Jump to content

Help! Cornwall IV vs RF7 III for electronic music


RL1
 Share

Recommended Posts

Hi RL1,

 

I have owned both. I currently have the Cornwall IV's. Two important things. While I do agree with the person who said the the RF7's were made for electronic music, remember these are a 2-WAY speaker (or 2.5) as opposed to a 3-WAY.

So...

If you want hard hitting punch and slam, go with the RF7's. They are a blast and a great speaker.

But...

If you want a truer window into ANY recording, and a more seamless speaker, top to bottom, go with the Cornwall IV's. They are, in the end, where I put my money.

Kind regards,

Tad

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Now owning both RF7 III and now cornwall IV.. I am so angry with myself because I have my listening ear totally confused. The speakers are so very close. I have a speaker selector switch and I can switch from one pair to the other pair  within a second.I drive FL, center and FR with emotiva 275 watt amp and my other surrounds with Yamaha RX-A 3080 165 Watts per channel... I have been going back and forth 100 times so I can distinct the differences. There is a difference from cornwallIV and RF7III but its a toss up to decide which one's you like better. To me when I switch back and forth playing the same sounds over and over switching speakers I can hear the cornwalls slightly more distinct and wider in sound delivery. The RF7III is more of a compact sound since they are not as wide yet also they are also in the lower midrange and the cornwalls playback is slightly in the upper mid range that give a little more crispness.also the wider cornwall IV is a hugh factor in the wider sound. They both deliver great sounds and I find to me owning both pair is not justified and I must make a choice as hard as it is I choose the cornwalls over the RF's.  I also played both with my other surrounds and watch latest digital technology movies and man yes the cornwall to me is a hair more desirable. I have klipsch center RC-64III and surrounds are RP 500S  and 4 ea. 500SA.. I use 2 atmos front atmos and 2 rear surrounds using the selector switch.  I find the cornwalls IV's  match great with my center channel and the wideness again delivers a broader sound in watching hi tec movies. To mention it to me is NOT an easy decision.. I guess the higher price of the cornwalls in this case kindof makes it a value added choice Just in my opinion.  Do not let someone say the cornwalls are more of  a music speaker and the RF's are more of a movie speaker. NOT SO ! They both do well if they are properly matched with components...

Edited by cornwall IV's vs RF7III
revisions
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have had Cornwall I, II and IIIs as well as rf7 iiis in the same room. The Cornwalls worked perfectly for me ON the wall and in a corner taking up less floor space. Their tonal balance was correct in this position as well sitting abotu 12 feet back. That was not at all true with the RF7 III for me. I found them VERY bass heavy and needing to be pulled almost 3 feet off the back wall to achieve a proper balance without eq.   The RF7 III absolutely thunder in the bass.  The Cornwalls have great bass, but much less in quantity to my ears. The QUALITY of that bass however was better.  The rf7 iiis lacked a bit of crispness in the treble to my ears, but were very smooth. Midrange, Cornwalls win hands down, all day every day. If you like to crank your music frequently, you'll like the RF7 IIIs better IMO or some type of Klipsch Professional (or other pro product for that matter).   I listen to a lot of electronic myself and I think you could easily be happy with either. The Cornwalls are for more expensive than the RF7s and for that difference in price, it will buy you the subs that you will likely desire.   I'd lean that way frankly between the two choices presented. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

Now owning both RF7 III and now cornwall IV.. I am so angry with myself because I have my listening ear totally confused. The speakers are so very close. I have a speaker selector switch and I can switch from one pair to the other pair  within a second.I drive FL, center and FR with emotiva 275 watt amp and my other surrounds with Yamaha RX-A 3080 165 Watts per channel... I have been going back and forth 100 times so I can distinct the differences. There is a difference from cornwallIV and RF7III but its a toss up to decide which one's you like better. To me when I switch back and forth playing the same sounds over and over switching speakers I can hear the cornwalls slightly more distinct and wider in sound delivery. The RF7III is more of a compact sound since they are not as wide yet also they are also in the lower midrange and the cornwalls playback is slightly in the upper mid range that give a little more crispness.also the wider cornwall IV is a hugh factor in the wider sound. They both deliver great sounds and I find to me owning both pair is not justified and I must make a choice as hard as it is I choose the cornwalls over the RF's.  I also played both with my other surrounds and watch latest digital technology movies and man yes the cornwall to me is a hair more desirable. I have klipsch center RC-64III and surrounds are RP 500S  and 4 ea. 500SA.. I use 2 atmos front atmos and 2 rear surrounds using the selector switch.  I find the cornwalls IV's  match great with my center channel and the wideness again delivers a broader sound in watching hi tec movies. To mention it to me is NOT an easy decision.. I guess the higher price of the cornwalls in this case kindof makes it a value added choice Just in my opinion.  Do not let someone say the cornwalls are more of  a music speaker and the RF's are more of a movie speaker. NOT SO ! They both do well if they are properly matched with components...

 

You need to get rid of all those other speakers (center, surrounds, etc.) and all that gimmicky processing. Listen to the Cornwalls on a good two channel amplifier. If all you care about is surround sound and  home theater, by all means don't waste money on a pair of Cornwall IVs. Just about anything you could get at Best Buy would suffice for such an application.......

 

  • Haha 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/1/2020 at 3:40 PM, RL1 said:

Cornwall IV or RF7 III for the most in your face listening experience? I will be doing dual subs with EITHER set, 100%.

I would recommend that you locate a klipsch dealer and Sample both speakers , yourself ,  with the music you like  , now , budget wise , for optimal savings  , search out for B stock ( minor defects ) in both speaker models  -

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, RandyH said:

I would recommend that you locate a klipsch dealer and Sample both speakers , yourself ,  with the music you like  , now , budget wise , for optimal savings  , search out for B stock ( minor defects ) in both speaker models  -

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, please do not take suggestions personally. You ask you tend to get here. Stereo listeners using 2 channel and now sometimes with a sub, prefer the mains only, with AVR in a pure direct stereo mode. Purists we tend to call them.

Sounds like you are already there having done the work already between the two.

Maybe abit more time will help with decision.

Now opening the door for Khorn or LaScalas... alright then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/12/2021 at 2:18 PM, Shakeydeal said:

 

You need to get rid of all those other speakers (center, surrounds, etc.) and all that gimmicky processing. Listen to the Cornwalls on a good two channel amplifier. If all you care about is surround sound and  home theater, by all means don't waste money on a pair of Cornwall IVs. Just about anything you could get at Best Buy would suffice for such an application.......

 

 

I listen to classical music and opera. 

  

My preferences for recording technologies:

  1. My favorite is modern performances/recordings (last dozen years or so) that were captured and mastered in hi-res (e.g., 24bit/192kHZ) multi-channel, and delivered on a Blu-ray audio/video disc featuring DTS-HD MA 5.0 (or 5.1) surround-sound.   (A few Ultra HD Blu-ray opera recordings are starting to become available.)  
  2. My second choice in formats are SACD and Pure Audio Blu-ray that feature surround-sound.  (No video.)

In all cases provenance of the recording is critical – i.e., modern recordings that were captured and mastered as hi-res multi-channel – NOT DSP-generated gimmickry applied to vintage recordings. 

  

IME/IMO, hi-res multi-channel (e.g., DTS-HD MA 5.1) is VASTLY superior to stereo for the large-scale classical music that I love.

  

There are countless modern (last dozen years or so) recordings of classical compositions that were recorded and mastered in modern “hi-res” formats, and delivered on multi-channel Blu-ray or SACD – and IME/IMO these hi-res multi-channel recordings “blow the socks off” stereo (particularly the 40-year-old Redbook CD format).   If you’d like to read about a few examples:    https://community.klipsch.com/index.php?/topic/202102-classical-recordings/&do=findComment&comment=2658804

 

I don’t know if hi-res multi-channel is relevant to the OP’s preferred music.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, robert_kc said:

 

I listen to classical music and opera. 

  

My preferences for recording technologies:

  1. My favorite is modern performances/recordings (last dozen years or so) that were captured and mastered in hi-res (e.g., 24bit/192kHZ) multi-channel, and delivered on a Blu-ray audio/video disc featuring DTS-HD MA 5.0 (or 5.1) surround-sound.   (A few Ultra HD Blu-ray opera recordings are starting to become available.)  
  2. My second choice in formats are SACD and Pure Audio Blu-ray that feature surround-sound.  (No video.)

In all cases provenance of the recording is critical – i.e., modern recordings that were captured and mastered as hi-res multi-channel – NOT DSP-generated gimmickry applied to vintage recordings. 

  

IME/IMO, hi-res multi-channel (e.g., DTS-HD MA 5.1) is VASTLY superior to stereo for the large-scale classical music that I love.

  

There are countless modern (last dozen years or so) recordings of classical compositions that were recorded and mastered in modern “hi-res” formats, and delivered on multi-channel Blu-ray or SACD – and IME/IMO these hi-res multi-channel recordings “blow the socks off” stereo (particularly the 40-year-old Redbook CD format).   If you’d like to read about a few examples:    https://community.klipsch.com/index.php?/topic/202102-classical-recordings/&do=findComment&comment=2658804

 

I don’t know if hi-res multi-channel is relevant to the OP’s preferred music.

 

Two channel vinyl makes all that sound like hammered dog s$&t...........😁

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Shakeydeal said:

 

Two channel vinyl makes all that sound like hammered dog s$&t...........😁

 

I can play “all-analog” - e.g., 1950s era classical LP pressings (i.e., no digitization), via 1950s era tube amps (e.g., McIntosh MC30s). 

 

I can play modern digital recordings via modern class D amps (stereo or multi-channel).  

 

I can play any combination of analog and digital, solid-state and tube, and modern and vintage.

 

My first choice for classical music is modern Blu-ray audio/video recordings featuring DTS-HD MA 5.1, played via my choice of vintage tube amps.   

 

For those who tout vinyl, I ask:   Have you heard top-quality modern hi-res multi-channel classical recordings played via your choice of tube amps?  (I.e., no AVR involved.)    Or, are you comparing your favorite LP system to an AVR (or home-theater-in-a-box)?   

 

Are you comparing your favorite LPs to DSP-generated pseudo-surround-sound applied to vintage recordings, or are you comparing LPs to state-of-the-art modern recordings that are natively hi-res multi-channel?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/14/2021 at 1:26 PM, billybob said:

Yes, please do not take suggestions personally. You ask you tend to get here. Stereo listeners using 2 channel and now sometimes with a sub, prefer the mains only, with AVR in a pure direct stereo mode. Purists we tend to call them.

Sounds like you are already there having done the work already between the two.

Maybe abit more time will help with decision.

Now opening the door for Khorn or LaScalas... alright then.

Got it and thanks... help's !

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Having the two pair together for me is something I should not have done. I love sounds by my ear and it is driving me nutts that the difference isn't jumping out to allow me to say WOW! This one is a lot better than theother pair.... NOT! What to me it is doing is if I stay with one pair and by getting rid of the other pair going to make me say wow, I really miss that sound no matter which pair i sell ..     The cornwalls IV's spread out a little and the RF 7III's  compact or narrow down the sound in a smaller space that makes the depth or talking or music  more in the middle or lower keyed. Problem is they bopth sound GREAT in they're own right. What a delima !!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

The sound that you are disappointed in is more a result of the electronics in front of the speaker than the speaker itself. That’s what happens when you have a highly resolving speaker, you hear what you put in. If you drive the Cornwall IV with a good two channel preamp and high quality tube amp, you still might not like them, but I guarantee the sound will be worlds better than what you have experienced so far.

 

You see this all the time. Someone buys a good speaker and puts it in a system with a cheap receiver or crap “AVR” and wonders where the magic is. The magic is due to every part of the chain. Even when they are relatively happy with the sound with the cheap electronics they have no idea how much performance is being left on the table.

 

So go back to the RF7s if that’s what you prefer. But you haven’t heard how good they can be either. Good luck.

 

Shakey

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Shakeydeal said:

The sound that you are disappointed in is more a result of the electronics in front of the speaker than the speaker itself. That’s what happens when you have a highly resolving speaker, you hear what you put in. If you drive the Cornwall IV with a good two channel preamp and high quality tube amp, you still might not like them, but I guarantee the sound will be worlds better than what you have experienced so far.

 

You see this all the time. Someone buys a good speaker and puts it in a system with a cheap receiver or crap “AVR” and wonders where the magic is. The magic is due to every part of the chain. Even when they are relatively happy with the sound with the cheap electronics they have no idea how much performance is being left on the table.

 

So go back to the RF7s if that’s what you prefer. But you haven’t heard how good they can be either. Good luck.

 

Shakey

 I agree with your summary to a degree. however I pre judged the corn IV's unfairly only because I was partial to the RF7 III's.  but now that I am playing more quality tracks I feel the cornwalls are performing great. To pick one pair of speakers vs the others is picky even though I think the corn IV's are slightly better listening... They both deliver nicely now that I am doing things differently.

BTW! I have nice hi quality receiver and amp. delivering 275 watts per channel, driving 3 channels.

Don't think it's my system even tho one can spend 1000's more getting all the hi tech and then find they're music sounds are not that much different from one's "cheap" stuff. It's funny spending 1000's more forces one the believe they have the best sounds on this earth til the guy with average struff sounds as good or better only because he may have better ears!!!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No it’s not imagined, the difference in electronics is real. I’m not saying you have to break the bank, but you have to move beyond the receiver and multi channel amp crowd to get to the good stuff. It’s ok that you like what you have, but don’t discount how much better it could be.

 

Shakey

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/15/2021 at 5:00 PM, cornwall IV's vs RF7III said:

Having the two pair together for me is something I should not have done. I love sounds by my ear and it is driving me nutts that the difference isn't jumping out to allow me to say WOW! This one is a lot better than theother pair.... NOT! What to me it is doing is if I stay with one pair and by getting rid of the other pair going to make me say wow, I really miss that sound no matter which pair i sell ..     The cornwalls IV's spread out a little and the RF 7III's  compact or narrow down the sound in a smaller space that makes the depth or talking or music  more in the middle or lower keyed. Problem is they bopth sound GREAT in they're own right. What a delima !!!

 

 

Cornwall IV's

RC64 III Center

RF 7 III switch back and forth.. 

Emotiva 275 watt 3 channel hooked up to my left, front, center and right front speaker.

 

RP 502S surrounds

2Ea. RP 500SA front presence

2EA. RP 500SA used for rear surrounds using selector switch set to surrounds. 

Yahama A-3080  9.2 channel , 165W/channel to remaining surrounds (502S). surround back (RP500SA) and front presence atmos.(RP500SA)

 

Edited by cornwall IV's vs RF7III
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...