Chorus II vs RF7

[cubdog]

For what it's worth concerning the Epic CF line. I have owned KG4, Cornwall, and RF7IIs. To my ears the CF3 is better than all those models. Unfortunately Moray and I are not alone in this assessment as prices remain high and availability low for Epic speakers.

cubdog

[Shiva]

I will throw in my props for the Epic CF3's. I have had my pair for the last 7 years or so. I have listened to dozens of speakers during that time, at high end shops and Audio shows and have never found anything that made me want to replace them. Not to long ago I added a Crown K2 amp to power them and that has been a pleasing addition as well.

[cheric]

are you aware that you can add 2.5 ounces of dead weight in the form of some large flat steel washers on to your passives and lower the resonant frequency for more and deeper low bass output??? Best regards Moray James.

Moray, do you have a picture or two of this modification?

Any other thoughts on the ChorusII vs RF7?

[Fish]

It depends on if you have the money to buy the 7s and compare them side by side to find out which you like better.

That's a great way to go. That's the only way you'll know for sure which you like better, with your source/amp, in your room.

Here is some more reading from the archives:

http://community.klipsch.com/forums/p/131588/1332344.aspx#1332344

Looking for good non bias advice , that's it

[moray james]

Sorry I do not have a photo though someone at AK posted a snap shot. If you remove the passive you will see immediately in the centre of the unit (inside) a about a 2.5" flat surface covered with dark gray paper. Position your dead weight in the form of large thick flat steel washers there centred for balance. As far as the Chorus Vs RF7 or RF7 ll for that matter I just happen to like a ten inch woofer sound over a twelve or a fifteen but that's just me. So I tend to prefer the KLF20 or better yet the CF3. Hope this helps best regards Moray James.

[MikeFord]

Lesson I learned a long time ago, speakers are the most dangerous things to compare because we have two strong preferences hard wired in our brands, the same and something different. Part of our brains doesn't want any change, and the other part finds change appealing, and it might take a month or more for this division to settle down into something logical and reality based.

If you can buy them and try them for a good month before you have to make a decision, then maybe why not, but seems to me you aren't really looking at speakers that should have a whole lot of differences where improvement is substantial.

That said, Chorus II is a speaker I would buy given the opportunity and good price and RF7 not so much, for no special reason, and I have not heard them, just reading comments from owners and thinking about what I would like to try. Chorus II with Crites diaphragms seem appealing. I would expect someone who owns RF7's to disagree.

[Vital]

I've said this before but I really believe that in a blind listening audition most people would be hard pressed to pick a favorite between the Cornwall, CF-4, Chorus ll, KLF-30, RF-7, RF-83 or RF-7 ll. I think they all have their little flavor to them and they each might do a little better with certain music but all in all they are pretty close to each other.

[moray james]

and some people can't tell the difference between a Yugo and a Porsche. So what? Best regards Moray James.

[pzannucci]

and some people can't tell the difference between a Yugo and a Porsche. So what? Best regards Moray James.

Well it all depends on style you want to arrive with. More up front, in your face presentation, get the three way (Porsche) or (brute force - Corvette) KLF-30, more mellow lower mids - RF7/CF4, the Yugo - RB5x's or something in that class. They are really more like a Honda Civic. Add subs and you have a Civic on Nitrous. Goes fast but wasn't built with the intent to.

Sorry, couldn't resist.

[derrickdj1]

I think they all have their little flavor to them and they each might do a little better with certain music but all in all they are pretty close to each other.

Don't say that, we will have nothing to discuss, lol[]

[ClaudeJ1]

Looking for good non bias advice , that's it

You can't be serious.

[pzannucci]

Looking for good non bias advice , that's it

You can't be serious.

OK, just speaking for Chorus II vs RF7

Chorus - more up front midrange - plays more open and somewhat more clear in the midrange - little more tubby bass, espeically if used next to a wall - may not seem to extend as low as the RF7

RF7 - more lean presentation - midrange does not stand out, it is just there as in most 2 ways - can appear to be more fatiguing, tilted up presentation, that is the reason for Dean's mod.

Some of these can be overcome by the room but you can never get the open mids as in the Chorus II with the RF7. On the flip side, some folks like the more subtle vocals of a two way (unless mid/tweet is crossed very low) instead of the forward presentation of many three ways.

[Fish]

Looking for good non bias advice , that's it

You can't be serious.

I know trying speakers side by side in your own room sounds pretty crazy, but it is the only way to know.People that "think" something probably sounds better than something else.........well.........ignorance may be bliss.

[wuboy]

One of my neighbors has the ore open, it;s nice but I prefer my Chorus II's and Forte II's. I guess I just like the open sound of the earlier horns.

[DrWho]

cviper: two way is these days very often done to save money and as we all can see there are a multitude or really a flood of cheap two ways on the market. If however we are talking quality sound then using only two components to deliver the bulk of the audio band is a very tall task and requires both very high quality components with extreem excellence in design. Remember that PWK had intended that the Khorn be a two way design. Problem was he could not sucessfully extend the upper range of the bass horn high enouth to mate with the mid/hi horn and so a three way design was accepted as a compromize. The goal was not forgotten and later the Jubilee was to be the Khorn ll, the replacement the Khorn and was finally realized as a two way design.

If you ever get the chance to audition either the CF3 or the CF4 do so. I think these two speakers are two of the finest home speakers Klipsch ever released and I personally place them above the Heritage series in performance and only in efficiency are they surpassed by Belle LaScala and the Khorn. Best regards Moray James.

Cf3 and 4 best klipsch speaker ever? I dont know if you

will get much support on that. How many have you owned (just asking)?

I'd agree about the CF3 and CF4 being at the top of the list...just make sure they are early vintages before they tried to raise the sensitivity. As far as RF7 and Chorus II, I'd stay with the Chorus. If you're looking for better sound then I'd look at minor voicing changes....the MF and HF could be attenuated a dB or two. I think they voiced them hot to claim a higher sensitivity, which makes them a bit forward sounding. There's also some crazy impedance happening in the xover that makes a high output impedance amplifier sound brash.

[SWL]

On the flip side, some folks like the more subtle vocals of a two way (unless mid/tweet is crossed very low) instead of the forward presentation of many three ways.

I fall into this category. I guess because I'm a bass freak.....don't want too much midrange getting in the way. Something about a full, deep and rich sounding bass that grabs me. [Y]

[SBinLilRock]

I don't have those, but do have similar in cornwalls and RF-7 II's. I love them both. I've only had the CWs for little over a month, but clocked many hours of listening. When I first got the CWs I was sure I liked them better than the RF-7 II's, but last weekend after only hearing the CWs for over a month I listened to the RF-7 II's and it was like wow those do sound good. They do sound different, but both sound great. I couldn't part with either. My recommendation: go a litter deeper in dept and get em both []

[moray james]

Quote: If you're looking for better sound then I'd look at minor voicing
changes....the MF and HF could be attenuated a dB or two. I think they
voiced them hot to claim a higher sensitivity, which makes them a bit
forward sounding.

Mike: regarding adjusting the tonal balance of the Chorus, since I am not much of a crossover guy I came at this type of problem from another direction. First off I do my best to address mechanical an acoustical resonances with cabinet brace work and damp the horns and drivers with dynamat and F-11 acoustical felt. I have found that three layers of 1/8 inch thick F-11 felt placed over the spider makes a significant difference in the preceived quality of the bass as this diminished both spider talk and cone reflections. These changes go a long way to improve balance and to clean up the sound. Best regards Moray James.

[ClaudeJ1]

Agree with Dr. Who on the Chorus recommendation. I have owned Chorus 1 and II. I prefer the II for the Tractrix mid horn (which I own and will make a super Heresy out of it).

It's hard to beat a 15" woofer with a huge magnet and a 15" passive for bass. 3-way beats the 2-way in definition, but the RF-7 is the best of the newer breed.

[DrWho]

Quote: If you're looking for better sound then I'd look at minor voicing

changes....the MF and HF could be attenuated a dB or two. I think they

voiced them hot to claim a higher sensitivity, which makes them a bit

forward sounding.

Mike: regarding adjusting the tonal balance of the Chorus, since I am not much of a crossover guy I came at this type of problem from another direction. First off I do my best to address mechanical an acoustical resonances with cabinet brace work and damp the horns and drivers with dynamat and F-11 acoustical felt. I have found that three layers of 1/8 inch thick F-11 felt placed over the spider makes a significant difference in the preceived quality of the bass as this diminished both spider talk and cone reflections. These changes go a long way to improve balance and to clean up the sound. Best regards Moray James.

What do you mean by spider talk? The K48 has the least suspension resonances in the pass band of any driver I've measured - almost a prefect compromise between excursion linearity and HF extension. Damping the spider might help other lessor drivers, but the K48 don't need it. As far as reflections - the cabinet can be tamed a bit, but don't go overkill because it will reduce the efficiency of the passive. However, 1/8" thick felt on the suspension will have no impact on acoustic reflections. Also, the passive radiator suspension isn't linear enough to keep up at the stock tune, let alone trying to push it lower in frequency by adding mass. I would sooner switch over to a different passive - I'll have to take a look too see if there's anything commercially available that can just drop in. I can even take some measurements to show proof of concept...