Rc7 vs rc62ii vs rc3

[Rich_Guy]

Could be that perhaps the RF-3 II's didn't match up correctly. I just know the RC-64 II's, which are really supposed to match up with the new RF-7 II's, sounded the best of all center channels mentioned with the RF-3's. Speaking of RF-5's, I found some on CL for $400 in Cherry and was considering purchasing to replace my RF-3 II's. Yet I'm concerned that the high crossover point is at 2500hz vs the 1950hz of the RF-3's and wouldn't sound as good with the RC-64 II due to lack of warmth. Any thoughts on that? Also, the RF-5 has the same exact woofers as the RF-3's. I called Klipsch this week to see about a replacement woofer for the RF-5 on CL which has one dented cone (common an unfortunate issue with used reference series speakers in general). The Klipsch rep said they had 70 in stock. I then asked if he had any RF-3 8" woofers in stock. He said they are the same part # as the RF-5's. To me that means the RF-5 would offer no sonic advantage over the RF-3 which has very similar specs, same woofers, nearly the same cabinet (larger port and slightly larger RF-5 cabinet for slightly deeper bass response) but with a bigger horn. The bigger horn and same 1" tweeter with much higher crossover point may sound a bit harsh to me as well so I haven't pulled the trigger yet. Not sure why Klipsch chose to change the crossover point on RF-5's and decrease the 'warmth' compared to the same generation RF-7's (2100hz)?

I think as far as the original vs the new II series they probably don't mix well and would not match timbre. I think it would be best to keep the series matched and not mix one with the other. Of course this wouldn't apply to the older RF-3 II which would be in the original series not the new II series.

The RF-3 / RF-3 II and RF-5 share the same woofer but everything else is different. The RF-5 is nearly 4 inches taller, has an 8 inch horn vs the 6 inch on the RF-3, the tweeters are different, the crossover is not the same and the port is not the same. They are quite different sounding speakers as well as the RF-5 having the beautiful real wood finish. I think the RF-5's are an extremely accurate, natural sounding speaker when set up properly.

[willland]

I was glad I did not sell my RC-64 II! The RC-64 II has the lowest crossover point of all the speakers and NO 'taper array' so that all four woofers output all frequencies up to the 1400hz crossover point for the tweeter.

Copper,

The RC-64II is of the tapered array design like the RC-64.

I contacted Klipsch technical support and Steve Philips sent a returned email stating that fact.

Here is some correspondence from another thread:

BluBitRates:

As far as improvement over the original rc-64, i really like that they went with a standard crossover between the woofers and tweeter.

Blu,

They still employ the tapered array design like in the RC-64. All (4) woofers are activated at the lowest frequencies, then (2), then just the horn.

Here is the thread and some correspondance with Steve Phillips and myself through email:

http://forums.klipsch.com/forums/p/144655/1482879.aspx

Hey, you even responded in that thread.

Bill

Bill

[CopperCone]

Hi Bill,

I don't see that I responded to that particular post? Thanks for referring me to it. I see you found out the tapered array gap IS designed into the RC-64II. However, the sonic gap has significantly closed from a crossover point perspective. 1100/1400 (RC64II) vs 550/1950 (RC-7). This is perhaps why I was not able to notice as much bias as I did with the RC-7. In addtion, the RC-64II seems more balanced sonically. This is likely due to having both sides of the speaker having two woofers reproducing sound up to the middle tweeter's crossover frequency. On the RC-7, one side of the tweeter has a woofer only reproducing sound up to 550Hz (little to no dialogue). The right side woofer is markedly more engaged by producing frequencies from 550Hz all the way up to the 1950Hz tweeter crossover point. This represents a 1400Hz gap between the two woofers on the RC-7 vs only a minimal 300Hz gap on the RC-64II. My ears may have interpreted a more seemless a transition between woofers. Also, it would seem that most of the time all four woofers would be engaged during movie dialogue and music. All things being the same in my system (no changes to eq settings etc..), I was fortunate enough to have the opportunity to rotate all three Centers Channels on the same day (RC-64II, RC-7, RC-3) and playing same movies and music tracks. The new technical information above seems to validate my impressions of sonic reproduction differences. I suspect that if I sat farther away than 9 feet from the RC-7 center channel I may not have noticed the right-side sonic bias as much, yet the speaker still didn't see seem nearly as dynamic during classical music tracks as the RC-64II (nor the previously owned RC-64 I had). I think Klipsch's updated design and technology in the later center speakers is really an improvement - yet the prices have also got more steep The RF-3 and RF-3II's are crossed at a low enough point for me (1950Hz) to still feel like a good match to the new 'warmer' center channels. I passed on buying a used set of RF-7's and RF-5's recently because of the 2500Hz crossover point seemed way to high for a good timber match with the RC-64II. Unfortunately, I didn't get to hear them first with my RC-64II to verify but wasn't willing to drop the cash for a CL buy and take that gamble

I had an ideal opportunity to cycle through several different center channels in my system as well as reviewing specs online to really form a good impression and understanding of what was the best fit for my main system. However, two differnent people from this forum may have two totally different impressions and conclusions It's all part of the fun and it seems more and more dated, but decent condition, Klipsch speakers of different era's, are showing up on CL and making it possible to rotate through various components and decide to keep or resell while breaking even. I may need to wait a while before some RF-82 II's show up on CL so I can see if they would offer any significant improvement over my RF-3 IIs

Neal

[Heritage_Head]

Hi Bill,

I don't see that I responded to that particular post? Thanks for referring me to it. I see you found out the tapered array gap IS designed into the RC-64II. However, the sonic gap has significantly closed from a crossover point perspective. 1100/1400 (RC64II) vs 550/1950 (RC-7). This is perhaps why I was not able to notice as much bias as I did with the RC-7. In addtion, the RC-64II seems more balanced sonically. This is likely due to having both sides of the speaker having two woofers reproducing sound up to the middle tweeter's crossover frequency. On the RC-7, one side of the tweeter has a woofer only reproducing sound up to 550Hz (little to no dialogue). The right side woofer is markedly more engaged by producing frequencies from 550Hz all the way up to the 1950Hz tweeter crossover point. This represents a 1400Hz gap between the two woofers on the RC-7 vs only a minimal 300Hz gap on the RC-64II. My ears may have interpreted a more seemless a transition between woofers. Also, it would seem that most of the time all four woofers would be engaged during movie dialogue and music. All things being the same in my system (no changes to eq settings etc..), I was fortunate enough to have the opportunity to rotate all three Centers Channels on the same day (RC-64II, RC-7, RC-3) and playing same movies and music tracks. The new technical information above seems to validate my impressions of sonic reproduction differences. I suspect that if I sat farther away than 9 feet from the RC-7 center channel I may not have noticed the right-side sonic bias as much, yet the speaker still didn't see seem nearly as dynamic during classical music tracks as the RC-64II (nor the previously owned RC-64 I had). I think Klipsch's updated design and technology in the later center speakers is really an improvement - yet the prices have also got more steep The RF-3 and RF-3II's are crossed at a low enough point for me (1950Hz) to still feel like a good match to the new 'warmer' center channels. I passed on buying a used set of RF-7's and RF-5's recently because of the 2500Hz crossover point seemed way to high for a good timber match with the RC-64II. Unfortunately, I didn't get to hear them first with my RC-64II to verify but wasn't willing to drop the cash for a CL buy and take that gamble

I had an ideal opportunity to cycle through several different center channels in my system as well as reviewing specs online to really form a good impression and understanding of what was the best fit for my main system. However, two differnent people from this forum may have two totally different impressions and conclusions It's all part of the fun and it seems more and more dated, but decent condition, Klipsch speakers of different era's, are showing up on CL and making it possible to rotate through various components and decide to keep or resell while breaking even. I may need to wait a while before some RF-82 II's show up on CL so I can see if they would offer any significant improvement over my RF-3 IIs

Neal

Wow I had no idea the tapered array gap on the rc-7 was like

that. That seems very strange but other than the size I can’t really recall

anyone every saying anything but good things about the rc-7.

[willland]

I don't see that I responded to that particular post? Thanks for referring me to it.

Neal, You are correct. I think I meant to reference another post that you gave imput on. Can't seem to find it right now.

Sorry about my obvious error.

Bill

[CHASLS2]

I'm happy with my RC7, sure blows away a RC52 i had used with my RF63's and first set of RF7's.

Now that i have both of my RF7's amped with a UPA2 , my RC7 does a great job with movies. I would try out a RC64ll in a heartbeat if i found one local to my area.

[Zen Traveler]

I can speak to the various center channels. I currently have an RC-3 and an RC-64 II, have had an RC-7 thinking to replace the RC-64 II with this past month but sold it, and have had an RC-64 for a few months last year, and also had a WC-42 for six months prior to going to reference series (not worth mentioning it's attributes here). Surprisingly, I sold my RC-7 after two weeks when it didn't sound nearly as balanced as the RC-3. I was thinking bigger is better regarding the drivers and the 8" horn. I was wrong. Vocals seemed to come from the right side of speaker during movies and music and it was really noticable. I'm thinking this has to do with the 'tapered array' technology...

This is surprising and am wondering if possibly one of the woofers wasn't hooked up.[^o)] The RC-7 is considerably more "balanced" than the RC-3 and the tweeter is definitely cleaner than in my RF-3s (and RC-3) when I tried them up front with my RC-7. Insofar as how the RF-3s compare with the RF-7s up front, it's night and day in clarity and dynamics and my RC-7 blends seamless like it was designed to do...In fact what you are reporting is the first time I've heard that description of the RC-7. Btw, I am not trying to be argumentative but giving a second opinion and am curious how the RC-64II would compare with the original RF-7s up front.

Could be that perhaps the RF-3 II's didn't match up correctly. I just know the RC-64 II's, which are really supposed to match up with the new RF-7 II's, sounded the best of all center channels mentioned with the RF-3's.

If what you are reporting can be confirmed then it stands to reason that the RC-64II could possibly be the best match for a myriad of old and new Reference speakers but your experience with the RC-7 compared to the RC-3 (not to say that there wasn't a more seamless match with it up front with the RF-3s) makes me think you may have had a "bad" RC-7. My 2 cents.

[CopperCone]

lNot sure my RC-7 was 'bad' or not as volume levels for woofers/tweeter seemed just fine and what each speaker was reproducing seemed to match the specs (only mid bass for left speaker 45-550Hz for example). Also, I sold that RC-7 to another forum member and they reported to me they were quite pleased with it. So, it's merely my opinion that the RC-64 II, to my ears, seemed markedly smoother than the RC-7 with an apparently better 'tie-in' with the much lower tweeter crossover point. I noted this when listening to violin music of Vivaldi. Transitions seemed to be missing. To confirm, I'd unplug the RC-7 and then plug the RC-64 II back in. I did this a few times and am certain some frequencies appeared to be subdued or missing from the RC-7 when listening with a critical ear. I am now wondering, after occasionally reading entries in this forum which discuss a 'DEAN-G' Custom crossover if that solution creates a 'warmer' crossover point? Anyhow, I just knew I couldn't live with that. I was hoping that the 8" tweeter horn and big woofers would make some kind of difference that may prompt me to sell my rc-64II. What the experience did for me was help me justify the big chunk of change I spent on the RC-64 II (retail with 30% discount since I also bought RC-62 II's) was well worth it! Not for nothing, the RC-64II also has an awsome looking all-wood front fascia - plasticy front plates of RC-7 and former RC-64 gone. Gives the speaker a much more refined look with the grill off to match the much more refined/warm sound it produces. I'm not trying to knock the RC-7 at all and anyone who prefers that speaker over the new line. I was actually hoping I'd like it , at least the same or more than my RC-64II, as the RC-7 was VERY difficult for me to find and for only $300! I could have then tried to sell my current center and perhaps could have potentially recovered back $500 by selling on CL Just as a note, the RS-64II's sound markedly more refined than the RS-3's, and again much more clams to get a set. However, in the 7.1 setup they all play together nicely I haven't heard RS-7's yet but probably wouldn't risk buying at this point since I didn't enjoy the matching center. There may still be a set for sale on CL in Conn. for $400 but I fear I may have difficulty turning those around if needed.

[Heritage_Head]

lNot sure my RC-7 was 'bad' or not as volume levels for woofers/tweeter seemed just fine and what each speaker was reproducing seemed to match the specs (only mid bass for left speaker 45-550Hz for example). Also, I sold that RC-7 to another forum member and they reported to me they were quite pleased with it. So, it's merely my opinion that the RC-64 II, to my ears, seemed markedly smoother than the RC-7 with an apparently better 'tie-in' with the much lower tweeter crossover point. I noted this when listening to violin music of Vivaldi. Transitions seemed to be missing. To confirm, I'd unplug the RC-7 and then plug the RC-64 II back in. I did this a few times and am certain some frequencies appeared to be subdued or missing from the RC-7 when listening with a critical ear. I am now wondering, after occasionally reading entries in this forum which discuss a 'DEAN-G' Custom crossover if that solution creates a 'warmer' crossover point? Anyhow, I just knew I couldn't live with that. I was hoping that the 8" tweeter horn and big woofers would make some kind of difference that may prompt me to sell my rc-64II. What the experience did for me was help me justify the big chunk of change I spent on the RC-64 II (retail with 30% discount since I also bought RC-62 II's) was well worth it! Not for nothing, the RC-64II also has an awsome looking all-wood front fascia - plasticy front plates of RC-7 and former RC-64 gone. Gives the speaker a much more refined look with the grill off to match the much more refined/warm sound it produces. I'm not trying to knock the RC-7 at all and anyone who prefers that speaker over the new line. I was actually hoping I'd like it , at least the same or more than my RC-64II, as the RC-7 was VERY difficult for me to find and for only $300! I could have then tried to sell my current center and perhaps could have potentially recovered back $500 by selling on CL Just as a note, the RS-64II's sound markedly more refined than the RS-3's, and again much more clams to get a set. However, in the 7.1 setup they all play together nicely I haven't heard RS-7's yet but probably wouldn't risk buying at this point since I didn't enjoy the matching center. There may still be a set for sale on CL in Conn. for $400 but I fear I may have difficulty turning those around if needed.

All you need now are the rf-7ii []

[Zen Traveler]

lNot sure my RC-7 was 'bad' or not as volume levels for woofers/tweeter seemed just fine and what each speaker was reproducing seemed to match the specs (only mid bass for left speaker 45-550Hz for example). Also, I sold that RC-7 to another forum member and they reported to me they were quite pleased with it. So, it's merely my opinion that the RC-64 II, to my ears, seemed markedly smoother than the RC-7 with an apparently better 'tie-in' with the much lower tweeter crossover point. I noted this when listening to violin music of Vivaldi. Transitions seemed to be missing. To confirm, I'd unplug the RC-7 and then plug the RC-64 II back in. I did this a few times and am certain some frequencies appeared to be subdued or missing from the RC-7 when listening with a critical ear.

I appreciate you sharing your opinion and wondered if the speaker positions could have had something to do with what you experienced and did you reposition the speakers when doing the tests? I am also curious if the person you sold the RC-7 heard the phenomena of only the "right speaker," ( I gather you mean the right driver on the RC-7 ) working on those frequencies or if you hadn't read about the "tapered array" design, if it would've influenced your initial description of noticing that "voices appeard to be only coming out of the right side of the speaker."

I am now wondering, after occasionally reading entries in this forum which discuss a 'DEAN-G' Custom crossover if that solution creates a 'warmer' crossover point?

I can see and have experienced that the RC-7 didn't sound good with RF-3s up front (note: I thought the RF-3's highs weren't as refined/clear as the RC-7s and it definitely wasn't a seamless match) , but given how you described the frequencies you noticed being missing in the RC-7 makes me wonder how you would feel with older RF-7s paired with your RC-64ii. []

... What the experience did for me was help me justify the big chunk of change I spent on the RC-64 II (retail with 30% discount since I also bought RC-62 II's) was well worth it! Not for nothing, the RC-64II also has an awsome looking all-wood front fascia - plasticy front plates of RC-7 and former RC-64 gone. Gives the speaker a much more refined look with the grill off to match the much more refined/warm sound it produces.

I agree that the RC-64ii looks awesome, but your description makes me wonder if it's attractiveness helped influence your opinion of how it sounds. Again, I am not being purposefully argumentative but given you thought the RC-3 was superior to the RC-7 and now think the RC-64ii blends seamlessly with your RF-3s the question for us Original RF-7 owners is how the RC-64ii plays with our speakers.

Just as a note, the RS-64II's sound markedly more refined than the RS-3's, and again much more clams to get a set. However, in the 7.1 setup they all play together nicely I haven't heard RS-7's yet but probably wouldn't risk buying at this point since I didn't enjoy the matching center. There may still be a set for sale on CL in Conn. for $400 but I fear I may have difficulty turning those around if needed.

I feel like you were saying the RC-64ii sounded more refined compared to the RC-3 (not "RS-64ii/RS-3") and imo, any of the WDST surround speakers will work with different Reference setups as long as they are level matched.

[Zen Traveler]

Surprisingly, I sold my RC-7 after two weeks when it didn't sound nearly as balanced as the RC-3. I was thinking bigger is better regarding the drivers and the 8" horn. I was wrong. Vocals seemed to come from the right side of speaker during movies and music and it was really noticable. I'm thinking this has to do with the 'tapered array' technology.

I was glad I did not sell my RC-64 II! The RC-64 II has the lowest crossover point of all the speakers and NO 'taper array' so that all four woofers output all frequencies up to the 1400hz crossover point for the tweeter.

Copper,

The RC-64II is of the tapered array design like the RC-64.

Fwiw, the RC-3 also has the tradmarked Tapered Array design.

[Zen Traveler]

.... I passed on buying a used set of RF-7's and RF-5's recently because of the 2500Hz crossover point seemed way to high for a good timber match with the RC-64II. Unfortunately, I didn't get to hear them first with my RC-64II to verify but wasn't willing to drop the cash for a CL buy and take that gamble

... I may need to wait a while before some RF-82 II's show up on CL so I can see if they would offer any significant improvement over my RF-3 IIs

You definitely seem to do your homework but imo, the RF-82s aren't an "upgrade" to the RF-3s (possibly a lateral move) and the RF-7s would be a significant upgrade to your RF-3s! That being said, I appreciate that the RC-64ii works in your current configuration. I may give up my RC-7 for the newer model, but if you are considering RF-82s instead of RF-7s to go with your RC-64ii, it would be a surprise if the former were a better sonic match for it.

[CopperCone]

On 7/6/2011 at 9:28 PM, Rich_Guy said:

CopperCone, that's odd. I had an RC-3 for years and replaced it with an RC-7 the difference was night and day. The RC-7 matched and balanced flawlessly with my RF-5's. I don't think I have ever heard a more well balanced and matched set of front and center speakers. Timbre is perfect between the 3 speakers and they blend perfectly, voices seem to come from the actors mouths and all effects seem perfectly placed.

I think there were other problems causing your poor experience, either a bad speaker, room conditions/placement or something along those lines.

12 years later I wish to concur that I must have had a “bad” Rc-7 back then, perhaps a woofer was blown. I now have 3 Rc-7 as of this year for 3 of my rooms and am trying to sell my Rc-64ii and my two Rc-62iis as although the Rc-64 ii comes close the the RC-7 in terms of power and detail it has no where near the “hit you in the chest” impact of the Rc-7 - it just looks prettier  also, the rc64ii doesn’t have ports and doesn’t hit as low as the 7 while it also seems the 4 x 6” woofers don't hit as hard as the two 8” woofers of the 7. For the used prices for these two speakers , the 64ii costs double which also make getting your hands on a $400 Rc-7 a much better ROI for your ears. I will say I have Rf-7s and likely the proper timber matching is a big factor .. but still cannon fire in movies at same volume hits harder with the rc-7 over the 64ii imho.