ksquared

If they were just ten miles from my house I'd go over there even if I had to set the refrigerator outside!! Is there any chance that they could be properly shipped without damage? There is a fair amount that can be paid for shipping at $1500. Maybe the Pony Express forum here would be able to help? They look very nice in maple, the one worry is he says they were wrapped in plastic and there is still a film on them.

Thanks Youthman!!

From the photos they look to be in excellent condition. https://miami.craigslist.org/mdc/ele/d/klipschorns-walnut/6695870712.html These are down south of Miami halfway between Kendall and Homestead. If they were there from '88 they might have witnessed Hurricane Andrew in 1992! No affiliation. Ad states: Hertiage Series Klipsch Klipschorns, great condition. circa 88' with sequential serial numbers 401 horns w/ AK-2 crossovers 15 subs in cabs And yes, somehow this should be moved to the "Alerts" section, I don't know how I was still in the "Garage Sale" section.

I don't know what the ad said last night, but yes, in addition to the "I want to sell them all together - if I don't get a decent price I may refinish them." the ad stated "Price is for all 4 speakers" when I looked several hours ago. So this is still a spectacular example of miscommunication. Once again, one sentence implies "all 4 speakers," but the "I want to sell them all together" implies they're for sale as singular speakers.  I was also wondering if the title could be "Klipsch LaScala 1 speakers" and then the quantity "x4" and then the price "- $1500" It would be great if Tony T could say what the ad was last night.

I saw the ad and I'm wondering, because of the wording: Klipsch LaScala 1 speakers x4 - $1500 (Mesa) OK, so it could be 1 speaker, $1500 x 4, but then why is "speakers" listed as plural, or it could be as is assumed here, 1 speakers x 4 = 4 speakers for $1500. What further confuses things is "I want to sell them all together - if I don't get a decent price I may refinish them." So they "want to sell them all together" but the ad would only refer to individual speakers if interpreted as 1 speaker at $1500 each. Hopefully somebody can clarify.

OK, 100% guilty as charged for reviving an old thread, and quoting an exactly one-year-old quote from Cory! I'm wondering if there has been any updated opinions now that the RF-7III has been out for awhile. It seems, purely based on the specs sheets, that the RF-7III should be far ahead of the Forte III, and the RF-7II also ahead but by a slighter margin. But yet, most here are liking the Forte III. Youthman compared and chose the RF-7II, but that was with an upgrade from Deang, and nobody has apparently followed up with the RF-7III vs. Forte III (at least here that I could find). The other confusing thing is the pricing for a new RF-7III is exactly the same as a new Forte III. I will add, in my opinion the Forte III, shorter and wider, looks a bit more substantial and "furniture-ish," but the actual volume of the speaker enclosure is only 63.54% of the RF-7III, if that makes any difference or matters. Is it somewhat the George Gershwin song? "You like potato and I like potahto, You like tomato and I like tomahto; Potato, potahto, tomato, tomahto!" And, just throwing this in at the end, how do all of them compare to a La Scala (used of course, the La Scala II is out of my price range)?

Thanks for the continued help. It is amazing what I can find out in the manual!!! I am going to have to look into Ceptorman's suggestion for the setup with two amps to one speaker. I had wondered if it would work, instead of having a switch between the amps and the speaker, if instead it was possible to have the amps plugged into a switch somehow such that only one of the two is on. I don't know if it matters then that technically both amps would be "connected" since both would have a connection to the same speaker? Could one amp still send power to the other amp and hurt it? But then you wouldn't be having any additional switches between the amps and the speaker, which must be better for the signal.

OK, I did just grab some numbers, switching 98 to 89. But I was trying to be extreme, as I'm sure 8 ohm 98dB with 8 ohm 97dB wouldn't really make much difference. I had wondered about the differing volume with different sensitivity, so if each channel can be adjusted that would seem to solve the problem. I didn't think this could be done, but I checked the manual and yes, it is in there! Thanks.

If I'm trying to put together a 5.1 system, is it essential for all speakers to be of equal sensitivity and with the same impedance? Could you have the center RC-64ii with 8 ohm 98dB @ 2.83 v / 1 m with the main pair of speakers as (just an extreme example) a 4 ohm 89dB @ 2.83 v / 1 m floorstanding speakers? What about if the main speakers were 8 ohm but 105dB @ 2.83 v / 1 m, or 8 ohm but 89dB @ 2.83 v / 1 m? What happens if you connect different specification speakers to an amp? It seems it would be less than optimum, but would the amp or the speakers be damaged? I am obviously a newbie with all of this, but I'm trying to set it up such that the two main speakers can serve dual-purpose with another amp (but a tube amp not a regular amp) to play only vinyl. And I have found out that my initial idea which would have been spectacular, connecting each amp to the two floorstanding speakers, probably won't work because at some point somebody would turn both amps on and destroy everything, so I will have to have either a switch or else disconnect/connect when I'm wanting to change from home theater to vinyl.

I don't know if this has been alerted here, the ad says posted about a month ago so apologies if it is a repeat, but there can't be a huge number of RF-7iii style speakers on the used market yet. The ad says "like new," which should be expected. Black. https://peoria.craigslist.org/ele/d/klipsch-rf7iii-rc-64iii/6682568589.html no affiliation with seller

OK, I'm thinking I've got a better understanding now. I appreciate the great help from the experts!

Thank you JohnA. I do agree too, an awesome answer! This does help greatly too. I can understand that the Acurus A250s as a real-world example, technically can't "double down" from 8 ohms to 4 ohms, because of the physics of the amp. But they are able to supply a significantly higher watts at 4 ohms, because the impedance is cut in half (significant). But I'm still left wondering, if you put the amp to power a 4 ohm 89db speaker, and set the output to 89 db, would it then power the 8 ohm speaker at 86db (89db - 3db) at that same set power output? So is it then 0.5 watts into the 4 ohm 89db speaker, giving 89 db, and 0.5 watts into the 8 ohm 89 db speaker then gives 86 db (since it would need 1 watt to output 89db)?

If you've taken any of these standardized tests, there is a question such as: Human is to Foot as Horse is to ______ with the answer being Hoof. Now, I absolutely can't figure out speaker impedance, despite many attempts. It reminds me of my combine driving days, I almost took out a fence post, and the supervisor calmly said, "OK, back it up and take it out REAL SLOW." So if somebody can go REAL SLOW, it would be greatly appreciated. I understand a speaker specification 8 ohm @ 99 db, and another one has 4 ohm @ 89 db. But what I can't understand is: 4 ohm @ 89 db is to 8 ohm @ _____? Is the 8 ohm speaker a higher db rating or a lower db rating? I might understand that 4 ohm is more efficient somehow, but from what I pretty much don't understand, that is only if your amp can "double down" which is beyond my understanding. I've seen a spec for the XA25 amp, where it says "outputs 25Wpc into 8 ohms, or 50Wpc into 4 ohms or 100Wpc into 2 ohms!" So it somewhat makes sense, as the resistance is cut in half, the output is doubled. Which would tie into the "if your amp can double down" phrase. But I then don't understand why any amp wouldn't "double down," as if it sends X Wpc into 8 ohm, it should be able to send 2X Wpc into 4 ohm. So any help is greatly appreciated.

Wow, thanks for that article! That pretty much is the definitive answer. I was happy to read though that there are other people besides me wondering about this. So thank you both kvndoom and Emile.

I've read about bi-amping, and almost understand the theory, and might be able to set that up. However, that's not what I'm attempting to do here. I want one set of speakers, and two different amps. One amp for playing the TV, BD, etc., and the other amp for playing vinyl records. Long ago, T2K stated about a switching system, where two amps could be connected to two sets of speakers, and the system would route things correctly. https://community.klipsch.com/index.php?/topic/1143-two-pairs-of-mains/&tab=comments#comment-9800 But that doesn't seem to be what I'm really trying to do here. So here is the question, and I'm hoping to get those more knowledgeable than me (which is just about everybody LOL) to see if I'm doing this correctly or if I'm going to destroy something. Can amp#1 be connected to the top speaker posts (Red and Black) and amp#2 connected to the bottom speaker posts (Red and Black), without destroying everything connected? I have left the little top post to bottom post connectors connected, since it is my understanding that the only time they would be removed is if it was truly a correct bi-amp setup. The rule would be then only one amp could be on at any given time. I don't know what would happen if both were turned on simultaneously, but I don't want to find out here, maybe theoretically would be interesting. Thanks for the help.

This is all tentative at the moment, but I might, and that is a big might, be going from Baltimore, MD down I-95 to Orlando, FL and I could pick up pretty much whatever you're thinking of. The only detail is that I would not feel comfortable loading or unloading any extremely expensive items, but I could help if needed. I guess on rare occasion things work out, so maybe this would be one of them.

Any chance you're moving to Florida? I hear the weather is nice, just don't mention the name Irma!

Now Cory knows how to make a newbie feel better.

No, no offense meant by you nor taken by me. I appreciate the help to understand it.

Now, I told you I'd already derailed. Would it be technically better to say the higher impedance speaker needs the power (current) at a lower rate? But, given the previous requirements, it would need a higher voltage?

OK, this part I now understand too. Give a speaker 1 watt of power, if 99dB come out, they're both using the power at the same efficiency. That makes perfect sense, and it doesn't matter what the impedance of the speaker is. And here's where I derail. Why? But, this then makes it more understandable that an amp gives out, I'm guessing it can't output the higher current required. The 8Ω speaker takes the power (current) at a slower rate?

I'm hoping it is OK if I add a question to this, as I'm a newbie to all the technical aspects. And I have tried to find out, but I'm not really understanding it. I can understand that speakers are rated 8Ω or 4Ω, although the actual number varies and is frequency dependent, and that somehow if you connect two 8Ω speakers in parallel you get 4Ω. My daughter even did a science experiment where she showed the output of the light was brighter when two wires were connected from the battery to the light in parallel, so I'm thinking I might understand this aspect. So, if there are two speakers, and one is 8Ω, 99dB and one is 4Ω, 99dB, the 4Ω speaker will use the power supplied to it more efficiently to put out the same volume (dB)? If one speaker was 8Ω, 99dB and the other was 4Ω, what dB rating would equal the 8Ω speaker for equal power supplied to each? Or maybe if I say you put enough power to make the 8Ω speaker produce 99dB, what db output would the 4Ω speaker be at the same power input? Why isn't there a "dB / watt input" rating in addition to all the other specs, isn't that what people want to know? I somewhat understand that a given amp only has so much power to output, but then why isn't everybody trying to get 4Ω speakers that use it most efficiently? And for that 18w amp, isn't the 18w producing more dB at just the 30% level than the 8Ω speakers at 50% level? Or am I just completely mixed up? (And if the answer is yes, I'm hoping it can be explained why as I'd like to learn.)

Ummm, any more dirt cheap RF 7ii's out there? Needing a good home in Sunny Florida? Will even take them to Disney World if necessary.

OK, you're both absolutely correct. Thanks so much. I guess it might have helped to look a bit closer. So, with this inspiration, I've gotten the WA-2 setup with the subwoofer, and it seems to be working fine. Getting the WA-2 to work was incredibly easy, so I'm wondering if many/most people do the connection this way or with the RCA wires. I keep wondering if there is some difference in sound quality.

I'm sure this way is not optimum, since each length of speaker wire isn't exactly the same, but at the current time if it will work even borderline I'd be OK. Is it possible to get the signal to the R-112SW in the following way: Amp ----> (speaker wire) ---> RC64II ----> (short length of speaker wire) ---> R-112SW? The RC64II has the two connection points, for if somebody wanted to bi-amp it, but they remain as from the factory bridged in my situation. So can I connect the speaker wire from the amp to the RC64II lower +/- connectors, and then use the upper +/- connectors to go with a short speaker wire from it to the R-112SW? I definitely don't want to hurt anything by doing things this way. I have the WA-2 subwoofer kit, and at some point that is what I'm hoping to use, although I'm wondering what the opinion from the experts here on that method is.