How do Cornwalls compare to RF-7?

[Heritage_Head]

We see it time and time again (me as well). Reference and other line owners come here very happy. But at some point some how they dive into heritage and the other speakers go bye bye. This isn't meant as a bash to the other lines. Its just showing how good these old offerings really are when compared. Unless you spend a lot of money (like new 7s money, or buy pro line speakers) its a pretty big downgrade in performance compared to these older speakers. Rf82s vs Cornwalls as one example is a joke. I have owned both of these speakers and mean no disrespect for the 82s but its like a different brand all together.  

Edited December 6, 2014 by Cinema_head

[willland]

We see it time and time again (me as well). Reference and other line owners come here very happy. But at some point some how they dive into heritage and the other speakers go bye bye.

 

Can't we just like as many flavors as we want?    

 

I do agree with this statement but there are exceptions, RF-63's, RB-75's both come to mind without much hesitation.

 

Now if a fine pair of LaScalas or Belles for the right price knocked on my door, then something would have to go.  Not sure which ones.  

 

Bill 

[Heritage_Head]

Sometimes when comparing two things we end up sounding like we are putting down one of the things we are comparing. Its hard to avoid that (at least for me). Klipsch is in a different market price point now. The bulk of what they do is selling speakers to the average Joe. That wasn't really what klipsch was back in the day. My dad bought speakerlabs and called them a poor mans klipsch as one example. After all the face of klipsch now is the best buy speakers sitting on a shelf next too bose not even hooked up. 

Edited December 6, 2014 by Cinema_head

[Rhetor]

I've been sharing a pair of first gen RF-7's between a HT setup and a 2 channel stereo to play my vinyl. I'm tired of changing the speaker wires on the back of the speakers to flip between movies and music. I have an all RF series 7.1 system and I'm not interested in breaking up the set . . .

I have read the thread . . . but I want to make a suggestion based in your original post, the beginning part anyway . . .

I too got tired of switching cables from HT to 2 channel (running a DENON 4311 with a rebuilt Phase Alinear 400 powering the fronts in the HT; and handing off to a Scott 299C and TT for 2 channel vinyl on the same fronts in the HT).

Tiring of switching the cables in and out, I did my homework and found this: http://www.amazon.com/OSD-Audio-ATM-7-Digital-Selector/dp/B004Y8MH3M/ref=pd_sxp_grid_pt_1_1/190-9256271-7498468 (no affiliation)

Absolutely perfect solution for me with built-in protection up to 490 watts. Can run 2 amps and 7 sets of speakers or 7 amps and two sets of speakers. I simply use it to switch between the Denon 4311/PL 400 for HT. And the unit comes with a remote control and has a mute button . . . good for when calls come in while I am using the vintage Scott in 2 channel.

Sure, I am underutilizing the units capabilities (using two amps and one set so hared speakers), but it negated the need to get another set of speakers just for 2 channel tube setup in the same room as the HT. I have the best of both worlds.

Just something for you to consider to continuing using your RF7s as HT and 2 channel on two different amps.

But, right now you do have a great reason to add a pair of Cornwalls to the stable if you do not desire to use a multi-amp/speaker selector.

Edited December 6, 2014 by Rhetor

[Jim]

I'm probably the last person who should add my 0.02, but shouldn't the comparison be made for a like built speaker to decide which one is better. 2 totally different build styles, different crossovers, cabinets,and everything else. One is a 3 way and 1 is a 2 way aren't they? Wouldn't the better comparison be between like a JBL and a comparable Klipsch? i would think it's like comparing apples to oranges, and the applications of the speakers that would matter most, and then what the speakers are made of when comparing. Maybe if the crossovers were same on them,maybe if made from same components,and cabinetry identical in materials used to make you could have a better discussion on them, but that's just me............Just take it easy on me when beating me up for my comments.

[Chris A]

Would really like to try a set of Cornwalls for my 2 channel music and am wondering how you folks think they would compare with the RF-7's.

This was the original question, which clearly is subjective in nature, and all responses recognize this but nevertheless reflect a preference, regardless of what kind of loudspeaker and design techniques are being used.

[Schu]

 

Would really like to try a set of Cornwalls for my 2 channel music and am wondering how you folks think they would compare with the RF-7's.

This was the original question, which clearly is subjective in nature, and all responses recognize this but nevertheless reflect a preference, regardless of what kind of loudspeaker and design techniques are being used.

 

 

I am not reading the question as such... subjective in nature.

 

Perhaps OP was asking... "How would a Cornwall Compare to a RF7?". In that, what are the sonic and tonal differences and unique qualities to each... not which one is "Better".

 

if we answer in this way, perhaps OP would have a better understanding as to which speaker, and more specifically which speaker line, he might prefer.

Edited December 6, 2014 by Schu

[ChuckAb3]

I'm probably the last person who should add my 0.02, but shouldn't the comparison be made for a like built speaker to decide which one is better. 2 totally different build styles, different crossovers, cabinets,and everything else. One is a 3 way and 1 is a 2 way aren't they? Wouldn't the better comparison be between like a JBL and a comparable Klipsch? i would think it's like comparing apples to oranges, and the applications of the speakers that would matter most, and then what the speakers are made of when comparing. Maybe if the crossovers were same on them,maybe if made from same components,and cabinetry identical in materials used to make you could have a better discussion on them, but that's just me............Just take it easy on me when beating me up for my comments.

No beating you up on these comments, Jim. The applications of speakers do make a difference to me. I'm a lifelong Heritage guy and use Cornwalls in our 2 ch system. BUT I have no present intention of moving them into our HT system where I have an all KLF lineup. I like the refinement of the Corn for listening and the explosiveness of the KLF for HT - and would probably like the RF-7 for the same reason. It's not a cop out to say it's subjective, because it is, in fact, subjective. Will I experiment and change out speakers in the future? Probably, but for now this configuration is working for me.

[Heritage_Head]

To state some facts that we do know is the Cornwalls are a more complete stand alone speaker. They just are. They have a big advantage in bass and also in the midrange. You would never need a sub for 2ch music. Or even multi ch music for that matter. The rf7 have a modern look, a TI driver up top with just a bit more sparkle, and a much more placement friendly matching center channel. This is comparing them side by side (7ii and cornwall 1s) in the same room on the same gear. 

 

So from this info for 2ch its a cornwall. And for ht its 7s with its matching center (if a 3rd cornwalls or heresys can't fit as a center).  

[J M O N]

If you've had Klipschorns in the past, none of these speakers will get you closer to that sound than Cornwalls.  I have/had Klipschorns, Cornwalls, Fortes, and Chorus II among others.  I realize this is subjective and everyone has different tastes but to me the Klipshorns are tops (not suprisingly).  What was surprising was how close the Cornwalls came to the Klipschorns.  This was using very good tube amps/preamps which does make a big difference in my opinion.  What will suprrise a lot of people is that I actually prefer the Forte sound over the Chorus II.