Arky Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 My opinion yes, unless you're going to have to eat spam sandwiches for the next year. Everyone seeks conformation but unfortunately your ears are the only valid measuring device. I bet you enjoy whichever Klipsch spkr choice you make. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnhart Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 How is your SVS 16-46 PC-Plus subwoofer compared to a regular (square type) sub? I am thinking of getting one of those,or a MFW15 (AV123). Thanks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J.4knee Posted January 13, 2009 Share Posted January 13, 2009 IMO the CW III is a notable improvement in sound quality over it's predecessors. That said the CW is my least favorite of the Heritage Series. Now having said that I prefer the Heritage line in general to the Reference Series. So where am I going with this. Here comes the curve ball. The RF 7 needs a serious amp to push it's bass given the ultra low impedance of the woofers. However when properly driven I have to say I tend to give a slight nod to the RF7 over the CW. The CW III makes that nod even smaller. These are two extremely different sounding speakers though, the difference is so dramatic IMO you should not make a decision without making an honest attempt to hear them both. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InVeNtOr Posted January 13, 2009 Share Posted January 13, 2009 just to throw my own curve ball.... those that say the CWlll is better than the RF-7, is that a stock RF-7 or one that has been upgraded by Dean? how does the CWlll vs. a Dean RF-7? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arky Posted January 13, 2009 Share Posted January 13, 2009 is that a stock RF-7 or one that has been upgraded by Dean? Either way, i've owned both ways. That's simply my preference though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InVeNtOr Posted January 13, 2009 Share Posted January 13, 2009 Arky, yeah i knew that was your answer. my only issue with having CW's is i don't like the surround situtuion. i prefer my surrounds to be small. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamesV Posted January 13, 2009 Share Posted January 13, 2009 Mojo, Since you already had the RF-7 then I think you should stick with them. With out being able to listen to the CW III that will be a tough sale, everyone has an opinion but it's your ears that have to be happy at the end of the day. I have only listened to the CW III at a dealer and I never listened to the CW II but the CW III is say to be better, over all, then both. Once again, if you have to purchase the CW III blind, then just go with the RF-7 and enjoy. James Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MojoX Posted January 17, 2009 Author Share Posted January 17, 2009 Thanks for your answers. Tomorrow I will get the RF-7 in cherry with the RC-7 :-). I couldn't bring myself to spend so much money without listen to the Cornwalls. But just in case I will be able to listen to them in the future and like them: Can I use the RF-7s as surrounds and the RC-7 as the centre then (I only use movies with 5.1/5.0)...? Mojo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamesV Posted January 17, 2009 Share Posted January 17, 2009 Can I use the RF-7s as surrounds and the RC-7 as the centre then (I only use movies with 5.1/5.0)...? No, the timber match across the front will not match. If you do decide to get the CW III down the line you should just use them for a 2-channel setup. Unless you want to change out the HT speakers, being the RF-7's and RC-7. James Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zen Traveler Posted January 17, 2009 Share Posted January 17, 2009 Thanks for your answers. Tomorrow I will get the RF-7 in cherry with the RC-7 :-). ...: Can I use the RF-7s as surrounds and the RC-7 as the centre then (I only use movies with 5.1/5.0)...? Mojo Congratulations! Post back what you think. If I had the space I would have a 2nd pair of RF-7s as side surrounds. [] Btw, did you purchase from Werner Enge? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MojoX Posted January 17, 2009 Author Share Posted January 17, 2009 Werner Enge seems to be nice but I had to buy the RF-7s used from a private guy because they aren't available in official shops. As I already had the RF-7 I can say that they sounded well with a Yama 2600 receiver (the highs were a little shrill though) and with a creek destiny combination they sounded amazing and beautiful (the highs were not a weakness anymore but a strength...). This time I could imagine trying rotel.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arky Posted January 17, 2009 Share Posted January 17, 2009 No, the timber match across the front will not match I tried this when I moved to heritage. The timbre mismatch was a distraction. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winchester21 Posted January 18, 2009 Share Posted January 18, 2009 The RF7s-are great speakers-maybe the best in the reference line. . Do listen to the Cornwalls when you get a chance Got a set of vintage Corns yesterday- I am ruined. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MojoX Posted January 18, 2009 Author Share Posted January 18, 2009 As long as you are happy while being ruined....[] I got my RF-7s (and the RC-7) today. They are really beautiful and after 5 minutes of accomodating to the sound ( In the last few months I only listened to "normal" speakers in shopws...) I was happy and didn't know how I could "survive" without them a few months.... Although I have to power them with a Yamaha RXV-2600 at the moment and I remember how the great amp Creek Destiny sounded with them... This is quite a difference and I think I have to spend some money again. Can anyone tell me how the Rotel RB-1080 sound with the RF-7s? You said that the RC-64 works well with the Cornwalls.Then I assume that the RC-7 would also work or am I wrong? And then the RF-7s would work as surrounds when I should get the CW III I guess ( until I maybe buy used reference surrounds...) Although I am happy now with the RF-7s I think I could be in heaven (and ruined) when I also have the CW III for stereo... This would be the perfect Klipsch apartment.... But I hope my sanity wins...[] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zen Traveler Posted January 18, 2009 Share Posted January 18, 2009 ...And then the RF-7s would work as surrounds when I should get the CW III I guess ( until I maybe buy used reference surrounds...) I wouldn't think the RF-7 would be a good choice for surrounds with the Cornwalls. My comment was in regard to getting a second pair of RF-7s for surround duty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MojoX Posted January 26, 2009 Author Share Posted January 26, 2009 Hi, surrounds are not that important for me. I am thinking about going without surrounds and ordering the Cornwalls instead. The RF-7s are great (although I don' t have a good seperate amp yet) but I feel like I need a step up.... Then I would use the Cornwalls for 2-channel and the RF-7s for homecinema (with a not so good projector then)... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.