UFObuster

Well said: 'the Music is the Magic'. It's all about content. The best gear in the world won't help you hear Glen Gould's 1955 Goldberg Variations much better than a good 'basic' home stereo system allowing that the speakers need to be average or better. I buy used for stuff that may have a short shelf life...ie, my DVD/CD player is a used Denon 3910. I 'need' good CD/SACD/DVD-A playback and 'want' a decent video player. Sooner or later, this product sector presents other interesting alternatives and I'm ready to move on. I found Rotel amps to be well matched to my RF-7/RC-7/RF-5/RC-35 speakers....so, this is a 'keeper', I bought new. Like "oldbuckster", I'm careful about over-spending or getting too exotic because the music content is so varied and much is limited. I find it ironic that in the home-theater products, we're driven by advertising to buy "hi-def" audio products, ie, new formats, to better hear bullets whizzing, cars crashing, explosions detonating, ping-pong sound effects, etc. thru high-priced and exotic equipment while some of the best recorded music material is still only available in vinyl and on CDs. BTW, I'm still not yet convinced that the expense of producing vinyl playback justifies the expense. I readily embrace the digital formats...how could you not...just to hear something like Von Karajan's Beethoven DVDs or see his production of Don Giovanni. I have Diana Krall in at least 4 different digital formats and ALL are delightful. My CD jazz and classical collection continues to delight me with their fidelity on some good, slightly-above-average new and used solid-state equipment. I'm with you 'buckster....it's not about the equipment. The content is everything.

Agreed, recording quality is all over the map. That's what I was talking about in referring to content. Looking over your equipment profile, like me, you're set-up already for good 2 channel with the separate RB-1080. I used a Yammie RX-V2600 for a while as a pre-pro before getting the Rotel RSP-1068. When you get a separate pre-pro with good analog 2-channel, you're set great. I use the 1080 exclusively for the RF-7 and power the rest with the RMB-1075. I toyed with the idea of adding a Jolida CD player, but went instead with the Denon 3910 used (at a great price) because it plays CDs very well and gave me back some of the "bells and whistles" that I missed from the Yammie. It up-converts video as well or better than the Oppos. I'm firmly in the "wait and see" catagory regarding "hi-def" players. As I went at length in my previous post about the so-called "hi-def" music scene, I'll just simply say we already have "hi-def audio" in current advanced formats thru analog inputs (and the DTS 96/24 format still remains impressive and under-used by the recording industry). Another reason to wait and see what, if any, music content follows. I won't spend mega-bucks on upgrades just to hear better sound effects in movies. You have a great set-up now. Get the most of it.

For some info on the Rotel RSP-1068 vs the newer 1069, check the "club Rotel" forum at http://www.htguide.com/forum/forumdisplay.php4?f=20 As I've read and understood the products: the players decode; you can get audio in thru the HDMI cable OR thru analog just like you would for DVD-A or SACD. The processor in the 1068 will do fine for this. Problems come up if you have an HD or Blu-ray player and a DVD-A/SACD player both needing the analog inputs...thus requiring some kind of switching. The leading edge is in the receivers of large-scale manufacturers at this point. Small producers such as Rotel and more high-end companies will lag...BUT, this is not much of a problem because the "content" is a long way off. Keeping in mind that Rotel and higher end producers are aimed at a sophisticated audio market, the current "hi-def" sound products (DTS 96/24, DVD-A analog, and SACD) are really going to sound as good as anything on the horizon. The movie industry is promoting the current hi-def video products but the sound tracks are still a little lacking. Let's be honest about your intent. Do you want to hear good music reproduction or is bus crashing, sword clashing, bullet tracing, bomb detonation, etc. your bag? It will be a long time before you will hear the best of the classics (and I include pop classics) available in any better sound formats than what are available. And IMHO, the music industry will continue to include a panoply of formats to enlarge their market share. And we haven't even mentioned that 2-channel music in CD and vinyl is still impressive if you're looking for "true" reproduction using some high quality equipment. The "hi-def" sound of the HD formats is still a bit of a marketing buzz because we've actually already got it. I own the Rotel RSP-1068 and still find it hard to find content that measures up to its potential....and that means the same for higher-end audio products. Most of the hard-ware schemes focus on an impressive list of "bells-and-whistles" that don't improve sound quality. Wait and see. Video improvement is a pretty good thing...but even there, the market is showing up with stuff like the Oppo products that are beginning to even marginalize HD video unless you've got a HUGH screen where you can actually see a difference. Be careful and don't just buy bragging rights. Bottom line. Determine if you are a hardware lover or a content lover. I know people who own $$thousands in camera equipment and can't take a picture. They love it. Do you like music? Then buy hardware that complements content and enjoy it. Last note: the 1069 may have some actual audio improvements over the 1068 in it that may make it worth looking at...but it's still a lot more expensive. I'll be waiting for "next-gen" to justify the expense.

I can hardly stand to hear Eva Cassidy anymore.....I get into such a rage over her loss at such a young age. Think of what we all missed.

Yep, I don't go to the corners with my RF-7s. 2+ feet out from the wall, toed in slightly as Fish wrote sounds good. I actually had a friend of mine help me build some ball-bearing rollers to replace the feet on my 7s. I change placement a bit during playback according to the source. When you get ready to power up, read up a bit about amplification for the 7s. I had a Yamaha RX-V2600 receiver with 130wpc, etc. that just didn't work. Going to a separate 200wpc 2 channel amp (Rotel, in my case...but others would work) seems to be the way to go. As good as they are, the 7s are very un-even in impedance across the spectrum dipping under 3 ohms at times. More detail available in other threads, but the usual line is to power them up on a separate amp. Use a receiver for a pre-pro and to power up the other channels....or go all separates depending on budget. Good luck and have fun listening!

It is interesting to note what users expect from surround speakers or shall I say "rear" speakers when playing back multi-channel music. In a previous life, I was working with Laurie Fincham, Chief Scientist at THX on certification issues for the Klipsch ProMedia V.2-400. Multi-channel DVD's were just getting big for the consumers via free DVD players in computers. DVD Audio was just an idea on the horizon for the average consumer but it intrigued me. THX is very secretive about their specifications for products and understandably so. It is their lifeblood for income. I was talking with Laurie Fincham about THX specifications for surround speakers when we got onto the topic of rear speakers for music, i.e. DVD Audio. We debated as to whether a mono-pole, bi-pole or di-pole speaker was the best solution for music source in the rear sound stage. The question that both of us had come to was...what did the mix engineer have in mind for sound stage imaging in the master mix? Was the listener to be in the middle of the band, or in the conductor's position? Could he or she be in the drummer's audible perception or in the audience of some premier performance hall with great acoustics? Any one of these answers could be correct depending on how we like to hear our music and / or what instrument we see ourselves playing. To be in the audience meant that a standard multi-pole speaker that was full range would be just fine if the master mix had reverb and fans clapping as the only signal going to the rear speakers. If you expected an instrument or especially a voice to come from one of these speakers you were in trouble. You didn't want the voice smearing across the rear walls of your listening area with out any direct signal coming from the speaker unless you were trying to imitate the performer singing away from you. I am a big fan of multiple speakers in the rear and above you for movie play back and any reverb effects. According to Thomas Holman, 20.2 is the limit before diminishing returns. I am only at 10.2 because I have run out of amplifiers and practical places to hang rear speakers. Now that we think about DVD Audio one could argue that you need a separate room or at least speaker designs for the rear, which is good for me because I design speakers. I just need to find an amplifier engineer to swap with....[8-|] Do you think Klipsch needs to make a DVD AUDIO SPEAKER? Keep Thumpin... Good info....but like you said....more speakers/amps gets more and more expensive and becomes more and more unfriendly to the "living" part of the living-room. I doubt I'll ever see a dedicated HT room in my place. So it requires this question: If recording engineers of the glory days of stereo could produce great sound fields with just two front channels, why are many multi-channel recordings so lame in use of just a 5.1 media? In my opinion, we should have our "cake-n-eat-it" too. It seems reasonable to expect that the use of 5 monopole speakers of your choice with a good sub should be able to do just about any playback representation such as 'live' performance in concert halls to 'in-studio' surround from any perspective. Why can't recording engineers use the same techniques for ALL discrete channels giving great detail in staging or just ambient sound depending on the recording's objectives? As I ask that question, it's partly answered in that there are some really great DVD-A,DVD-video recordings out there many of which are named in this thread (and SACD). I guess I'm impatient for more choice and for better use of the sound and video system potential that I already own. IMHO, playback technology and available equipment is way ahead of the source material.

If your system is mainly for movie watching, then cross-overs, musicality, etc. are secondary....go less expensive. HSU is highly regarded for the price. If you really decide that critical music listening is a part of your experience, then stay in the RSW line....out-side of Klipsch, I would look at SVS and Velodyne.

Regarding multi-channel....I agree, Carl......I use a pair of RF-5 speakers for surrounds. There are a number of DVD-a and concert DVDs that use the surround channels well. Clapton's DVD Sessions for Robert J. comes to mind...and also the Deutsche Grammophone DVD recordings of Von Karajan's Beethoven series.....virtual action movies of symphonic music. How could you not listen to Steely Dan's DVD "Two Against Nature" without tower surrounds, although, all of those horns coming from behind and a little left are weird. Lest I forget, some good SACDs....Elton John comes to mind. BTW, I use a left-over RC-35 (Klipsch-center channel speaker) in my system as a center-back channel, too. It smooths out the rear channel response a lot in a big room and helps the surrounds not "ping-pong". I think recording engineers have a way to go to get surround channels right. Disclaimer: if your HT needs are to listen to bus, car, plane, train crashes and battle/action all night long...the previous comments will make no sense.

This being the more 'esoteric' forum for music listening...what is your most favorite transport device for everyday listening? I know that there are a lot of turntables out there. I'm more interested in finding out what this group uses for CD, SACD, DVD, etc. Are you locked into sophisticated pieces like the Jolida tube models or high priced mods of Denon, etc. Do you use universal players? Separates? Multi-disc units? In short, not what you want to have or bragg about but what do you really consistently use and a few lines why. Thanks

Have heard only a little of these two artists. What album titles from these two would you think are "best of" those available. Not an either/or....I'm interested in getting one CD of each artist: what's your recommendation for each of their best? thanks

Thanks zuzu....you have a few years on me but not that many! So, it will make a difference....shopping I go....I've heard references to Cat Cable before, maybe I'll start there. BTW, never had the big Heritage speakers, opted for the RF-7, also due to room limitations. Thanks, again

Same vein but more specific question: The interconnect from output devices, ie, DVD, CD, Tuner to th Pre-amp/processor: how important is this? I've recently installed a new pre/pro (Rotel) with the stock cables provided. I've been using BlueJeans stuff from my processor to amps for a while. Do I need the same quality (or better) to connect the output devices to the pre/pro? Especially, regarding analog 2 channel for CD and multi-channel analog for SACD and DVD-A (obviously not digital toslink connections). What's the dope on that? thanks...

Ditto the RB-1080 (rotel 2x200wpc) for the RF-7. I like 200wpc due to impedance issues with the RF-7. Only experience I have is with SS...others get good results with lower powered tubes. I love this combo; other quality amps would certainly do (no experience with NAD). This is my "2-channel" set-up. I complete the HT system with an additional RMB-1075 (5x130wpc) for the center, surround, and one back channel making a 6.1 using a Klipsch RC-35 for a "center-back". The Rotels are affordable, easily found used, and keep value. Sometimes, dealers will discount if you ask. I got my 1080 brand new for $850...not much more than a used one. BTW, I may have misunderstood. Are you looking for just a receiver? Have you already planned for a pre/pro? Sometimes, receivers with high-power ratings still don't do well with the RF-7. I gave up a perfectly good Yamaha RX-V2600 with 130wpc in favor of the Rotel and pre/pro. The Yammi was not even close to what the separate Rotel does. This is obvious by virtue of extra power and power supples etc. But you will have a significant extra expense for the pre/pro. However, once again, I haven't ever auditioned a dedicated 2 channel receiver. It might be just right.

Not so true.... I can think of three movies off the top of my head that are in 6.1 dts es discrete and they are the Lord of the Rings movies in their extended versions. I am sure there are more but definitely not a lot more. Right about that and maybe more..... But the big (and only) thing is....there is just no content to justify this. Jeez.....is anyone suggesting spending mega $$ with muti-channel amps, surround processors, transport devices just to hear SOUND EFFECTS in slightly more DETAIL. Come...ON.... Breaking my brains and my bank account to get a multi-channel rig is ONLY justified if I could really hear best conceived and executed music....So far, only in 5.1 or SACD/DVD-A that I know of. Why do you think the 2-channel music forum is so popular? $$ compete for best sound products. Multi-channel is still not clicking on all cylinders (channels)....hey, but maybe I'm really wrong....are you guys really into surround shoot-outs?..medieval wars?...bus crashes?.... bodies ripping?... crickets chirping?...adolescent gaming? ...and when do you stop spending to make sure that 4, no 6, no maybe 8 people can sit in the HT room and hear all of these multitudinous sound effects equally well....is there some ego thing here? I'm invested in both...but I haven't heard anything yet to trump good 2 channel........music.....some DTS concert DVDs...and a smattering of SACD/DVD-A ......keep 'Bored of the Rings' (sic), etc for "Home-theater in a Box"....let's discuss good sound, please.

I agree. That said, there may be instances where an extra back channel can help. I use one now, but I consider it a special case. My "common" room is of normal width but very deep to include a dining area. My system has forever been 5.1 but when I did some upgrades I ended up with some "extras". So, my recommendations are these:1) Improve 5.1 as far as you can. 2) If the room is large or long...maybe consider 7.1 if you already have the back channel amplification anyway. Most of us already have it or plan for upgrades that could include an extra one or two channels. 3) I'm biased to music and can't see spending $$ to just get more sound effects from a movie placed behind me even for an accurate "theater experience". I just don't think it computes from what I've heard. 5.1 works just fine. Musical enhancement is another story. 4) To improve the musical quality of a 5.1 system in a large or long room, consider using another center channel speaker in back. Two reasons: a. the back channels in 7.1 are mono anyway, and b. keeping musical quality high suggests using a good full-range speaker back there. Even if the recording is 5.1, most processors will give you a mono-composite of the surround tracks that are really helpful if you have a large space to fill behind you. Use your $$ for one good full range speaker...especially another center speaker. Placement issues are easier, one wire, and viola...6.1.

If Pink Floyd is in your thoughts, then "In the Flesh" by Roger Water's has to be near the top of your list. I also have Pulse but I really prefer Water's own versions of the PF material. The musicians on this DVD are just phenom. The sound is practically all two channel music with surrounds used mostly for sound effects and depth. This is a 'tour de force' by Water's with a finely concieved, well rehearsed, and well recorded disc. You will LOVE it if you like PF.

"the degree to which that illusion surpasses their personal threshold to be pleasantly fooled"....nails it. I've always maintained that evaluating sound reproduction is a skill and that some are naturally gifted and some acquire it by hard work. It's like being an art critic or a wine taster. Either may not be an artist or a vintner but they acquire sufficient skills to stand on the edge and to appreciate and define it. That leaves the lessor skilled of us not just contemplating the quality of the product but also wondering about the skills of the reviewer (or salesman). To further the art analogy, if you're contemplating buying a Degas and have to ask if it's "real", then you have no business buying it. You should have the skill to know it. Listening to sound reproduction brings everyone up to their personal thresholds....but then there is still the confounding issue of how well the source material is presented. That is an entirely separate and equal part of the picture. I think that part of the Klipsch 'magic' is a yeoman style technology that grinds away a lot of the chaff and presents sound pictures at least equal to what the recording industry can produce. I think that it's represented well in the cost of the product and that mega-expensive or expansive claims to the contrary are venturing into the lands of unfounded and imaginary claims to reproducing what is not there in the first place. Bottom line, I'm not an 'audiophile' but I have human ears and have heard real live music and have a good recollection of how it sounds. I know that artificial reproduction of it is never 'true' but my own goal is to approximate it within the bounds of reason while trying to understand the limitations of the medium....ie, trying not to buy a fake Degas!

Agreed with one exception..."if you don't really care that much then $800 rack equipment will do"....In fact, for most (including me) we do care and milk all the quality we can get...but let's face it...you have budget ceilings...other interests...etc. And finally, there's the WALL: what are you actually using it for? I'm still refining my ability to HEAR the difference in two versions of a Vivaldi concerto.....or the difference in a Bosendorfer vs a Steinway......and the quality of "rack equipment" is not factoring too much into this equation at the moment when applied to the source material, lest we forget why we buy this stuff anyway. But I really appreciate your question because I struggled with it and attempted to give credence to use of "mid-fi" solid-state. As always, I really enjoy the responses.

Try Peter Gabriel's "Play-The Videos". It has a DTS 96/24 option that is better than anything I've heard in multi-track. I know this is 2-channel...but you asked for HUGE dynamic range....try it, you'll like it [H]

In a two quick words.....It's hogwash. Definitely take Craig's word on this. He's certainly an expert, as I suspect he's washed more than his share of hogs living up there in Burton. [] Seriously, the first time I heard my RF-7's on any amp south of 100 WPC, they were being driven by a pair of Craig's VRD's, and they sounded SUPERB! I was there. Actually it was at my house. It was the best I ever heard RF-7s and I believe they were with the stock crossover networks. I think I can simplify this and give a good answer to the question: Here's the deal....I'm your ordinary guy shopping for new speakers. I already have a nice receiver with a "kick ***" HT system (as compared to HT out of a box....like I actually HAVE a receiver). So, I'm all over the 'net and in the "big box" stores looking for a deal.....venture out to a "boutique" and hear some reference models.....OK..this is good, this is good.... So now I'm home....bragging to friends that I've got these "boutique" speakers (RF-7) set up....and WOW...listen to this. Sad thing is.....they aren't as good as I thought....maybe should have stuck to the CircuitCity/Best-Buy deals for the money.....I know my set-up is clean, healthy, and POWERful, ie, I have the Yamaha/Onkyo/Denon.....latest 27x,38x,8x something receiver.....and I read that Klipsch is so efficient=I don't know what's wrong...I just know it LOOKs cool but..... I'm a college guy....no head-banger is going to have a better system than mine!!....so I start researching.....(actually, this is some what auto-biographical) ......start scratching beneath the surface and learn a little about amplification. Now, look guys....don't even suggest tubes to me...its alien. But I DO find out about getting "quality" amperage....who-the-hell knows what that means.....went back to the same store and for about only $800 turned my (now expensive) sound system into a monster!! Happened to be 200watts of Rotel.....could have been anything else probably, as long as it made up for the output sag from the receiver. Bottom line, the fall-out reported on all the web sites leans heavily toward SS because that's what we all grew up with, we can buy it down the street, plug it in, and use it. You can search for the "quality amps" high and low....I don't doubt much that I've read in this forum...the best is usually the best. But for the average guy...who's not going to get "Dean-mods"...or learn about tubes....this IS the solution. And its NOT a bad solution. In fact it's a fantastic solution that so many RF-7 owners finally "get-it" and find some Watts......and finally get to enjoy a really good speaker.

Maybe my original post was a little too open-ended. If you've owned or had experience with the higher end reference line, specifically the RF-7, then how would you characterize their sound compared to what you have or know about in any of the heritage line. Any comments at all....imaging, naturalness, accuracy, low volume sound, etc....I know this is subjective, but this is a forum where I might actually trust some subjective statements and would be interested in hearing about them. Keep in mind...I've never even SEEN another Klipsch speaker except the ones I own....have at it, thanks.

This question is more for my info than anything so that I might know more about the Heritage group. I'm living happy with a pair of RF-7 for 2 channel & fronts for HT (dual system including RF-5 used as surround). These two models of Klipsch are what I'm familiar with. Never heard any of the heritage line. So, help me put this in perspective: How/where would the RF-7 line-up in comparison with the array of heritage models. For instance, if I saw a deal somewhere, what would I need in order to get any significant improvement over what I hear at home now. This is hypothetical...but don't rule anything out....even though I don't really have "corners" free. (16x35 room) Thanks...will enjoy hearing your opinions.

I recently did a similar upgrade. I chose the RB-1080 because I have a 'reasonable' local dealer who worked with me on price and let me try it out. I was using a Yamaha RX-V2600 for 5 channels including RF-7 front, RC-7 center, and RF-5 for surround. Soundwise, was a little thin (the RF-7 were added last) and I wasn't happy that they weren't sounding much better that the RF-5 which I previously had up front. I am mostly music, concert DVD, a lot of 2 channel, a little SACD. OK, I got the RB-1080 about 3 mo ago and amped the RF-7 fronts and left the center/surrounds on the Yammi. The difference was impressive. I was not able to audition anything else except the Rotel 1095 (5 channel x200), and a Classe (2x200)..$$$$...amp with same speakers in shop. I could not hear an audible difference. At home, it seemed better than in the shop. I researched this pretty well, here, on-line, locally, etc. There is a lot of good opinion that 200 watts is enough for the RF-7. I don't know that brand will matter that much but check out all you can...."Arky" has good ideas about some pro-amps, too. Addendum: since your situation is nearly identical to mine, I'll go ahead and mention: I was so impressed with the improvment over the Yammi, that I immediately decided to trade up to the RB-1095 (5 channel x 200)...but after more advice here...and more shopping....I became convinced that keeping the RB-1080 dedicated to 2 channel was ideal for the RF-7. So I got the Rotel RB-1075 (5x120) to do center/surrounds & added a center/back. Now this really cooks for 2 channel....and then throw in the second amp for concert DVD and movies....the set-up looks cool, works great, and didn't really cost but a few dollars more than the 1095 by itself. In retrospect, the Yammi was good after it got to do just 3 speakers and I could have lived with that arrangement for a while...but I just couldn't put-off going all separates after that first experience with the 1080. You will really like getting dedicated power for the RF-7. Good luck on your choice

Might be room treatment issue....getting some standing wave thing happening neutering some frequencies of the RF-7? I'm not an engineer and can offer nothing there....but ask around. Unfortunately, and not to open a "can of worms", the RF-7 is very finicky about power. I looked up your HK receiver...and it may not be doing the job, even though the watts/per channel/driven looks OK on paper....it may need some help. A lot of threads on this. 1) best advice looks at room treatment first. 2) next best advice looks at the "heavy lifting".....lot's of RF-7 owners end up with 200wpc in pro-amps like QSC, Crown or audio stuff like Rotel, Outlaw, Emotiva (and many more expensive options). Check this out, too Basically, if the RF-7 doesn't sound right....changing speakers may NOT be your solution. There is likely something else a problem. On the other hand, changing speakers may be the solution if you find a set that fits the components you already own. My biased opinion is to work with the RF-7 because there is so much potential there. Changing speakers may get you a short-term satisfaction in sound but losing out on the long-term gain of getting the RF-7 to play to their potential.

In fact, a good first step might be to get quality 2 channel power...the rest to the receiver. Many people (me included) start on our way to separates this way. Don't worry about balance..you'll take care of this in set-up with either "auto" in the receiver's preamp section or get yourself a little radio shack SPL meter. I don't have anything against QSC...well spoken of here.....Also, check AudioGon for a used Rotel RB-1080....great 2 channel amp. My solution started with the RB-1080 added to my receiver.....immediate 2 channel improvement with my RF-7....later added the RMB-1075 to get HT up to par....with both together giving 7 channel while isolating the front 2 for best 2 channel playback. Last step...changed the receiver for a pre-pro. Make a plan...don't have to buy it all at once....just map it out and before long you'll have it.