated into the main Klipsch article. I'd also propose that it deserves to stand on its own, since it concerns a specific, famous product which has been manufactured for well over half a century (and is unique among audio products for that reason; nothing else even comes close). This isn't precisely comparable, but the principle is similar: would it make sense to merge the DC-10 article into the Boeing article? Rivertorch 19:58, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

    A better comparison would be whether the Quad ESL should have an article separate from Quad Electroacoustics. GlassFET 20:01, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
    Perhaps if enough were written about it, it should. At any rate, gee, thanks for considering my suggestion for all of 11 minutes before doing the merge. I don't feel strongly about it, but I thought I made two valid points, and I don't suppose there would have been any harm in seeing whether anyone else had anything to say. I will admit the results look acceptable, but I'm not persuaded the separate article wasn't better. Rivertorch 06:08, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

    [edit] Merge articles

    You are indeed stewardly, though Paul would cringe at the criterion of "polite"  :) Peegee53 22:48, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

    [edit] Mirage Speakers / Audio Products International

    Seems there used to be articles on wikipedia about Mirage and API but they have now gone away since Klipsch bought API. Even if Klipsch owns API, I think the histories of Mirage Speakers and Audio Products International are notable enough to still require their own articles, or at least the information in this article regarding Mirage/API could be expanded. Mirage has more than 25 years history of innovation and advances in speaker technology that deserves some kind of mention.

    76.186.91.224 (talk) 06:04, 20 December 2007 (UTC)