tsmalls

I am a dealer in Ga, and the RC-64 is a very natural sounding speaker, not really louder. If you listen to music in multichannel mode, and set your center to large, you might prefer the RC-7 due to it's larger dynamic range. If you have your speakers set to small, you probably won't notice any difference on the lower end. The RC64 is a much more natural sounding speaker than the RC-7 though. During movies, I've tried RC-7 and RF-7, RC-7 and RF83, RC64 and RF-7, the differences are slight.

JamesV It does come down to personal taste, but as long as i have been in this business, i have never heard anyone say that a Marantz doesn't match well with Klipsch, but what i have heard many times, is that Denon, and Yamaha accentuate the already "bright" Klipsch speakers. I do think that with the new reference line, i will almost not hear this any more. The top end has really been tamed, but still very articulate, crisp, and smooth.

Hey JamesV, I am a Klipsch dealer. In an ideal world, yes, you would put the same three speakers across the front, as DrWho mentioned, but in many cases, as you mentioned, it is not possible due to screen placement, tv, etc to put a large floorstander in the center. So if this is the case, your second best bet is to follow the recommended matching speakers list. As far as the rears go, you can do the largest ones in the recommended list your space can provide, but don't be concerned too much if your space can handle RF83s, and can only get RS42s, or an RS-10, that would be ok tonally, they have the same type of drivers (titanium dome). I happen to sell all the receivers you mentioned above that you were looking at. Any of those would be great choices. If you are new, and are not used to the Klipsch sound (you may have read about people saying that the klipsch are very bright speakers, and some may even say harsh at high volumes), the Yamaha, and Denon are brighter receivers than say the the Marantz and could accentuate this brightness, which is ok if your tastes so suit (Denon and Marantz are owned by the same company by the way), The Marantz, which is a warmer receiver and matches very well with the Klipsch speakers. Find a dealer in your area and listen to the Klipsch speakers on all of your choices to find which sound suits you best for your selected Klipsch speakers. Create your theater as a whole if at all possible, as different receiver/speaker combinations can make the speakers sound differently, and is very important. i.e. i wouldn't get RF-83s for a Denon AVR-1706, if you are going to crank it to high volumes, i would do a 3805 or better. Marantz uses Torroidal transformers starting at the SR8500 and above, which would do a great job with the 83s. The Reference Series, Heritage Series, and Synergy series are all different, and their are musical differences between them. You definitely want to get as high into a particular series as you can afford. That's my two cents.

I am a dealer in Ga, and tried that combo, all matching, and various other combos, i get that question daily in my stores for those wanting to upgrade some, but not all of their speakers. I also spoke with my Rep about it. It sounds fine, although the drivers differ in specification, they are the same type of drivers (titanium tweeters, cerametallic woofers, etc.) kind of like an RF-5 and RC-7 situation (different tweeter specs, but both titanium). Yes, matching would be ideal, but you should have no qualms about mixing them.

I'm not sure of your question, are you talking about mixing the RF-83s with the RC7 and RS7, or are you asking about a comparison between the two?

The RF-83s do come in cherry, i have them, i posted pictures of them on another thread. Here is the link http://forums.klipsch.com/forums/680045/ShowPost.aspx

We are in Stockbridge

With Grillz

Rear Ports

RF-83

Old and New

This is what Knife Edge Means

Klipsch Showroom

Binding Posts

I will post some pics tonight around 10pm EST. I personally have never heard clipping in my RF-7s either, but as a dealer of several speaker brands, I'm just telling you some of the complaints I have heard and read concerning the RF-7s. I personally own the RF-7 system in my home, and love it, with my only complaint (and many customers), is the speaker grill that is easily to break. Certainly, the RF-7s have a harsher sound than the new RF-83s, that will be apparent to anyone who listens to them. The RF-83 tweeters are smoother, cleaner, and more detailed than on the RF-7. I had approximately 50 customers listen today. We conducted a "poll" of them, and it was about a 60/40 split with the RF-83s taking the 60%. But i can say this, 95%+ of all 50+ people loved the tweeter, but many loud listeners added at it was too subtle for them, and preferred the greater presence of the RF-7.

I can't answer that question, there are clearly situations when one would prefer the RF-7, and there are situations where one would prefer the RF-83. Overall, the RF-83 is a better speaker. People who listen to them will like them, and have very few complaints, as opposed to the people who originally listened to the RF-7, and had some minor complaints about clipping, rolloff, grill, feet, etc. None of those problems exist on the RF-83. I'll tell you what sounded absolutely amazing, playing both the RF-7s and the RF-83s at the same time, now that was a beautiful blend.

IMO, the midrange and midbass are noticeably more "pronounced" on the RF-7. Specwise, the RF-83 does go deeper, not that noticeable though since the 10s on the RF-7 have better extension. You can definitely play the RF-83 louder without the vocals becoming harsh, that's where the improved tweeter comes in, at high volumes, it stays smooth. Also, at high volumes, the 8s maintain "control", and you still can make out all the details with all those soundwaves flying around. The RF-7 was good at this too, but the 8s are a noticeably more controlled at higher volumes. At lower volumes, the RF-7 have a little more presence. All in all, its a tough call, if i had my choice, i would have upgraded the tweeter (this tweeter sounds amazingly sweet, maybe made it 1.75"), kept the 8" horn, and kept the 10s. But those who like more controlled balanced music, will love the arrangement of the RF-83. Now, keep in mind, i just got these, so i am still breaking them in. Overall, I think that Klipsch addressed all the complaints that they had regarding the RF-7, and came up with the RF-83. This is definitely an overall improved speaker, but some will definitely prefer the tad bit more colorful RF-7s.

I am a dealer in GA, and received my RF-83s today. I have been "a/b" ing the speakers all day since i cracked open the boxes at 9am this morning. They definitely sound different. I would certainly say that the RF-83s sound more natural than the rf-7s. The tweeter is an obvious improvement over the rf-7s tweeter. I mean dramatic, it's much tamer, and has a much smoother sound, no clipping. Now, that being said, the horn and tweeter, being smaller on the RF-83, does not, in my opinion, do as well of a job on the mid-upper range vocal extension as the RF-7. To me, the RF-7 is much louder, and more front stage focused than the rf-83 (one con to a deep cabinet is staging, it's a long way from the speaker to the rear port), on pure vocal tracks, the vocals "breathe" more out of the RF-7s, but that comes at the price of clipping and minor distortion at high volume levels. The RF-83s are more balanced, not overbearing, and subtle, and you can continue to crank the volume, and they stay balanced. Those who like loud, rock, hip-hop, or even pure vocal music, might find it hard to depart from the RF-7 to the RF-83. Those who listen to softer, smoother, more detailed music will certainly appreciate the subtle, but forceful (the three eights can slam!!!) and more natural tones of the rf-83.

Will do, Both sets are running on a Marantz 8500, currently RF-7s speakers a, RF-83s speakers b.

"knife-edge" back means that the back connects to the sides like the sides connect to the top (one continuous box). It "continues" around vs. the back being a panel attached to the box like the rf-7.

I have been "a/b" ing the speakers all day since i cracked open the boxes at 9am this morning. They definitely sound different. I would certainly say that the RF-83s sound more natural than the rf-7s. The tweeter is an obvious improvement over the rf-7s tweeter. I mean dramatic, it's much tamer, and has a much smoother sound. Now, that being said, the horn and tweeter, being smaller on the RF-83, does not, in my opinion, do as well of a job on the mid-upper range vocal extension. To me, the RF-7 is much louder, and more front stage focused than the rf-83 (one con to a deep cabinet is staging, it's a long way from the speaker to the rear port). Those who like loud, rock, hip-hop, or even pure vocal music, might find it hard to depart from the RF-7 to the RF-83. Those who listen to softer, smoother, more detailed music will certainly appreciate the subtle, but forceful (the three eights can slam!!!) and more natural tones of the rf-83.

"knife-edge" back means that the back connects to the sides like the sides connect to the top (one continuous box). It "continues" around vs. the back being a panel attached to the box like the rf-7. I am a dealer in GA, and i received my RF-83s today.