cubdog Posted February 2, 2012 Share Posted February 2, 2012 Who else uses their RF7 IIs for a dedicated 2 channel setup? What amp are you using to drive them? It seems most people like them as HT speakers. My HT consists of four CF3 some I'm not losing out on much there. cubdog Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wuzzzer Posted February 2, 2012 Share Posted February 2, 2012 They'd rock for two channel listening. Something with a stout power supply would be in order. An Emotiva UPA-2 would be a great choice and not break the bank. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ski Bum Posted February 2, 2012 Share Posted February 2, 2012 Recently heard them, guy had an ATI stereo amp, unsure of model. It was a very nice sounding rig, Heritage-esque even. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willland Posted February 2, 2012 Share Posted February 2, 2012 A pair of these will sound nice. http://community.klipsch.com/forums/t/159072.aspx or this will drive your RF-7II's with ease. http://app.audiogon.com/listings/450735 Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cubdog Posted February 2, 2012 Author Share Posted February 2, 2012 I'm happy with my amps. I just wanted to know who else is using RF7 IIs in a 2 channel system. cubdog Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willland Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 I'm happy with my amps. I just wanted to know who else is using RF7 IIs in a 2 channel system. Sorry, I misunderstood the point of this statement, "What amp are you using to drive them?" Next time I will read the entire post to understand the context.[:$] You do have some nice amps.[Y] Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cubdog Posted February 4, 2012 Author Share Posted February 4, 2012 I find it hard to believe that no one else uses RF7 IIs in a two channel system. I enjoy them much more than I did my Cornwalls or KG4s. Curious. cubdog Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dennie Posted February 4, 2012 Share Posted February 4, 2012 I find it hard to believe that no one else uses RF7 IIs in a two channel system. I enjoy them much more than I did my Cornwalls or KG4s. Curious. cubdog I Know! Dennie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heritage_Head Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 Do you run a sub with them? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cubdog Posted February 5, 2012 Author Share Posted February 5, 2012 Do you run a sub with them? I do, a Mirage BP150. I don't think they need a sub but I have an extra one so why not. cubdog Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heritage_Head Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 I don’t really use them for 2 channel but I would guess they would be really good. Glad to hear your happy with them. [] I do listen to sacd and super cds and they sound as good as anything I have ever heard. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moray james Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 Cubdog: what aspects of the RF7ll do you prefer over the CF3? Is there anything about the CF3 that you prefer? I am surprised because you are running two dual ten inch woofers and a single mid/hi horn in both speakers. With the RF7 ll you have shifted your crossover point up from about 800 Hz in the CF3 to about 1200 Hz. in the RF7 ll. Frankly given the larger mid/hi horn in the CF3 I would expect it to be the better sounding speaker. I am speculating here with information gleaned from the forum and users. I have not had the opportunity to listen to both together. I do have the parts for a pair of CF3. I think I will pull the horn and the crossover out of storage and drop them into the dual ten woofers in my KLF20 speakers just to see how they sound sitting on top of the cabinets. So are there similarities or are these very different speakers? Which version of CF3 do you have? I am always interesten in hearing more especially about the CF3. I have not been impressed enough with the Rf series to jump from three ways to the RF brand of two way mainly because of the crossover point. The CF3 though has appealed to me for some time and I have decided that I thinkit will be the two way which makes me want to sell my three ways. Time will tell on that one. Looking forward to reading further comments from you regarding these two speakers. Best regards Moray James. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cubdog Posted February 6, 2012 Author Share Posted February 6, 2012 Cubdog: what aspects of the RF7ll do you prefer over the CF3? Is there anything about the CF3 that you prefer? I am surprised because you are running two dual ten inch woofers and a single mid/hi horn in both speakers. With the RF7 ll you have shifted your crossover point up from about 800 Hz in the CF3 to about 1200 Hz. in the RF7 ll. Frankly given the larger mid/hi horn in the CF3 I would expect it to be the better sounding speaker. I am speculating here with information gleaned from the forum and users. I have not had the opportunity to listen to both together. I do have the parts for a pair of CF3. I think I will pull the horn and the crossover out of storage and drop them into the dual ten woofers in my KLF20 speakers just to see how they sound sitting on top of the cabinets. So are there similarities or are these very different speakers? Which version of CF3 do you have? I am always interesten in hearing more especially about the CF3. I have not been impressed enough with the Rf series to jump from three ways to the RF brand of two way mainly because of the crossover point. The CF3 though has appealed to me for some time and I have decided that I thinkit will be the two way which makes me want to sell my three ways. Time will tell on that one. Looking forward to reading further comments from you regarding these two speakers. Best regards Moray James. Moray, I have not done any more comparisons since our last correspondence. If my back ever improves I hope to do some in depth listening of the CF3, version 2, and the RF7IIs on my Bel Canto system. It is impossible for me to draw any conclusions with my current setups being vastly different. cubdog Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stripedcat99 Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 Im also interested in responses to this question. I currently am running Forte II's, driven by one of several Marantz vintage receiver / amps, and RB81's, same electronics. I wouldn't be replacing the Forte II's, just adding a system, essentially. Good, tight bass WITHOUT using a sub is one REQUIREMENT....a center channel wouldn't be out of the question, and am interested in exploring that as a separate issue......(that would probably be designed/built by me, or using one RB81, unless someone has a NIB Academy laying about somewhere, lol..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Superstocker Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 I do not have the RF 7II's but my RF7's are connected to a McIntosh MA6500. I am very happy with the results. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beta Posted February 16, 2012 Share Posted February 16, 2012 I just logged on to this forum to ask this exact question. I'm currently using a pair of Heresy IIIs in my 2 channel system. Electronics consist of a quality tube amp and tube preamp. Given my listening room constraints (furniture etc.), I need to have the Heresy IIIs slightly elevated up off the floor (i.e. on custom stands). I am using a sub to try to make up for the Heresy IIIs being elevated and their lack of lower end. However, I have found it simply too difficult to adaquately (to my ears) integrate my sub with these speakers. Therefore, I am seriously considering the RF 7IIs. Use is 2 channel only. Never for HT. Again, given room constraints, Cornwall IIIs, Cornscalas, La Scala IIs and Klipschorns are simply not an option for me. Their footprints are, unfortunately, to big for my situation. I love the upper end of the Heresy IIIs. However, their lower end, even with a sub, isn't working for me. Any input on RF7IIs for 2 channel would be most appreciated. Thank you! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danzo Posted February 16, 2012 Share Posted February 16, 2012 Beta do yourself a favour and try Forte II. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cubdog Posted February 16, 2012 Author Share Posted February 16, 2012 I just logged on to this forum to ask this exact question. I'm currently using a pair of Heresy IIIs in my 2 channel system. Electronics consist of a quality tube amp and tube preamp. Given my listening room constraints (furniture etc.), I need to have the Heresy IIIs slightly elevated up off the floor (i.e. on custom stands). I am using a sub to try to make up for the Heresy IIIs being elevated and their lack of lower end. However, I have found it simply too difficult to adaquately (to my ears) integrate my sub with these speakers. Therefore, I am seriously considering the RF 7IIs. Use is 2 channel only. Never for HT. Again, given room constraints, Cornwall IIIs, Cornscalas, La Scala IIs and Klipschorns are simply not an option for me. Their footprints are, unfortunately, to big for my situation. I love the upper end of the Heresy IIIs. However, their lower end, even with a sub, isn't working for me. Any input on RF7IIs for 2 channel would be most appreciated. Thank you! Beta, obviously I am very happy using RF7 IIs for my 2 channel system. I have in the past used Dahlquist DQ10, DQ30s, JBL L96 and L112, Cornwalls and other nice speakers for my 2 channel setup. The 7s aren't going anywhere soon. I remain baffled as to their lack of popularity aside from HT use. cubdog Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CECAA850 Posted February 16, 2012 Share Posted February 16, 2012 Beta do yourself a favour and try Forte II. Have you done a side by side comparison, same electronics, same room between the two? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moray james Posted February 16, 2012 Share Posted February 16, 2012 Beta: welcome to the forum though you have been on for a little while. I have a pair of Heresy (late 85) and a pair of Heresy lll (2010) I have found with both the Heresy that I have as well as with the several other Klipsch that I have that you do obtain better results when the speakers are raised. I have found the best results when the speaker is raised up so that bottom edge of the tweeter is up of the floor at about 38 -39 inches. This will place the horns at ear level when seated. With a Heresy that means a stand (four post look and work best) which is 18 - 20 inches high. Don't worry about bass response as the Heresy has little enough and any small loss experienced by raising them is more than off set by the improved image and stage presentation. You have a sub so make any small adjustments you feel necessary. I run two HSU VTF2 Mk11 subs with my Heresy lll and the results are excellent with seemless intigration between the two systems. I would suggest that you experiment with your sub placement. If you are having bass issues with a sub in your room set up I see little reason not to expect the same or similar results with what ever floor standing speaker that you might choose to use in the same set up. As for floor standing loudspeakers I am sure that you would be happy with the RF7 ll. Positioned properly the RF7ll will make lots of controlled bass into the low 30 Hz range. Best regards Moray James. 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.