A new love and appreciation for the RF-7's

[Youthman]

My son spent the night tonight with a friend so I decided to bring his RF-7's into the HT since I had the RF-83's pulled out from behind the false wall. I have spent the last 3 hours in the HT switching back and forth between the two pairs. Back in Jan of 2011, in this thread I did a pretty extensive comparison between my Maple RF7's and my RF-83's. For the most part, I still hold to my findings back then however, I believe I now have a better appreciation and a new love for my son's RF-7's.

My first tests were with one of each speaker hooked up and both Velodyne subs. Honestly, when I closed my eyes, I really could not hear a difference between the two speakers. Maybe every slightly but really not noticable differences. Granted, I did have to nudge up the level on the RF-83's about 3 clicks to get them to blend together nicely. That was true back in my Jan findings as well since the RF-7's are slightly more efficient than the RF-83's.

Next I just began to A/B between the two sets in both 2ch as well as standard concert DVD's (Norah Jones, Newsong) as well as Michael Jackson's This is It BD, and movie clips from The Book of Eli.

This time around, I felt that I was hearing more detail with the RF-7's than with the RF-83's. That was the same as I commented in my previous comparison thread but at that time, I actually preferred the more laid back sound of the RF-83's. As of tonight, I really enjoyed listening extensively to the RF-7's. Their dynamics, richness and clarity was slightly preferred over my RF-83's.

Do you think your ears change over time like your taste buds do? []

Tomorrow (actually today after I get some sleep), I want to tuck the RF-7's behind the false wall to see how they sound compared to the RF-83's. I've always felt that the way my false wall was built, the RF-83's suffered some by behing "enclosed". They definitely sound better when pulled out into the room as shown in the pictures below. I'm curious since the RF-7's are not as deep, I believe I will be able to toe them in more towards the primary LP. If it sounds much better back there than the RF-83's, my son might find some new speakers in his room when he gets home.

Here are some pics I took tonight showing my black RF-7's next to my cherry RF-83's.

[P-Gavin]

Thats a great looking set up you have there Michael..only thing missing would be "me" sitting in the front row with the remote in one hand some popcorn in another and a glass of sweet tea in the cup holder! Look foreward to seeing it in person soon.

[ivanhurd]

Do you think your ears change over time like your taste buds do?

Yes, but not in the same way =^P

[Youthman]

Thats a great looking set up you have there Michael.

Thanks Pat. It has been a work in progress over the past 3 years that we have been in our home. I have enjoyed the journey as much as I am enjoying the system.

only thing missing would be "me" sitting in the front row with the remote in one hand some popcorn in another and a glass of sweet tea in the cup holder! Look foreward to seeing it in person soon.

That is for sure. Well if you weren't too busy running to Sarasota, Orlando and Tampa buying Klipsch speakers, you might have a chance to actually stop by. []

Hey guys, when I woke up this morning, I had a thought (don't get those that often). Last time I compared RF-7's with RF-83's, I was using a Yamaha RX-V1800 as my pre/pro. The Yamaha was never that musical. It was ok but I was longing for something that had better SQ in 2ch thus I purchased the UMC-1. Could it be that the UMC-1 is allowing the RF-7 to shine more than the Yamaha was capable of? And that's why I'm hearing more of a difference than I was before? Now that everyone is awake, I can crank them up a bit to see how they sound at higher db.

[Youthman]

Do you think your ears change over time like your taste buds do?

Yes, but not in the same way =^P

Maybe it's not my ears that have changed, but my equipment.

[Fish]

I think you're onto something with the better prepro theory.I have always held that the 7s must have a minimum of a really good pre section or they can't do their magic.I also believe that the louder 7s go the better they sound, not true with many speakers.The 7s are such a great speaker that I think few of us will ever hear their true capabilty as most just can't afford the front end to do them true justice.You have a great front end so you have a chance to start to appreciate their capabilities.I have auditioned gear on the 7s that I can't afford but I learned the 7s capabilty is more than I realized.You have two great choices so it's a win win.

[CHASLS2]

Your pics sure pop with clean detail. I would love to do a side by side with the older 7's and the new RF7ll's.

[Fish]

Your pics sure pop with clean detail. I would love to do a side by side with the older 7's and the new RF7ll's.

That would be cool, I've not yet had an opportunity to do side by side.

[Youthman]

I think you're onto something with the better prepro theory.I have always held that the 7s must have a minimum of a really good pre section or they can't do their magic.

Still switching back and forth between speakers. The 7's seem to have more of an enveloping presence than my 83's do. They are more forward, and lively. Maybe the 83's are like a refined Supra. Very powerful, fully capable with plenty of horsepower but the 7's maybe are like an old muscle car? Raw, untamed in your face roar kinda car? I'm not that into cars so forgive me if my analogy stinks. Haha But you probably get the idea I'm trying to make.

You have a great front end so you have a chance to start to appreciate their capabilities

Another thing that I just realized that has changed sinc my last comparison is not only did I add the UMC-1 pre/pro, but I also have acoustic panels that I've added. That definitely has cleaned up the quality and detail.

Your pics sure pop with clean detail.

Thanks
Charles. I'm not a "photographer" but I enjoy photography. A lot has
to do with camera settings. I manually set the white balance to tell
the camera what white should look like in my room. Then I set the
aperture to adjust for the desired depth of field (blurriness of
background), then I set the camera on something still (serves as a
tripod to eliminate any motion blur), set the timer on the camera (again
preventing the camera from moving when the shutter button is pressed).
Typically with those settings, the shutter often stays open for over 1
second. If I were to try and hand hold it, the photo would be very
blurry because you cannot keep your hand still for more than a fraction
of a second. Then I typically bring the image into Photoshop to crop,
straighten slight adjustments using Curves and then add a slight
unsharpen to the image.

[Heritage_Head]

Your pics sure pop with clean detail. I would love to do a side by side with the older 7's and the new RF7ll's.

I got these pics from the AV forum. The owner (Harley) says

in his opinion the new ones are a big improvement over the older 7s (that he

likes a lot as well).

Side by side old and new

[Heritage_Head]

http://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?hl=en&rurl=translate.google.com&sl=no&tl=en&u=http://avforum.no/forum/klubb-entusiasttrader/82340-klipsch-klubben-585.html&usg=ALkJrhhFhyy6RfB3hDNUXwwWi3MYfHgx6A

[Shodrewken]

That's a cool pic, I've been wanting to see a side by side comparison of the class 7's with the new ones. You know youthman, maybe you should just get a pair of rf-7 ii's to do a comparison of all the different flagship year models for the reference line, and let us know your thoughts.... for science [6]

[Rich_Guy]

I got these pics from the AV forum. The owner (Harley) says
in his opinion the new ones are a big improvement over the older 7s (that he
likes a lot as well).

Side by side old and new

WOW, I did not realize the new RF-7 ll's were that much larger than the previous RF-7's.

[Youthman]

Yeah, the new 7's are a bit larger than the older but when compared to the RF-83's, they kinda look small.

Take a look at these comparison photos of the RF-7's and RF-83's.

You know youthman, maybe you should just get a pair
of rf-7 ii's to do a comparison of all the different flagship year
models for the reference line, and let us know your thoughts.... for
science

If I can find someone that wants to trade custom website design for their RF-7ii's, I would do it tomorrow. I'm just too cheap to pay retail for them. []

[Fish]

The owner (Harley) says
in his opinion the new ones are a big improvement over the older 7s

I listened to the new 7's for a good while with some of my favorite music on an Anthem 700.I did not hear anything that made me think there was a big improvement or I would have bought them on the spot.Thats not a side by side but if I were to have heard a big improvement I think I would know.I think I would be happy with either as they sounded great but that grill killed the deal for me.

I'm still not sure what Klipsch was thinking. I have heard no one say I wish my speakers had half grills, I know several that wish they did not.Without the grill the 7ll's are beautiful, with it.........Polk audio comes to mind.

[Youthman]

Without the grill the 7ll's are beautiful, with it.........Polk audio comes to mind.

OUCH! Truth hurts though. []

[Youthman]

Well, I had some quality time comparing the RF-7's and the RF-83's. Again, my conclusion is they both sound different but unique and great in their own respects. I'm blessed to be able to own both speakers and to be able to appreciate both of their qualities. To my ears, the RF-7's seemed to be more "enveloping". That could have been due to placement. Not sure. There were certain music where the 7's were more detailed and other music that the 83's were more detailed.

I invited a friend over for a second opinion. He preferred the sound of the 83's and said to his ears, the 83's clearly had more detail.

I found the 7's were brighter and the highs were more noticable where the 83's were a little softer on the highs. Midrange seemed to be about the same and both had great bass response.

If I didn't have children, I would keep both pair just like I had them setup and enjoy their beauty and their musicality. Unfortunately, it was back to the "dark place" for the 83's. [:'(]

[joshjp]

like them naked. []

[Shodrewken]

You know as far as the half grill thing goes, that was my first thoughts too, they kinda look like Polks. But after having them for a little while now I kinda like them. If I didn't have nephews and nieces over all the time, I'd have them off completely, but since that's not the case, I like that at least I can see some of the the beautiful wood finish even with the grills on.

[Heritage_Head]

The owner (Harley) says

in his opinion the new ones are a big improvement over the older 7s

I listened to the new 7's for a good while with some of my favorite music on an Anthem 700.I did not hear anything that made me think there was a big improvement or I would have bought them on the spot.Thats not a side by side but if I were to have heard a big improvement I think I would know.I think I would be happy with either as they sounded great but that grill killed the deal for me.

I'm still not sure what Klipsch was thinking. I have heard no one say I wish my speakers had half grills, I know several that wish they did not.Without the grill the 7ll's are beautiful, with it.........Polk audio comes to mind.

Everyone’s ears are

different and yours saved you a few grand. Plus

there’s nothing wrong with liking what you got (you should your speakers are awesome).

And as far as the grill I also agree with viper they do grow on you. if

klipsch offered a kit for a full grill and it was free with a trade of the half

grill I would keep the half grill.

If you read a lot of that guys posts (he has 100s) he has

had more klipsch speakers than Jason (I think hes running the 60th Anniversary khorns

atm). He doesn’t even own the 7s new or old anymore. I think he

owns some kind of audio company and brings speakers and other audio gear home

(not just klipsch). So his opinions on these are totally no bias just what he

thinks not what he owns. Not saying that

makes him right just saying.