RF-7 Mini Review - Trey, are you listening?

[richinlr]

As everyone who has read my posts, I am a newly returned to the fold Klipsch fan. I have always loved Klipschorns and La Scalas.

After being so knocked out with the performance of the RB-25's after hearing mine on good electronics as a stereo pair, I could not help dreaming about RF-5's or RF-7's replacing my ET LFT-VIII's and increasing my sonic satisfaction to the point that I could actually live comfortably while I awaited the economics and right opportunity to pick up either some K-horns or La Scalas or Belle Klipsch.

Well, after checking out the comments on this forum regarding RF-7's I decided it was time for a serious listen. To this end, I went to my local Klipsch Refernece dealer armed with a few good CD's (Telarc Time warp - the dynamics trash my system, Sheffield Labs Prime Cuts - best tracks from various Sheffield direct to disc recordings). My dealer has a room set up for his high end demos (Klipsch and B & W) with reasonably good amps (Denon separates). He also lets you get serious about listening - closes the door and leaves.

So, I put the Telarc on. From the get-go, I was absolutely knocked out - not only did that CD NOT trash the RF-7's but the dynamics and transient response was astounding. I am thinking "Oh, I just might be able to get into this sound!".

Then I put the Sheffield CD on and went straight to Thelma Houston's "I've got the music in me". Starts great and then Thelma starts singing and I sit up straight in my chair! The big question:

What happened to the power and clarity in her voice? Where did it go? It was, in a nutshell, missing in action.

So, I went to another track on the CD with a female vocal (Amanda McBroom - "Only With You") to see if I could tell what was going on (amps?, speakers? recording?). SAME PROBLEM!

Then I went to Harry James (same CD) and "Roll 'Em". There was a discernible muddiness and hollowness in the lower midrange that is simply not there at my house.

So I got to thinking that something is wrong somewhere and decided to have the dealer let me listen to the same CD on the RF-25's (on a Denon receiver). Voila! The wonderful clarity in the mid-range that convinced me to buy the RB-25's in the first place was back!

Now I REALLY started thinking about what was wrong and I figured it out.

PWK said the "We live in the midrange...". Back when I was in my speaker building days, I learned two very important truths:

1. Keep crosover points out of the all important midrange as best you can.

2. Trying the get an 8 inch woofer to properly do midrange is very difficult, not to mention larger woofers.

I always wound up building a 3-way system for these very reasons.

I also remember looking a the Klipsch Reference brochure a couple of weeks ago and seeing that the RF-7 was a two-way with the horn crossed at 2200 Hz. I wondered "Now how did they pull that off?" Must be the new ceramic drivers...

Well, I am here to tell you that they didn't pull it off and the old truths still apply...

To all the folks at Klipsch who happen to be listening (and anyone else who may be).

1. Do exactly the same test as I did with well recorded female vocals and hear it for yourself - this is not subtle - it's like daylight and darkness.

2. When you re-do the RF-7, PLEASE make it a 3-way. Put an RB-25 woofer in to do it and cross the RB-25 with a gentle slope lower than 300 Hz. Leave the crossover to the horn at 2.2 kHz.

3. Do not screw around with the woofers or the horn! The bass slam and power is fantastic. The transient response and clarity of the horn is stunning!

I will leave it to the designers to figure out the baffle design to accomodate a midrange driver.

[leok]

richinlr,

The RF-7 is not a 3-way. 2-way designs do have a certain advantage in the seamless transition from upper midrange to tweeter frequencies. I listen to a substantial amount of chamber and solo classical music, and occasional pipe organ. Having a single, good quality speaker handling from 2.2KHz up provides very lifelike detail to the highs, upper harmonics, and nonharmonic sounds such as bow and plucking sounds. Solo violin, one of my favorites, is very well reproduced using the RF-7s and a SET amplifier. I can easily tell the difference between the two violins that Andrew Manze uses in his recordings. I have heard Mr. Manze play both violins in concert and the RF-7 reproduction is very close. The soft, woody sound of his violins comes across better on the RF-7s than the Chorus-II 3-ways. Also, interesingly, the RF-7 handles the powerful highs of a huge pipe organ with a full set of mixtures producing an intense, but still properly textured high end. The RF-7 bass also handles the organ lows quite well.

I'm well aware of the advantages of the mid horn on my Chorus-IIs and its advantage in overall dynamic balance. But I find the RF-7 preferable in certain situations.

Leo

[meuge]

I am pretty sure it was something about the setting you were auditioning the speakers in. I have a pair of RF-3IIs (8" woofers) and the dynamics of voices is absolutely stunning. Furthermore, I have listened to the RB-25s on this very same system, and the RFs are by far superior. I can only guess how much better the RF-7s are, considering that with all the changes to the reference series the RF-7s have survived the RF-3->RF-3II->RF-35.

PS. I am using a Pioneer receiver as a pre/pro and an awesome B&K amp.

[richinlr]

"I can easily tell the difference between the two violins that Andrew Manze uses in his recordings."

This not surprising after hearing the RF-7's. They do present that information but, IMHO, this is at the expense of articulation in 400 to 1000 Hz range. Improve the articulation in this range and you will not only hear the wood difference, but you would also hear the lower harmonics of the resin effect on the bow (you hear this clearly sitting in the flute section of an orchestra). I am sure, as well, that the upper harmonics of a cello would be clearer with more articulation in this range.

Your post has caused me to reach another conclusion. The reason I question these things and the reason I like the absolute clarity in K-horns probably has to do with my background in music and performing with orchestras and bands. To sum it up, there ain't no seat in the entire concert hall that comes even close to sitting in the middle of the orchestra...

[richinlr]

"I am pretty sure it was something about the setting you were auditioning the speakers in."

Must be. I would really like to hear the RF-7's on my Electrocompaniet pre-amp and amp. On my amp, the RB-25's have an absolutely luscious midrange as do my ET LFT-VIII's. When listening to RB-25's on a really good system, one must be aware of their shortcomings in the bass and the fact that the horn in a RB-25 is nowhere near the quality of the one in the RF-7's.

I am only discussing midrange here. As I said before, the bass and highs of the RF-7 are truly stunning.

As an aside, if anyone out there has not heard Electrocompaniet (most folks have never even heard of them much less heard any of their amps), you would do well to audition one. They have the smoothness and non-fatiguing sound of tubes, the transient response (slam) of solid state and enough current to handle any low impedance troughs that a speaker might present. And the detail in the midrange is to die for. I have yet to hear another amp that does all of these things so well. Heard plenty of amps that do some of them but never heard one that can do all of them. And believe me, I have listened to everything from McIntosh to ARC to Krell. Give me my 15 year old Electro's over anything I have heard to date. Go to audioreview.com and look up 'Electrocompaniet' and see what everyone has to say.

[Trey Cannon]

I don't see a 3 way in the RF-7 but we are addressing your issue.

I use La Scala's for somewhat the same reason.

I can not say a thing about the next run of product. We just started realy talking about it...But I will say this.

We continue to "raise the bar" with every "new" product we build, while doing our best to keep our past in mind.

We do hear you and value your advise.

As you all know, blending the "WAF" with sound is a thin line to walk to say the lest.

[Parrot]

Didn't people have wives back in the Heritage days? Oh, wait, that was before women's liberation! Who'd have predicted the movement would spell the end (pretty much) of the Heritage series?

[TBrennan]

So to make a long story short midrange sounds better from a compression driver-horn than from a cone. That's why A7s have better mids than 604s. Yeah, hornys, including ole PWK, have known that for years.

[Klipsch RF7]

Bottom line is that Denon and Klipsch donot mix, I recently bought a Denon AVR-3805 Reciever and hooked it to my RF-7's, in all respects the bass is severly lacking and the highs are very harsh and the midrange is hollow. Donot make final judgements on the RF-7's unless you hear them on a nice tube setup, you are not doing them justice listening to them on High wattage, low current Japanese solid state equipment, it is not optimal and it is simply a awful combination to put it lightly. Now, when i have them hooked to a rebuilt Scott 299-C or my main setup which is a pair of Dynaco Mark III mono amps completely rebuilt going through a tube preamp. The sound is simply stunning, warm smooth highs with clarity, deep rich bass with a thick midrange. Overall the sound has heft and wieght to it that only the tube equipment provides. Look at my sig for my setup, I am very pleased indeed. Donot pass judgement on them unless you bring them home and hook them to your tube setup with a nice CD or SACD player or DVD audio player, you will be quite surprised of the diffrence. I still to this day goto my local high end electronics store and listen to the RF-7's on thier solid state seperates and I just simply want to leave the room because the sound is harsh and hollow and simply upsets me that people listen to them in this configuration and draw the wrong conclusions about them.

[Frzninvt]

You failed to mention that you RF-7 crossovers have been modified and trust me I know that they make a difference over the factory installed versions. I am certain the crossover mods addressed some of the midrange issues for certain.

[Klipsch RF7]

----------------

On 8/4/2004 1:27:55 PM Frzninvt wrote:

You failed to mention that you RF-7 crossovers have been modified and trust me I know that they make a difference over the factory installed versions. I am certain the crossover mods addressed some of the midrange issues for certain.

----------------

Right, even so with modified crossovers, I have tried SS seperates like Rotel and Denon $1500 recievers and I find the sound lacking, newer solid state amps and digital preamps just dont mesh with these klipsch bottom line. Even my brothers KG 5.5's which are at a lower crossover frequency in the 1600khz range with updated crossovers are very bright and harsh and lacking in bass with the Denon equipment, my brother notices it big time over his Scott 299-C rebuilt amp, the richness and texture is not there and sounds very unnatural. The point is not to pass judgement on speakers simply because a stereo shop has them setup with high powered megawatt solid state amps which do nothing for the speakers but kill thier sound.

[richinlr]

Thanks to all for the comments.

Please do note that these are meant to be constructive comments rather than critical. That being said I do have a few comments.

Before passing final judgment on the RF-7's I will audition them in my house with my gear (the gear I know and trust). At least my own gear with my own ears will give a reasonably solid basis for comparison.

"As you all know, blending the "WAF" with sound is a thin line to walk to say the least."

Thanks for the reply, Trey. Boy, am I ever aware of this - the WAF factor comes into play everyday in my house. However, my wife actually things the ET LFT VIII's are nice looking (about same width as RF-7 but about 5 ft. tall) so RF-7's would fit right in.

Also, thanks for listening to my comments - they truly are meant to be constuctive.

"So to make a long story short midrange sounds better from a compression driver-horn than from a cone. That's why A7s have better mids than 604s. Yeah, hornys, including ole PWK, have known that for years. ;)"

Yes, horns are best but a properly done cone midrange (note that my ET's have PLANAR midranges and tweeters) is better than none. In descending order of midrange driver quality:

Horn - best

Planar - barely second (a good planar will beat the socks off of a bad horn). By the way, single ended planars (like Magnepan - magnets one side only) are not in the same league as double ended planars (like ET - magnets on both sides)

Cone - third and very hard to execute successfully - probably why Klipsch doesn't do them.

"Bottom line is that Denon and Klipsch donot mix, I recently bought a Denon AVR-3805 Reciever and hooked it to my RF-7's, in all respects the bass is severly lacking and the highs are very harsh and the midrange is hollow. Donot make final judgements on the RF-7's unless you hear them on a nice tube setup, you are not doing them justice listening to them on High wattage, low current Japanese solid state equipment, it is not optimal and it is simply a awful combination to put it lightly."

Thanks for that info about Denon & Klipsch because your comments about the midrange are pretty much what I heard and that may well be the best piece of info so far.

Now, please note that, if I bring them home I will be listening to them through some of the best amplification in the world (tubes or solid state) and not some high wattage, low current (my Electro is good for 60 amps at the speaker terminals and triples its 8 ohm rated power output into 2 ohms) Japanese equipment (mine are made in Norway). I will reserve final judgment of the RF-7's for that event.

Ah, the solid state vs. tube controversy... Which is exactly why I own Electrocompaniet electronics - I like both and these are absolutely the best of both worlds... Don't knock 'em until you've heard them - they are NOT typical solid state. Sounds corny to say but Electrocompaniet's slogan is "if music really matters..." and it is the truth. Proof is in the pudding - they made the RB-25's sound high end (also says a lot about RB-25's).

Now, after all this, can anybody offer an explanation of why the RB-25 STILL had better midrange with even cheaper Japanese electronics?

[Klipsch RF7]

Good on you You can only make a final judgement after the speakers are setup in your listening enviorment with good amplification and allowing the speakers to settle in for a bit. You cannot compare speakers unless you have both on the same exact setup, same DVD player, same cabling, same amplification and equipment, same room Good luck to you and I look forward to hearing your impressions, I hope they are good

[Frzninvt]

I resent the comment on the megawatt SS amps killing the speakers sound that is absolute nonsense, I can personally show you that is a big misconception on your part. I run high quality SS amps (built in Japan no less) and can assure you that they could easily sound as good if not better than your tube set up. Don't pass opinionated judgement when you have not heard everything. Perhaps it is those shrieky titanium tweeters in those RF-7's that are bright with certain SS gear. I personally thought that some of the Denon gear sounded halfway decent with the RF series the little bit that I was exposed to it in the Audio store.

[Klipsch RF7]

----------------

On 8/4/2004 2:13:39 PM Frzninvt wrote:

I resent the comment on the megawatt SS amps killing the speakers sound that is absolute nonsense, I can personally show you that is a big misconception on your part. I run high quality SS amps (built in Japan no less) and can assure you that they could easily sound as good if not better than your tube set up. Don't pass opinionated judgement when you have not heard everything. Perhaps it is those shrieky titanium tweeters in those RF-7's that are bright with certain SS gear. I personally thought that some of the Denon gear sounded halfway decent with the RF series the little bit that I was exposed to it in the Audio store.

----------------

Ive had Denon, Rotel, Onkyo, Krell $3k stereo amp, Pioneer $1500 recievers and they all have that same exact shrill, hollow sound. The only solid state equipment that I have found which sounds good is older 70's Marantz, Technics, Mcintosh 2 channel discrete component recievers. I assure you that no solid state amplification that I have auditioned in this past year has had the sonic richness of my tube equipment, and these opinions are all as a result of the amps and recievers being setup in my listening enviroment, my cables, in my room and using all the same equipment and speakers with diffrent SACD, DVD Audio and CD's as test mediums .

[richinlr]

"Ive had Denon, Rotel, Onkyo, Krell $3k stereo amp, Pioneer $1500 recievers and they all have that same exact shrill, hollow sound. The only solid state equipment that I have found which sounds good is older 70's Marantz, Technics, Mcintosh 2 channel discrete component recievers. I assure you that no solid state amplification that I have auditioned in this past year has had the sonic richness of my tube equipment, and these opinions are all as a result of the amps and recievers being setup in my listening enviroment, my cables, in my room and using all the same equipment and speakers with diffrent SACD, DVD Audio and CD's as test mediums ."

Have you heard Electrocompaniet ever?

[Klipsch RF7]

----------------

On 8/4/2004 3:17:36 PM richinlr wrote:

Have you heard Electrocompaniet ever?

----------------

Hi Rich,

I sure have not, but from what you describe it sounds like a killer amp, it should be in the same ballpark as the discrete component solid state units such as Marantz, Technics, older Pioneer, HK, Etc.... They all have that nice warm sound that sets them apart from the current solid state offerings What sort of equipment do you have as far as DVD player, CD player etc...?

[whell]

----------------

On 8/4/2004 10:33:07 AM Trey Cannon wrote:

I don't see a 3 way in the RF-7 but we are addressing your issue.

I use La Scala's for somewhat the same reason.

I can not say a thing about the next run of product. We just started realy talking about it...But I will say this.

We continue to "raise the bar" with every "new" product we build, while doing our best to keep our past in mind.

We do hear you and value your advise.

As you all know, blending the "WAF" with sound is a thin line to walk to say the lest.

----------------

Wouldn't it be great if the solution implemented was "backwards compatible", and current versions of the RF-7 could be retrofitted with upgraded drivers or crossovers, etc.

[Fish]

As a rf7 owner and fan I really appreciate this thread.I always enjoy hearing well informed opinions whether I totally agree or not.I've had my 7's for a few years and will be the first one to say they can sound like crap or sound quite good.I've had them on a wide variety of equipment,at least 10 different set ups,and they sound better every time I move up in quality of source/pre/amps.

This leeds me to believe they can still be even better but there are limits for price/performance.I am of the opinion that there is some mid range issue,small but not totally insignificant.This extent of this issue depends greatly on source.All things considered its a great speaker but somewhat short of perfect,like most things.I say this as a guy thats owned $2k speakers that really did suck.

To the poster,I think you would find a big improvement on your set up vs Denon(nothing against Denon,I've owned several).

[Frzninvt]

Well as I previously stated you have not heard everything. My speakers are a little more revealing than yours unfortunately, and you have never heard a rare DBX BXI reference amplifier, they sold for about $5K apiece. They run Class A up to about 30 watts as if that is ever needed, are 0.1 Ohm stable, have two 3.7kW transformers in them and a dampening factor of 500 at 20Hz. These are about as clean and pure as they come, easily tube amp warmth and quality all the electronic components in the amp are of extremely tight tolerances, wired entirely with monster cable. They are not available anymore and come from the 1988-1990 era. Hey, but it is your ears and your opinion, I would like to try tubes someday myself but I don't go badmouthing tube amps because a number of the ones that I have heard did not meet my tastes either.