reference vs. heritage

[MrMcGoo]

John,

Since you actually want a very valid question answered, I will give it a shot.

Reference speakers tend to be smaller than Heritage speakers and are two way designs intended to be run with a potent subwoofer. There is less crossover distortion due to the two way design. The Khorn and La Scala have horn loaded bass while Reference speakers are direct radiators in the bass frequencies.

Horn loading bass drivers in a three way design reduces doppler distortion. The Reference speakers benfit from the presence of a subwoofer which reduces doppler distortion when the speakers are run as small. Hence there are two different ways to get to the same place more or less.

Reference speakers are video shielded while Heritage are not. Hence, Heritage speakers cannot be located near CRTs, but are ok near other display devices.

Heritage speakers have an easier impedance curve to drive than RF-7s. The RF-7s need a true high current amp to do their best. Heritage have a reputation for sounding good on smaller amps that can be either tube amps or solid state. Both types require quality electronics to sound good. Poor electronics sould terrible on both as does poor program material.

Reference speakers were designed for home theater and music, hence the center channels were designed to sit on top of a TV. The RC-7 is better than the other Reference centers by a wide margin. The Heritage speakers were designed before center channels were designed to sit on top of TVs. The Academy by Klipsch was later designed to sit on top of TVs for Heritage home theaters. They are no longer produced and are expensive on the used market due to their rarity.

Debates about the differences in sound quality can turn into religious holy wars, so be careful. Heritage afficianados tend to be uncomfortable with the idea that RF-7s need a big amp for the minimum impedance of the RF-7s which is 2.8 ohms.

Bill

[sunburnwilly]

It's kind of funny, I asked a question regarding the merits of the Heritage vs. the Reference series of speakers, and I now have a thread of debate over what needs to be done to make the Heritage spkr's sound smooth. God forbid that I should have suggested some heritical idea of purchasing another line of speakers. I am glad everyone has their passion, but I am more aligned with Klipsch for the value that I see than as a blind belief that Heritage speakers are the best thing anyone could do for their sound system. Just my HO.

Hey jgatty , You posted a thread titled reference vs. heritage , what did you expect ? [6]

[jgatty]

I appreciate your reasoned response, and as near as I can tell, the reference series seems like a good option for someone who does not want to spend more time trying to find the right spot for their speakers than listening to them (sorry, but I had to say that). I will look into the DeanG upgrades though.

[MrMcGoo]

Most speakers are sensitive to location including Reference. The smaller size gives more placement options.

Modern receivers have made placement less important. Pioneer started the trend toward acoustic room correction. Pioneer's Advanced MCACC can help partially overcome many placement issues.

Acoustic room treatments also help overcome less than ideal room acoustics. You listen to your room as much as you listen to your speakers.

Bill

[sunburnwilly]

Hey jgatty , Screw Audio ! Good Luck in the comming week ! Rita is looking Bad ! Take Care !

[TBrennan]

Nevermind.

[Frzninvt]

If you are looking to sell the Belle's my brother in law Gilbert might be interested in taking them off your hands depending on year and condition. He has a thread "Looking for Belle's"

Then you can pick up a new pair of RF-7's and the matching RC-7 center channel and be all set.

The Reference and Heritage series speakers each have their merits and it all depends on what your sonic goals are. Either are a good choice!

[Deang]

Dean has the ability to build crossovers so now everybody needs a new one. There's a proverb that says that when the only tool you have is a hammer every problem looks like a nail.

Thank God, because I'm almost broke.

The problem is a nail, but I don't drive it in -- I pull it out.

[TBrennan]

Dean----You shame me. Really. I'm sorry for the barb.

[Deang]

It's O.K. I know you love to push buttons. I don't take it personally anymore. In a way, you're right -- and I do try to moderate myself. But sometimes it's obvious it's a problem I can help with.

[skonopa]

I appreciate your reasoned response, and as near

as I can tell, the reference series seems like a good option for

someone who does not want to spend more time trying to find the right

spot for their speakers than listening to them (sorry, but I had to say

that). I will look into the DeanG upgrades though.

Ahhh yes, the infamous "Reference vs Heritage" debate.

I have a full on Reference 7 setup driven by some pretty good

electronics, such as B&K Reference 200.7 amp. At the same

time, I've got to listen to some very nice Heritage setups, such as

GaryMD's K-horn, tube and turn-table setup.

Yes, there are going to the those "purists" that think the Heritage is

the end-all-be-all of speakers, but from my own experience, and in my

opinion, no the Heritage, are not! After

listening to these Heritage systems, it made me appreciate my own

system all that much more, because I know it is quite capable of

hanging there with the best of them.

MrMcGoo, up above, already did a nice job of pointing

on the technical differences between the two. It truly

comes down to what your sonic preferences are, and the smaller

footprint of the Reference speakers do help with space and placement

issues. For example, to fully take advantage of K-Horns, you must have

two good corners, preferably some 19 or more feet apart. Not

everybody has that, especially with some of these more modern homes

that tend to have very open floor plans (such as like my parents house).

The big difference between the sonic is that the Heritage is definitly

more "in your face", which is pretty much due to the fact that they are

three-way designs with a mid-range horn. The Reference are a more

refined sound, but still very aggressive. I personally liked that

more refined sound, especially since it seems to work really well for

the type of music that I listen to the most (power/progressive metal),

which tend to have a lot of orchestral parts that sound beautiful on my

system, but still has the aggressiveness to let me still rock out when

those guitars gets a wailing. Obviously, people like the Heritage

since it does seem to recreate that "live" sound from concerts. I

tend to find that annoying, and is one reason I tend to wear earplugs

to concerts, not only to protect my hearing, but it helps take some of

the edge off. But still, my Reference based system has no problem

recreating that live experience. The most notable example I found

in my own personal experience was just how close my system recreated

the sound I experience at that Trans-Siberian Orchestra concert I saw

last fall. The only difference was that the show was somewhat

louder than I would otherwise normally listen to (and this was without

wearing earplugs to the TSO show - it was after that Sonata Arctica

concert I saw this last spring when I got smart and starting wearing

earplugs).

If you really like the sound of those Belle speakers you have, then the

best advice would be what was already given to you and see if you can

make them work in your setup, especially since you already have

them. If you just simply cannot make them work, than you

certainly cannot go wrong with a Reference setup. If you go

Reference, than I would highly recommend to go straight to the top and

get the RF-7s with RC-7 center for the fronts. For the sub, any

good sub will work. Klipsch's own RSW line as well as

SVSubwoofers (SVS) are also highly regarded on here. If you got a

few more dollars, the new Klipsch's new THX Ultra 2 subs would be

sweet! As for the surrounds - well, there is yet another whole

ugly debate there. The matching surrounds, as recommended by

Klipsch, are the RS-7s, but there is a whole debate as to using those,

which is a wide-disperson type speaker, vs using a monopole design,

such as the RB-75, or for that matter, another pair of RF-7s.

That is a topic for another thread (and if you do a search, you'll find

plenty of such threads).

[psg]

The big difference between the sonic is that the Heritage is definitly

more "in your face", which is pretty much due to the fact that they are

three-way designs with a mid-range horn. The Reference are a more

refined sound, but still very aggressive.

Funny, I would have assumed it would be the other way around, at least comparing the RF-7 to KHorns.

Nice refined soundstage, not "in your face" at all.

[skonopa]

The big difference between the sonic is that the Heritage is definitly

more "in your face", which is pretty much due to the fact that they are

three-way designs with a mid-range horn. The Reference are a more

refined sound, but still very aggressive.

Funny, I would have assumed it would be the other way around, at least comparing the RF-7 to KHorns.

Nice refined soundstage, not "in your face" at all.

Hmm... Interesting. I'll admit that I really do like the

sound of the K-Horns, but in my particular situation, they just will

not work - simply do not have the two good corners. But at the

same time, I just friggan absolutely love the sound of my RF-7 based

setup with the B&K amp and such. I've listen to many a setup,

but still found myself coming back to what I already got. That

being said, I do have a decent sized room (20 x 15 feet) down in the

basement that would work with K-Horns. If I get pair of

those, then I'll want to get the VRD's and the Blackberry Extreme, a

Cambridge Audio 640c CD player, a decent turn table, and,

and.... I just don't have the money and time to start

down that road right now. So, I'll stick with what I got, and

believe me, I am not disapointed at all!

[psg]

So, I'll stick with what I got, and

believe me, I am not disapointed at all!

Didn't sound like you were! []

[Heideana]

John,

Heritage speakers have an easier impedance curve to drive than RF-7s. The RF-7s need a true high current amp to do their best. Heritage have a reputation for sounding good on smaller amps that can be either tube amps or solid state. ...

Bill

What is it about the RF-7's that give them such a low impedence? The two woofers?

[DrWho]

John,

Heritage

speakers have an easier impedance curve to drive than RF-7s. The RF-7s

need a true high current amp to do their best. Heritage have a

reputation for sounding good on smaller amps that can be either tube

amps or solid state. ...

Bill

What is it about the RF-7's that give them such a low impedence? The two woofers?

I wouldn't worry too much about the low impedance dip in the

RF-7's...it only becomes a problem when you start pushing your

amplifier to its extremes - which means you need a better amp anyway.

When you're pushing the amp hard, you'll notice some loss in the low

end because the amp isn't capable of supplying the current for long

enough - with the RF-7's it just happens earlier (a little over 3dB

earlier to be exact).

But yes, having two woofers in parallel causes every impendance to drop

in half...so if the speaker was a one driver design, you would have a

minimum impedance of 5.6 ohms, which isn't uncommon for an 8ohm driver.

The impedance of a driver is actually a function of a few variables so

it is going to depend on the T/S parameters of the driver needed to

achieve the design goals. I'm not sure if it's an actual trend, but it

seems the wider the frequency range drivers have lower dips in the

impedance (like the RF-7 woofers that go from 30Hz to 2kHz).

Btw, does anyone know precisely where the dip occurs? I would assume somewhere in the 100Hz region?

[MrMcGoo]

The two woofers are run in parallel which halves the impedance on the RF-7s. Bass takes lots of power to start with, then you have the low impeance where explosions take place in action movies. The only thing that prevents sold state receivers from overheating is the high sensitivity of the 7s.

Bill

[MrMcGoo]

DrWho,

The impedance dip on the RF-7s run as "small" makes a 130 wpc receiver (all channels driven) sound like tubby bass with only one note. The receiver weighs 68 pounds and cannot properly drive the 7s when set as small. The receiver can get very loud on the 7s, but the sound quality is not there.

A 200 watt Sunfire gives very good bass with the same receiver as a processor. A bigger Sunfire makes you think the kettle drums are in the same room with you. The output devices need to operate in their linear zone with plenty of power available. It takes a big amp for 7s to sound their best.

Bill

[DrWho]

The difference between 130 and 200 watts isn't even 3dB...and we're

talking max SPL which shouldn't even be a concern when running at 1

watt for 100dB...so at the absolute most, the RF-7 is drawing 4 watts

at the lower frequencies when listening at 100dB due to the impedance

dip.

Seems to me that the difference you hear has more to do with the amp

constructions rather then the actual output (which is probably rated

differently too). Have you had the chance to compare two amps in the

same family? (say the Crown XLS 202 versus the 402 or 602). How loud

were you listening when doing the comparisons?

[MrMcGoo]

The difference between 130 and 200 watts isn't even 3dB...and we're talking max SPL which shouldn't even be a concern when running at 1 watt for 100dB...so at the absolute most, the RF-7 is drawing 4 watts at the lower frequencies when listening at 100dB due to the impedance dip.

Seems to me that the difference you hear has more to do with the amp constructions rather then the actual output (which is probably rated differently too). Have you had the chance to compare two amps in the same family? (say the Crown XLS 202 versus the 402 or 602). How loud were you listening when doing the comparisons?

I have compared the RF-7s and RC-7 on a 225 wpc Sunfire and 625 wpc Sunfire as well as a 405 wpc Sunfire. (Prior amps were a B&K ST2140 and Pioneer flagship receivers.) The higher wattage amps sound better. The smaller Sunfire amp is designed not to sound as good as the big boys with a low impedance load. The power supplies on the big boys are only 20% bigger. It is all in more output devices and better quality parts.

Amp designers are like any other business person. They have cost constraints and taget markets to deal with. If the bigger amps didn't actually sound a bit better, they would be harder to sell. The big boys have better contribution margins and therefore help the bottom line of the manufacturer.

There are folks with Rotel 1090s and Mark Levinson 400 wpc amps on their RF-7s. The amazing thing is that all of the descrptions are remakably similar as to how the RF-7s respond with the jump from 200 wpc to 400 wpc. I do not believe in coincidences.

The other side of the coin is that diminishing returns do set in over 200 wpc.

I am not an amp designer, but I have no doubt that the differences are in the design, not the watts per channel. A flagship receiver has a single pair of MOS-FETs per channel which is to say that output is not linear as the impedance varies by frequency.

Bill