Doug C

I listened to the 3's and 5's at a dealer with my CD player and amp. The 3's are a fantastic value. The 5's have a slight bass advantage if you are using a lower power tube amp like me and the midrange is a bit smoother (not dramatically though). If you are real picky about your music it's probably worth the extra cash to get the 5's. If you are looking more at HT then the 3's are very good and will save you a good bit of cash. I ended up purchasing the 5's and liked them so much I upgraded to the 7's after about 6-months. My dealer made me an upgrade offer I could not refuse. Doug C

I have dual Ultras and the RF-7's. If you run the RF-7's full range and set the sub crossover at about 50hz you won't know the subs are even behind you. If you bump the crossover up to 80hz then the subs may become noticable. But with the RF-7's I find I don't need to set the crossover that high. The main thing will be to find the best sub location for your room. Hopefully the only good spot for a sub will not be where you have no room. I have my twin Ultra's, one in each front corner and an 18" Velodyne along a side wall right next to my couch. Sounds great! Good Luck, Doug C

I agree with others, it sounds like a cancelation problem. I have twin Ultras and an 18" Velodyne. When you have multiple subs in various room locations it can be a real challenge to get the proper phase settings. It is virtually impossible unless you have the ability to set the phase for each sub separately. Also you really need a variable phase control as opposed to a simple 0 or 180 degree toggle switch. The simplest approach initially may be for you to co-locate the Ultras. This way at least you will not have to worry about the subs canceling one another. then you can work on finding the right phase between the subs and mains and see how it works. Another problem you have to consider is the possibility of room induced peaks. I have a nasty +16 dB peak in a narrow band around 36hz. If I tried to increase sub volume to fill the bass range above this the result would be very boomy in the 36hz region. Once I installed a parametric equalizer prior to the subs and notched out the peak I was able to double sub volume to fill the upper bass region with no boom. To really tweak the low frequencies you need a sound meter, good low frequency test tone CD and lots of time. I'm fortunate that my B&K preamp has a test tone generator providing tones in 2hz increments. Increments much bigger than this in the 20-100hz range will not tell the whole story. The best low frequency test tone CD I've seen can be found at http://basszone.stryke.com/testcd.html Another problem with some rooms is that it is virturally impossible to excite the air in some areas of the room (especially the center areas). So you may have to consider this when selecting your seating position. I know in my room moving the seating position a couple of feet is the difference between no bass and good bass. I have a couple of null areas in my room that can not be excited even with all three subs going. These black holes just gobble up anything you throw at them. Good Luck Doug C

I really like the Standesign Base 1 amp stand purchased from audioadvisor.com. Although Audio Advisor does not advertize them, they do sell shelf modules for the Base 1. The shelf modules are very sturdy, you can stack as many as you want on top of the Base 1 and if you want you can cut the legs on the shelf modules to any height you want. They have 18"x18" shelves that will accomodate deeper gear than most racks. A nice feature is that there are no supports obstructing rear access to equipment connections. I have three of the Base 1 stands and 4 of the shelf modules. If I decide to reconfigure my equipment it's easy to swap the shelf modules around as needed. If you go to the following http://www.standesign.com/ and look for modular stands you will see this unit. I see they make the shelf modules in 8", 10" & 12" heights, I have the 8" shelf module units. The ones I purchased through Audio Advisor I thought were affordable. I've built my own in the past and I'm convinced stands are not generally overpriced, building your own takes a lot of time! These units look nice but the flexability and larger shelf size is what has sold me over the long haul. I've reconfigured my system many times and these always work. My old fixed stands have been collecting dust. Doug C

Take a look at the Bass Zone site. I've found this one of the most useful test tone CD's. They are a little slow shipping. I think it took about 2-weeks to arrive. http://basszone.stryke.com/testcd.html Doug C

KAiN64, I was looking at the amp features on the PC sub at the SVS site. It really does have a lot of nice features. Speaker level & line level inputs for example. I run my RF-7's full range with a tube amp and use speaker level connections to my crossover and then on to the subs. I prefer the speaker level hook-up as opposed to the line level on my system (bass just seems to integrate slightly better with the mains). With the SVS amp on the PC sub it would be easy to experiment with both. Line level with interconnects directly to each sub or speaker cables from amp to each speaker and cables from each speaker to each sub? Auto On/Off is nice and the 0-180 degree variable phase control is almost a must for multiple subs. The more I think about it I would probably opt for the powered version if in your situation since it has so many nice features. You can duplicate some of these featrues with outboard crossover devices but it becomes more complicated (more cables & boxes) and you have to have room in your rack for more amps, boxes and cables. Obviously with my Ultras the only choice was a separate amp. I really like the Ultras, but now that I have the amp, extra cables and external crossover it would be nice to have all the features that the PC amp provides. All the hook-up options you would want integrated into one neat package. Just my thoughts. Doug C

It has a 220 oz. magnet, 13.75 pounds. Doug C

I have twin SVS Ultra and an older 18" Velodyne. When I compare the twin Ultras to the single Velodyne I like the twin Ultras. The output of each is about the same (twin Ultras compared to single Velodyne) but having two subs provides more placement options. In some rooms colocating the SVS may be best but in my room placing one in each of the front corners is best. Placing them separately smooths out some of the low frequency response peaks and dips in my room resulting in smoother, fuller bass. The single Velodyne, regardless where I place it excites a nasty +14 dB room induced peak in a narrow band around 36hz and the result is a boomy tendency. With the twin Ultras located separately the peak is only about 8 dB which makes quite a difference. For my money I would go with twin subs as opposed to one big one. I like the Ultras but the other subs you are considering should do a great job in the twin configuration. One thing that I think is a must on a twin sub set-up is to have a variable phase control for each sub as opposed to a phase switch which gives you the option of 0 or 180 degrees only. In my system I find a phase setting of about 30 degrees works best. I run both subs at the same phase since both subs are equal distant to the listening position in my room. If I go 0 or 180 degrees I get big dips at different points between 20 and 100 hz. 30 degrees seems to be a good comprimise. Now the SVS powered models have the variable phase control knobs if I'm not mistaken. In this case it is simple to set each subs phase differently if needed. If you go with a passive sub then you will have to have some method to phase them separately if required by placement. I use an outboard Paradigm Crossover. The powered models have phase control and lots of nice features built in which provide flexability and set-up simplicity. Just my thoughts, Doug C

I've had a Velodyne F1800RII, 18" sub for about 5-years. Some time back it developed a problem where it wants to spit out a rapid series of loud pops (3 to 5 seconds in duration) when first powered up. Finally got around to removing the amp to ship in for service. The sub weighs about 105 pounds and is rated at 600 watts output. Figured the amp was going to be a real bear to handle while unhooking the wire connections. The amp is attached to a rear plate attached flush mount to the enclosure with 10 wood screws. It was a surprise to find out that the entire amp weighs 4.8 pounds! I guess this is one of the differences between class A/B normally used for speakers and class D used in subs? Just thought this would be of interest to those like me that have never removed or seen a sub amp. Doug C.

The RF-5 is a great speaker. Comparing the RF-5 to the RF-7 the RF-7 performs as well if not better than the RF-5 in the midrange based on my listening. I was a skeptic but hearing is beliving. Now I have to say after listening to the RF-5 & 7 at two different dealers I was not impressed (on music). In each case speaker placement was bad and the systems were really set-up for HT demos (subs turned up to much for music). I took my CD player and amp in for a listen. Moved the speakers out into the room, played music with my gear and no sub. Much different impression. Doug C

For the post asking about the Paradigm Studio 100's, I've owned the 100's for over a year and they are a good speaker. I purchased RF-5's about 6 months ago to go with a small tube amp (needed a high effiency speaker for tubes). I upgraded to RF-7's a couple of weeks ago. The 100's were not bright for me but source and amp are important. I tried CD's on my run of the mill DVD player and that was bright compared to my Marantz CD-17 dedicated CD player. For my taste I like the Klipsch. Some call them In Your Face but for me they bring a lot more life to music. I do like the tube amp with the Klipsch. Comparing the 100's to the RF-7's using a Musical Fidelity A3CR, 120 watt/channel SS amp I still opt for the RF-7's. Having said this, the 100's are probably a bit more forgiving when using an average quality source and amp. Doug C

Thanks to everyone for their input on this subject. Have been listening and experimenting some over the past two days and will try to answer some of the questions. For evaluation purposes I have been using the Chesky Records "Guide to Critical Listening" CD. This CD has about 14 tracks that include Rebecca Pidgeon, Sara K., Leny Andrade, Livingston Taylor, Ana Caram, etc. I generally listen to Rock and Blues but find this CD very useful for evaluating the effect of system changes. Each track has been selected for it's specific qualities, Soundstage Depth, Midrange Purity, Transparency, Rythm & Pace, etc. I purchased this from Audio Advisor a few years back. I had been listening with my Marantz CD-17 CD player connected via interconnects to the B&K Reference 30 preamp, using the B&K Direct Pass Through via interconnects to the front Direct Inputs on the Zen Select (the Direct Inputs bypass the Zen volume pot). This arrangement allowed me to use the Zen for 2-channel play and HT without physically switching any cables. Based on input from Mobile Homeless I decided to backtrack and connected my CD player via interconnects directly to the Zen Direct Inputs and from the Zen directly to the RF-7's (B&K preamp removed from signal path). The real differences are a much greater sense of the recording space (you can hear the effect of the recording studio) and greater resolution of fine vocal and instrument detail which add to realism. Now the difference in music reproduction quality is not night & day, but at the same time once you hear these things you don't want to do without them either (if that makes any sense). So as Mobile Homeless stated, the preamp tends to muck things up a bit. Male and Female vocals are very natural with no apparent chestiness from male vocals. On well recorded material you can clearly hear vocalists inhaling. Eliminating the preamp also seems to have improved soundstage depth. Vocals and instruments seem to be more distinctly placed within space. The preamp seems to impart a thin veil that tends to mask that last little bit of detail and clarity. Doug C

Hello Dean, I thought the 2+ dB increase in output of the RF-7 over the RF-5 was pretty good considering the SPL was taken at the primary listening position which is approximately 10.5 feet from the speakers. Dynamics of the RF-7 are top notch, a little better than the RF-5 in my listening room. I have to admit the RF-5 was a very good performer in my room, 11.5' wide, 21.5' long, 8.0' high, with two large openings into other parts of the home. Since I'm driving the RF-7 with only 2 watts/channel the slightly higher sensitivity gives my amp a bit more headroom. When playing loud (90-95 dB) the RF-7 produce the sensation of effortless sound. The RF-5 at these levels sounded great but maybe a hint of strain. Did not notice this until listening to the RF-7 for comparison. Listening to the RF-7 placed in the same position as the RF-5 is dissapointing. The RF-7 had very little soundstage depth compared to the RF-5. Yesterday I moved the RF-7 out into the room a bit more (further away from the front wall) and increased the distance between the two speakers. This really opened up the soundstage (big increase in width and depth that matches the previous RF-5 set-up). With this arrangement the front outside of the RF-7 enclosure is only about 12 inches from the side wall so I'm using free standing absorption panels along each side wall to minimize the first side wall reflection and this is a noticable improvement as far as soundstage clarity. Distance between speaker centers is now approx. 8.5 feet, distance from speaker grill to primary listening position approx. 10.5 feet. Front of speakers are approx. 5.5 feet from the front wall and listening position approx. 5.5 feet from the rear wall. With the new speaker positioning I'm gettig quite a bit more bass from the RF-7's (probably due to the speakers being closer to the side walls). Actually had to turn my sub off because things were a bit muddy. I plan on going back through the sub set-up today to get sub levels correct with the new speaker positions. Once again I think the interesting point here is how differently the RF-7 and RF-5 interact within the same room. If someone were to demo the two in their home they can not assume that ideal placement would be the same for both. I read a review some time back where an individual opted for the RF-5 over the RF-7 because in their listening room the RF-7 had insufficeint bass output. I'm finding that if you have placement flexability the RF-7 have great bass output capability (even with a 2 watt amp). If you have limited placement options the RF-7 may be a tough animal? I'm fortunate that I have a dedicated room so there are few limitations to placement options. Doug C

In response to Kjohnsonhp's question. I've experimented extensively in my listening room comparing my two SVS Ultra's to a single 18" Velodyne. I would say the two Ultra's have approximately the same output capability of the one 18" Velodyne. I find the flexability of having two subs to be an advantage however. You can experiment with locating them separately in different parts of the room or colocating them. The best sub location will depend on the room. Im my case locating two subs separately helps to excite all low frequencies more evently (much less room induced boom). My experience indicates that a good quality sub by itself does not have any boomy qualities. It's the room you place the sub in that has the boomy qualities produced by room induced peaks and nulls across the low frequency range. I find two smaller subs that together have approximately the same output capability of one large sub to be better simply because you have more placement possibilities or placement combinations to experiment with. You may be lucky and have great room dimensions that allow a single big sub to produce a very even frequency response across the entire low end. On the other hand this may not be the case? It was not clear to me if you currently have the SVS PC-Plus, two of these or none? If you have none, I would suggest trying one of them. If you like what you hear and would like more of the same order a second. Although I own twin ultras, I can't imagine there is a huge difference between twin PC-Plus and twin Ultra? I see the PC-Plus has a variable phase knob as opposed to a simple 0-180 degree switch which is a big plus if you are thinking ultimately of two subs. Two subs located in different parts of a room may have to be phased differently and the variable phase knob gives added set-up flexability to do this. Doug C

I've used twin SVS Ultra's and a single 18" Velodyne sub in my Music/HT set-up and prefer the twin Ultra's over the one 18" Velodyne on music and HT. I actually have one of the Ultra's in each front corner rather than colocated in the same corner. I find locating them separately results in a smoother low frequency room responce (magnitude of room induced peaks & nulls is smaller which provides smoother sounding bass). Some people don't like the looks of the SVS (personal taste). I actually prefer the appearance of the SVS over the big box sub. The foot print of the SVS is much smaller than big subs (especially if you are placing them in a corner). The SVS are also much easier to move (simply tilt and roll). The question of powered or passive sub depends somewhat on your set-up. If you don't have room in your equipment rack for another amp then the powered subs are nice. The passive sub has the advantage of using an amp that you may already have. The amp on my Velodyne has developed a problem so I will have to remove the amp and send it in for repair which means this sub will be completely out of service for a while. Doug C.

I had the RF-5's for about six months and really loved the sound with my little Decware Zen Select tube amp. Could not resist the upgrade bug to the RF-7's. Here are some initial impressions after having the RF-7's for about a week now. Before removing the RF-5's I played a pink noise track and recorded the SPL at a given volume setting. Installed the RF-7's and played the same track at the same volume setting. SPL produced by the RF-7's was a tad over 2 dB higher. This is probably a reasonably good reference as to the increase in speaker effiency of the RF-7 over the RF-5. During the first 3 days of continuous play I did not do any serious critical listening. Had the RF-7's placed in the same position as the previous RF-5's and had not changed my sub set-up (crossover setting or sub volume). Initially it seemed that the RF-7's did not have the midrange clarity or sound stage depth of the RF-5's. About day 5 I got a chance to go through the complete sub set-up. Experimented with crossover settings, sub volume and setting up my parametric EQ in-line to the sub amp (EQ is in the low frequency path only). I found that the RF-7's had a good bit more bass output in the 50-100hz range compared to the RF-5's. The crossover setting of 80hz that worked well with the RF-5's just seemed to muddy things up with the RF-7's. I'm finding that a crossover setting of 50hz works much better with the 7's. The RF-5's had been placed about 5 feet from the front wall to the front of the speaker. I repositioned the RF-7's so the distance from front wall to front of the speaker is about 4 feet. Also moved the speakers so that the total distance between them was increased by about 1 foot. This seemed to really improve midrange clarity. Will have to listen to the system for a few day with this set-up. I guess the interesting point here is that an accurate A - B comparison of speakers is more complicated than just switching back and forth between speaker A and speaker B. Im my case ideal speaker locations for the two are not the same and ideal sub set-up is quite different. One other note, as others have found, the foam insert visible through the rear ports was out of position on one of my speakers so that it was partially covering the ports. It was easy enough to get my hand through the port to tuck the foam up and above the upper 10 inch driver as positioned on the other speaker. Doug C

This is how I do it using pink noise. Pink noise is a signal spanning all frequencies. Start by turning your sub volume knob on the sub all the way down to zero so that there will be no sub output. Play the pink noise and record the sound pressure level from the mains. Then disconnect the speaker cables going to your mains at the sub. Now play the pink noise again turning the sub volume knob up until the sub output equals the output recorded previously from the mains. The output of both should now be approximately the same. Reconnect the main speaker cables and play some familiar music. Tweak the sub volume by ear to your liking. Doug C.

Based on my experience (many hours with a SPL meter and test tones) the old 20 band equalizers are not very useful. The biggest frequency response problem in almost any room will be found below 100hz and usually in very narrow bands. For instance in my room I have a +14 dB peak between 36-40hz. Adjustment bands on most equalizers are much broader than this. In my case you could reduce the +14 dB peak with a standard equalizer but it will also reduce frequencies much lower and higher than the narrow 36-40hz band where my peak exists. The net result being I could get rid of my 36-40hz peak but on the flip side bass below and above this narrow band is left very thin. I have found that a parametric equalizer is very useful for taming frequency response problems below 100hz. I use a Rane PE-17, 5-channel parametric equalizer. Each of the 5 channels has a knob that allow you to precisely dial in the center frequency you want to effect (in my case 38hz). A second knob allows you to set the bandwidth (36-40hz in my case). And a third knob that allows you to set cut or boost in that range (-14 dB in my case). I connect my preamp sub out directly to the equalizer and the output of the equalizer to my sub. This way the equalizer is only in the path of the low frequency content. In my case a 3-channel parametric equalizer would have been more than adequate. I've only got three peaks below 100hz. The equalizer does a nice job cutting peaks. If you have nulls (frequency ranges of low volume) it is difficult to fill these nulls by using the boost on an equalizer. Null areas are areas where frequencies cancel each other out (especially at low frequencies). Boosting these frequencies just results in more cancelation and the net effect is generally no increase in volume. Nulls usually have to be addressed by finding the right speaker and or listening position within the room. Properly setting up an equalizer as described above is a bit complicated. You have to have an SPL meter and a test tone generator or good test tone CD. With no EQ I record the SPL at 2hz increments between 20-100hz. This gives a clear indicating of where peaks & nulls sit within the frequency range. If I have any serious nulls I play with sub phase to see if that will minimize the problem. I prefer subs with a variable 0-180 degree adjustment knob as opposed to a 0 or 180 degree selector swich. I have my sub phase set at 35 degrees for best performance with no equalization. After getting the sub phase optimized then I start setting up the parametric equalizer to cut the two or three room induced peaks that exist. Even high dollar subs will often sound boomy due to these room induced peaks. It's amazing how smooth bass can be when using a good equalizer properly. A note about setting sub phase by ear. Most sub manuals say try setting the sub phase a 0 degrees and listen to the system and then set the phase to 180 degrees and listen to the system. Then select the phase which appears to produce the greatest bass output. I find this method unreliable. When the sub is out of phase with the mains cancelation tends to occur in relatively narrow frequency bands. In other words you may get a serious null say between 50-70hz. This can tend to make the sub sound boomy which is often percieved by the ear as louder when in fact you have the sub out of phase with the mains. When properly phased the bass will be smooth and the sub will not call attention to itself. Doug C

I'm driving a pair of RF-5's with a Decware Select amp (2 watts/channel) with excellent results. I typically listen in the 88-92 dB range which is pretty loud and this little amp has no problems. My room is 12'x 21' x 8' with two large openings into other areas of the house and I do not lack for volume. I like the RF-5's so much I decided to trade up to the RF-7's which should arrive in a couple of weeks. Decware claims this amp actually performs better with 4 Ohm speakers than 8 Ohm. Recently I had a tube go out so I put my Musical Fidelity A3CR (120 watts/channel) SS amp back into the system until new tubes arrived. The A3CR is a great amp but tubes have really spoiled me. Was glad to get the little Decware amp back in the system. Doug C

Me personally I don't like powered towers. A separate sub gives the flexability to place the sub anywhere in the room for best low frequency performance. Best performance location for a sub is seldom the best location for the main speakers. The usual result is that you place the powered towers where the upper frequencies sound best and just accept whatever you get as far as bass performance (a big comprimise in many rooms). Even with full range floor standing speakers the addition of a sub is a significant improvement. I have RF-5's driven by a 2 watt/channel tube amp and love them. Am also using twin SVS Ultra subs. I think the fact that you have such a large room is another reason to go floor standers with a sub. Doug C

If you want the best music play from your HT system larger main speakers (with larger low frequency drivers) help based on my experience. Your mains have to be able to keep up with the sub in the upper low frequencies (80-200hz) to have the best and most seamless bass. This is more important if you like to listen at higher volumes. Let's say as you start to crank your system the sub keeps up but your mains start to loose ground as you ask more of them. For instance when your sub is producing 80 dB output at 50hz, your mains should be capable of producing 80 dB at 150hz. Now if you crank the system up and the sub is producing 95 dB at 50hz and your mains only 88 dB at 150hz (because of smaller low frequency drivers) a critical listener will notice this. If you are just looking for satisfying HT and not especially concerned about music then the smaller main speakers should be satisfactory. Doug C

Over the past year I've been reading alot about the new SACD and DVD-A formats. Supporters of both formats, including Sony have come right out and stated that the current CD format with it's lower sampling rates just does not cut it for serious music listeners. Now I realize they have to say this to sell the new formats but based on my experimentation (curde as it may be) I think there is a lot of truth to the inadequacies of CD. I tend to think that my Klipsch RF-5's are very true to the source (revealing). I think the grainy tendency I hear with the RF-5's when using good quality SS amps is actually very close to what's coming off the CD. Now I can tame that grainy quality by using my Paradigm Studio 100's (coloration of the source) but the sacrifice is loss of detial on more delicate material. Meaning some CD's just loose all their life. I agree that my tube amp (Decware Select 2 watt/channel) colors or smooths out the sound. For my taste I would rather have a speaker that is brutally honest. For me this makes getting the "right" upstream equipment synergy a much easier task. I love the music my Marantz CD-17, Decware Select amp and Klipsch RF-5's crank out. I've listened to the entire Reference line at dealers and have not been impressed. Most systems were set-up to blow you away with HT or speaker placement and/or room acoustics were poor for music play. Doug C

For a long time I was fighting a slight hum from my mains also. I did a bunch of things and finally have dead quiet speakers. Some of the things I did include: I had no grounding rod tied into my main breaker box so I installed one and tied it into the neutral buss bar at the breaker. Had clicks & hum when the frig and AC would come on. Installed Monster power conditioner strips which helped further. Wiring from breaker box to wall outlets were a mess. At some outlets hot & neutral were switched so I corrected this problem. Found one outlet was not grounded and corrected that also. Also found one of my interconnects between the preamp and amp was not making good contact causing low level hiss & hum. I now use Homegrown cables with locking barrels. Doug C

mobile homeless, You are right about most Zen reviews being from tube amp newbies, I'm one of them. I never really looked at tube amps before because of the prices! When I found I could purchase a tube amp from the manufacturer for 700 bucks with a 30 day trial I figured why not? The Zen may not be the end all of tube amps but Decware does make it easy from a price and support standpoint for a newbie to get his/her feet wet and this has to be good for all of those in the business of building and selling tube equipment. My experience with the Zen Select has made it quite clear that there is yet another hole for me to throw money into (tube gear in general). Doug C

I have twin SVS Ultras and an older Velodyne F-1800RII 18" sub. I prefer the two SVS to the single Velodyne. In my listening room there are fewer peaks and nulls in the bass range using twin subs, one located in each of the front corners as opposed to the one big Velodyne in one corner. I've spent 100's of hours with my SPL meter checking out different sub locations and the frequency response. The SVS take up less floor space and are much easier to move around than one large sub. My Velodyne developed a problem a while back with the amp where it wants to pop sometimes when powering-up. I'll have to remove the amp and send it in for service. Considering this problem, I like the Ultra with separate amp. I prefer the SVS over my single Velodyne on music and HT. Again I think alot of this is due to having two subs located in different positions (at least this seems to be the case in my listening room). With twin subs you have the option to locate them in the same area or separately (flexability to locate them best for your room). I've had my SVS over a year now and am extremely satisfied. I use the Rane Parametric EQ that SVS sells also. If you tend to get boomy bass in your listening room the EQ does wonders. My room has a bad peak at 36hz (+14 dB). The peak is a little less of a problem with the SVS than the Velodyne but still troublesome. With the EQ I got rid of the peak and all boom is gone (never knew bass could be this good). Doug C