MrMcGoo Posted September 30, 2005 Share Posted September 30, 2005 Right, I guess my quick explanation was not enough, but I was just simply answering why 400 watts, and just tried to simplify, well you would be running about that if you want the very high current capability and cheaper amps that can withstand 2 ohm impeadance, which absolutly makes these klipsch or any high efficiency speaker sound smoother in the highs, and drives the bass with much more control and authority with higher current in my experiance again unless you buy a CODA or Krell which will give you something in the 75-100 watt per channel, and give you 100 amps of current still per channel and you will pay for it, I know of no others, but they could be out there, from what I understand the 7's will drop to somewhere in the 2.5 ohm range, .. .By the way I borrowed a sunfire 300 watt per channel signature model, it was around 2200.00 or something like that, and it was horrible with the 7's, sounded absolutly anemic I opened it up and it is a very cheap amplifier under the polished chassis, do not let the fancy meter and gold logo fool you, then I borrowed a 200 watt per FORTE 4A and it was about 400.00 used, not to mention the forte just blew the sunfire away but it was built 10 times better and far more musical in the end, plus 100 watts per channel less, but after hearing that I wanted much more, so I went to monos. First, the RF-7s dip to 2.8 ohms per Sound and Vision. Other magazines put the minimum higher. As far as Sunfire goes, the Sunfire Signature amps are in the 400 watt and 600 watt range, not 300 watts. IMO, they sound great with Klipsch if your front end is good and your room acoustics are good. Over on AVS, there is a Beverly Hills dealer that had a $12,000 Mark Levinson 336 on speakers that dipped below 1 ohm. The Mark Levinson sounded very good, but it shut down on loud passages. The dealer claimed that the Sunfire replacement sounded 98% as good as the Mark Levinson, but it never shut down and ran cool. Mark Levinson is not avaialble locally, so I have no opinion on the sound quality. Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
imperfectcircle25 Posted September 30, 2005 Author Share Posted September 30, 2005 Sorry to cause any arguements, I was simply trying to point out that a 400 watt amp is not always better at driving a diffucult speaker than a 100 watt amp is. It has much more to do with how much current they can put out. Im not sure were you got the idea that a 100 watt amp has more difficulty doubling its power output into 4 ohms than a 400 watt amp does?? Ability to double the power into lower impeadances has nothing to do with the watts an amplifier puts out. I am going to stick to my origional statemtn that a good qualiuty 100 watt amplifer is more than enough in most cases to drive a pair of RF-7's. If a 60 watt tube amp can drive them well then a 60 watt SS amp can do an equally good job. A watt is a watt wheter its SS or tube. People seem to forget that, with this crazy idea that tube watts are twice as powerful as SS watts, that is the biggest load of BS ive heard yet people still believe this for some reason. A good high current SS amp will almosty always be better at driving difficult speakers due to thier ability tobetter deal with lower impeadances and output more current. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thirdeye Posted September 30, 2005 Share Posted September 30, 2005 I guess everything sounds good until you hear something better to reference it, unfortunatly it happens to me all the time, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrMcGoo Posted October 1, 2005 Share Posted October 1, 2005 There is nothing other than design and price that limits the current output of a 100 watt amp. There are some good ones out there, but they tend to be expensive. They are not available locally to me. The 400 wpc amps are more expensive typically and are usually built to a higher standard for current output and have a wider linear range. Specifically, I have only read of one 100 watt solid state amp that is stable with 1 ohm loads. The linear range of a 100 watt amp in not as wide as a 400 watt amp. Most 400 watt amps are stable with 2 ohm loads and some are stable at 1 ohm. For many moons, I believed that you do not need a big amp with Klipsch RF-7s, because the experienced owners said so. Well, RF-7s are a more difficult load than most Klipsch speakers. Even Klipsch tech support recommends a 200 wpc amp. A 400 wpc is usually better. Diminishing returns have set in, but performance is better. The verbal descriptions of performance on the RF-7s by the big amp owners is very similar. I get a few yucks when people who have never heard the different amps try to tell me about it. Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whatever55 Posted October 3, 2005 Share Posted October 3, 2005 Dean, I have a pair of RF 7's with a Pioneer 1980. Do you make a crossover for the RF-7's and if so how much ? Thanks Mike T. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
imperfectcircle25 Posted October 4, 2005 Author Share Posted October 4, 2005 I think you put far to much importance in if an amp can double its power into 4ohms or not, it really is not important. Some of the most musical sounds ive gotten fromt he rf-7's was with a little 35w/4 or 8ohms Exposure XV integrated amp. This amp certainly isnt a high current design although it does have a very well built power supply for a 35 watt amp, every section of the amp including the power amp section are fully regulated which is rare even in very expensive amps. The XV sold for $1300 in 1992. But it had no trouble driving the RF-7's to pretty loud levels, and as long as you stayed within its limits and werent trying to recreate a rock concert in your living room, it sounded better than a bunch of other much more powerful and high current amps. My point is, one specs mean nothing, two quality is far more important than quantity, and third more power isnt always better. Most of the amps that sound best to me ar between 50-100 watts and use a single pair of output transistors. Some of these amps are Pass Aelph 3, Naim Nap250, Exposure 4DR, Monarchy SE160, Sugden A21 and the Lavardin IS. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrWho Posted October 4, 2005 Share Posted October 4, 2005 I wouldn't say specs mean nothing because that would imply science means nothing, which means we would need to redesign the scientific models that the amplifier manufactures are using...I would say specs are more of a tool for determining when a device isn't going to perform as well as needed, but only because we rarely have enough specs to be fully capable of predicting the entire behavior of the device. In other words, most of the specs we as consumers see are only part of the picture. The companies themselves have far far more specs available with which they can model and predict changes to the design (and when the scientific model fails, then a new one is built that works better). When an amplifier cannot double its output when the impedance drops over a range of frequencies, then those frequencies will be quieter than every other frequency...the amplifier then essentially becomes an EQ, which moves away from the straight wire with gain goal for the amplifier. Whether or not this EQ sounds good or bad is entirely another debate - one that needs to be taken up with the sound guy in the studio. Btw, I'm not sure how one would place a quality factor on output...power is power. When purchasing an amplifier you need to know the sensitivity of your system and how loud you want it to go, which will then tell you how much power your amplifier needs to have. Amplifier quality no doubt plays an important role in the system, but it has no correlation at all to the power output of the device - in other words, it is a fucntion of other variables not pertaining to power output. I agree that more power isn't always better, but less power isn't always better either. Again, power has no correlation to "quality" (which as I just mentioned is function of all sorts of other variables, which is what all those other "useless" specs are there for). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nuclearay Posted October 4, 2005 Share Posted October 4, 2005 Wow. This thread took a turn. I also wanted to hear peoples opinions on other speakers in the price range. If only to justify how right I was in justifying my decision to by 7s. [] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray Garrison Posted October 4, 2005 Share Posted October 4, 2005 DrWho, I agree with everything you said, but I'd point out that in a post on the previous page you made a comment that gave me a chuckle. You said "...an amp capable of outputting 8 watts is going to have absolutely no problem driving the speaker up to 101dB!..." as if that were loud. While I wouldn't call it background levels, 101dB is, for me a least, nowhere near what I would call "really loud". I don't play music really loudly very often, but every once in a while, usually in times of stress or sorrow, nothing helps me move on like listening to really good music, played really loud. Once upon a time long ago I spent some time listening to a pair of KHorns play Bach, driven by a pair of the original series Adcom GFA-555 amps (the ones with the big black handles) bridged into mono, with a CD player's line level output driving the amps. Specs on the amps rated them at over 600 watts into that load, so I figure the spl was something north of 125dB. It attracted a bit of attention, but I enjoyed it. Granted, 500 or 600 watts into a pair of KHorns is not something I'd do every day, but when you need it, you need it... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrWho Posted October 6, 2005 Share Posted October 6, 2005 lol, I too love cranking the music...there's nothing more exciting than a hard snare hit at over 130dB (wearing ear protection of course). [] ok fine, with the low impedance dip of the RF-7's you would need 500 watts to achieve 120dB. Is that loud enough for ya? lol Btw, isn't that already exceeding the power limits of the speaker? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray Garrison Posted October 6, 2005 Share Posted October 6, 2005 Yeah, that's over the power limits of the speakers... but then again, being a firm believer in the concept that nothing succeeds like excess, I have, in my short time here on our planet, managed to destroy a rather depressingly large number of innocent speakers through the application of unrestrained enthusiasm. I actually managed to rip apart the passive resonator on a VMPS SuperTower II A/R once, melted the voice coil on a Dalquist subwoofer, separated the drone cone mass loading on an Electrovoice Interface/A, etc... Regarding the original poster's question, I have compared the RF-7 to the PSB Stratus Gold using the same amp and source (a Bryston preamp / amp, don't remember which, middle of the line in price, probably 100 watts and a Sony ES CD player). I thought the Klipsch sounded a lot livelier, a lot more dynamic, but the PSB went quite a bit deeper in the bass and made voices sound more, uh, "real" (?). For quiet evening listening I'd go with the PSB's, but for almost every other use I'd be a lot happier with the RF-7's, maybe augmented with a really good subwoofer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
imperfectcircle25 Posted October 6, 2005 Author Share Posted October 6, 2005 Im not quite sure I understand what you mean that power is power and quality has nothing to do with it. I donno how you could possibly think that the quality of the amplifier has nothing to do with how good it will sound?? Compare a cheap Sony 100watt reciever to a "high quality" hi-end amplifer of even 25 watts say a Sugden a21, and then tell me the quality doesnt matter. As for the specs, I didnt mean that they dont mean anything, they just dont mean anything when it comes to an amplifier sounding good or not sounding good. An amp with great specs can sound aweful and vice versa. Regardless this post went in a totally differant direction then I was hoping, I really was interested in hearing opinions about other sub $3k speakers compared to the RF-7's. I have heard the Paradigm Studio 100v3 a few weeks ago at a dealer, and currently have a pair of PSB Stratus Goldi in house for audition. The PSB's are quite good, they require more power than the Klipsch's and arent quite as powerful. My Mccormack DNA-1 is putting out over 300watts into the 4ohm load and it plays very loud and clean. Ive only had them in house for a few days, but this is what I have found so far. Both the RF-7 and the Stratus are big and powerful speakers, the Klipsch;s are more lively and the PSB are more laidback. The PSB's seem to have the edge in the bass power and impact as well as extension, this came as a surprise considering the RF-7's use a pair of 10in drivers compared tot he PSB's single woofer, I guess thats the advantage of a three-way design and lower sensitivity. The midrange was more laid back and definitly smoother on the psb's, compared to the Klipsch's they are more refined but not as lively. The treble is one place that I really did prefer the PSB's none of the shouty horn type sound that you get with the RF-7's, the highs are sweet and extended with out ever getting to bright or harsh. Soundstaging was quite good with both, the Klipsch's more foward and the PSB more laidback but deeper. So thats what ive found so far with limited listening time so far, the PSB's are at least as good at the Klipsch's in most areas, the only place the Klipsch's really had a big edge was in senstivity and dynamics, but the PSB's equaled the field with thier more extended low bass. So basically I think they are both great speakers for the money, its mostly a matter of taste, do you want upfront and in your face but a little roough around the edges, or do you want a smooth and refined sound with excellent bass, take your pick. I personally must say I think I prefer the easier to listen to sound of the PSB's on most music, especially on alot of the rock recordings I listen to that are recorded a bit hot in the highs, the PSB's are more forgiving. Has anyone else compared the RF-7 to the STratus Goldi and wish to comment? A few others id really love to hear compared tot he rf-7's.. NHT 3.3 or 2.9 Paradigm Studio 100v2 or v3 Gallo reference 3 Legacy Classic Klipsch Forte Snell c/v Just to name a few, anyone heard any of these? Wish to comment on how they compare tot he RF-7? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrWho Posted October 6, 2005 Share Posted October 6, 2005 Im not quite sure I understand what you mean that power is power and quality has nothing to do with it. I donno how you could possibly think that the quality of the amplifier has nothing to do with how good it will sound?? Compare a cheap Sony 100watt reciever to a "high quality" hi-end amplifer of even 25 watts say a Sugden a21, and then tell me the quality doesnt matter. As for the specs, I didnt mean that they dont mean anything, they just dont mean anything when it comes to an amplifier sounding good or not sounding good. An amp with great specs can sound aweful and vice versa. A few others id really love to hear compared tot he rf-7's.. NHT 3.3 or 2.9 Paradigm Studio 100v2 or v3 Gallo reference 3 Legacy Classic Klipsch Forte Snell c/v Just to name a few, anyone heard any of these? Wish to comment on how they compare tot he RF-7? Ya, sorry for going off topic...though it is a forum and that's just how things happen. Btw, I think you totally misread my post...I was pointing out that quality is not a function of power. In other words, the power capability of the amplifier has no impact on its sound quality as long as you've got enough power to linearly play at the levels you desire (which is a function of impedance, speaker distance and sensitivity, the size of the room, source material, etc etc...). As far as specs go...if the specs are "good" and it sounds bad, then the specs really aren't "good" afterall. As I mentioned earlier, we as consumers only get to see part of the picture - just enough for the marketing to work. If you did your homework and researched the full specs of the amplifier (which is usually spelled out in the manuals if its a good company) then you should be able to entirely predict the behavior of the amplifier...though whether or not someone can understand the full specs is another issue (and is another reason amplifier companies don't post the full specs out in the open because it can be very misleading to the un/mis-informed). Anyways, I currently have the Klipsch Chorus II's which can be bought for around $700 used (got mine for $150) [] and they leave the RF-7's in the dust. The forte is very similar sounding as is the Cornwall, though I have never heard the fortel. There are a bunch of threads discussing the minor differences in sound so perhaps you might find more enjoyment with one of the other models. If you are openly considering the used market then this is certainly the way to go. The 3-way designs with the midrange squaker will probably make voices through the PSB sound very fake. I have a few unfinished recordings that I've brought home at one time or another to work on, so I've got a lot of sounds recorded that I haven't cut yet...everytime you pick up someone talking between takes or even worse calling my name, I always end up flipping around thinking someone is in the room. There are so many times that I have to pause/rewind the playback to see if something was actually on the recording or if it was happening in real life. It seriously gets uncanny at times and continues to this day to fake me out even though I know it's on the track. I'm not sure how much realer the sound could get outta those Chorus II's... Before you make your purchase, I would highly recommend coaxing the dealer into letting you take speakers home to demo. The room is responsible for well over 50% of the sound and you must take that into consideration. If the dealer doesn't want to let you, then let him know (kindly of course) that you will search out other dealers until you find one that provides the option (or you can just abuse the return policy). It really is a common practice to let customers demo equipment and any high-end smart sales person should be understanding and even encourage it. The speaker choice is a big one and is one you will have to live with for a long time. Btw, one of the advantages to horn loaded designs is the narrower more controlled directivity which lessens the impact the room has on the sound of the speaker...definetly something to keep in mind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin Posted October 6, 2005 Share Posted October 6, 2005 So is this a fault of the speaker (should speaker companies shoot for a linear impedance versus frequency?) or is this a fault of the amplifier manufacturer (should an amp be able to linearly track any impedance from 0 to infinity?) ? <?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /> Both, but they have to exist in a market that pays no attention to either impedance curve or the same objective power measurements, unless mandated by FTC. Should we even care if our listening environment has a larger influence on the sound? Absolutely. Newbies should know that the path to audio nirvana includes room treatments along the way. Watt for watt, tube amplifiers put out about 5 times more current than solid-state amplifiers so tube watts aint solid-state watts see venerable Stereophile magazine article. The Carver amplifier (not Sunfire) I tried decades ago on horizontal horn, B2 crossover, walnut oiled Cornwalls had horrible high THD which big ole horns reveal as powerful, but later, as harsh, ear wearing nastiness - Ability to double the power into lower impedances has nothing to do with the watts an amplifier puts out it does have everything to do with the tightness of the bass, especially with wild or deep impedance dips. <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" />SeeNelsonPass majestic $6K, Single-Ended, Class-A, X250 Stereo Amplifier (February 2002, http://www.enjoythemusic.com/magazine/equipment/0202/passx250.htm) DeanG and Bec too (I think) both make xovers for RF7 heard Deans at peacherman Daddydees Arkansas gathering in May 2004, it is excellent improvement for the money almost as significant as new amplifier. [H] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
imperfectcircle25 Posted October 6, 2005 Author Share Posted October 6, 2005 DRwho, Why do you say the voices would sound bas through the PSB because its a three way?? Im not following you on that one?? What did you mean exactly?? Ive found 3ways to usually sound better on voices?? The PSB's sounded very good to me in the midrange, id say a slight step above the RF-7's in the mids as far as smoothness and natrualness. Id be interested in hearing the Klipsch Forte, a few of my audio buddys whose opinions i respect have told me thatthe Forte is one of the best Klipsch ever made and the best normal sized speaker they made, the Khorn may be better but most people dont have the room for such a monster. If the Fortes are as good or better than my RF-7's, i could save a bunch of money and buy more music! Do the Fortes need a high current amp like the RF-7 or are they an easier amplifier load? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrWho Posted October 6, 2005 Share Posted October 6, 2005 I was saying the squaker (midrange horn) on the forte, chorus, and cornwall would spank the PSB in terms of vocal reproduction (I was trying to point out that an AB comparison would make the PSB's sound very fake, even though they sound more real compared to the RF-7's). I feel the tractrix flare on the chorus II sounds smoother than the exponential flares so I would suggest the chorus if vocal reproduction is what you're after. The cornwall is just like the chorus but sacrifices a little accuracy for a much much larger in your face sound. The cornwall is definetly the epitomy of klipsch in terms of rock it out speakers. The Rf-7 is technically a 2-way design and that HF horn is crossed over right in the middle of the vocal range, not to mention in one of the most sensitive areas of our hearing (so any crossover issues are very audible). Nevertheless, klipsch did an amazing job considering the design limitations (those woofers are a work of art, both in performance and aesthetics). The midrange on the RF-7's greatly improves when you implement a high pass of some sort (running as small on a reciever) and then use a subwoofer to fill in the low end. An 80Hz crossover knocks off almost a complete 2 octaves which means 4 times less excursion, which means 4 times less FMD which is probably the most likely culprit for the dirtiness in the midrange. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
imperfectcircle25 Posted October 7, 2005 Author Share Posted October 7, 2005 Yes the one thing that really disapointed me with the RF-7's is the midrange, but it wasnt a surprise really a 10in driver running up to 2000hz is never gonna sound as good as a smaller midrange driver in a three-way system. I wonder why they didnt go the 3-way route on the Rf-7's? So one of the three way's like the Forte, Cornwall...etc will be far better in the midrange than the RF-7's? Thanks Frank 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.