Jump to content

Need To Chose Between RF-7II And III


miliellie111
 Share

Recommended Posts

Excellent thread although nobody provided a detailed review of the IIIs 😓

 

I will admit i am a derrick disciple so my opinions mirror his

 

a key to keep in mind is all autocorrection systems are ROOM CORRECTION software

unless you have an outdoor setup the room itself is what causes the rf7s to sound different than the testing lab

most owners become used to their rooms...and only a few can or are willing to treat it

 

Audyssey and MCACC and Dirac all strive to recreate the original sound by correcting room problems

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, miliellie111 said:

The Denon X-6200 arrived from Accesories4Less. Do I need more power? I was listening to some pretty demanding instrumental and vocal tracks for over an hour around -5db and began to hear distortion from the tweeters. Should I have gone for the X7200, or do the RF7-‘s need more power and can anyone recommend a good external amp around $500?

 

Thanks

 

Just curious...any idea of the SPL in dB where you heard distortion?

 

I once tested our RF-7 II's up to 106 dB peaks at 12 feet with music, and there was no audible distortion.  That was louder than I would ever listen.

 

Also, were you using any EQ or treble boost?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, miliellie111 said:

Should I have gone for the X7200, or do the RF7-‘s need more power and can anyone recommend a good external amp around $500?

Sure, there are plenty, used and new.  Here are just a few.

 

https://www.audiogon.com/listings/solid-state-2-ch-reference-power-amp-2017-12-04-amplifiers

 

https://www.monoprice.com/product?c_id=109&cp_id=10919&cs_id=1091903&p_id=30875&seq=1&format=2

 

https://www.accessories4less.com/make-a-store/item/marmm7025/marantz-mm7025-2-ch-x-140-watts-power-amplifier/1.html

 

Bill

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, adam2434 said:

 

Just curious...any idea of the SPL in dB where you heard distortion?

 

I once tested our RF-7 II's up to 106 dB peaks at 12 feet with music, and there was no audible distortion.  That was louder than I would ever listen.

 

Also, were you using any EQ or treble boost?

 

 

It was loud consistently for about an hour around -5db. Perhaps the amp was getting too hot. I have it in an AV cabinet but probably needs a little more space around it in the back by pulling out from the wall more.

 

Treble was set to 0 and bass at +2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, miliellie111 said:

Update: All is well. Receiver caused distortion to RF7’s it was getting too hot. Pulled a little farther out from cabinet and kept doors open also turned on ECO mode. Playing loud all day long and no distortion at high volumes. This Denon X6200 is a workhorse and sounds great.

 

If the AVR is still getting hot, you can place one of these fans over the heat sink and output transistors where you feel the most heat.  The fan will draw heat up and out of the unit.  

 

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00G05A2MU/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o07_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

 

Nice AVR, by the way.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

IME, RF-7II sound great with tube amps, except KT88 sound too bright (which can be mitigated via the treble control on my McIntosh MX110Z).   I prefer RF-7II with 6L6GC - beautiful sound quality playing classical and opera - no harshness or listener fatigue.    (I don’t care for RF-7II paired with solid-state amps.)

 

Here's my basement system:   Front, center, and left speakers are Klipsch RF-7 II.  A single rear speaker is a Klipsch RF-7.   Subwoofers:  SVS SB16-Ultra, Klipsch R-115SW.  Source:  Oppo UDP-205 universal player.   Amps: Scott 272 (EL34), Inspire “Fire Bottle” SE Stereo Tube Amplifier HO (single-ended-pentode (SEP) power amp equipped with 6L6GC), Scott 222C (7189), McIntosh MX110Z tuner/preamp, Fisher KX-200 (7591), Scott 296 (6L6GC), Pilot SA-260 (EL34), Scott LK150 (KT88).   A patch panel allows me to connect the speakers to whichever amp I want, and F/F RCA cables enable me to connect an amp to the Oppo, and (optionally) a power amp to the MX110Z.   I can use this system as 2.0, 2.2 or 4.2 (i.e., single rear channel).

 

FWIW, a great “minimalist system” is the Inspire “Fire Bottle” SEP power amp equipped with 6L6GC, connected directly to the Oppo UDP-205 (i.e., no pre-amp), driving Klipsch RF-7II.   The Fire Bottle SEP amp equipped with KT-150 also pairs well with KF-7II.

 

I've not heard the RF-7III.   I’m intrigued.  I considered upgrading, however since I have my system with the RF-7II voiced to my satisfaction via tube rolling, I've decided not to change.  I can’t justify the expense … for now.   Plus, in order to have LCR match, I’d have to buy 3 RF-7III, and I think I’d have a difficult time selling my 3 RF-7II.  (I imagine that most people would want to buy a stereo pair.)

 

I’m looking forward to reading someone’s assessment of RF-7II vs. RF-7III side-by-side – hopefully playing non-electronic music, such as classical music.

 

Happy New Year everyone!  One of my resolutions this year is to spend more time riding my exercise bike listening to my basement system, vs. sitting in a recliner listening to one of my other systems!   :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just out of curiosity, did you consider the RF-7?  I mean the original.  That's what I am getting, and so many people have told me that they prefer them to the RF-7 ii.  Just saying that you might want to see if you could listen to them.  If they worked, it would be so much cheaper.  I am totally new to this, so I have no opinions of any value to offer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, robert_kc said:

IME, RF-7II sound great with tube amps, except KT88 sound too bright (which can be mitigated via the treble control on my McIntosh MX110Z).   I prefer RF-7II with 6L6GC - beautiful sound quality playing classical and opera - no harshness or listener fatigue.    (I don’t care for RF-7II paired with solid-state amps.)

 

Here's my basement system:   Front, center, and left speakers are Klipsch RF-7 II.  A single rear speaker is a Klipsch RF-7.   Subwoofers:  SVS SB16-Ultra, Klipsch R-115SW.  Source:  Oppo UDP-205 universal player.   Amps: Scott 272 (EL34), Inspire “Fire Bottle” SE Stereo Tube Amplifier HO (single-ended-pentode (SEP) power amp equipped with 6L6GC), Scott 222C (7189), McIntosh MX110Z tuner/preamp, Fisher KX-200 (7591), Scott 296 (6L6GC), Pilot SA-260 (EL34), Scott LK150 (KT88).   A patch panel allows me to connect the speakers to whichever amp I want, and F/F RCA cables enable me to connect an amp to the Oppo, and (optionally) a power amp to the MX110Z.   I can use this system as 2.0, 2.2 or 4.2 (i.e., single rear channel).

 

FWIW, a great “minimalist system” is the Inspire “Fire Bottle” SEP power amp equipped with 6L6GC, connected directly to the Oppo UDP-205 (i.e., no pre-amp), driving Klipsch RF-7II.   The Fire Bottle SEP amp equipped with KT-150 also pairs well with KF-7II.

 

I've not heard the RF-7III.   I’m intrigued.  I considered upgrading, however since I have my system with the RF-7II voiced to my satisfaction via tube rolling, I've decided not to change.  I can’t justify the expense … for now.   Plus, in order to have LCR match, I’d have to buy 3 RF-7III, and I think I’d have a difficult time selling my 3 RF-7II.  (I imagine that most people would want to buy a stereo pair.)

 

I’m looking forward to reading someone’s assessment of RF-7II vs. RF-7III side-by-side – hopefully playing non-electronic music, such as classical music.

 

Happy New Year everyone!  One of my resolutions this year is to spend more time riding my exercise bike listening to my basement system, vs. sitting in a recliner listening to one of my other systems!   :D

I can also attest to the fact that the amp makes a big difference in sound. I originally had a Denon X6200 on the Rf-7II’s. It sounded good and dynamic, however it was pretty bright and at times shrill. In my living room I am running a pair of 280’s off of a Marantz SR7010.

 

Some say the Denon and Marantz sound exactly the same. Others say the Marantz has a warmer sound and is better for music due to using HDAM in their amps. I decided to see for myself. I moved the Marantz to the RF-7s and the sound is a perfect match. I played the same songs on each amp and the Marantz is a noticeable improvement. These were with equivalent settings to the Denon 2 ch stereo with no Audyssey. The Denon seemed to have a bigger impact on the lows than the Marantz but the Marantz definitely sounds warmer. I moved the Denon to the 280-s and it sounds good there perhaps because the 280’s tweeter has a more laid back sound than the 7II’s to help offset a bright amp.

 

So basically, some complained about the 7II’s being bright and harsh at high volumes which makes the 7III’s more appealing based on the new horn modification. We always don’t know which equipment others have hooked up to their speakers. Put the right amp on the 7II’s and they sound beautiful, warm and detailed.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, vasubandu said:

Just out of curiosity, did you consider the RF-7?  I mean the original.  That's what I am getting, and so many people have told me that they prefer them to the RF-7 ii.  Just saying that you might want to see if you could listen to them.  If they worked, it would be so much cheaper.  I am totally new to this, so I have no opinions of any value to offer.

 

Never considered the original. For one, they are not being sold anymore and are hard to find. And also everything I’ve read is that the version II is an improvement over the originals especially for music listening. Plus they flat out look better with the all front wood veneer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎12‎/‎23‎/‎2017 at 3:58 PM, willland said:

 

That Marantz would be a perfect match to the SR7010 I just moved on my 7II's. In your opinion, how much better would they sound since the SR7010 is pushing 125 watts and the MM7025 is only 15 watts more at 140? Will I notice a big difference in sound?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎12‎/‎23‎/‎2017 at 11:21 AM, Youthman said:

If your tweeters are starting to distort, your Receiver is running out of gas.  I use an Acurus A200 (200 x 2) and it’s awesomre.  Plenty of clean power for the RF-7 II.  I paid $275 for mine

Did you run your 7's on a regular avr before and if so, how much was the improvement once you hooked up the Acurus A200?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

Yes I started with just the HK3490 receiver.  Adding the Acurus A200 wasn’t a night and day difference but it does provide more bottom end which is great because I don’t use a sub not to mention I don’t have to worry about the Acurus running out of gas when I’m pushing them hard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators
25 minutes ago, miliellie111 said:

 

That Marantz would be a perfect match to the SR7010 I just moved on my 7II's. In your opinion, how much better would they sound since the SR7010 is pushing 125 watts and the MM7025 is only 15 watts more at 140? Will I notice a big difference in sound?

You won’t hear a difference from 15 watts.   You have to Double the wattage to gain 3db in volume.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, miliellie111 said:

In your opinion, how much better would they sound since the SR7010 is pushing 125 watts and the MM7025 is only 15 watts more at 140? Will I notice a big difference in sound?

The amount of wattage gain(15w/ch) may not enhance the sound but the quality of watts just might. 

The guts look pretty impressive to me.

Image result for marantz MM7025

 

The MM7025 tips the scales at 23.8lbs while the SR7010 weighs 30.4lbs.  Only a 6.6lbs difference for 7 more channels of amplification.  I know weight is not everything but 11.9lbs/channel vs 3.37lbs/channel is a huge difference.  Something to think about.

 

Bill

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/16/2017 at 8:01 PM, Grizzog said:

They have to make improvements/changes otherwise there's no reason to introduce a new model.

 

I had the Forte I, currently have the Chorus II and Forte III. The Forte I and Chorus II are not fatiguing and are great speakers. The Forte III, however, blows them out of the water. They truly are fantastic.

 

I also owned the RF-7II, which was fatiguing and bright to me. It has a rising response above 2k with a couple peaks in the response that bother some people but not others. That doesn't make them bad speakers, but ones that did not fit my (and many) tastes. I assume the RF-7III is in response to the complaints around some of the response issues and I'm excited to get the news ones and see what they're all about!

 

Have you done any mods to your forte or Chorus II?  Or are they both all original?  

 

I own a pair of forte II I purchased new in 92.  I have Crites networks and titanium diaphragms in both the tweeter and squawkers.

 

When you say the forte III blows them out of the water, can you be more specific? 

 

Best regards,

John

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, John Chi-town said:

 

Have you done any mods to your forte or Chorus II?  Or are they both all original?  

 

I own a pair of forte II I purchased new in 92.  I have Crites networks and titanium diaphragms in both the tweeter and squawkers.

 

When you say the forte III blows them out of the water, can you be more specific? 

 

Best regards,

John

The Forte III just sound much more realistic.

 

They have more full midrange than the Chorus II and don't ever get "shouty" at higher levels. The detail of the 3s is also just about the most I've heard from ANY speaker. There are many pieces to songs that the Chorus just don't capture. Bass I'd say is a close match.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, miliellie111 said:

Never considered the original. For one, they are not being sold anymore and are hard to find.

@miliellie111 Bear in mind that I am not only new here, but new in general, or at  least gone for 10 years.  There are quite a few RF-7 out there for $700 to $1,000 per pair.  I have talked to a lot of people about them, and they seem to say that version 1 was very  bright, version 2 was more restrained, and version 3 is in between.  Not sure if I am getting that exactly right, but there seem to be distinct differences.  I never cared what they look like, so that is not an issue for me.  I only brought it up because of if the sound of version 1 worked, you would save a lot of money.  I'm sure you will figure it all out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, vasubandu said:

I have talked to a lot of people about them, and they seem to say that version 1 was very  bright, version 2 was more restrained, and version 3 is in between.  Not sure if I am getting that exactly right

 

No not really.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...