Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

dbossa's Achievements


Member (2/9)



  1. My RF-7's sounded a bit bright/harsh for my taste and Dean has my crossovers as we speak. I'll be getting them back by the end of this week and will post my results.
  2. Note from Lonnie, the general manager at Emotiva: "In regards to your system, I would suggest using two of the XPA-5 amps and bi-amping your main speakers and center channel. The XPA-2 has a lot of power but due to the higher rails within the unit the noise floor is slightly higher than on the XPA-5. It isn’t much but enough that when connected to Klipsch horns you can hear a hiss, so the XPA-5 is a far better choice for you." Maybe I'll go that route instead.... would be hard to argue with him ;o)
  3. I'm waiting to get my upgraded crossovers back from DeanG... will run them like that a bit just to see what difference it made, and will get the Emotiva a little later on. I'll post back with my findings []
  4. Well, after considerably more reading tonight, I think I'm going to go with an Emotiva XPA-2 to power my mains and continue to run my center and surrounds through my receiver for now until later on where I'll add an XPA-5, run it as a 3 channel amp at 250 WPC to power the center and surrounds. Best bang for the buck I was able to findand they also won the Audioholics 2008 Product of the Year...... can't deny that! Thanks for all your input guys!
  5. The 30 watt amp I run on the highs is not a tube. I wish it was. It's a Harmon Kardon 430 vintage receiver that I paid $100.00 for. Some say it has "tube qualities" but I don't hear it.After all the amps etc. I've experimented with RF-7's.......It seems that a lot of power to the bass and minimal "good" power to the highs with the ability to adjust the gain controls on both just works. Some CF owners have claimed the same thing. And by the way.....yes, I did run the Crown on the whole speaker and the HF's were terrible. Does a great job on the bass, though. Eeesh.... I was hoping to get just the one amp that would power the whole speaker... and not sound like crap [*-)] For now I'd probably go something like an Emotiva XPA-5 or a Rotel RMB-1095.... unless someone can prove to me that isn't the way to go...
  6. Ah! Good to know! Did you used to run just this amp at one point for the whole speaker and add the tube amp later on? Did you really see that much of a difference with the tube amp?
  7. I found an excellent amp by Crown, the xTi 2000 with is 475 watt at 8 ohms, 800 watts at 4 ohms, and 1000 watts at 2 ohms and the amp is reasonably inexpensive for what you're getting. Only thing is that it is a pro amp which means noisy fans. Other than the fan issue I'm wondering if there is any other difference between a pro amp and an HT/audio amp.....
  8. There are two schools of thought here. One says that my speakers are so sensitive that I could drive them with a 2 watt tube amp and they would be fine. However, I've also read tons of posts from people who used to drive them with a receiver (like me), upgraded to a high current amp, and that the results were nothing short of spectacular.... that they simply could not believe the difference it made. Currently, I find the sound from my RF-7's to be 'OK'. I just sent in my crossovers to DeanG. The next step will be to start using an amp. I just don't want to spend money on one only to realize that another model would have been much better suited for my system.
  9. Hi Dean! Looking forward to hearing my RF-7's once I get my crossovers back from you ;o)
  10. I can't say I fully understand all of the technicalities... but read that even if you have an amp with very high WPC it doesn't necessarily mean that it is stable down to the low ohms like that. I read that the Klipsch speakers can really put a load on an amp that isn't stable that low. I originally wanted to get an Emotiva XPA-5 or a Rotel RMB-1095, which I'm sure that either could easily do the job. It's just when I started reading about the ohms thing, and neither amp mentions anything about less than 8 ohms, I wondered if I shouldn't keep that as a variable when choosing my amp....
  11. Hi guys, With the 2.7 ohm dip of the RF-7, I figure I'd be best getting an amp that is stable down to 2 ohms. Can any of you point me in the right direction? I was figuring something with at least 200 watts per channel at 8 ohms. Probably a 2 channel amp but I might be willing to go as high as a 5 channel amp since I'm doing 5.1.. or maybe just add a 3 channel amp later on. Anyway, some makes and models would be really appreciated!
  12. OK, I have much better results now even though I haven't added any room treatments (which I'll do eventually). This is what I did: REW gives a target of 75db. I noticed that performing sweeps using a target of 75db and then doing more at 85db gave completely different results. Since I tend to listen to music and movies at louder levels I used a target of 85db instead. Using the sweep is not effective in a room that has poor acoustics for bass. What I did I took manual readings using REW and let each frequency sit for a good two seconds to allow the bass to reverberate through the room which would usually cause certain frequencies to rise a lot higher vs doing the sweep. Once I had my graph I made my adjustments and made sure that my bass would roll off after a certain frequency just like the curve that REW displays. So, I essentially followed the same curve only 10db's above it. Also, I did not add any gains of any kind to increase the nulls. I simply got rid of the peaks. The bass is now far more balanced though a touch lacking in some areas. However, I find that it sounds much better than having too much bass reverberating through the room. In some places where I used to reduce a peak by 5db when using the sweep, I had to reduce the same frequency by 15db because I allowed it to resonate throughout the room. This became a good band-aid until I get some bass traps.
  13. I believe that, according to what he said, that would be fine. It's boosting the nulls that can make the sound come out sounding a touch unnatural. I think that could be one of the culprits behind my problems as I boosted a few nulls. I also noticed that the volume affects my graph. Setting the volume to 75db and then setting the volume to 85db gives completely different graphs. Seeing as how I tend to listen to louder levels when using my sub, I wonder if I should be taking measurements at louder levels since they are more realistic vs the suggested 75db?
  14. Well you're never going to get it figured out trying to use any form of EQ... The problem is that the bass issues in your room exist in the time-domain (reflections and all of the standing waves and all of the superposition happen because the sound takes time to bounce around the room). An EQ is a frequency-domain device and does not correct time-domain issues. If you're interested, I can point you towards some time-domain solutions. If not, well I hope you enjoy beating your head against the wall [] Yes, please do, by all means. I was just trying to get the best end result with what I already had vs spending more money [:$]
  15. The meter itself wasn't calibrated. I simply loaded the meter's calibration file in REW which should give the same end result. I just noticed that the Mic Cal graph shows most of it's frequencies below the target graph. I would imagine that this is because the RS meter isn't sensitive enough at lower levels which would mean that it detects 20Hz at 62db vs 75db (as an example). So I figured that my target should be the line that corresponds to the Mic Cal line. Hmm, I never realized how the mic cal lin worked and if it does or not compensate, if I have time I will research it. You see, that's what my question is. You'll notice that the 'target' line eventually evens out and the 'mic cal' line also evens out. I THINK you're supposed to take the mic cal line and slide it up until each of the two lines is level with each other. I THINK you're supposed to then use the mic cal line INSTEAD of the target line and set your filters so that your reading matches your mic cal line... I THINK Please please please.... someone... anyone... correct me if I'm wrong here because I'm not entirely sure.
  • Create New...