Is there any chance Cornwall III's can be better than my RF7II's?

[zebra03 4]

I have had my RF7II's for a year . I still have this nagging feeling Cornwall III's are far and away better than the RF's .  What say you ?

[Ceptorman 12113]

I will say the new RF7llls are superior to the RF7lls 

[zebra03 4]

Close , but no cigar .

[willland 3070]

zebra03,

 

Welcome to the forum.

 

1 hour ago, zebra03 said:

I have had my RF7II's for a year . I still have this nagging feeling Cornwall III's are far and away better than the RF's .  What say you ?

Very nice speakers in the RF-7II.

 

What do you mean by "better"?

 

I love my RF-63s that I have owned since May 08 and have never had a reason to "upgrade" to anything else.

 

Bill

[ricktate 624]

Depends on what you listen to i think. Go find a member that has some and listen to them. Your talking about new ones or older ones? 

[Deang 2940]

Cornwall III now uses the horn from the Heresy. If the mid-horn was bigger, I think the comparison would be closer to fair. I've heard the Cornwall III several times, and was never particularly impressed. I even consistently picked the RF-7 over the Cornwall III in a blind test in Indy after it was first reintroduced.

[Frank1938 42]

8 minutes ago, Deang said:

Cornwall III now uses the horn from the Heresy. If the mid-horn was bigger, I think the comparison would be closer to fair. I've heard the Cornwall III several times, and was never particularly impressed. I even consistently picked the RF-7 over the Cornwall III in a blind test in Indy after it was first reintroduced.

Agree with Dean. I've had the CF-2, Forte I, II, Heresy 1, 2, 3, Cornwall III. My favorite? Forte III. Great looking and excellent sounding speakers.

[ODS123 384]

Haven’t heard the Cornwalls vs RFs but did so vs Hersey’s. To my ears, they sound wayyyyy more open than the Hersey iiis, shared mid horn notwithstanding.  I think people are irked by the fact the Cornwall’s now share a driver with the Heresy and this may be impacting, via expectation bias, what they are hearing.  I think you need to judge for yourself.

 

 

[Schu 4938]

If by better... you mean different, then yes. Cornwalls are better.

It's a different sound, not a better sound.

[Deang 2940]

1 hour ago, ODS123 said:

To my ears, they sound wayyyyy more open than the Hersey iiis,

How does that work -- they use the same tweeter, same mid-driver, same mid-horn, and same crossover topology.

 

If they sound more open, it's because they're at ear level.

[dtel 29041]

Also a different cabinet, this would only change the bass except for the height as Dean said. BUT when you change any part it's going to sound different, like on a old receiver with 3 tone controls, if you turn up the mid range and tweeter, it sounds like less bass and just the opposite.

2 hours ago, ODS123 said:

I think people are irked by the fact the Cornwall’s now share a driver with the Heresy and this may be impacting, via expectation bias, what they are hearing.  I think you need to judge for yourself.

Even with the same top half drivers "to me" the Hlll and Clll sound a good bit different from each other, I guess the big difference is the bass could throw off my perception of the top horns ?

 

9 hours ago, zebra03 said:

I have had my RF7II's for a year . I still have this nagging feeling Cornwall III's are far and away better than the RF's .  What say you ?

I have no idea with the RF line,  but if you consider any change I would only do it after listening to a FEW other models, you wouldn't want to change for only a slight difference, that would  be silly.

[Schu 4938]

you should ask... is the CW3 better than the CW1/2... the answer is fairly clear.

 

[ODS123 384]

As a more general comment regarding version II vs. version III of both the Heresy and Cornwall:

 

 It i's totally predictable that when a newer version of a speaker is introduced there will be those who claim that all improvements ended w/ the particular version they own.  It's as if the crack team of engineers who made their great speaker suddenly became incompetent just as they were designing the successor.  Or that the engineering focus abruptly changed from improving performance to only cutting costs.  I recall reading this when Vandersteen went from 3A to 3Asig, Paradigm from Studio 100 ver4 to 5, Paradigm S8 v2 to v3 (w/ Berrylium Tweeter), and so on.  

[Ouachita 15]

I will make this observation:

 

Both speakers sound fantastic - but different.

 

RF-7ii is a 2 way with a compression driver that goes down to 1200 hz, below that are  dual 10 inch direct radiators.

CWiii is a 3 way with compression driver(s) that go down to 800 hz, below that is a 15 inch direct radiator (same driver that is used in some or their pro speakers and the La Scala and Klipschorn)

 

The mid horn in the CWiii is exponential while the horn in the RF is tractrix.

 

If you're my age (~50) and are looking for that classic Klipsch sound, the CWIII is the speaker to choose.

 

The RF-7 is also an astounding speaker, there is no wrong choice.

[Deang 2940]

2 hours ago, ODS123 said:

As a more general comment regarding version II vs. version III of both the Heresy and Cornwall:

 

 It i's totally predictable that when a newer version of a speaker is introduced there will be those who claim that all improvements ended w/ the particular version they own.  It's as if the crack team of engineers who made their great speaker suddenly became incompetent just as they were designing the successor.  Or that the engineering focus abruptly changed from improving performance to only cutting costs.  I recall reading this when Vandersteen went from 3A to 3Asig, Paradigm from Studio 100 ver4 to 5, Paradigm S8 v2 to v3 (w/ Berrylium Tweeter), and so on.  

All else being equal, the larger horn will typically sound better. Even when things are not equal -- the larger horn still sounds better.

[Deang 2940]

46 minutes ago, Ouachita said:

CWiii is a 3 way with compression driver(s) that go down to 800 hz, below that is a 15 inch direct radiator (same driver that is used in some or their pro speakers and the La Scala and Klipschorn)

 

The mid horn in the CWiii is exponential while the horn in the RF is tractrix.

The CWiii does not use the same compression driver as the LaScala or Klipschorn, or the same tweeter.

 

While one would think the edge goes to the tractrix horn, consider that with these two-ways, all of the midrange is being reproduced by large cones, as opposed to a compression driver and horn. IOWs, by the time the horn takes over, there is no midrange.

[wuzzzer 1839]

55 minutes ago, Deang said:

The CWiii does not use the same compression driver as the LaScala or Klipschorn, or the same tweeter.

 

He was saying that the 15" was the same between them.

[ODS123 384]

2 hours ago, Deang said:

All else being equal, the larger horn will typically sound better. Even when things are not equal -- the larger horn still sounds better.

 

Hmm..  So why then does the CWiii sound better (to my ears, anyway) than the Forte III, which has a larger mid-horn?  I listened to both in the same room and in quick succession using the same music.  ..The CWiii's sounded more open and detailed.

 

Your comment also begs the question, why did the Klipsch engineers use a smaller mid-horn in the 3rd iteration if LARGER is ALWAYS better??  ..I'm not an acoustical engineer but I somewhat suspect there is more to the calculus than you are suggesting.

 

 

[avguytx 1457]

The "rumor" is the mold for the K600/601 was lost somehow. So, the Heresy III horn was apparently used because it was in the barn. Or so I've read. 

[dtr20 1051]

50 minutes ago, ODS123 said:

 

Hmm..  So why then does the CWiii sound better (to my ears, anyway) than the Forte III, which has a larger mid-horn?  I listened to both in the same room and in quick succession using the same music. 

My guess would be placement. My father @TomR would probably agree with you. We listened to both at ask audio store, but in different rooms. I liked both, but I loved the mid-range I the forte III more, but my dad like the Cornwall overall better.