whell

McGoo said it - with the RF-7's, unless you're planning to rock a stadium the size of, say, the Rose Bowl, 200 or 250 WPC is WAY more than you'll ever need. Its not about the WPC, its about making sure that the amp produces that FIRST watt very cleanly. I'm having pretty favorable results right now with one of the Tripath chip amps. Mine is made by Carver, but there are a growing number of them out there. I also have heard my RF-7's through a pair of NOSValves' VRD tube amps. Wow, what a great combo that was! Point is, I think that the RF-7 can live happily with a pretty wide array of high quality amps. See what you can audition, and see for yourself what you like.

Audio Flynn said: "I have heard Senior' WHELL's RF-7 during a brief stay in my home. SACD of James Taylor "JT" into BLueberry into VRDs; it was one of the most meorable demos I have attended in the past 5 years; and heck I was at home for it!" Although I imagine that the Bluberry and the VRD's had ALOT to do with how good they sounded. One of these days, after I win the lotto, I'm going to buy a pair of Craig's amps!

I like the comments that some have made about auditioning. Wherever possible, see if you can work with a dealer that will allow you to audition the speaker in your home with your equipment, not in your dealer's showroom with their equipment. These type of dealers are out there. I ended up with RF-7's and RF-3's - for the two systems that I use often. I was able to match the speaker with my equipment, and with only a few tweaks (pleacement, toe-in, etc.), get very pleasing results.

Was Tom Hanks in the crowd trying to get an autograph?

---------------- On 2/17/2005 11:58:29 AM JPM wrote: Study finds Windows more secure than Linux http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/businesstechnology/2002182315_security17.html From the article you site: "They compared Windows Server 2003 and Red Hat Enterprise Server 3 running databases, scripting engines and Web servers (Microsoft's on one, the open source Apache on the other). But they concluded with statistics showing that the Windows setup had a clear advantage over the Linux alternative. Ford said the idea was to represent what an average system administrator may do, as opposed to a "wizard" who could take extra steps to provide plenty of security on a Linux setup, for instance. " First, I think my comments were intended in the context of a home PC user, not a server environment. Its the home environment, I think, where individuals are most vulnerable, because they are largely unaware of the latest and greatest in worms, adware, spyware, viruses, etc. Second, it is clear that most of these viruses, etc. are written to exploit vulnerabilities in Windows code. While I'm sure its possible to exploit Linux code, its a bit more challenging. Also, most individuals who would distribute a virus want to achieve the maximum amount of mayhem possible. Since there are far more Windows boxes out there, Windows users are the primary target.

The best anti spyware, and anti virus software available today is Linux. Does most everything that Windoze and Windoze-based apps can do, and most distributions are available for a free download. I'm a non-techie, and I've been using Linux for a few months now. I think its ready for prime-time on the home desktop - finally.

Randy, another subject for another time, please. I think that what truly sets the two appart are the suddenness, scope and total devastation of this particular tragedy. For me, the opportunity to truly understand the depth and breadth of this tragedy arose when one of my employees' father passed away over the Holidays. The family asked that donations be made to the American Red Cross, in the deceased's name. Even in their grief, the family appreciated the horror that the folks in the path of the tsunami were facing.

More proof that PT Barnum was right...

Interesting. I went from Monitor Audio Silver 5's to Klipsch RF-7's. One of the best "upgrades" I've ever made.

No way, Fini! They can go get their first system the same way their dad did: they can go get a paper route or something. Dad is such a grinch! And don't worry, mOOn. Laurie and I are both non-smokers!

I had the opportunity to listen to Rick F's Chorus's, followed by my RF-7's, using Craig's amps, and the Juicy Music pre. My experience is a bit different than Jerry's. This might be attributed to the differnce in our ears, equipment, listening room, or who knows what. Here is what I observed: First, both speakers sounded awesome, probably due as much to the upstream electronics as anything else. The easiest way to describe the difference to my ears, was that the Choruses sounds big and wide, with alot of power and detail in the mid range. I didn't find the highs to be harsh, but they were certainly more pronounced than with my RF-7's. The Choruses also had bass in spades. The RF-7's did not have the super-wide sound stage, the sound was smooth and clean, but not "in your face". Imaging was a strength, and the bass was not lacking in depth or detail. The Chorus, though, probably had a bot more low end. I could live happily with either speaker, though I think the RF-7 would more foregiving of upstream electronics of less quality than what we used in our comparison.

Well, this isn't exactly honest. The reason that this resolution will come so easily is that I CAN'T spend anymore...at least, not since my wife and I found out we were having TWINS! As much as I love all things audio and music, this is one resolution I'll be happy to keep. Good lord, at age 42 my family is still growing. I think its great, but we're still in shock that the family will be growing so fast so quickly! We just learned last week that we're having 2 for the price of 1, and that they are also identical twins. They will be due in August, but we suspect they will come sooner, as multiples usually do. My wife and I are still negotiating about finding out about the sex of the twins. I'm all for it for planning purposes, but Laurie thinks that the surprise at the end is all part of the fun. Good grief! Anyway, wish me luck, and I'll continue to read here about the evolution of your systems, with some level of envy, likely until the kids graduate from college!

Just about any female popular music singer - non R&B. They all, to me, seem to be trying for the same stilted, nasally sound. Yeesh!

Here's a 2nd vote for the Carver Pro series of amps. I'm currently using the ZR 1600 with my RF-7's, and my system has never sounded better....and I've been through quite a few amps!

I think it is a decision that has to boil down to your ears. The RF-7's and LaScalas are two very different sounding speakers. I happen to own RF-7's, and love them. There is a smoothness to them that I miss with the LaScalas. However, the La's are big and wide sounding, lively, and seem to put you right in the middle of the performance - a great speaker! All that being said, it seems to me as a practical matter to try the route of the crossover upgrade first. This is more of a $$$ consideration, since a crossover upgrade should cost far less than a pair of RF-7's. Try that first, and see if it brings you to where you want to be. ---------------- On 11/15/2004 1:04:51 PM jwcullison wrote: Thanks for the responses so far. I would love to explore the tube situation but there is a problem...the wife. She only wants me to get McIntosh becuse of the Matching factor. I have shown her pictures of the tube amps and she is disgusted with how they look. The MC2102 looks good but this would cost me 6000$ w/o a tube preamp. I don't want to spend this money without getting the true benifit of tube. Before you laugh, let me just say that my wife has been good about the high end audio. After I bought the Mac stuff, she has agreed to spend more but with the limitations as stated above. Therefore, another Mac SS amp is my option. Again, my question is whether the upgrade on the existing La Scala is better money spent than the sell of the La scalas and Buying new RF-7's. I want to say that I am not putting networks together myself. I would need to buy them preassembled. I just don't have the time for that project. Thanks again ----------------

Scroll down the page here in the 2 channel forum and you'll see my feedback about my "test drive" of the Carver Pro ZR 1600 digital amp. They are using the TriPath chipset. Specifically about the bass: this is one of the more fascinating experiences during my test drive. I guess I'm used to "boomier" bass. The Carver seems incapable of boomy bass. It is quite capable of producing bass with weight and detail that I've simply never heard before, and enjoy immensely.

Got some more one on one time with the ZR 1600 over the past couple of days. I'm off to Miami this AM to conduct a couple days of training, so while cooling my heels in the airport, now seems as good a time as any to share some observations. Listening over the last couple of days: SACD James Taylor, JT; SACD Aerosmith, Toys in the Attic; CD Michael Buble; CD Alison Krauss, Everytime You Say Goodbye; CD George Benson, Big Boss Band; CD John Coltrane, Lush Life. I continue to be impressed by what this amp is able to do, and the new character of sound that is coming from my system. I'm much more inclined now to listen to music and just sit back and enjoy it, where I must admit to being previously guilty of listening to my "system" as much as I was listening to the music. One thing that has impressed me with this amp is what seems to be going on with the bass. Previous amps I have used have produced deep, substantial bass, but without much detail. What I'm noticing now, when listening to Krauss or JT for example, is that the bass is deep, not quite as "boomy", but I'm noticing the detail that the bass guitar or upright bass is producing. The "slap" of the strings on the upright bass is heard with the sting of the fingers on the strings and the vibratto of the strings as the note decays. I've never noticed this before with anything near the detail that the ZR is producing. On the most recent listening session, as noted before, the sound stage is now wide AND tall. Coltrane is about 6 feet tall in my living room, Krause is just as tall, and is clearly standing center forward of the rest of Union Station. Steve Tyler is also standing tall and forward of his band mates, who seem to be distrincly placed across my living room. Each of the band's instruments are clearly defined in their own space. This is just so darn cool! Big Boss Band is a nicely recorded (maybe a bit bright) recording, and the band is large and wide in my living room. Benson's guitar is clearly the lead instrument, but sax, piano and string solos are clearly placed with smoothness and detail. One additional note about Krauss: to me, her voice has always sounded more breathy and thin, though none the less beautiful. Her voice now has substance and depth, which I've not heard before. This amp seems to me to be the real deal. I'm enjpying the hell out of my music, more so than ever before.

---------------- On 10/19/2004 9:38:49 AM Audio Flynn wrote: Whell, Can you post a link to some specs for this amp? It seems like there are quite a few different design concepts using the TRIPATH. ---------------- Here's a link to the Carver Pro web site: http://www.carverpro.com/2003/products/zramps.html You can view product manuals and schematics for the ZR series amps.

These mods do not void the warranty. Carver Pro is actively participating with a number of 3rd parties in modding their ZR line, as this is deemed to be a good way to determine how best to implement the amp as an in home product.

Let tne audition begin! BACKGROUND I've removed the Adcom GFA 535 that I had powering my RF-7's and moved that the power my center channel. Taking the place of the 535 is the Carver ZR 1600 digital amp. This is part of the latest "wave" in amplification, based on the Tripath chip design. In a nutshell, here is what Tripath is looking to do with their design: "In Audio, Tripath is enabling personal computers to have home theater quality sound systems. In home and car sound systems, Tripath technology is enabling systems with more power in smaller, lighter configurations. Tripath has used its Digital Power Processing technology to create a new breed of digital audio amplifiers referred to as Class-T® amplifiers. "Class-T® digital amplifiers provide the audio fidelity of traditional linear (Class-A/B) amplifiers with more than twice the power efficiency of these devices. This leads to higher levels of integration and smaller packages at the semiconductor level. At the system level, these advantages reduce the size of power supplies and heat sinks and significantly reduce the heat management challenges of today's dense, complex electronic systems. While pulse width modulated (PWM) switching amplifiers (Class-D) can also achieve similar power advantages, none have been able to do so without a significant compromise in audio fidelity. Hence Tripath's new designation, the Class-T® digital amplifier the new standard in audio performance and power efficiency." So, while Tripath was looking to reduce amplifier current needs and also retain high fidelity, there has also been achieved an amplifier, in this Carver implementation as well as other products from other audio companies, amps that produce stunning and rewarding sonic results. Carver Pro is licensing the Tripath design to create the core of their "ZR" product line. This line includes the 1600, as well as the 500 and the 1000. Both use the same basic core amplifier design. The differnce in implementation is on the addition at higher levels in the product line features which might appeal to sound engineers using these products and professional and commercial applications: Plug in modules for signal processing, input sensitivity adjustment, front panel controlled high pass filters, etc. The original design intent of these amplifiers was to service commerical sound applications. Carver Pro has indicated that they are entertaining the ideal of an implementation of this amp design for home use. It must be noted on the version of this amp that I have placed in my system has been modified. The modifications are designed to make the amp more acceptable for home use: The pro phone jack imputs have been replaced with Vampire OFC RCA Jacks , 23GA Solid Silver Teflon hook-up wire directly to an IDC connector on the mainboard, which bypasses the input card (bypassing 5 or 6 op-amps that supported some of the pro audio features, but were reputed to add some graininess to the sound), reduced fan speed to significantely reduce the Fan noise level, and rewire outputs with Kimber 15 gauge OFC wire to NEW Cardas Copper Binding Posts. In the future, I many choose to replace the fan with a Papst or other fan designed to operate much more quietly. I did not do the mods myself, as my skills are limited in this regard, so I cannot comment on the relative complexity of the modification work. SYSTEM Mine is a system that for many would embody an incorrect approach to a "high end" sound system. For a variety of reasons, my primary system does double duty as a stereo and an HT system. In my opinion, it does both farily well, though it probably does neither extremely well. The system in use is described in my signature below. My listening room is about 22' X 12', with an 8' ceiling. The room is carpeted, and includes 2 cloth covered couches. The walls are papered, and the paper has fabric conent with a texture that may serve to "deaden" the room more. LISTENING I will be adding to this section over time. I must say that my initial impressions are extrememly favorable. There, to me, is a dramatic difference in the performance of the 1600 versus my Adcom 535. The difference can best be described as like the difference between listening to a decent, not perfect, recording of a live performance, and then going to the live performnace. So far, I have listened to Alison Krauss - So Long So Wrong, James Taylor - October Road, Lyle Lovett - Joshua Judges Ruth. With each of these three recordings, I can safely say that there are characteristics of the recordings, as well as instrumentation, that I have not before noticed. What seems to be standing out to me right now are the placement of instruments and vocals on the sound stage. There is a much more defined (accurate?) sound stage than I have previously been aware of. Drums riffs travel much more distrincly across the sound stage. Cymbals suddenly have a much sweeter character to them: what used to sound more like a hiss now sounds like a shimmer. Krauss's and Taylor's vocals are the most stunning. (My wife even took notice of this, and just for "testing" sake, I chose not to tell her that I had made a change in the system.) Both singers are now "in the room with us". Both are noticablely forward of the other band members, and clearly distringuishable from their back up vocalists. Lovett's vocals, certainly now clearer and more distinctive than I am used to, did not seem to move forward in the soundstage as noticably, if at all. I can't wait to hear more, as only 3 CD's don't make for much of a review. I was gone over the weekend, and will be traveling later this week. Tonight and tomorrow night become the next listening opportunities. I'll post more feedback as I can.

Check out the latest digital amps. Many rave about the (believe it or not) Panasonic HT receiver line that employs digital amps based on the Tripath circuit. Carver Pro also has a line of digital amps. I'm test driving the Carver Pro ZR 1600 right now, and I've never heard a better solid sate amp.

I just replaced the Adcom 535 that was driving my RF-7's with the Tripath based Carver Pro ZR 1600 digital amp. My initial impression of the combo is that I am absolutely stunned at what the RF-7's are now capable of when being driven by this amp. I'm tempted to write a review and post it here, but my writing skills aren't the greatest, and I don't know if I could fully convey in words how much of a stunner this combo is, and just how much of a jump forward in sound quality this change has produced. The RF-7's are fully capable of making your jaw drop when fed with the right amp.

---------------- On 10/12/2004 8:42:23 PM garymd wrote: Definitely. Well, I can only speak for the 9600 but it kept me happy for over 20 years with my cornwalls. Very quiet. More bells and whistles then you'll ever use. I'm sure there are plenty of reviews on the web if you do a few searches. May as well keep it. It, like most others of its type, go for a song these days.---------------- Me thinks the days of the KR-9600 "going for a song" are long gone. Word got out about these great receviers elsewhere on the net, and now the prices have really jumped. Case in point, and there are many others: http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=39787&item=5723453547&rd=1&ssPageName=WDVW

I dunno. I imagine that if you're looking for a front end upgrade from Adcom, you've certainly accomplished that. I can't help but think that you've just spent a ton of money on an integrated and a tuner that, while excellent in their own right, are overkill for the RF-3's. I own a pair of RF-3's and power them with a vintage Marantz 1060 (recapped), and the sound is wonderful. Didn't spend much, but I hung around various sites like this, saw what other folks have had success with, and parked some cash on an option that was effective, and fit my budget. As with all things audio, there is always plenty of room for dissenting opinions. However, The gear you've just described, I'm sure, put you WELL above $1000, maybe closer to $2000, for a set of speakers that is going for about about 1/4 of that. Just seems to me to be alot of cabbage for gear, and the RF-3's have demonstrated that they can be pretty happy with gear that is alot further down the $$$ scale. On the positive side, I can't imagine the RF-3's sounding poor with the gear you've just described. If it does, I'd have to think that the problem lies elsewhere. Speaker placement, listenting position, room accousitcs play major roles in how ANY speaker sounds. Experimenting with speaker placement in a room could result in the cheapest, but most effective, upgrade.

Here's a song that I always sang to my daughter when she was a baby - quieted her right down when she was crying, or needed to calm down before bed or nap time. The songs that I associate with specific events in my younger days, and now I guess "my older days", have the most meaning to me: Why are there so many songs about rainbows And what's on the other side? Rainbows are visions, but only illusions, And rainbows have nothing to hide. So we've been told and some choose to believe it I know they're wrong, wait and see. Someday we'll find it, the rainbow connection, The lovers, the dreamers and me. Who said that every wish would be heard and answered When wished on the morning star? Somebody thought of that, and someone believed it, And look what it's done so far. What's so amazing that keeps us stargazing And what do we think we might see? Someday we'll find it, the rainbow connection, The lovers, the dreamers, and me. All of us under its spell, We know that it's probably magic... ... Have you been half asleep? And have you heard voices? I've heard them calling my name. ... Is this the sweet sound that calls the young sailors? The voice might be one and the same I've heard it too many times to ignore it It's something that I'm s'posed to be... Someday we'll find it, the rainbow connection, The lovers, the dreamers, and me.