Youthman
-
Posts
15623 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
24
Content Type
Forums
Events
Gallery
Posts posted by Youthman
-
-
No worries. I removed the duplicate thread.
-
1
-
-
Here is an audio demo comparing the Klipsch RF-7 III vs RF-7 II vs RF-7.
-
6
-
-
I agree @burninator. I like the front veneer on the Black RF-7 II but never liked it on the Cherry RF-7 II because to me, the cherry front conflicted with the copper woofers. The black front of the RF-7 III really makes the copper woofers stand out. Copper and Black look soooo sweet together!
-
She texted me several weeks later saying I could have them and I said, "No thank you".
-
1
-
-
Oh mercy. I have seen worse. Take a look at this thread I posted awhile back. Rat Poop all inside the Khorns. No thank you!
-
1
-
-
On 2/15/2018 at 7:37 AM, Born2RockU said:
I used these white Furniture pads ! ...and just love them.
They certainly assist with scooting these RF-7iii speakers with ease, across my new Granite floor.
We ended up doing the same thing and it works out much better on my hardwood floors.
-
1
-
-
On 10/6/2017 at 12:11 AM, aperfectcircle said:
How did the Forte III compare to the RF-7 II at the low end?
It didn't....at least in my room. For my room and the music that I listen to and the fact that I am not using a sub in my 2ch setup, the RF-7 II with Deang was the clear winner. Midrange was a bit better on the Forte III but not enough to make up for the differences I heard in the RF-7 II. Stock crossovers might have had a different outcome.
-
I'm definitely a fan of wide dispersion for side surrounds. Surround backs can go either way. Just my opinion.
-
1
-
1
-
-
-
12 minutes ago, Ceptorman said:
Your RF62s would work as surrounds.
Absolutely. Some guys also prefer to use floorstanding speakers for surrounds. Again, available space, budget and preference all play a part in what works best for your room.
-
21 minutes ago, whostorm05 said:
Thank you. Would I use the same model for both side surround and rear surround? Two total pairs of RS-62 II's?
I use (4) RS-62 II for side and back surrounds. Some guys like to use wide dispersion (RS-52 II, RS-62II etc) for side surrounds and then use direct radiating for back surrounds (RB-61 II, RB-81 II etc) for surround back. Merely preference on which you prefer. You can see in the video below how I have my surrounds setup.
-
1
-
-
The matching surrounds for the RF-7 II is the RS-62 II.
-
2
-
-
Correct...the RC-64 II matches the RF-7 II.
-
Another fantastic score @WFP! I love hearing stories like these.
-
1
-
-
17 hours ago, Ho2op3s said:
Thanks a lot for your help!!
I have added the photos to your post above.
-
If I was swimming and saw a gator, you might just see me run on water. Haha.
-
And that's how you do it folks. Nice score bro!
-
1
-
-
7 hours ago, ACV92 said:
Well, if I get a pair I'll have to try both scenarios. Looking forward to it.
That's the best thing to do. You really have nothing to lose except for time.
7 hours ago, ACV92 said:Nice room by the way.
Thank you kindly.
-
3 hours ago, CHASLS2 said:
They won't fit in my Vette.
So rent a $15 Uhaul or get a friend to help you.
-
1
-
-
43 minutes ago, Grizzog said:
If everyone waits a year or two to buy used...there will be no used speakers to have. Someone has to buy new to keep Klipsch going - they don't make any money from used.
No worries Grizzog. There will always be guys that buy new, there will always be guys that buy used, and there are many of us that buy both. This happens with automobiles, homes and everything else we buy.
-
2
-
-
3 minutes ago, ACV92 said:
I feel confident in getting myself a pair of II's for sure. Will fit my budget better than the III's.
The RF-7 II are fantastic speakers and will be a HUGE upgrade from your KG 5.5. I've owned a few KG speakers over the years and although they are ok, the RF-7's are in a different league. I think you will really enjoy the RF-7 II.
4 minutes ago, ACV92 said:Curious, did you run them straight, or bi-amp them? The Marantz receiver that I have allows for bi-amping. Benefit, or none? Thanks again.
Straight. I tried bi-amping using my previous Yamaha Receiver and heard zero difference. Some guys claim they hear a slight difference but I just don't see how it can physically make a difference unless you bypass the internal crossover and go with an active crossover. Fel free to try it if you have extra speaker wire.
-
1
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, adam2434 said:
Did you compare the stock II's and III's with tone controls flat?
Yes, we did that immediately after we realized the RF-7's sounded even more bright than normal. LOL
4 hours ago, adam2434 said:Regarding the III's, smoother highs and more balanced sound vs. the II's is what I took away from the video. Were these III improvements the consensus from all, independent of track and volume level?
We would typically play a verse and chorus of 1 track, then switch to next speaker and repeat until we went through all 4 speakers. All of us were in agreement the RF-7 III had the smoothest top end out of the RF-7, RF-7 II and RF-7 III. Same track, same volume for each demo using my SPL Meter.
4 hours ago, adam2434 said:Are you keeping the III's? That will be a telling sign.
Not really. I'm COMPLETELY content with the RF-7 II that I have now. Do I like the sound of the RF-7 III better? Yes. Buying a pair of $3000 speakers is not the typical "Youthman Deal" that I"m known for. LOL. I would rather take my family of 6 on a cruise than to spend $3000 on something for myself.
4 hours ago, adam2434 said:Thanks for doing this and posting the video.
I'm having a blast doing it!
4 hours ago, Deang said:“Distortion products contribute to a crisp, but un-natural hi-fi sound. People sometimes mistake that crispness for detail, but it's actually not part of the original sound. If you listen to unamplified acoustic instruments and voice you'll notice that it's really quite soft on top. Improving cap quality in high frequency crossovers moves their sound in that softer, more natural direction.“ — Leo
This may be very well true but I think of it like I do with a flat response. Some guys say a flat response is ideal while others feel it's lifeless and dull. Our ears hear differently. If my ears prefer a brighter sound (even if that brightness is not "natural"), wouldn't it make more sense to appeal to what your ears prefer? I can assure you, I'm no audiophile. Just a guy who loves audio, movies and Klipsch.
-
1
-
-
You are quite welcome. If you need help with the photos, email them to me at mike@soleproductions.com and I'll resize and add them to your initial post.
Also, you might want to add where in Florida you are. You can add that in your Profile Settings at the top right of the forum.
-
Thanks for the tag @Scrappydue. @Ho2op3s Welcome to the forums. I have moved your thread to the Garage Sale. Just some info for ya....the Garage Sale is for listing items that you are selling. There is a sub-section within the Garage Sale called Alerts. This is for good deals that you find online that you want to share with others that might be interested in purchasing. The rest of the forum is for discussion on various topics.
As far as photos, I typically resize my photos to 1200px wide using Photoshop but if you don't have Photoshop, you can download a free program I have used for over 10 years called Irfanview. Just open an image with it, go to Image > Resize / Resample and choose 1200 px wide and save the file and upload to the forums.Best wishes with your sale!
Klipsch RF-7 III vs RF-7 II vs RF-7 - AUDIO DEMO
in 2-Channel Home Audio
Posted
Thanks bro. I hear a difference in person and people claim they hear differences on their systems or nice headphones. Guys watching on their phones always say "I can't hear a difference on my phone" LOL. You are right, all three speakers rock! My ears prefer the RF-7 III slightly over the RF-7 II for certain tracks but then there have been other tracks that I played that the RF-7 II sounded better. The RF-7 are a bit on the bright side in my room, especially since I have a lot of hard surfaces. I hear some differences in midrange between the RF-7 III and RF-7 II but the bass response seems to be on par on all three.