RF-63 review versus RF-7s

[Mr. RF62]

Unrestrain the room...

[Fish]

Unrestrain the gear.....

[Zen Traveler]

It is generally said that the RF-83's are more laid back in their sound, smoother if you will.

That's exactly what several sales guys told me after auditioning the RF-83, as they were trying to get me to get rid of my RF-7s. ;-)

I agree that everyone's hearing is different. Imo, the RF-7s/RC-7's highs sound more like the KL-650s, with better bass response, whereas the RF-83/RC-64 sound more laid back/warmer and not as precise in vocals and dialog. That being said, I did not compare the systems side-by-side or in the same room (edit: but did hear them all on several occasions).

[MrMcGoo]

My second pair of Rf-63s were installed mid-week as side surrounds. The difference has surpassed my wildest espectations with 7.1 material. Surround backs are RS-7s as floor standers will not fit.

The RF-63s all around are cleaner than my prior setup not to count better balanced and seamless. New details are showing up in movies that I've watched many times. There is no way small surrounds can keep up with the big boys IMO. I'm using a crossover of 50 Hz on Thump's recommendation and after tweaking to get tighter bass, the setup is excellent.

The RF-7s still have a better presence, but the RF-63s do have a better attack, more detail and are generally cleaner. I suspect that the identical drivers add to the cleaner sound. The small amount of coloration in each speaker is identical instead of different coloration with each speaker.

Now I have to watch and listen to all my reference movies again. As I watch more movies I will add to my findings.

Bill

[Zen Traveler]

..The RF-63s all around are cleaner than my prior setup not to count better balanced and seamless. New details are showing up in movies that I've watched many times. There is no way small surrounds can keep up with the big boys IMO. I'm using a crossover of 50 Hz on Thump's recommendation and after tweaking to get tighter bass, the setup is excellent...

I have tried RB-75s as surrounds but prefer my RF-3 towers (which I have raised to the same height as my RF-7s) in that position and never use my RS-7s which are "B" surrounds. Multichannel music IS what I listen to several hours a evening and the way that my Denon matrixs the rear channels (RB-75) into 7.1 is awesome. For movies I also prefer having 5.1 material converted to 7.1 with direct radiating speakers firing towards me instead of WDST spreading out the sound. I have the RF-7s and RF-3s and RB-75s crossed at 60 Hz and the low end being sent to a front RSW-12 and a rear RSW-15...Simply Awesome. Btw, congrats on the new setup, MrMcgoo. [Y]

[masterxela]

Very nice review. Functional, and devoid of the meaningless language that plagues 95% of speaker reviews nowadays.

(I sold a power conditioner the other day, and the guy said, "So do you hear a difference with the receiver plugged into it?" I said, "Well the bass is faster and the highs are more airy, NOT)

Having owned 2 pairs of rf-7's, one dean g'd, it was particulary insightful.

I've been thinking about getting some 63's for awhile now; have kg4.2's up front right now. For the record, they are absolutely killer for $200-300. I a/b'd them against my rf-7's several times, and sensitivity dominates the comparison, but depending on the recording, I preferred the kg's to the 7's, especially in the high end. It's just more natural on acoustic stuff.

I could max out my spl meter at 126db with the rf-7's, and the denon with headroom. No way with the kg's. But, my 4 18" subs might have been supplying a bit of that 126 reading....

[skonopa]

I have tried RB-75s as surrounds but prefer my RF-3 towers (which I have raised to the same height as my RF-7s) in that position and never use my RS-7s which are "B" surrounds. Multichannel music IS what I listen to several hours a evening and the way that my Denon matrixs the rear channels (RB-75) into 7.1 is awesome. For movies I also prefer having 5.1 material converted to 7.1 with direct radiating speakers firing towards me instead of WDST spreading out the sound. I have the RF-7s and RF-3s and RB-75s crossed at 60 Hz and the low end being sent to a front RSW-12 and a rear RSW-15...Simply Awesome. Btw, congrats on the new setup, MrMcgoo.

Your system is pretty similiar to mine, except that I have a single RC-7 in the back (just don't have room to try to put a pair of something like RB-75s back there), plus I DO have RF-5s as my side-surrounds, along with a pair of RS-7s as the 'B' surrounds. The other difference is that I have a REL Storm III and an RW-12d for subs (don't have any of the RSW line).

From my personal experience, I found that I actually do like the RS-7s when watching movies or just watching TV. However, for playing music, including listening to concert DVDs, I found I much prefer to have the RF-5s engaged.

For the original poster - very interesting review, comparing the RF-7s with the RF-63s. Again, as others pointed out, I wonder how much of that is just having pretty much identical speakers all the way around as well as the room itself.

As for me, I am sticking with my '7s, as I just love how they sound in my room, with the music and material I typically play through them. I guess tha is why Klipsch has so many lines and such. The fact they are bringing back the RF-7s and RF-5s must really say something about just how good those speakers actually where.