[Klipsch RF 7 III vs Forte III]

I own RF-7II and Palladium, but have never heard Forte.  I listen mostly to classical music.

 

In my experience with using Klipsch speakers, a tube amp helps to get the timbre of a natural instrument such as the human voice right.   I specifically like 6L6GC amps with my Klipsch speakers, but other tube amps can sound good via use of tone controls. (For example, IME KT88s can sound bright - turning down the treble helps.)

 

Bottom line, synergy between amps and speakers is important.   I love my RF-7II.  I’m certain the RF-7III is a great speaker.   I suggest that you consider driving them with a tube amp, and as others have suggested, use tone controls.   (All vintage tube integrated amps have tone controls.)    I’m not saying that you can’t achieve good sound quality with a solid-state amp – I just prefer tubes.   Whether tube or solid-state, I strongly encourage you to get an amp with tone controls.

 

The RF-7II have strong bass, nonetheless I use 2 subwoofers with my RF-7II (SVS SB16-Ultra, Klipsch R-115SW) because I listen to large-scale orchestral music.  My Oppo UDP-205 universal player includes a crossover that off-loads the power-hungry bass from the main amp and speakers, increasing overall dynamic range.  For folk music, this isn’t a factor.

 

In deciding between the RF-7III and the Forte III, I suggest that you also consider the dimensions of each, and how each interacts with the room.   Which will fit your space better in terms of footprint, and where it must be placed relative to the walls?  I suggest that you google something like:  “klipsch forte placement site:audiokarma.org”.  (My RF-7IIs are far away from walls.)   Which speaker will put the high frequency driver at ear level, based on your listening position?

 

I think you are asking the right question by asking people who listen to similar music (and have similar room size and listening habits) which speaker they prefer.  I suggest that the amp is also important, and if you have restrictions regarding where the speakers must be placed (particularly distance from walls), that may also be a factor.

 

I’ll be interested in reading others’ comments.

 

Good luck, and please keep us posted.

[Is upgrading a cd player (still) worthwile, in the streaming era?]

On 8/25/2019 at 2:33 AM, ILI said:

 

I just discovered this: https://www.prestomusic.com/classical/products/7955558--beethoven-symphony-no-6-in-f-major-op-68-pastoral#reviews

 ...recorded on a Taperecorder for the conductor 's son. But then the professional mastertapes got damaged so they used the tape instead... I'm pretty sure you know the story.

 

The recording of Beethoven Symphony No. 6 you are referencing reportedly was recorded in 1983 from a radio broadcast onto a cassette tape.  I listened to this recording for a few minutes via youtube.   Of course, youtube isn’t a good way to assess the audio quality of a recording – nonetheless it is clear that this recording has poor quality audio.   Recordings such as this may be of interest to music scholars because of their interest in the unique nature of the historic performance, however this is not my cup of tea.    I have no tolerance for poor audio quality.   

 

It seems to me that there are plenty of choices for modern recordings of Beethoven symphonies.

• I know of at least 3 Blu-ray audio/video box sets of modern performances of all Beethoven symphonies that feature excellent audio/video quality.  
• There are at least 4 SACD box sets of modern performances of all Beethoven symphonies.
• There are at least two Pure Audio Blu-ray box sets of modern performances of all Beethoven box symphonies.
• In addition to the box sets that include all Beethoven symphonies, there are many modern recordings of individual Beethoven symphonies in various hi-res formats.  

My point is this:  For the person who wants digital recordings of Beethoven symphonies that have top-quality audio, there are many choices.
 

[Is upgrading a cd player (still) worthwile, in the streaming era?]

6 hours ago, ILI said:

 

Your posts have triggered my interest in recent high quality recordings. I do have an extensive CD collection of classical music, but most of them date back to the 90s, 80s or even 70s and still earlier - the rcordings, I mean.

If you can direct me to reviews of recent recordings on CD, I would greatly appreciated that. I found out already that new releases often are old recordings...

 

Most modern SACDs are “hybrid SACDs”, meaning they contain an SACD layer, and a CD layer that will play on a CD player.  IMO these discs potentially can be a good investment, because you can play them today as a CD, and then if in the future you acquire a player that will play SACDs (whether stereo or multi-channel), then you can play the SACD layer.

 

I suggest that on amazon.com you select the category “CDs & Vinyl” (upper left), then search for “SACD”, then in the upper right select “Sort by Release Date”.   If you see an SACD you’re interested in, you can click on the back cover, then enlarge it to see if the disc will play on a CD player in addition to an SACD player, what SACD tracks are included (e.g., stereo and 5.0), and the recording date.   (If the recording date is not known, an obvious clue is provided by the principal performers – i.e., the conductor and named musicians.   When was their heyday – i.e., when did they record?  Setting aside performance quality, and focusing instead on audio quality, if a classical recording was conducted by a conductor whose discography is mostly from the 1950s, how do you think the audio quality of the recording will compare with a modern state-of-the-art recording?)

 

As I suggested earlier, you can also look for SACDs on these sites:

 

https://www.prestomusic.com/classical/formats/sacd

https://www.hraudio.net/

 

I searched my amazon orders for “SACD”.  In random order (i.e., not prioritized), here’s some SACDs in my collection that are hybrid SACDs:

 

 

I’ll stop flooding this thread with examples.  I own many more SACDs, and there are countless other modern hybrid SACDs available.

 

I hope this helps.

 

P.S.  Just to be clear, my favorite formats are currently Blu-ray and Ultra HD Blu-ray audio/video.  My next choices are Pure Audio Blu-ray and SACD that include a 5.0 or 5.1 track.  Provenance of the recording is extremely important.

 

[Is upgrading a cd player (still) worthwile, in the streaming era?]

For any classical music fans in the USA who want to try Blu-ray audio/video classical recordings, and want to acquire a “universal player” for a modest amount of money, and who only need stereo analog audio connections to a traditional hi-fi amp (i.e., no 5.1 analog connections), then I suggest that you investigate eBay item # 312383606733, which offers a “manufacturer refurbished” Sony UBP-X1000ES for $280 including shipping.  I have no experience with this unit, but I’ve read good reviews on another hi-fi forum.   I have no affiliation with the seller.

 

If you want the latest Sony universal player that is equipped with stereo analog audio output, I suggest that you investigate the newer Sony UBP-X1100ES.

 

My understanding is that in addition to Blu-ray and Ultra HD Blu-ray, the Sony UBP-X1000ES and UBP-X1100ES also play SACD, DVD, DVD-Audio, and CD.

 

(I use Oppo UDP-205 universal players, but they’re discontinued.)

 

Then, I suggest that you consider this Blu-ray box set, which I think has excellent quality, and is a great value:
https://www.amazon.com/Ludwig-van-Beethoven-Symphonies-2110433-35BD/dp/B071JBXWC6/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=beethoven+Rafael+Frühbeck+de+Burgos+and+the+Danish+National+Symphony+Orchestra&qid=1566575825&s=movies-tv&sr=1-1

 

IMO, this would provide a reasonably priced way to try classical Blu-ray recordings, and decide if they’re “your cup of tea”.   

[Is upgrading a cd player (still) worthwile, in the streaming era?]

2 hours ago, ILI said:

I got an interesting Amazon Warehouse deal for the Marantz CD5005, which was welcome after my failed attempt to repair my Pioneer cd player. So I got the Marantz CD5005, which is Marantz's entry level cd player. I can confirm what has been said here a couple of times: the Marantz combo (CD+PM5005) sounds really well with the RP160M speakers and it comes with a pretty decent phono stage as well!

 

 

 

Congratulations – I’m glad you are happy with your purchase.

[Scott 299-C - EL84 for the power tubes vs 7591]

I am not a technician.  There are a number of people, including “tube fanatic”, who know 1000 times what I know about electronics.  I am a classical music lover, hi-fi enthusiast, and tube amp collector.

IME, output tubes affect the sound of an amp less than the input tubes, assuming they’re functioning properly – e.g., not worn out.  If you’re wanting to try different output tubes, I suggest that you investigate the 6P14P-EV that I mentioned.

   
You can google how to set bias on the 299B.  Again, I’m not a tech.  The only time I adjust bias is for amps that have test points installed on top of the chassis.   (Craig / NOS Valves installed test points for some of my amps.)

Several years ago, I did extensive listening tests of the sound quality of various 12AX7s.   FWIW, two new production 12AX7s that I like are the Tung-Sol (for a warm, rich sound), and the new production Genalex Gold Lion 12AX7 / ECC83 / B759 gold-pin tubes (Russia).   (The non-gold-pin Gold Lion 12AX7 is a completely different tube - made in China, short plate – and doesn’t sound as good, IMO.)

One thing I’ve learned, is that tube sockets can become worn, and loose.  This can cause problems.  Be careful regarding how many times you’re swapping tubes in a vintage amp.   There is a product called a “socket saver”, but I’ve never tried them.

Good luck.
 

[Scott 299-C - EL84 for the power tubes vs 7591]

42 minutes ago, littlejackhorner said:

 

Oh - you are right! It’s a 299-B and I never knew. That being said the power tubes in the B should be 7189.

It sounds good to me and other than one blinking light it performs flawlessly.

I did google search for this type of substitution and found nothing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

What substitution did you google?  7189 is the correct output tube for a Scott 299B.  You might want to read about Russian surplus 6P14P-EV .  (6П14П-ЕВ)    EL84 might be OK.  Google these tubes - you'll find lots to read.

 

7591 is NOT the correct tube for a 299B.   (7591 is a completely different tube.  It is used in the 299C.)

 

Here's a good reference site:   http://hhscott.com/integrated_amps_stereo.htm

 

[Is upgrading a cd player (still) worthwile, in the streaming era?]

13 hours ago, ILI said:

 

Your input definitely has me hesitating even more: a good blu-ray player would be more futureproof than a cd player. So I looked for a Marantz blu-ray player and discovered something weird: (at least in Europe), Marantz no longer has blu-ray players in their product line. I can't imagine a reason that would make sense here. They did have many of them in the past, but not anymore.

 

Unfortunately, John Q. Public apparently is more interested in the convenience of video streaming vs. the superior video quality that is often available via Blu-ray and Ultra HD Blu-ray discs.  And John Q. Public is more interested in the convenience of audio streaming vs. the superior audio quality often available via high-resolution audio discs such as SACD and Blu-ray, or hi-res downloads.   My guess is that’s why Oppo ceased manufacturing.   This is unfortunate for audiophiles, because Oppo’s UDP-205 is a fantastic product IMO.  The UDP-205 will play all discs, plus I can connect a Chromecast Audio via TOSLINK (i.e., using the Oppo’s DAC) for streaming services such as internet radio (e.g., kusc.org) and Spotify Premium, and it has analog audio connections for 5.1 (and 7.1) including configurable bass crossover, and variable output (which adds convenience to my vintage tube amps).  The UDP-205 sold in the USA for $1299, which I think was a great value, considering what it does.  (When Oppo announced that they were ceasing manufacturing, I bought a second UDP-205.)   Sellers are now asking inflated prices for used UDP-205 players.   I also own an Oppo BDP-105 and BDP-95, which play all discs except Ultra HD Blu-ray.   

 

Are any used Oppo universal players available in Belgium for a reasonable price?

 

A universal player with analog audio outputs affords the flexibility to use any traditional hi-fi amp(s) you want – which to many hi-fi enthusiasts is a significant advantage.   (In other words, you are not forced to buy an AVR, or stereo HDMI receiver, or HDMI DAC.)  

 

An important question is whether you have interest in surround-sound (e.g., 5.1).

 

How large is your listening room?  How far apart are your stereo speakers?  IME, surround sound is useful in large rooms, and/or when the main speakers must be far apart.   I have 5 hi-fi systems, and only one has surround-sound (the system in my basement).   The surround-sound system in my basement sounds awesome playing classical Blu-ray and SACD via tube amps and large Klipsch speakers.  I have several other stereo systems (2.1 and 2.0) that also sound great.  My stereo systems are in smaller listening rooms, and the stereo speakers are only approximately 5 feet apart, and there simply isn’t much need for a center channel.  IME/IMO stereo is adequate for smaller rooms; surround-sound excels in larger rooms.

 

If you have no need for surround-sound, then there is currently one option that I know of for a new “universal player” with analog audio outputs.  Have you investigated the new Sony UBP-X1100ES 4K UHD Blu-ray Player?  I have no experience with this unit, but I’ve read positive reports about its predecessor, the UBP-X1000ES.  My understanding is that these machines will play almost any disc:  Ultra HD Blu-ray, Blu-ray (presumably including Pure Audio Blu-ray), SACD, DVD, DVD-Audio, and CD.  It has analog stereo connections (no analog connections for 5.1 or 7.1, and no subwoofer connection).   Based on a brief look at the Owner’s manual, the UBP-X1100ES appears to play most audio file types including FLAC, and can play audio files via its USB connection, and via networking (presumably DLNA).

 

If the Sony UBP-X1100ES 4K UHD Blu-ray Player exceeds your budget, is the predecessor UBP-X1000ES available in Belgium for a discounted price?   (In the USA, eBay item # 312383606733 offers a “manufacturer refurbished” Sony UBP-X1000ES for $280US including shipping in the USA.  On another hi-fi discussion forum, a member bought one of these “manufacturer refurbished” Sony UBP-X1000ES and is very happy with the unit – he thinks it sounds better than his Oppo in a 2-channel installation.)   

 

The Panasonic DP-UB9000 has 7.1 multi-channel analogue outputs.  However, the DP-UB9000 doesn’t play SACD, which IMO is a disadvantage for classical music lovers.  (It also doesn’t play DVD-Audio, which to me isn’t as important.)  There are many classical SACDs available.  Most (but not all) SACDs are “hybrid SACDs” that have an SACD layer and a CD layer.  The biggest benefit IMO to the SACD track is 5.1 surround-sound.  Assuming a high-quality recording, the CD layer of an SACD would undoubtedly offer good stereo audio quality, and presumably the CD layer of an SACD would play on the Panasonic DP-UB9000.

 

OTOH, if you get a universal player such as the Sony UBP-X700 which has only an HDMI connection (no analog audio output), then you must buy an AVR that has an HDMI input, or buy an HDMI DAC.    It appears that this external DAC might work, but I have no experience with it: https://www.essenceelectrostatic.com/product/evolve-ii-4k-hdmi-v2-0-7-1-channel-dac/   FWIW, this configuration doesn’t appeal to me, vs. buying a universal player with DACs built in – but it might appeal to you.

 

Of course, there are countless AVRs available, and there are a few “stereo HDMI receivers” (i.e., 2 channel AVR) such as the Onkyo TX-8270, Pioneer SX-S30, and Denon DRA-800H. However, I’m a tube guy, so these aren’t my cup of tea.  Again, this might appeal to you.

 

There are probably other options for playing Blu-ray and SACD – these are the ones that I know about off the top of my head.  (Ripping Blu-ray and SACD discs is reportedly possible, but not straightforward.)

 

Bottom line, I strongly suggest that you consider a universal player, in light of the wealth of classical recordings available on Blu-ray and SACD, as well as CD and DVD.  

 

As I said earlier, I’m reluctant to get into the contentious debate about whether hi-res recordings sound better than CDs.  IME modern best-in-class CDs can sound good.  IME modern best-in-class hi-res recordings generally sound excellent – and I particularly like surround-sound, and I like hi-def video.  

 

I recently conducted very brief, informal listening assessments of the digital recordings that I own of Beethoven Symphony 9:

• CD (Archipel) of a 1942 performance by Wilhelm Furtwängler and the Berliner Philharmoniker
• SACD (tahra) of a 1954 performance by Wilhelm Furtwängler and the Philharmonia Orchestra London
• CD (Testament | EMI) of a 1957 performance by Otto Klemperer and the Philharmonia Chorus & Orchestra
• CD (Chesky) of a 1961 performance by Rene Leibowitz and the Royal Philharmonic Orchestra
• SACD (DG) of a 1962 performance by Herbert Von Karajan and the Berliner Philharmoniker
• CD (Penguin Classics) of a 1972 performance by Sir Georg Solti and the Chicago Symphony Orchestra
• CD (Seraphim Classics) of a 1988 performance by Riccardo Muti and The Philadelphia Orchestra

With my hi-fi systems and my ears, the difference in audio quality between these older recordings is immediately apparent.

 

Following are more modern recordings of Beethoven Symphony 9 that I own.   With my hi-fi systems and my ears, the difference in audio quality is significant between the older recordings listed above, and the modern recordings listed below:

• DVD (Euroarts) of a 2000 performance by Claudio Abbado and the Berliner Philharmoniker (PCM stereo and Dolby Digital 5.1 tracks)
• 24bit/96kHz FLAC download (DG) from HDTracks.com of a 2002 performance by Claudio Abbado (stereo only)
• SACD (BIS) of a 2006 performance by Osmo Vanska and the Minnesota Orchestra  (stereo and 5.1 tracks)
• Blu-ray (DRS | Dacapo Records) of a 2013 performance by Rafael Frühbeck de Burgos and the Danish National Symphony Orchestra (DTS-HD MA 5.0 and PCM Stereo).   IMO, of the recordings listed above, this is the overall most enjoyable recording, with the best audio quality, and best quality video. 

I have ordered two more Blu-ray box sets of all Beethoven symphonies:  a Blu-ray box set by Christian Thielemann and the Wiener Philharmoniker recorded at the Goldener Saal der Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde in Vienna, plus a Blu-ray box set by Mariss Jansons and the Bavarian Radio Symphony Orchestra recorded in Tokyo Suntory Hall.   I’m anxious to see/hear these recordings.

 

I have a thread on talkclassical.com about Blu-ray classical recordings, if you’re interested in joining that discussion.

 

Please keep us posted.

 

P.S.  Obviously, if you invest in a universal player, your hi-fi system can also serve as a home theater system for playing Blu-ray and DVD movies.

 

P.P.S.  I also want to mention the following DVD box set of 25 concerts by the Berliner Philharmoniker.  The Dolby Digital 5.1 tracks sound very good.  (These DVDs also have a stereo track.)  While not Blu-ray quality, when upscaled by my Oppo UDP-205 the video quality varies from good to very good.   (These concerts span 25 years:  1991-2015, so the audio and video quality vary.)  IMO this DVD audio/video box set of 25 live concerts on 25 DVDs is a good value, and it provides the chance to see 25 European concert halls, which I enjoy.   (Again, this provides a fundamentally different experience (IMO more enjoyable) compared with CDs or streaming audio.)
https://www.berliner-philharmoniker-recordings.com/25-years-europakonzert.html

[Is upgrading a cd player (still) worthwile, in the streaming era?]

2 hours ago, glens said:

 

And I'm not disputing any of that.  What I specifically addressed was the audio which is available on a compact disc.  Nothing more.

 

You always make a large production out of the superiority of newer formats with the initial emphasis on the "high res" aspect.  If program material were available with all the extra channels, video, etc. but in the bit depth and sample rate of CD Audio (note my specificity), it would work entirely as well in terms of sonic quality.  No need for you to hotly contest it here and now.

 

All that extra stuff is moot at this juncture since the OP already has a CD collection which he wishes to utilize now and in the future.  "Rip 'em, encode 'em to flac, and serve 'em up" is my recommendation.

 

This past Spring, I asked Khatia when the Blu-ray of the following performance will be available, and she said “soon”.  If you’d rather just listen to audio of this composition (i.e., not see the video), then … OK.   Have fun ripping your CDs …  

 

 

 

If you’d rather just listen to the audio of “La bohème” vs. seeing the acting in stunning Blu-ray quality, then … OK.  Have fun with your CDs.

 

 

 

To me, “all that extra stuff” (i.e., video, surround-sound) is NOT irrelevant.

 

And, for anyone who’d rather listen to DSOTM, then … OK ...

 

To each their own.

 

P.S.  For everyone who is satisfied with what CDs have to offer (i.e., CD level audio quality, no surround-sound, no video), and want convenient access to individual “songs”, why not just subscribe to a streaming service and have access to millions of recordings, vs. investing time and money in ripping CDs?
 

My advice:  Enjoy the hobby as you choose to enjoy it.  And more important, enjoy your music.

[Is upgrading a cd player (still) worthwile, in the streaming era?]

5 hours ago, glens said:

Rip the CDs to flac and never touch them again.  CD Audio is, technically, of entirely sufficient quality and given in all other respects comparable treatment in laying down the tracks, 9.9 out of 10 people cannot discern a difference between it and "hi-res".  It's not the bit depth or sample rate that makes the "usually noted" difference between CD and "hi-res" audio, rather the "treatment" administered during their creation.

 

Get you a https://www.bluesound.com/products/vault-2i/ and be done with it.

 

Of course, the assertion that hi-res audio recordings do not often exceed CD audio quality is hotly contested.  I won’t beat that dead horse.  I think that everyone needs to listen to “true” hi-res recordings for themselves, and decide for themselves. (By “true” hi-res recordings I mean recordings that have hi-res provenance and are delivered in a hi-res format.   NOT ripped CDs.)

It cannot be disputed that CDs can’t deliver 5.1 surround-sound.   IME, surround-sound is particularly useful when the main left and right speakers must be far apart due to room layout.   Also, part of the “live-concert-hall experience” for large-scale classical orchestral music is the amount of acoustic power.   In your home listening room, if you have a quantity of 3 or 4 or 5 speakers, you’ll have more acoustic power than 2 similar speakers.   (In my basement system, the left, center, and right speakers are Klipsch RF-7II.  A single rear speaker is an RF-7.  Two powered subwoofers.)

 
It cannot be disputed that CDs can’t deliver video.  As I said earlier, high-definition video is essential for visual art forms such as opera and ballet, and IMO very enjoyable for classical orchestral music.  Moreover, hi-def video can be very useful by displaying an opera’s libretto (in one of several languages) on the HDTV screen (vs. having to turn on bright lights and use strong reading glasses to try to follow the tiny print in a printed libretto).

I respect the fact that different people like to enjoy the experience of attending a live classical orchestral concert in different ways.  Do you like to close your eyes?  Or, do you like to watch the conductor and musicians?  What if there is a soloist?  FWIW, I prefer to see the performers.

Following are excerpts of a few recordings that I own on Blu-ray that feature audio/video.   (Except in the case of Yuga Wang, which is DVD.)   I own many other Blu-ray classical recordings.  Of course, the youtube audio and video quality pales in comparison with the Blu-ray disc.

 

Khatia Buniatishvili 

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=30jnieVq8Cs

 

Pepe Romero

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uu0jsqljVe0

 

Claudio Abbado conducting Mahler Symphony 9

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mrJ8e51__yE

 

Angela Gheorghiu

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gnqa94oeGfw

 

Anna Netrebko

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yiGpm56Bi8s

 

Elīna Garanča

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LoXqkUZW7do

 

Yuga Wang (I have this recording on DVD – not Blu-ray.   When upscaled by my Oppo UDP-205, it looks great, and it sounds great.)

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2GGx8TRWFVA

 

Two ballet excerpts:

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0SKgGF4v8_c
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-w7vPLNcsZI
 

 

Again, the audio and video quality of these youtube videos pales in comparison with the Blu-ray disc.  Nonetheless, these excerpts illustrate my point that technology has advanced in the more than 30 years since the Redbook CD entered the market.  IMO – for the classical music that I love - Blu-ray’s high-definition-video and hi-res surround-sound significantly enhances the experience of enjoying recorded music in my home.   For me, Redbook CD doesn’t hold a candle.  (And because I listen to an entire symphony or opera, there is no benefit associated with being able to “shuffle” or randomly select individual tracks via a “ripped” CD.)

As I said in an earlier post, the relevance and availability of modern Blu-ray audio/video recordings varies by music genre.   For classical music, modern hi-res recordings are plentiful, and highly relevant.
 

[Is upgrading a cd player (still) worthwile, in the streaming era?]

25 minutes ago, dubai2000 said:

BUT - if you are into classical music - what about performances from the past? - I mean there are recordings of great artist around that were recorded - yes, even in days of mono 😀 - hence I don't think traditional CD players are obsolete - but you might want to mod a bit (for example transformer output rather than the usual opamp stage).

 

Classical music lovers sometimes must decide which is more important:  performance quality, or audio quality of a recording.  I’m not a music scholar, and I’m not hyper-critical of a performance.  However, I have no tolerance for poor audio quality.  I therefore choose modern performances of classical music that were recorded in hi-res.    (In contrast, some classical music fans are willing to tolerate less-than-state-of-the-art audio quality in order to enjoy what they regard as the best performance of a classical composition – which may have been recorded decades ago.) 

A few vintage classical recordings IMO have marginally acceptable audio quality.    For example, I have a 1950s LP pressing of this recording that sounds surprisingly good.  And IMO the SACD also sounds surprisingly good when played via my Oppo UDP-205 universal player, tube amps, and Klipsch speakers.    The Mendelssohn Violin Concerto was recorded in 1959 on analog tape employing 3 channels (left, center, right) , and the SACD delivers the original 3 channels.  The Technical Notes for the SACD state:  “In remastering these tapes, we kept the signal path as short as possible.”   “No signal processing was necessary to ‘improve’ these extraordinary tapes.”

However - IME – these older recordings (whether in LP or SACD format) pale in comparison to modern hi-res recordings when delivered in a modern hi-res format.  
 

[Is upgrading a cd player (still) worthwile, in the streaming era?]

Following are just a few examples of the countless modern classical recordings that are available in various hi-res formats:

Rafael Frühbeck de Burgos Danish NSO

• Ludwig van Beethoven: Symphonies Nos. 1–9
• Joaquín Rodrigo: Concierto de Aranjuez
• Hector Berlioz: Symphonie fantastique, Op. 14
• Richard Strauss: Eine Alpensinfonie (An Alpine Symphony), Op. 64, TrV 233

 

Blu-ray

 

Audio options:

•    PCM Stereo
•    DTS-HD MA 5.0

Video:  1080p

 

Excellent performances.  State-of-the-art audio and video quality.
-----------------------------
Jean Sibelius: Complete Symphonies

 

 

Blu-ray

 

Audio options:

•    PCM Stereo
•    DTS-HD MA 5.1

Video:  1080i

 

Excellent performances.  State-of-the-art audio and video quality.
--------------------------
"Tchaikovsky, The Complete Symphonies". 

 

Blu-ray

 

Audio options:

•    PCM Stereo
•    DTS-HD MA 5.1

 

Excellent performances.  State-of-the-art audio and video quality.

-----------------------

 

I also have Blu-ray audio/video box sets of symphonies by Brahms, Bruckner, Schumann, and Mahler.  

 

Plus, several other classical concerts on Blu-ray.  

 

IMO, classical concerts that feature soloists are particularly well suited for Blu-ray audio/video. I’ve seen Khatia Buniatishvili perform live, and I recommend this Blu-ray. (IMO, Khatia is very enjoyable to watch, as well as listen to.)

 

 

If you like film adaptations of opera, consider the following:

 

 

There are many Blu-ray recordings of live opera stage productions.

 

IMO concerts that feature excerpts from operas are enjoyable. Here's 2 examples that are available on Blu-ray:

 

Two examples of ballet on Blu-ray:

 

 

There are countless modern classical SACD discs available that feature surround-sound. On Amazon, simply search for "classical sacd" under category "ALL".   I’ll make a shameless plug for one of my “hometown teams”, and recommend the following excellent SACD:

 

 

Pure Audio Blu-ray are not as common as SACD.  Here’s an example of a Pure Audio Blu-ray that features 3 audio tracks:  5.1 DTS HD MA 24bit/192kHz, 7.1 DTS HD MA 24bit/96kHz, and 2.0 LPCM 24bit/192kHz:   

 

Here’s another Pure Audio Blu-ray I own:  

 

Here’s an example of a hi-res download available from HDTracks.com:

 

Again, these are just a few examples of the countless classical recordings available in various “hi-res” formats.

[Is upgrading a cd player (still) worthwile, in the streaming era?]

IMO, sometimes people overlook one of the most important factors in achieving top-quality audio via their home hi-fi system:  the quality of the recording.  

 

Redbook CD was introduced to the marketplace more than 30 years ago.  I suggest that you consider the fact that there are newer ways to enjoy classical music (compared with CDs), and consider the fact that the sound quality of your hi-fi system is limited by the quality of recordings you play.  

Modern high-resolution (“hi-res”) formats can deliver 3 benefits for classical music:

• Potentially superior audio quality by virtue of 24bit/192kHz or 24bit/96kHz PCM, or DSD, vs. CD’s 16bit/44.1kHz.   (Provenance of a recording is critical – i.e., the best audio quality requires modern recordings that were recorded and mastered in hi-res – NOT ripped CDs.)
• Surround-sound (e.g., 5.1).
• High-definition video, which is essential for visual art forms such as opera and ballet, and IMO very enjoyable for classical orchestral music.  Moreover, hi-def video can be very useful by displaying an opera’s libretto (in one of several languages) on the HDTV screen.

For the classical music I love, my first choice for media is Blu-ray audio/video featuring DTS HD MA 5.0 or 5.1 hi-res (24bit/192kHz or 24bit/96kHz) audio tracks.   (Blu-ray discs also offer a stereo hi-res track.)   Ultra HD Blu-ray classical recordings are starting to become available.   My second choice, SACD and Pure Audio Blu-ray that feature hi-res 5.1 surround-sound and stereo tracks (but no video).   My third choice, hi-res (e.g., 24bit/96kHz or 24bit/192kHz) stereo FLAC downloads (e.g., from HDTracks.com).  

 

There are countless classical recordings available in hi-res formats, and almost all new classical recordings are offered in a hi-res format.   There are numerous web sites that catalog hi-res recordings.  Here’s a few:

 

https://www.hraudio.net/ lists some, but certainly not all hi-res recordings.
https://www.prestomusic.com/classical
https://www.nativedsd.com/
http://store.acousticsounds.com/superhirez
https://concertsondvd.com/collections/blueray-concerts

 

Considering the number of modern classical recordings available in a hi-res format, and considering the potential value of high-def video and surround-sound, I think that classical music lovers are best served by a “universal player” that is capable of playing Blu-ray, Ultra HD Blu-ray, Pure Audio Blu-ray, SACD, DVD, DVD-Audio, and CD.  

 

FWIW, I use Oppo UDP-205, BDP-105, and BDP-95 universal players directly connected to vintage tube amps.   If you only want stereo (i.e., 2 channel), I suggest that you research a universal player like this: https://www.sony.com/electronics/blu-ray-disc-players/ubp-x1100es.  This unit provides 2 channel analog connections (i.e., no 5.1 analog connections), and no subwoofer connection.  If you want to spend less, I suggest that you consider the earlier model Sony UBP-X1000ES which is sometimes available as a "manufacturer refurbished" unit on eBay for bargain prices. 

$64k question:  Do you want to try newer “hi-res” audio (and audio/video) formats, or just play the 30+ year-old Redbook CD format?  Or, will you be satisfied with streaming?    

 

Make certain that the equipment you buy supports all of the audio (and video) formats that you are interested in.  (If you are considering an external DAC, I suggest that you investigate which formats it supports.  Will the DAC play the SACD layer of a hybrid SACD (i.e., not the CD layer)?   Will the DAC play DTS HD MA from a Blu-ray?  What are the limitations of coax and TOSLINK, vs. HDMI?  Does the DAC support 5.1?)
 

[RF-7ii and RF-7iii timbre matching - LCR]

In my basement system, my front, center, and left speakers are Klipsch RF-7II.  A single rear speaker is a Klipsch RF-7.   (Subwoofers:  SVS SB16-Ultra, Klipsch R-115SW. )

 

You might consider getting a pair of RF-7III for L&R, and using your existing RF-7II for center, and a single rear.  Or, get three RF-7III for LCR, and use your RF-7II for 2 rear.

[New to Klipsch! Love my RP-160s but disappointed with performance of classical music. What to buy next?]

On 7/17/2019 at 10:02 AM, Man in the Box said:

 

At the moment the speakers are about 6 feet apart. They’re positioned slightly off center and slightly diagonally (with one speaker a bit farther from the wall compared to the other). I’m still experimenting with their position. 

 

Did you add any acoustic panels or anything of the sort to your listening room? Mine is also my bedroom, and I feel that bass traps are a bit of an eyesore for my personal living space. But there’s certainly unwelcome reverb in my room that I can do without. It’s most pronounced when I play high frequency notes on my piano (also in my bedroom) at forte or fortissimo. I imagine the speakers would sound better if room surfaces are somewhat treated. 

 

It’s good to know that I can get away with one rear speaker for 5.1 classical music. I’ll try it after I add the next pair of speakers (probably the 280s/ 8000) — before I add the central speaker as the system’s final piece, as has been suggested to me in this thread. 

 

With the main speakers only 6 feet apart in a 13ft x 13ft room, I think a 2.1 (stereo plus subwoofer) system would work great.  (All Blu-ray recordings have two audio tracks:  stereo and 5.1.  Each time you play a Blu-ray recording you choose which audio track to play via a Blu-ray menu selection.)    If at some point your budget allows you to upgrade to 5.1 you probably won't regret it.  There are many surround-sound classical recordings on SACD and Blu-ray.

 

FWIW, I put art on my walls, not acoustic panels.   Of course, it's highly personal what you choose to put on your walls.  I have hardwood floors, and use oriental rugs.  You said that you have ceramic floors with rugs.   I suggest covering as much of the ceramic tile with rugs as possible.  Draperies over the windows can also help tame live acoustics.   You can use your receiver's tone controls to tailor the sound (e.g., if you need to tame the high frequencies a bit).

 

I suggest living with the RP-8000F (or RP-280F) for a while before adding more speakers.  Because the most important thing is the music, and recording quality is extremely important (garbage-in/garbage-out), I suggest getting a universal player and start investing in Blu-ray audio/video classical recordings.   (Am I correct in assuming that you have an HDTV?)    I suggested in an earlier post Blu-ray box sets of all symphonies by Beethoven, Sibelius, and Tchaikovsky.  I also have Blu-ray box sets of all symphonies by Brahms , Bruckner, Schumann, and  Mahler.  Plus Blu-ray recordings of other classical concerts, opera, and ballet.   Once you get a good quality hi-fi system that is suitable for your room, IME the best investment you can make is in quality recordings of the music you love.  I can suggest more Blu-ray recordings (including opera and ballet) if you'd like.  (Do you participate in a classical music discussion forum, such as talkclassical?)  

 

Later, if you want to get a step closer to the illusion that you're in the symphony hall, I think the next priority would be a subwoofer.  I'd get the biggest one your budget and space allow (while being respectful of your neighbors' right to peace and quiet).   

 

If after living with a 2.1 system for a while you find yourself wanting to take another step towards recreating the concert hall experience, then upgrade to surround-sound.

 

That my 2 cents.  Hope it helps.

 

Please keep us posted.

[New to Klipsch! Love my RP-160s but disappointed with performance of classical music. What to buy next?]

On 7/17/2019 at 9:34 AM, Man in the Box said:

 

Yes, the local store still sells the 280s, but a Dubai-based store that will deliver has the 8000s. I’ve been looking for how the two pairs differ but haven’t found concrete comparisons (assuming they’re possible). Seems like I’d have to listen to them side by side, but unfortunately that’s not possible for me at the moment.  

 

On this note, any clue as to whether 280s/ 8000 are too big for my room (~13 x 13 x 10)? This is the only factor that made me consider the smaller 260s/ 6000s.

 

 

Because large-scale orchestral music has significant dynamic range, I suggest that you get the largest speakers that your budget allows.  My TV room is approximately the same size as your listening room, except with 8' ceilings.   I have Klipsch Palladium P-37F (which are slightly larger than the RP-8000F) in my TV room, and they're not too large for the room.  (And I have a matching Klipsch P-312W subwoofer in this room.)

 

If the RP-8000F is the same price delivered to your door as the RP-280F, I'd get the newer RP-8000F because it will be easier to buy a matching center channel later.  If the RP-280F is discounted significantly, that would be a factor.   (When the RF-7III was announced, RF-7II were offered in the USA at 50% off, with free shipping.  I pounced on the RF-7II.)

 

[New to Klipsch! Love my RP-160s but disappointed with performance of classical music. What to buy next?]

At the risk of beating a dead horse … 

Some people claim that science completely understands human hearing, and cite theories like Nyquist theorem to assert that Redbook CD “exceeds human hearing capability” (whatever that means), and that hi-res formats don’t sound any better than CD.   OTOH, some hobbyists with many years of experience, involving listening to many different recordings, report that modern hi-res recordings often deliver the best audio quality – for whatever reason.   (If a hi-res recording sounds better, the naysayers will always say that it was recorded and mastered more carefully.   Some people (including me) have the attitude –  I don’t care why a recording sounds better - if it sounds better, it sounds better – I want the best quality audio recordings for the music I love.)

 

Similarly, some people claim that science completely understands human hearing and how a few technical specifications like frequency response and THD affect our perception of audio quality, and insist that all modern amplifiers sound the same.  OTOH, some hobbyists with many years of experience, involving listening to many different amplifiers, report that different amps sometimes sound different.

 

Maybe someday science will provide better insights regarding these different views.   For now, each hi-fi hobbyist has to decide if they believe theories, or their own ears.

 

If a recording was captured and mastered in 24bit/192kHz, why not buy it in that format, vs. buying a version that was down-sampled to fit onto a 30+ year-old digital storage format – i.e., Redbook CD (16bit/44.1kHz)?  (Similar question re DSD recordings.)  Digital storage technology has advanced in the last 30 years – the same size disc that was used for CDs decades ago now is available in Blu-ray and Ultra HD format that holds vastly more data.   Technologies like SACD, Blu-ray, and Ultra HD Blu-ray, as well as hi-res downloads, are well established in the marketplace.  For classical music, recordings are routinely released in hi-res format.   

 

Because I listen to classical music and opera, I have a clear benchmark for the audio quality of recordings reproduced via my home hi-fi system:  The live performance of classical music in its intended venue - i.e., a symphony hall or opera house with world class acoustics – where no electronics are employed.    In other words, no sound reinforcement system is used when classical music is performed in its intended venue.  The sound is 100% natural.   We know how a violin sounds.  We know the sound of a trumpet, clarinet, cello, timpani, etc.   Classical music lovers know how classical music sounds when performed in a world-class symphony hall or opera house  (recognizing that there can be some variance in hall acoustics).   IME, modern hi-res recordings often excel at creating the illusion of being in the symphony hall or opera house – particularly hi-res surround-sound recordings. 

 

And, the “extras” that Blu-ray provides deliver significant benefits for classical music, particularly opera and ballet.   

 

For a Hollywood movie, would you only listen to the audio and not also watch the movie?   That’s the difference between CD vs. Blu-ray for opera and ballet, because they are visual as well as musical art forms.   This is a non-trivial benefit of Blu-ray vs. CD.  

 

When you attend the symphony, do you like to watch the performers, or do you close your eyes?  (I respect both preferences.)  What if there is a soloist – do you like to watch them perform?  (I’ve seen/heard Khatia Buniatishvili play piano live.   I’d MUCH RATHER see Khatia, than not.)

 

When listening to a language you don’t understand, would you rather try to follow along phonetically in a printed libretto (which has tiny print that requires you to have bright lights on, and wear strong reading glasses) and read the English translation, or have the English translation (or whatever is your preferred language) automatically displayed as subtitles on the HDTV screen?   That’s the difference between CD vs. Blu-ray for opera.   This is a non-trivial benefit of Blu-ray vs. CD.  

 

If you have a large room, and/or the speakers must be far apart, surround-sound can deliver a significantly improved listening experience vs. stereo.   This is a non-trivial benefit of Blu-ray vs. CD.    

 

When buying a collection of many recordings, would you rather have it delivered on one hundred CDs (which often happens with classical music box sets), or on relatively few Pure Audio Blu-ray discs that deliver audio quality that is at least as good as the CDs, and possibly better?   

 

This thread is about classical music, and all of these potential benefits of Blu-ray are relevant to this discussion.

 

For a modern classical recording that was captured and mastered in hi-res, what benefit would there be for a consumer to choose a CD, if a hi-res deliverable such as Blu-ray or hi-res download is available?

 

If a classical music lover is in the market for a disc player, what benefit would there be to buy a machine that will play only CDs, vs. a machine that will play CD, DVD, SACD, Blu-ray, Pure Audio Blu-ray, and Ultra HD Blu-ray, plus hi-res downloads?  (Unless the consumer’s budget is $10, and they want to buy a used CD player at a garage sale.)

 

All I’m suggesting is that each consumer decide for themselves, based on accurate knowledge about what’s available in today’s marketplace.   And I’m suggesting that the types of recordings that are available today for classical music is a richer variety, than - for example - recordings of 4 or 5 decade-old popular music that are limited by 4 or 5 decade-old recording technology.  

 

To each their own.  I suggest that everyone enjoy the hobby they way they want to enjoy it.

 

My opinion (which is based on my experience):  Multichannel hi-res/hi-def audio/video recordings played via a state-of-the-art universal player and vintage tube amps and large high-end Klipsch speakers are the “cat’s pajamas” for classical music.  (I point out that I’m stating my opinion, and not representing it as a fact.)
 

[New to Klipsch! Love my RP-160s but disappointed with performance of classical music. What to buy next?]

OP:  How far apart are your speakers?

 

IME, multi-channel (5.1) can be useful in a large room, and when the main L & R speakers must be widely spaced.   (For example, in my basement system, the speakers must be 12 feet apart due to room layout.)   OTOH, in a small room, if the main speakers are spaced 5 feet apart (which is the case for 3 of my hi-fi systems), there is not as much benefit IMO to a center channel and surround speakers.

 

Also, part of the “live-concert-hall experience” for large-scale classical orchestral music isn’t just the surround-sound, it’s the amount of acoustic power.   In the same size room, if you have quantity of 3, or 4, or 5 speakers (left, center, right, 2 rears), you’ll have more acoustic power than 2 similar size speakers.  (As we’ve already discussed, subwoofer(s) can also help overall dynamics by off-loading the power-hungry bass from the main amp and speakers – if the sub is implemented correctly.)

 

Because there is little rear channel content for classical music, and little distinction between the surround-left and surround-right channels, in a surround-sound system you might be satisfied with 1 rear speaker vs. 2, or no rear speakers.

 

I have one 4.2 system (i.e., surround-sound with a single rear speaker), two 2.1 systems (i.e., stereo with subwoofer), one 2.0 system, and one mono system.   They all work well in the room where they’re installed, for the purpose they’re used for.

[New to Klipsch! Love my RP-160s but disappointed with performance of classical music. What to buy next?]

4 hours ago, Man in the Box said:

For future reference, should anyone else with similar issues stumble across such issues, here's a summary of what I've done since starting this thread:

 

• experimented with speaker placement for improved bass performance. My current set up also followed the advice of placing them somewhat diagonally due to my square room's acoustics
• experimented with bass gain of (which is at ~30% at the moment) on my Yamaha receiver. The default setting will not do
• downloading actual high res tracks from hdtracks.com
  • sidenote: while Primephonic's material varies from record to record, none comes close to the quality of the aforementioned tracks. It remains a useful tool for discovery, I think

 

I'm sure these are avoidable for many people, but they apparently weren't for noob like me. 

 

OP:  It appears that Klipsch has a newer version of the RP-280F called the RP-8000F.  Have you investigated this?

 

The speaker’s “power handling” specification isn’t very useful, except perhaps in determining when the warranty is voided due to abuse.   (Usually this happens when someone gets drunk at a loud party and “cranks it up.”)   

 

The more useful speaker specifications are:

• The RP-280F and the RP-8000F have a “sensitivity rating” of 98 dB.   In your 13.6 x 13.4 x 10 ft room, at sane listening volume, I think that your Yamaha R-N602’s 80wpc would have adequate power.   I doubt that a more powerful receiver would be a “high value” use of your money.
   
• The RP-280F and the RP-8000F’s “nominal impedance” of 8 ohms means that your Yamaha R-N602 is compatible with the Klipsch RP-280F and the RP-8000F.

Now that you’ve discovered the potential quality of “hi-res” recordings, I encourage you to consider a universal player that will allow you to experience Blu-ray and Ultra HD Blu-ray audio/video discs.  As I’ve said before, video is essential for opera and ballet, and IMO very enjoyable for orchestral concerts.  (And it is extremely helpful to have an opera’s libretto displayed on the HDTV screen in the language of your choice.)    The Blu-ray box sets (e.g., all symphonies by a composer) are also a great value.   

 

You’ll have a decision to make if you want to acquire a universal player (i.e., a player that will play all discs:  multi-channel SACD, Blu-ray, Ultra HD Blu-ray, CD, DVD, etc.).  It appears that your existing Yamaha R-N602 receiver does not have an HDMI input, which means that you would need a universal player with analog outputs in order for it to function properly with your Yamaha R-N602.   (The coax and TOSLINK connections generally cannot deliver SACD output, or the full Blu-ray hi-res audio bit rate.  In other words, you wouldn’t realize the full benefit of the hi-res audio when using the coax or TOSLINK connection.  This is due to copyright restrictions, and bandwidth limitations.)   The Sony ES UBP-X1100ES has analog audio outputs, and retails for $600.   

 

OTOH, the Sony UBP-X700 which has only an HDMI connection (no analog audio output) sells on Amazon for $158.44 including shipping (USA price – I don’t know about Bahrain).  That’s a $441 price difference.   You might consider getting the cheaper HDMI-only Sony UBP-X700 and a new AVR that has an HDMI input.   (If you get a multi-channel AVR that is equipped with pre-amp outputs for the front channels, you might be able to use the new AVR to drive the center and rear channels, and your existing Yamaha R-N602 to drive the front channels.  I’m not an expert on AVRs – I don’t own one – others can weigh in regarding this configuration.)   

 

If you’re certain that you only want stereo (not 5.1 multi-channel), then there are stereo-only AVRs (i.e., stereo receiver with HDMI input) such as the Onkyo TX-8270.   (I assisted a friend with purchasing and installing an Onkyo TX-8270 and Sony UBP-X700.  He got a great “open box” price for the Onkyo TX-8270 from a seller on Amazon.)    Apparently, Pioneer offers a similar receiver:  SX-S30DAB.  However, I don’t know how the sound quality of either of these “HDMI receivers” compares with your existing Yamaha R-N602.  (I’m a tube amp guy.)   I’m just pointing out that you could buy an inexpensive “HDMI-only” universal player such as the Sony UBP-X700 and an inexpensive stereo “HDMI receiver” (such as the Onkyo TX-8270 or Pioneer SX-S30DAB) for about the same price as a universal player with analog audio outputs.   (That’s what drove my friend’s decision to buy the Sony UBP-X700 and Onkyo TX-8270.)

 

However, continuing with our discussion of stereo (not multi-channel), the more expensive Sony ES UBP-X1100ES (which has analog audio outputs) provides you with the flexibility to use any traditional hi-fi amp you want – which to many hi-fi enthusiasts is a significant advantage.   Some people think all amps sound the same.  FWIW, I’m not in that camp.  (As I said, I’m a tube amp guy, but tube amps are for hobbyists, not John Q. Public, and I don’t know how practicable it would be to purchase and maintain tube amps in Bahrain.)   Many hi-fi enthusiasts would never consider playing music through an AVR, while others are perfectly satisfied with an AVR for music.   (FYI, there have from time-to-time been some great deals on eBay for “factory refurbished” Sony ES UBP-X1000ES (the earlier version of the Sony ES UBP-X1100ES), but I don’t know about shipping to Bahrain.)   

 

My recommendation:  I suggest that you strongly consider an upgrade path that eventually leads to 5.1 surround sound, which is fabulous for classical music.   Many modern hi-res 5.1 classical SACD and Blu-ray recordings are available.   There are also some classical recordings delivered in Ultra HD Blu-ray, and Pure Audio Blu-ray.   (Pure Audio Blu-ray delivers hi-res multi-channel audio, but no video).   If you want 5.1, you might be wise to buy the cheaper HDMI-only universal player such as the Sony UBP-X700, and buy a new 5.1 AVR.   (Again, I suggest you consider an AVR with pre-amp outputs.)  You could use your existing speakers for the rear channels, and buy a matching Klipsch center channel speaker (e.g., RP-504C).   IME Blu-ray audio/video is a significant step up in how to enjoy recorded classical music in the home.   Modern Blu-ray concert videos, with a high-quality surround sound system and HDTV, represent the next best thing to being in the symphony hall or opera house.    IME this is far superior to what CDs and streaming services can offer.

 

It’s a lot to think about.  I’m certain that others can share their experience with these options.

 

Please keep up posted if you acquire the Klipsch RP-280F or RP-8000F.     
 

[New to Klipsch! Love my RP-160s but disappointed with performance of classical music. What to buy next?]

OP:  Here's my 2 cents, based on great comments by several contributors:

• For approximately $20US you can download a hi-res classical recording from hdtracks.com.  (I'm assuming you can do this in Bahrain.)   This clearly represents an inexpensive test.
• If you can buy an SVS SB-2000 Subwoofer in Bahrain, and this is within your budget, this seems like a good investment, regardless of what you end up doing regarding your main speakers.

Please keep us posted.

 

 

[New to Klipsch! Love my RP-160s but disappointed with performance of classical music. What to buy next?]

45 minutes ago, billybob said:

Trying to stick to logic.Not the best option for me to say just upgrade the bookshelves. Sub of a sort likely still required for those

low passages. And before asking op to shell out a sackful of $ on a sub to test theory,an inexpensive test is called for. And doing this before opting for floors standers

Is monetarily the way to go.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Considering that OP lives in Bahrain, what "inexpensive test" do you recommend?

[New to Klipsch! Love my RP-160s but disappointed with performance of classical music. What to buy next?]

I have full season tickets to the symphony, performed in a world-class symphony hall.   And full season tickets to the opera, performed in a world-class opera house.  I attend more than 20 live classical performances each year.  One of the things that strikes me when listening to large-scale orchestral works in the symphony hall is the power of the sound, and the amount of bass content, particularly when 6 or 8 double bass are playing.  The bass drum and tympani also have significant bass power.   And, of course, the pipe organ.

 

Here's my basement system:  Front, center, and left speakers are Klipsch RF-7 II.  (Each RF-7II:  Dynamic 1.75" titanium Tractrix™ horn-loaded compression driver.   Dual 10" high-output Cerametallic woofers.)   A single rear speaker is a Klipsch RF-7.   Subwoofers:  SVS SB16-Ultra, Klipsch R-115SW.   Even though the RF-7II are not "wimpy" speakers, the 15" and 16" powered subs really help recreate the feeling of being in the symphony hall.

 

P.S.  I'll reiterate a recommendation I made above:   Saint-Saëns: Symphony No. 3 "Organ"  FLAC  24bit/176kHz   https://www.hdtracks.com/saint-saens-symphony-no-3   A hi-fi system should be able to recreate this hi-res recording's delivery of the sweet sound of Noah Geller's violin in "Introduction and Rondo capriccioso in A Minor for Violin and Orchestra", the dynamic impact of the orchetra, and the deep notes of the organ in Saint-Saëns: Symphony No. 3.

[New to Klipsch! Love my RP-160s but disappointed with performance of classical music. What to buy next?]

14 minutes ago, Man in the Box said:

Robert, thank you very much for this. It opened my eyes to options I wasn’t aware of. 

 

Investing in a universal player shouldn’t be a problem at all, especially given that inexpensive options are available. I’ll look into it. I appreciate your recommendations too. I’ll revisit them if I end up buying such a unit. 

 

But the RF III is well beyond what I can afford. They can be had at $1,800 per speaker, which isn’t unusual in markets outside of North America. I imagine that they may also compel me to buy a more powerful (and presumably expensive) receiver. Then there’s the heavyset stature, which seems to be too big for my space. 

 

Do you think the RP 280s would be a decent compromise, though? I can justify getting them over the 260s, especially if they’ll let me forego purchasing a sub. 

 

I have no experience with the RP-280F.  I'm certain it's a good speaker.  If it were me, I'd get the RP-280F in PIANO BLACK.   

 

Here's the good news:  Your Yamaha receiver has tone controls, so you can tailor the sound for your speakers, in your room, for your ears.   

 

I can't say if your existing bookshelf speakers plus subwoofer would sound better than the RP-280F without a subwoofer.   I don't think that you will go wrong buying either the SVS SB-2000 sub, or the Klipsch RP-280F.  I think that they're both good quality products.  You could buy one, and if your budget allows later, buy the other. 

 

If you like organ music, perhaps start with the subwoofer.

[New to Klipsch! Love my RP-160s but disappointed with performance of classical music. What to buy next?]

I’ll agree to not rehash the hotly contested debate about whether “hi-res” consumer deliverables generally sound better.  I suggest that each listener decide for themselves.

 

OP:  If you haven’t already tried the following, I’ll suggest an easy, fast, and cheap way to try a “hi-res” classical recording, and assess its quality for yourself.

 

Find a modern classical recording on hdtracks.com that was recorded in hi-res, and is delivered in a hi-res format.   Here’s a few examples that I own.   (There are probably newer recordings with higher sample rates.)

• Beethoven Symphony 9.  HDTracks has several hi-res recordings.  I have this one by Abbado:  FLAC 24bit/96kHz  https://www.hdtracks.com/beethoven-symphonie-no-9
   
• Beethoven: The Late String Quartets.  FLAC 24bit/88kHz  You can buy individual tracks, which means you can try a hi-res FLAC download for a few dollars.   https://www.hdtracks.com/beethoven-the-late-string-quartets?___store=default&nosto=nosto-page-search1
   
• Dvorak: Symphonies Nos. 6 And 9.   FLAC 24bit/96kHz.  I have this one: https://www.hdtracks.com/dvorak-symphonies-nos-6-and-9-132397
   
• Elina Garanca “Meditation”  FLAC 24bit/96kHz   https://www.hdtracks.com/meditation-191462
   
• Saint-Saëns: Symphony No. 3 "Organ"  FLAC  24bit/176kHz   https://www.hdtracks.com/saint-saens-symphony-no-3   (This will be a good recording for trying out your new subwoofer.)
   
• J.S. Bach Organ Works Volume II  FLAC 24bit/96kHz https://www.hdtracks.com/j-s-bach-organ-works-volume-ii  (Another good recording for a subwoofer)
   
• WAGNER: Preludes And Overtures  FLAC  24bit/88kHz https://www.hdtracks.com/wagner-preludes-and-overtures-129214

Download the file to your computer, and copy it to a USB drive.   Unplug the USB drive, walk it over to your Yamaha R-N602 receiver, and plug it in.  See page 36 of the Yamaha R-N602 receiver Owner’s Manual for instructions for playing the USB file.  (Of course, these recordings do not have video, and are stereo - not 5.1 surround-sound.)   If you try this, please report back your findings.

 

Switching gears, I didn’t intend to imply in my previous post that you can’t realize good sound quality with your existing Klipsch speakers.  (RP-160M?)   Augmenting these with a subwoofer might produce very good results.   I’m certain that the SVS SB-2000 is a good choice.   (I own an SVS SB16-Ultra.)  I’d get the biggest subwoofer you can accommodate, because IME large-scale orchestral music can have significant bass content.

 

P.S.  If DLNA networking is easier for you (vs. USB drive), see page 29 of your Yamaha R-N602 receiver Owner’s Manual.

[New to Klipsch! Love my RP-160s but disappointed with performance of classical music. What to buy next?]

As I said in my previous posts, IMO Step 1 is to equip yourself with the ability to play modern high-quality digital audio and video recording formats, and start buying high-quality hi-res classical recordings.

  

The second step I’d recommend is to upgrade your speakers.   I respect the fact that different people have different budgets.   With that said, my advice is to wait and save up more money, and buy the best you can.  That way you’ve invested in speakers that can serve you for the rest of your life, and you won’t have to upgrade again.   My recommendation (if it’s an option in Bahrain):  Consider Klipsch RF-7III.  (I use RF-7II for classical music.) 

 

With RF-7III, subwoofers aren’t necessary in order to enjoy classical music.   With that said, subwoofer(s) can enhance the experience of listening to large-scale classical music.   However, subwoofers can be a PITA, because audio recordings and movies are not consistent in bass content.  When my sub is adjusted to a natural level for classical music, with some Hollywood movies there is over-powering bass content.    I reject any assertion that I must listen to a movie based on the LFE (low-frequency effects) levels that some audio engineer or producer want.   Explosions are a common problem.   Or, a movie character walks into a nightclub and there is obnoxiously loud pop music with thumping bass.   I hate that.   I refuse to be assaulted by moronic levels of LFE.   IMO, a remote volume control (preferably with multiple presets) is a very useful feature for a subwoofer, so that when watching a movie, with one button push I can adjust the subwoofer to a tolerable level (i.e., an explosion doesn’t shake my listening room).   Then, when listening to music that has natural tonal balance (e.g., classical music), I can restore the “normal” sub setting via a single button push (i.e., the double bass sound like what I remember hearing in the symphony hall). 

 

My suggestion for the next step, consider 5.1 surround sound.  (Perhaps your existing speakers can be redeployed to the rear channels.)