Jump to content

Any thoughts on the new Reference line?


Recommended Posts

I haven't been frequenting the forums here as much as I once

did. I see that the new Reference line of floorstanding

speakers has launched, and that the old RF-7 and it's siblings are now


I was looking at the new lineup - I must admit initially I was a

tad confused

as to which is the "top of the line" floorstander. I

thought, because the number was higher, it was the RF-82, but

it's quite a bit smaller than the RF-63. It was a

break from tradition, from the Epics to the KLFs to the last Reference

speakers - in each series the top of the line had the higher number

(CF-4 > CF-1, KLF-30 > KLF10, RF-7 >

RF-3). The new numbers obviously refer to the size and

number of woofers. Oh well, so much for tradition.

I looked at the specs closely of the RF-63, and compared it to the RF-7


102 dB/w efficiency

250 watts continuous power handling

4.8 ft3 enclosure

157 sq inches bass radiational area

32 hz - 20 khz +/- 3dB

Weight - 90 lbs


99 db/w efficiency ( RF-7 is 3 dB more efficient)

175 watt continous power handling ( RF-7 has 43% greater power handling than the RF-63)

4.4 ft3 enclosure (RF-7 has 9% more cabinet volume)

99 sq inches bass radiational area (RF-7 has almost 60% more bass radiation area)

30hz -21 khz +/- 3 dB

Weight 82 lbs (RF-7 is almost 10% heavier)

So there it is. The RF-7 seems superior (at least on paper)

in every design parameter to the RF-63. The RF-63 is

less efficient, and it also has greatly reduced power handling

capacity, so it's dynamic range is less. At low

volumes perhaps it can produce as much bass as an RF-7, but absolute

bass production for the RF-7 must be significantly higher - it has much

more woofer area, a bigger enclosure, higher power handling, and

greater efficiency. I'd guess the woofers on the RF-63 would be

clicking and bottoming out long before the RF-7s would be begging for


I'd compare the RF-63 to my CF-4s, but that would be needlessly cruel.

So what's the list price on the RF-63s? I would think it would

have to be a lot less than the RF-7s. Was this a price point

adjustment to position them differently against the competition, or is

there another rationale in downsizing and derating the flagship

Reference speaker?

What's anyone elses thoughts about these speakers, and the rest of the Reference line?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cleve, The top of the line Reference is now the RF-83 (three 8" woofers) the RF-63 is the lower model three 6.5 woofers, The 83's dig down to 29Hz which is pretty impressive for three 8's. There was a thread not to long ago where a dealer got some 83's in and compared them to the RF-7's, He stated that the high end was alot smoother and not as in your face as the RF-7's. Didn't hear that much noticeable difference in the low end as I recall... I have yet to hear a pair. I think that the CF-4's are the best so far that I have heard IMOHO!! I love my CF-4's !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

hmm the rf83 page seems to be M.I.A.

I can't find any specs on it either.

BTW, What the heck is up with the forum search function? It's

terrible! Goes to Google, whereas the old search was internal,

gave you a choice of options, etc etc. Plus, it

doesn't seem like the new search function can access many older posts


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Alright, I did find the specs for the RF-83


100 dB/watt efficiency

250 watts continuous power handling

5.4 ft3 enclosure

150 sq inches bass radiational area

29hz - 21khz x/- 3dB

Weight - 100 lbs.

Far more impressive speaker in terms of specs - It's 10 lbs

heavier than the RF-7, and has about 10% more cabinet volume - both

significant for bass output. No wonder it can dig deeper than the

RF-7, even though there's a loss of 7 sq inches in woofer area.

I'm much more optimistic than before. After all, it's not

really a speaker is it, unless it weighs at least 100 lbs!? [:)]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Heh! Klipsch needs unit priciing for their speakers, like grocery

stores use. That would make it easier to compare them for value.

So for instance, if a speaker weighs 100 lbs, and costs $2199 per

pair, the unit price is $10.99 per pound.

Bose would DEFINITELY not like this method of comparison. [:)]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Create New...