MrMcGoo Posted January 31, 2004 Share Posted January 31, 2004 I have read that the Cornwall starts to get a bit harsh over 95 db. Many that own the Cornwall use rope calk on the horns and so on in order to tame the harshness. If the RF-7 can play loudly with little or no distortion or harshness, it would be a major advantage. There are many other aspects of music and movie reproduction that would need to be evaluated as well. Putting down a relatively new member of the forun for playing RF-7s loudly during a demo is inappropriate. I will not refer anyone to the 2 channel forum again due to the poor treatment that they might receive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harrysfavoritemusic Posted January 31, 2004 Share Posted January 31, 2004 sorry guys---point well taken---i am a relatively new member as well---i just have spent my whole life fighting this volume and "kick" and bashing and thrashing mentality with other musicians, sound engineers, and innocent listeners(!) and i was pouring it on too heavy---i guess i was directing my anger more at the salesperson, as i think about it. anyway, to quote another piano-player, "if it sounds good, then it is good". don't let my grumpiness deter you, but make sure they sound good at low volumes as well, which i'm sure you will! cheers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike stehr Posted January 31, 2004 Share Posted January 31, 2004 "Do whatever ya like, and see if you can Blow them up" If some gomer stereo salesmen tells me that, then he's asking for it. (But I completely agree with you, Jeffrey.) It's like going to test drive a car at a lot. "I wanna test drive this '67 'vette roadster." "Sure! Here's the keys, so if you can blow it up!" Uh...Okay!!! Mr.McGoo, Don't you work at EWU? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norcuron Posted January 31, 2004 Author Share Posted January 31, 2004 Hi All, I just spent the last 2 solid hours comparing these side by side, one Chorus on Left and an RF-7 on right, vice a versa, both RF-7s, then back to both Chorus lol. Here is my honest opinion: I will be returning the RF-7s. This was a great reality check as to how great the Chorus IIs are. As far as music goes, there is no comparison in the highs, the tweeter on the Chorus bring out more. I do hear the tinty bright part on the higest part of the spectrum and may try some of the mods I have read about. As for Bass, I think the RF-7 was a little better, but I will have my new SVS PB2+ this Wed by 5pm. I would say that they are closest in classical music. Country, Rock, and old pop like Chicago all sounded better to me and my wife on the Chorus. My wife said she felt the Chorus IIs sounded more alive and that the voices seemed blended into the music more on the RF-7 to a point of almost losing the voices compared to the Chorus (hope that makes sense). The Chorus IIs are also a little louder at same volume (not better in that aspect, just an observation). I was surprised, because I honestly thought I was going to be keeping these as I drove home. I think if anywhere I need to upgrade from the Marantz receiver. I think could help the slight tinty sound on the Choruses. This truly shows that you cannot make wise decisions without comparing the speakers side by side. Thanks you Klipsch for making great speakers and thank you forum for throwing your opinions my way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike stehr Posted January 31, 2004 Share Posted January 31, 2004 I liked my '95 Chorus II's. I like my Cornwalls too. I have a pair of SVS 16/46 CS subwoofers, they did pretty well with the Chorus II's I had. They fare well with the Corns too. Haven't listened to RF-7. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deang Posted January 31, 2004 Share Posted January 31, 2004 Looks like I've gotten in here a little late -- oh well. First of all, any judgment or evaluation of the RF-7 without first running them in for 50 to 100 hours -- is in my mind, almost completely worthless. Out of the box, the speaker is a harsh and closed-in sounding. After sufficient break-in, the RF-7 "explodes" into a very natural and dynamic sounding speaker. I experienced this first hand with the RB-5s, the RC-7s (which I ran as mains in a two channel system for a year), and then the RF-7s. I was actually sitting in front of the RC-7s when I heard them "snap" into focus and "let go". The experience was a bit unnerving since it was so clearly audible when it happened, enough so that I actually got up to go check the equipment in the rack. With all due respect to Tom Brennen, the RF-7 is indeed extremely dynamic. Tom's objection is the non-horn loaded midrange, which is reproduced primarily by the cones. However, they more then get the job done, and spare one the annoyance of having to deal with some of the not so perfect things a horn loaded midrange brings. It is difficult for me to take many of the comments and criticisms of the RF-7 seriously, especially by those who have not heard a pair in a real listening room, and optimally placed. Now, it is true that I have not heard stock RF-7s in a long time, but I do remember always enjoying them no matter what state they were in. I'm sure my mods elevated them to a higher level of performance -- but I think they are marvelous none the less. So, now I sit here with the the Majestic Klipschorn, and enjoy them very much. However, it would be dishonest and ludicrous to say they trounce all over the RF-7 in every way. The Klipschorns are rich and full, with everything on a grander scale --but they are NOT as clean, or as "fast" sounding as the RF-7s. No way, no how. The K-horns certainly take the lead in the dyanmics department -- but the distance separating the two is not as far as one would think. I like the new "ceramic" cones being used by Klipsch and Infinity. They sound great. http://www.infinitysystems.com/homeaudio/technology/whitepapers/cmmd.pdf I would definitely consider the RF-7 an upgrade from the Chorus -- and midrange horn be damned. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leok Posted January 31, 2004 Share Posted January 31, 2004 I have both & consider myself lucky that I do (since I'm unlucky in that I can't fit LaScalas in my house). I think the Chorus-II has a more even dynamic presentation over the frequencies it is capable of reproducing. But, as Dean said, the RF-7 has one clean high end (I think because there isn't a crossover in the middle of it). The RF-7 also goes lower than the Chorus-II. I wouldn't call the RF-7 a step up. I would call it a different approach (the 2-way approach, which I like). The Chorus-II is a superb speaker. I love it for big, complex presentations. It's also wonderful for human voice .. male or female. For me, the RF-7 is better with strings, esp string quartet or baroque chamber orchestra. Because of the low bass, there are some rock tunes I prefer through the RF-7s also. You can't go wrong with a Klipsch horn 3-way, but their 2-ways are great in their own ways. Leo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norcuron Posted January 31, 2004 Author Share Posted January 31, 2004 Hi All, I will admit that I have continued playing with them and have learned that they definately need to have bass and treble adjusted totally different than the Chorus IIs. After tweaking with the bass and treble I think they do sound much better than before. I tried to do most of my comparing as flat as possible. I am now undecided as to whether they are going back or not. I actually got a local dealer to agree to 750 a piece. That is tempting me possible into keeping them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Audio Flynn Posted January 31, 2004 Share Posted January 31, 2004 Dean, I agree with the Break in on reference series. I do not agree RF-7 mid is superior to Chorus II. This gentle man should look at source and amp. Optiojns: 1. Monarchy Class A SS amp from receiver pre outs 2. Pick iup a pair of used KG-4 fo the HT and pu the Chorus II in a different room for 2 channel with a vintage tube integrated amp. 3. If the receiver has analog pass through get the new Rotel CD player 1072 just reviwed in TAS for $ 700. I have the RP-91; it is great for HT and DVD_A but a stand alone CD player of merit does wonders. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteelerFan Posted January 31, 2004 Share Posted January 31, 2004 One should ever only say they prefer speaker A over speaker B and leave it at that. I have RF-7's and Forte II's and while they don't sound exactly the same, I like them both. They both posess that distinctive Klipsch sound I fell in love with the first time I heard a pair of KG4's back in "91". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norcuron Posted January 31, 2004 Author Share Posted January 31, 2004 AudioFlynn, I agree that the RP91 is not very good for playing regular CDs. I use the Carver CD player and it does much better than the Panasonic. I'm not saying that a new one would not be even better though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Audio Flynn Posted January 31, 2004 Share Posted January 31, 2004 Does your receiver have an anlog pass through? These clean up music nicely. Next suggestion go to www.virmode.com buy for $ 15 their paper on EMI radiation and resonce control in cd layers. Then for about $ 50 you can order a "kit" for doing these simple mods to improve your current player. Mayube even get an external DAC if your Carver has a digital output. Then buy a vintage integrated tube amp to play with and have a tech go through it. Many of us fell comfortable with www.nosvalves.com to update older tube equipment. Tube with any 3 way Klipsch is amazing; if you have only heard SS amps. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daddy Dee Posted January 31, 2004 Share Posted January 31, 2004 Hope you are having fun with the comparison. You have been getting some good advice in the process. And that's a good thing to be considering in the process. I might have missed it in the thread, but what kind of amp and source are you using. Now, as someone who is familiar with the sound of Klipsch Heritage speakers, but has not heard Chorus or RF's, I know that I would bring a preference bias toward Chorus, because of it's kinship to the Heritage line. I do know that you will can get helpful info from this forum on the impact of amp and source on your end results. One bit of advisement on making a decision. I have learned that if I find myself really agonizing over a decision, it is better to leave things alone. I've been happier with the results when the decision flows and rings true as the right thing. Best regards, Dee Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deang Posted January 31, 2004 Share Posted January 31, 2004 Well then norcuron -- it has been decided. You must keep both pairs of speakers AND uprgrade your equipment. Aren't you glad you stopped by? No one can help someone else go broke faster than we can. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norcuron Posted January 31, 2004 Author Share Posted January 31, 2004 I was sitting here a couple of hours ago and thought "Hmmm, Maybe I should pull my KSP-s6s off of the back walls and hook up my Chorus as rear speakers...I must say I have never heard anything quite like it.....I think both are GREAT speakers.....If I do buy the RF-7s for 1500 out the door I will keep both pairs. FYI for who asked what I was using for power..Marants SR-96 with a Carver TFM45 pushing 375wpc to front mains..and the MArantz 90wpm to the Center and rears. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deang Posted January 31, 2004 Share Posted January 31, 2004 Wait a couple of weeks, and the RF-7's will start to pull away. Someday, when you have money again -- I'll make both sets even better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Anonymous Posted February 1, 2004 Share Posted February 1, 2004 Deano, your one hellofa guy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stream Posted February 1, 2004 Share Posted February 1, 2004 I think I will eventually purchase a pair of K-horns to complement my RF-7's. It seems that way I'll have the best of both worlds. -Jesse Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whell Posted February 1, 2004 Share Posted February 1, 2004 By the way, RF-7's for $1500/pair is a pretty darn good deal, IMHO. I'd jump on it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deang Posted February 1, 2004 Share Posted February 1, 2004 That's true too. Not a bad deal at all. While we're at, and I simply can't help myself here -- but am I the only person in the world that thinks phenolic diaphragms have a bit of that kazoo thing going? I bet PK studied the sound of these things for a long time. Hell, now doesn't that look just like phenolic diaphragm and horn? Damn, where's that picture of the RF-7 titanium kick-a$$ compression driver when you need it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.