RF-7s VS KLF_30'

[mario]

Ive heard and owned both, I had the 30s first and sold them to get those nice copper coned woofers which I say sound way better then those huge 12 inch woofers that the 30s have.

Over all better sound"

I just want to ask the people in the forum what they think?

WHICH ARE "KING IF THE HILL"?

[lynnm]

I A/B'd the 30's and the RF-7's and thought both were better than anything I had heard in years but preferred the 30's as the 7's sounded just a little "dry" to me. I have to admit also that at the time I was being offered the 30's at just a little over 1/2 the price of the 7's so it could be that I was a little biased in the direction of the speakers that I could buy as against the ones I could not .

I see the comparison as being a Rolls vs. Bentley kind of deal.

[leok]

I've heard the KLF20s and have the RF-7s. I prefer the cleaner highs of the RF-7, but they are rough on any high freq. system imperfections. Also, I think the 2-ways image better than 3-ways, as long as the source is low in distortion.

leok

[Fish]

I agree,they are maybe a very little dry,and a speck rough on high's(when at reference levels).That said, I still love em'.I had a full year to trade up,I tried many of the most popular ones in my price range.I have set others right beside them,a/b switched,and they are very realistic compared to others I tried.They may just work great with my gear/room,but I'll keep em' till I got about 5k to spend.Have you hugged your Klipsch today?