Does the RF-7 defy physics??

[ProStereo]

Regardless of all the fuss being made here, how quick some of you forget to realize that the RF-7's do a great job of what it does. I've had Klipschorn's and now I have RF-7's. You DO NOT need a sub if you have a good amp. I have 4 RF-7's (2-pair) on one amp and I have NEVER had any clipping at all, not even once. I think Dylani's problem is more due to his amp than the RF-7. I absolutely love the RF-7's. Just enjoy the RF-7's, they are outstanding speakers and give an excellent music presentation that mere words and a good amp cannot describe but must be heard.

Do not question excellence, to question is only to confuse.

[Fish]

When I bought my 7's I bought em' based on the way they sound.I really didn't care much about numbers cause when put to a scientist numbers can always be off.I've never in my life bought any audio based on numbers(other than price),only sound to my ears.

As of this date the ONLY number that really matters to me is how much I like based on a scale from 1-10.

[Ray Garrison]

ProStereo,

Whether you need a subwoofer or not with RF-7s depends entirely on what type of music you listen to and what your expectations are.

The RF-7s simply *DO NOT* reproduce the range below 30 cycles or so. There are not a lot of different types of music or different recordings that contain any musical content that low, but there are a few, and if you listen to those recordings, you will find a good sub makes quite a difference. For example, the Saint-Saens Symphony No. 3 in C minor (the "Organ Symphony"). I have about 18 different recordings of this, and my favorite is Philips 412619-2, recorded with the San Francisco Symphony in Davies Hall, using the Ruffatti organ. Throughout the entire 2nd movement, there is a deep, moving, powerful underpinning of the theme conveyed by the organ. It is playing quietly, and VERY deep. It dips down to 16 cycles on several occations, with a lot of playing in the sub-32 cycle range. I've owned Klipshorns, La Scalas, KG-4s, CF-4s, a boatload of non-Klipsch speakers, and played this on at a friend's house with RF-7s. On ALL of these speakers, there is simply *NOTHING THERE* at all when the organ is playing the deepest notes. Not even a hint that something is going on. Adding a decent subwoofer completely changes the experience of listening to this music.

In addition to that, a lot of CD's contain random hall ambient sounds that have some content that goes quite deep, well below the RF-7's cutoff. You'd be surprised at how much having a good sub can add to the "you are there" feeling you get with a good recording, even on music that doesn't have any musical content that goes terribly low.

Ray

[Colin]

At first, I thought I was going to finally disagree with the wise Ray Garrison, but no, he does come to the proper conclusion, that active solid-state powered subwoofers do indeed add a lot to the music, even for full range speakers as powerful and as deep as the mighty Khorns.

The point he makes is true: There are not a lot of different types of music or different recordings that contain any INITIAL musical notes starting that low, except a ½ dozen of the farthest left keys of the piano and deep notes of a massive church organs. (See http://www.enjoythemusic.com/magazine/judging/ for a scale of instruments compared to frequency response.) There is not much above 3kHz either, but that does not limit our high-end loudspeaker response. At normal volumes, humans dont hear a huge amount beyond 100-4kHz, but that doesnt limit our speaker frequency response either. Why? Because the complex nature of music signals creates more waves than the just the initial note. After the first harmonic, the frequency response of a note bounces like a new ball. In fact, it is the subsequent bounces that inform us which instrument is playing. A bass tube resounding like a lighthouse at 40Hz can carry fourth, fifth and seventh, eighth harmonics that descend both lower and higher generally higher all the way up the audio spectrum. One saying of tweaking audiophiles is to improve the bass, improve the treble.

Below the audible spectrum is the inaudible, tactic spectrum. The stuff we feel, not the stuff we hear. This begins at 14Hz. It is the seat rumblings of kick drums and action movies. It is the 5Hz vibrations that cause road stress on long trips. Rf7 and Khorns dont recreate these subterranean notes at a noticeable energy level but powerful sub woofers can. So Ray is right again: You'd be surprised at how much having a good sub can add to the "you are there" feeling you get with a good recording, even on music that doesn't have any musical content that goes terribly low.

You dont provide any information in your profile Klipshguy, please specify your system: amps, subs, room size, most tastes, preferred volume level, etc. This will give thoughtful posters more of the right information they need to make insightful suggestions. For example, I believe the creation of dedicated subwoofers, with built in crossovers and cheap, but powerful class D amplifiers really frees up big ole horns for the delicacy of low powered refurbished vintage tube amplifiers. If we knew ore about your system, we might be able to speak more accurately abut your sub. Thanks.

[ProStereo]

I guess I did not make my point too clear. What I am saying is, if you have a good amp, the RF-7 is NOT bass shy, it goes deep and it goes low without a sub from what is expected.

Agreed, Now if we want to talk about getting the lowest and deepest organ pedals and the like, you will have to have a sub, most speakers will, such as the RF-7 or Klipschorn will need a sub to get that lowest organ pedal desires. I'm not even trying to dispute that. The RF-7's have very good bass but much depends on the amp used with it, I know this first hand, this is why we hear some complain they don't get good bass or others who say they get excellent bass. I cannot stress enough to people that you must put quality with the RF-7's, not in-between. The RF-7's are worth putting the quality needed to it's best performance.

[ProStereo]

"Fish" makes a very, very good point here, something we all should remember and keep in mind.

[Northshore]

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

On 8/1/2005 1:11:04 AM ProStereo wrote:

"Do not question excellence, to question is only to confuse".

Things that cannot be catagorized, cataloged or compartmentalized generally are dismissed. Maybe, just maybe the excellence of the RF 7 is attributed to the fact that it just IS.

[Speedball]

I havent had the opportunity to hear what my svs 2039+ sounds like with the RF7's but with the old Paradigm Studio 40 v3's it made a world of difference.

Seemed as though it would provide tons of bass with all types of music and movies.

[TBrennan]

"I guess I did not make my point too clear."

Yeah, you did, it just doesn't signify. We're having a technical discussion about whether the claims made the speaker's bass response are, or even can be, true. An objective discussion. One which you evidently don't understand because the question is not merely whether the RF-7 goes as deep as claimed (it very well could) but if it can go as deep as it does AND be as efficient as claimed AND be such a small box.

You're talking preference, subjectivity. Everybody has a preference.

[DrWho]

Well there's also a difference between preference and personal experience as well

I've heard the RF-7 a few times, but have ton more experience with the RF-3II...the RF3 is almost just as loud as my chorus II's at the same dial location on my reciever, I can only imagine that the RF-7 is a lot closer considering it's bigger with bigger drivers. I'm not sure how this would be even close to possible with only a 90dB sensitivity...

[formica]

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

On 7/31/2005 5:47:23 PM meuge wrote:

Well, I can see that, sort of. They are rated to 32Hz, after all... So under perfect conditions, they can be -3dB at 32... and more like -6dB under unfavorable conditions

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

Technically the ±3db rating and 32Hz cutoff does imply -6db at the 32Hz point ... anechoic. I don't think Klipsch states the F3 point of these speakers.

Although they are good speakers with a healthy bass response, the efficiency spec (as well as their impedance) seems to have been massaged by the marketing dept. Most manufacturers play the same game, and I suppose Klipsch feels obligated to play along not to loose out to the "spec sheet shoppers".

Rob

[DrWho]

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

On 8/1/2005 5:41:14 PM formica wrote:

Technically the ±3db rating and 32Hz cutoff does imply -6db at the 32Hz point ... anechoic. I don't think Klipsch states the F3 point of these speakers.

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

Well that's only true if there are no peaks above the reference line (wherever they drew it). In other words, the 32Hz point is 6dB down from the highest peak in the spectrum. But let's just say that it's -6dB at 32Hz, the speaker is dropping around 18dB/octave below the tuning point because it's a ported enclosure...that puts the -3dB point right around 36Hz (and totally flat down to 50Hz where it just begins to start rolling off).

[KlipsDude]

Yes --TBrennan--

In fact it does go as low as the specs. The RF-7's have better and lower bass than I got with my past 3 Klipsch speakers, and best of all, with much better resolution.

[TBrennan]

KD---I'm not saying they can't go as low as they claim. Perhaps you don't understand the issue here?

Look at the claims made for the Cornwall and then compare them with the claims made for the Chorus and RF-7. If the Cornwall claim is valid then the others are, uh, interesting.

[jacksonbart]

Would agree we are talking about (ok, I am mostly just reading) an academic question whether the RF7s live up to their stats in Klipschs testing room. It would not change the fact that they can sound great. Have their testing procedures for publishing figures changed over the years as say compared to the chorns. Given that the room is (rough estimate) 50% of the sound equation are reputable manufacturers using similar test rooms? Is there a standard (perhaps a dumb question)?