My RF-7 review & Klipschorn Demo

[KathyMason]

I've been breaking-in a brand new pair of Klipsch RF-7 speakers

over the past few weeks. The speakers weigh about 95 pounds

each so I had to get help moving them to the right spot in my

house. It took two girls and one guy to move them into place

and I was so nervous we were going to drop one going up the

stairs with them but all went well. I love the weight, I don't

like it when a speaker is feather-lite. The RF-7 feel and look

a very nice quality. The only complaint I can find with them

are the feet, seem too cheapy and my friend's husband told me that

his broke when he tilted his back too far but that he replaced

the feet with a nice metal set so I'll have to look into that,

I do wish Klipsch would have made them metal! The speaker grills

seem fine to me with the quality of it, I've seen much cheaper

ones but Klipsch did pretty good on the grill, a heftier than most.

They sounded much better in my home than at "The Good Guys". I

noticed the difference right away. I was very impressed with the

sound from the beginning, although the highs were slightly bright

and harsh at first but about two days of play, they went to very

smooth. I also noticed a lack of bass in the beginning but after

about one week, the bass was deep down low, tight, and impressive.

The bass that the RF-7's give is so good that you do not need a

sub at all. This will greatly depend on your amplifier though.

I have three different amps and I got very much three very different

results. I knew from my research on the RF-7's that two of my

amps wouldn't do that well but the Rotel equipment would. I

wanted to try and see. One amp was too bright and harsh where

it was hard to listen to for very long. The other amp was a little

warmer but kind of harsh in the highs and both amps really lacked

in the bass area. My Rotel RB-1090 amp gives the RF-7's just what

they want, the sound is very musical, dynamic, great slam and

punching bass.... best I ever heard! The detail is incredible.

The soundstage is huge, wide, and open. The other two amps suffered

with too narrow of a soundstage. I can really see how the RF-7's

need just the right equipment to sound their very best! It's

quite incredible to hear the RF-7's best, it leaves me feeling

very satisfied, thrilled, very involving, stunning, live, and big

performance, leaving me in such awe with the RF-7. It leaves me

with wanting nothing more, as if nirvana has been found.

I was concerned about the midrange lacking with the RF-7's two-way

design. This is another area where it is very important to pick the

right equipment. My other two amps did not give the midrange with

the RF-7 is capable of and gave some disappointing results. My

Rotel RB-1090 gave the midrange a very involving forward and smooth

midrange with great clarity and detail and absolutely beautiful

accurate male and female vocals. It didn't lack in the midrange

at all with the Rotel RB-1090 so I think you need to pick an amp with

very good ampage, the Rotel RB-1090 is 380watts per channel, and no,

it is NOT an overkill at all. It gives it all it's best! I really

think you cannot go any less than 200watts per channel with the RF-7's

if you want the best midrange and bass output. My other two amps

never even came close to achieving the sound quality given by the

Rotel RB-1090 on every level.

I think that Klipsch has an exceptional product here if equipment is

chosen wisely! I cannot even describe the detail, resolution, articulation,

dimensionality, and how the RF-7's can recreate room dimensions of the

recorded source. You can even hear when a singer moves 3 to 6 inches

away from the mic when singing! It's incredibly amazing! If a CD has a bad

recording, the RF-7 do let you know.....even if unpleasant!! Great recording

sound phenomenal! The greatness and dynamics of the RF-7 have my Martin Logans

sounding so lacking now and what's so amazing is the RF-7's cost so much

less than my Martin Logans. Yes, I will be getting rid of my Martin Logans

with the first found buyer! The Logans never, but never gave me bass like

the RF-7's and that was always the big disappoint with the Logans. The Logans

just cannot do the dynamics and dimensionality of the RF-7's! The Martin

Logans are very impressive for what they are but just doesn't do it for me

like the Klipsch RF-7's can do. I think I will be a hooked Klipsch addict

from here on out for life!

Ok, now on to the Klipschorn speakers! I've been thinking just how in the

World can anything surpass the RF-7's performance. I've been very curious to

hear the Klipschorn's so over the weekend I made the 240 mile trip up to

Seattle, Washington to have a listen..... and a weekend vacation. I was so

hoping to hear the potential of the Klipschorn's but I really don't feel

that I did. The listening was a disappointment. I really feel that the

place has them not setup at it's best for equipment and not direct to the

speakers, going through too much switchboard options for equipment and speakers.

When the Klipschorn's started playing, I noticed the big sound that my RF-7's do

about the same. I thought.....hmmmm.... isn't it supposed to be bigger. The demo

room was smaller than my room that I have the RF-7's in so that could be the

problem. My room the RF-7s are in is 30 feet by 40 feet with 23 foot v.ceiling.

The Klipschorn's were in a room that was about 25 feet by 10 feet and 8 foot ceiling.

I also noticed a great absents in the presentation, resolution, dimensions, and

detail I'm used to hearing in the RF-7's. The bass was definitely better with

the RF-7 being with much slam and punch, whereas the Klipschorn's were a much

more relaxed type of bass. The Klipschorn was being run off a Carver ZR1600

amp and I can't say that it went very well with it, seemed to make the Klipschorn

edgy sounding and the midrange sounded harsh compared to the much smoother

midrange of the RF-7. I did notice that the Klipschorn midrange does have a

more forward midrange and does have slight more detail in the midrange than

the RF-7's. The RF-7's come close but just a little harder to hear with the

RF-7's than the Klipschorn's.

I also listened to the RF-7's while there and they had it on a Denon amp and I

don't think that goes well with it either, the RF-7's sounded so crappy and dead

sounding than what I'm used to hearing at home. Not the sound I know that the

RF-7's can do at all! It would really leave one with the wrong impression of

the RF-7's. It's a real shame some places don't set things up right to get the

best out of these speakers! I was so hoping to really hear the Klipschorn's

potential while in Seattle and I really feel I didn't get to hear the true

nature of the Klipschorn's! My CD's I brought with me for listening didn't even

sound the same as what I'm used to, was such a disappointment. Real shame!

The salesman was also the type that he thought turning the volume up to 71

with the Klipschorn's was how it was to be heard. I had to jump off the sofa

and get to the back of the room before the Klipschorn's took my skin and ears

off, way too much volume! They do get loud but I wanted to evaluate, not damage

my ears! I think the only way I will get a true quality evaluation from the

Klipschorn's is to find someone local that would be willing to let me listen

to theirs. Please guys, don't take my disappointment of the Klipschorn's to

heart! I know they have to be a great speaker with the following they have

here, it's just I really don't think it was run with the right equipment to

give me it's true potential, in fact I know it, I just felt right away that

something was wrong with the setup or amp it was being used with. I'm really

looking forward to hear just how great the Klipschorn's sound in the near future,

and soon I hope! Klipsch has me feeling like, why bother with any other speaker

when I have a Klipsch !!! Maybe that sould be their new logo!!!

"Klipsch - Why bother with any other speaker"

Sounds good to me!!!!

[heresy2guy]

Stop the press.

Khorns in an 8 X 10 room????

Game over. Don't pass Go, do not collect $200.

If somebody told me ahead of time that they had anything above a Heresy in a room that small I wouldn't even waste my time giving it a listen...even if they threw in a few sandwiches and some beer.

Well...MAYBE some beer.

But you get my point.

Still, you say it was a vacation of sorts, so all was not lsot I guess.

-H2G

[Marvel]

Kathy,

Great review and very well said about matching the right amp with the speakers.

That room would hardly be big enough for one KHorn, much less two. How sad. It's a wonder people buy them at all.

I still have to make do with my Heresys for a while longer. My living room is only 13 x 22 w/8 foot ceilings, and many would consider that too small for the big horns. Still hoping to convince the wife for us to at least try them sometime.

Marvel

[jacksonbart]

Nice post, would agree the RF7s are awesome IMO. Very happy they are working for you. Couple of questions, what were the other amps your heard the FR7s on prior to the Rotel. Sounds like you have an amazing room, 30 by 40 wow, can you please post pictures, very envious to have thet kind of space for music. Would also be interested in what you listened to. Congratulations on getting your speakers home, could not agree more that Klipsch is it.

[timbley]

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

On 3/16/2005 12:57:16 PM KathyMason wrote:

My Rotel RB-1090 amp gives the RF-7's just what

they want, the sound is very musical, dynamic, great slam and

punching bass.... best I ever heard! I can really see how the RF-7's

need just the right equipment to sound their very best!

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

Hey, are you near Eugene? I've only tried a few amps with my RF-7s. I definitely did not like my cheap RCA receiver, or my old Sony receiver on the RF-7s. But an old Sherwood tube amp sounded very good, and I think the Panasonic SA-XR50 sounds excellent. I'd like to hear that Rotel amp with the RF-7. I hear all this talk about other amps and pre-amps, and it makes me wonder if I'm missing out on something good.

[AnalOg]

Very nice review, hit it on the nose with your descriptions. I don't think you'll have a hard time finding a forum member to have you over for a listen, unless he's married.

[BillH2121]

Kathy - did you check your RF-7s to make sure that the foam batting was pushed to the front and floor of the speaker cabinet. The batting was partially covering the ports in the back of my speakers - properly positioning the batting made a remarkable difference in the bass production of the 7s. Enjoy your speakers, the more I listen to mine, the more I love them.

[m00n]

Kathy, Timbly

You guys are in Oregon? I'm in the Portland area myself.

Running RF7s myself with a Harman Kardon AVR7200. Very nice setup. However, my feelings differ just a tad. I always felt the RF7s were a little weak in the bottom end, just my opinion, but a fantastic setup is RF7s and a RSW-12.

IF, and ONLY IF, you ever begin to suffer from upgraditus, contact DeagG. He makes some very nice RF7 crossover upgrades. They tone down some of the edge, maintain the clairity and seem to enhance the bottom end. The upgrade is subtle but very nice.

[Deang]

Nice job Kathy, it's not easy writing about sound, and I've just about given up on it myself.

Where did Kathy say anything about an 8x10 room?

"The Klipschorn's were in a room that was about 25 feet by 10 feet and 8 foot ceiling."

[GeorgeV]

Hi mOOn,

I think a SS amp with 200wpc would give your RF-7's more bottom end. I use a Acurus A250 amp and I get a lot of bass.

[cjgeraci]

Kathy,

Nice review of both speakers. What you said about the RF-7s is dead on. I've been beating the drums about them being demanding speakers in that they really need the right amplification to sound right. However, once you provide that amplification, boy - watch out. As a result, my RF-7s will always be run either by my 200 watt Rotel (1080) or a similar tube amp equivalent (in power), Dynaco Mark IIIs.

As for the Klipschorn you heard, just out of curiousity, was this a brand new pair?? I sort of assumed that based on your post, but if they were older models, that may account for some of the deficiencies you heard. That being said, the main problems with the K-horns you heard were most likely the preamp and amplification. When I first acquired my Belles, I was a little disappointed about their performance (vs. my RF-7s), and that was mainly due to room constraints and older networks. With some recent tube rolling in my amp (and CD player), opening up my room (tearing down interior walls), and installing new networks, my Belles are now in another league (a large step up) from my RF-7s. That's not to denegrate my RF-7s but to applaud the large Heritage, and you will find out at some point. That being said, I still enjoy my RF-7s, and there will always be a spot in my house for them.

And yes, for the Heritage gang, the DHAxover is incredible. Received my pair last week from Dean - and I am very pleased. I have pushed them and pushed them, and my Belles sound incredibly dynamic (and smooth) at all volumes. And it also handles extreme volumes. A nice crossover that succeeds in taming the mid-horn (at least for tube amp owners). Kudos to John and Dean for this crossover - its a good one.

Again, nice job Kathy.

Carl.

[m00n]

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

On 3/16/2005 2:16:17 PM GeorgeV wrote:

Hi mOOn,

I think a SS amp with 200wpc would give your RF-7's more bottom end. I use a Acurus A250 amp and I get a lot of bass.

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

Very well could be. I've been told that the RF7s really open up at around 200 watts.

I shouldn't say that there is NO bottom end, just not what I personally have a taste for. I just generally like that little extra UMPH in my bottom end.

[m00n]

cjgeraci

Interesting to hear what you say about the belles. I had a set, first thing I noticed was that there we a lack of bottom end. Got rid of them, not just because of the lack of bass but also because I took money away from my theater funds to get the belles. Came down to what was more important, the belles or my theater. Theater won and I sold the belles to Audible Necter.

Damn you Dean... Had you been making crossovers back then I may still have them belles.

[cjgeraci]

Moon, I've read some of your prior impressions of your Belles, and yes, its true - with my original cans (original '76 AA crossovers), they were not as "dynamic" or "detailed" as my RF-7s, and the bass did not compare. New networks, a better preamp (the Peach), and different amps cured that.

In my experience, the Belles do have sufficient bass such that you can get by without running a sub IF you use the right amplification (and networks). I actually obtained better bass from them by using tube amps instead of SS (counter-intuitive), and then was able to fine tune that response by rolling output tubes in my tube amp. So, they can get the job done with bass. Bass response with my SS Rotel was not bad with them, but tubes worked better (both my Mark IIIs and Marantz 8B). Again, that seems counterintuitive to me.

Despite the above, I still run my SVS monster to anchor my system because I still like a sub to fill in (even when the mains can handle all or most of the load). On the other hand, I've run the Belles without the sub enough to know their true capabilities.

Carl.

[oscarsear]

Don't know which way you went to get to Seattle. If you're in eastern Washington you're welcome to listen to my system...I'm in western Idaho. Running a pair of 2004 Khorns in a 15 X 35 X 8 ft room. Got bass that'll part your hair, along with the rest the Khorns can deliver. I also own a full Reference system which is s/u in an A/V room. The RF-7s were designed as part of an entire system and require some work for proper 2 channel which I believe you have achieved in your s/u. Glad you're enjoying them...and...yes, I'm married and the wife won't mind...too much...I think.

[KathyMason]

I forgot to mention that the Klipschorn's were new models. I also

forgot to mention that I also listen to the new LaScalas and what he

had on the LaScalas made it sound better than the Klipschorn's,

although LaScalas didn't sound probably at their best either with

the bad setup. He had the LaScalas too close and both pointing

straight into the room.

I forgot to mention that I saw the new crossover in the LaScala.

Wow, I was impressed with the hefty new crossover compared to the old

builds! They look very high quality and big! I asked the guy if the

Klipschorn's have the same new crossovers as the LaScala and he said

yes they were but just tuned a little different for their enclosures.

Do the Klipschorn's use the same new crossovers? I have to say that

I was very impressed with the quality and looks of the new LaScala

crossovers! You guys would be very impressed with how nice and

different looking it looks to the older versions. I have to say it

looks like Klipsch is doing a very nice job with the quality of the

new crossovers!!! Wish I had a picture to show you guys, I really do

think you would be impressed! I tried to peek at the crossovers in

the Klipschorn's but they were tight in the corners where I couldn't

see in the back of them.

[Deang]

Kathy, the network for the Klipschorn is inside the bass bin, so you wouldn't have been able to see it anyways. But since you were curious -- here it is.

[m00n]

Good lord! That's one hell of a crossover!

[tigerwoodKhorns]

Why does the RF7 need so much power? I realize that teh K Horn is fully horn loaded, but with my 20 wpc LK-48, I have plenty of power to drive them.

For the record, my K Horns sounded awful when I bought them, teh guy had them hooked up to a cheap receiver ands told me that they should be placed about 4" from the floor and three to four feet out into the room from the corners.

Chris

[cjgeraci]

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

On 3/16/2005 3:59:04 PM tigerwoodKhorns wrote:

Why does the RF7 need so much power? I realize that teh K Horn is fully horn loaded, but with my 20 wpc LK-48, I have plenty of power to drive them.

For the record, my K Horns sounded awful when I bought them, teh guy had them hooked up to a cheap receiver ands told me that they should be placed about 4" from the floor and three to four feet out into the room from the corners.

Chris

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

I will let the engineers provide a technical analysis. I can only provide personal experience.

My "guess" is that it has something to do both with the two-way function of the RF-7s and the low impedence dips of the speakers. With a two-way consisting of two 10 inch woofers and a horn, you are asking a lot of the speakers (and the amp) to duplicate the midrange (and adequate bass) with that setup. Therefore, you get cleaner and more defined midrange as well as tighter bass response with more stouter power supplies. Will a RF-7 owner ever need all the power of a 200 or 300 watt amp?? No. But, if the amp has to strain even a bit going to reference levels, the midrange and bass suffer. Also, the horns sound harsher as a result.

I discovered this with my RF-7s. I ran a number of receivers and solid state amps with them (all below 150 watts per). I also ran some decent tube amps with them (Dynaco Stereo 70: 30 per and Marantz 8B: 35 per). None of those power supplies allowed the RF-7s to truly shine. It wasn't until I got serious (Rotel 1080 or Dynaco Mark IIIs) that the RF-7s truly shined (no staining on highs or mids and tight bass).

In comparison, my Marantz 8B provides adequate power, detail and bass response for my Belles just fine.

Carl.