Ou8thisSN Posted October 28, 2006 Author Share Posted October 28, 2006 Well i went to the store at 6pm. the salesman initially thought, looking at me (i look like i'm 16 when i shave) that i wanted some of the entry level klipsch speakers but then i intimated that I have built a theater based around the reference 7s and his eyes lit up and apologized and told me to follow him into another room, which was filled with all their expensive stuff. Then we tested the speakers, on a rotel 200wpc amp and prepro. i wanted to listen to the sub, but it wasnt hooked correctly and he couldnt get it to work, so i listened to the rf83s. They are defniertly tamer than the RF7s. Now i usually listen to it a bit brighter than with tone defeat, but they sounded pretty good to me, and had excellent mid-range. I took the Metallica black album and the eagles "hell freezes over" album with me for test material. They didnt have the cherry in stock so they said it would have to be special ordered, but I thought the speakers sounded great, and he gave me a fabulous deal, much lower than i expected to pay and it was done. So i'll have them in a week. I'll let you guys know what i think after i get them home. Listening to them at the store was less than ideal since at home i listen to it at listening position which is in the center, and here there was a projector rack, where i would normally be sitting. But it sounded pretty good to me, and i was afraid to fiddle with their equipment myself. Anyway, it says *no refunds* on the reciept, which i have now discovered, but i really dont think it will come to that, i've loved klipsch equipment and i'm quite sure i will still. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheEAR Posted October 28, 2006 Share Posted October 28, 2006 RF5 use a lesser tweeter and do not sound cleaner at all,RF7's,more impact,explosive dynamics and better tweeter.The cheapie (mod it or get it done by someone with plans and good soldering skills)crossover holds the full potential of the RF7's back,this si why mods exist and will make them more open sounding and less harsh at the top. I used Krell and Celeste MOON amps,the RF7's are not harsh and I prefer them to RF5's,not even close.RF5's are more forgiving(revealing)and will please more people with receivers than the RF7's. I have both RF7's and RF5's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhilMays Posted October 29, 2006 Share Posted October 29, 2006 Moon, Question for you. I have the DeanG modified RF7's for my mains. I have RF 3-II's for my surrounds. I LOVE the 3's as I feel they have a generaly great response over the spectrum. I have been toying with the idea of getting another set of RF-7's for the surrounds and moving the 3's to the rear center. Another thought I have had which would be more reasonable $ wise would be to get the RF-5's for the surrounds and move the 3's to the back. I am more criticle on music for SACD/DVD-A over anything. I guess I'm saying the movies and dolby are just fine the way it is. What are your thoughts. Phil Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhilMays Posted October 29, 2006 Share Posted October 29, 2006 I didn't mean to hijack this thread, sorry...I considered the 83's as well...just I'm so danged happy with the 7's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay481985 Posted October 29, 2006 Share Posted October 29, 2006 RF5 use a lesser tweeter and do not sound cleaner at all,RF7's,more impact,explosive dynamics and better tweeter.The cheapie (mod it or get it done by someone with plans and good soldering skills)crossover holds the full potential of the RF7's back,this si why mods exist and will make them more open sounding and less harsh at the top. I used Krell and Celeste MOON amps,the RF7's are not harsh and I prefer them to RF5's,not even close.RF5's are more forgiving(revealing)and will please more people with receivers than the RF7's. I have both RF7's and RF5's. rf-5 use a 1.25 tweeter but uses the same traxtric horn from the rf-7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay481985 Posted October 29, 2006 Share Posted October 29, 2006 Well i went to the store at 6pm. the salesman initially thought, looking at me (i look like i'm 16 when i shave) that i wanted some of the entry level klipsch speakers but then i intimated that I have built a theater based around the reference 7s and his eyes lit up and apologized and told me to follow him into another room, which was filled with all their expensive stuff. I hate that when they won't even look at me and help an older customer buying something way cheaper then me. Even when I was shooping for rf-7/rf-83 they didn't give much enthusiam to me thinking I was making a wishlist not a purchase! BTW I like the rf-83 and to anyone that says the rf-83 are polite or not harsh, they can sure be harsh if you put the right material source. Also the rf-83 can go deep (i believe 29 db vs 32 with the rf-7) and the bass is there and noticeable. One thing to note with the newer cabinet is the height difference and with it I've noticed since the cones are placed so high, you can actually place your head on the floor and then turn the speakers on and you get a very low volume. This is good to reduce floor reflection and I believe the whole doppler effect. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheEAR Posted October 29, 2006 Share Posted October 29, 2006 Jay, The horn has ZERO impact here(as it is the same),the much better qulity compression driver used in the RF7's and RC7 is a clear step above the RF5's and the speakers below. Just try a pairt of modded RF7's(crossovers)and a pair of Tenor Audio 15W monoblocks,makes all receivers sound very crude in comparison. [] I'll post some pics this Monda...MONDAY MONDAY I am setting my rooms now... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay481985 Posted October 29, 2006 Share Posted October 29, 2006 I would disagree and say the horn has impact to the sound. Remember the rf-83 went smaller but has a better (as they claim) horn design. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheEAR Posted October 29, 2006 Share Posted October 29, 2006 Hell-O I said the horn has no impact in the case of a comparo RF7 to RF5.Same horn,the drivers are not the same. Anybody home? hello hello jell-O Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay481985 Posted October 29, 2006 Share Posted October 29, 2006 and many would say the rf-5 horns sound better than the rf-7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheEAR Posted October 29, 2006 Share Posted October 29, 2006 and many would say the rf-5 horns sound better than the rf-7 Who exactly are these "many",untrained ears refusing detail and transperency and using sub standard amplification from e-stores. You want to hear Klipsch at thier best? You simply use very high quality tube amplifiers,almost all the elders here ,all the members with true high end systems use TUBES.Look in the two channel section,it is evident.You have some whu use solid state,again high quality separates. Large horns prefer tubes.No way around this.A fact RF5's ,yes I use them as side sourrounds. Damn I was a bit harsh on the sub standard. Hmm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ou8thisSN Posted October 29, 2006 Author Share Posted October 29, 2006 hey ear, you say you're the king of Subs, so what do you think of the Rt-12d? like i said, at the store, it wasnt hooked up so i couldnt audition it. I will be using the RF83s strictly for 2-channel audio, to fill a 20 x 20 x 11 room. When i previously had the RF7s, I used a SVS PB2+ sub with it, and it kept up quite nicely, but I never cranked it full volume even. I use that sub for home theater right now, but I want something that will be a good match for this, for music (all kinds, rock, dance/trance/etc. ). I want it to keep up fairly well. Should i even consider any klipsch subs or stick with SVS? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrWho Posted October 30, 2006 Share Posted October 30, 2006 I think the RF-3 sounds better than the RF-7 and the RF-5 better than the RF-3. I certainly like bass, but the midrange is far more important and you're not going to achieve clean mids with dual 10's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheEAR Posted October 31, 2006 Share Posted October 31, 2006 hey ear, you say you're the king of Subs, so what do you think of the Rt-12d? like i said, at the store, it wasnt hooked up so i couldnt audition it. I will be using the RF83s strictly for 2-channel audio, to fill a 20 x 20 x 11 room. When i previously had the RF7s, I used a SVS PB2+ sub with it, and it kept up quite nicely, but I never cranked it full volume even. I use that sub for home theater right now, but I want something that will be a good match for this, for music (all kinds, rock, dance/trance/etc. ). I want it to keep up fairly well. Should i even consider any klipsch subs or stick with SVS? I say give the RT-12d a spin,it is a very worthy ...great subwoofer.Output wise it is very capable,extends quite deep and integrates like a charm. Given the fact you should find this sub below retail is the icing on the cake.Will keep up with RF83's no problem.The only case you would need a pair is when in a huge room or your listening is done at hearing loss inducing SPL. I have the RD-10d and its a fine sub also,a bit less output and a hair less extension. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheEAR Posted October 31, 2006 Share Posted October 31, 2006 I think the RF-3 sounds better than the RF-7 and the RF-5 better than the RF-3. I certainly like bass, but the midrange is far more important and you're not going to achieve clean mids with dual 10's. Not going to achieve clean mids with a 10" driver! This is one is funny The extra cone weight and air mass is compensated by the much more capable motor on the RF7's mid/bass drivers.And the tweeter using a larger piston is cut lower. You can have very clean midrange from 10" drivers. How about the two way Altec Voice of the Theater? They use a tweeter and a 15" woofer,the midrange by your standards would have to be almost dirty...as a 10" had trouble. It is not even close to being the case. End of story Oh my I never knew my RF7's cannot achieve clean mids! [:@] Dirty speakers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay481985 Posted October 31, 2006 Share Posted October 31, 2006 excuse me...... the rf-83 horn goes deeper (1600 hertz) compared to the rf-7 (2200) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrWho Posted October 31, 2006 Share Posted October 31, 2006 Polar response is a function of geometry normalized to wavelength...meaning that the RF-7 mids beam quite a bit. And then you have ringing drivers and plenty of intermodulation distortion thanks to the wide bandwidth the drivers need to cover. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fish Posted October 31, 2006 Share Posted October 31, 2006 I think the RF-3 sounds better than the RF-7 and the RF-5 better than the RF-3. I think you should give Bose one more try,sounds like they might be right down your alley.I owned all these speakers for years(other than the very brief stay for the 83's),in my house and used regular,not on paper,in my mind or in a chamber.Of them them the 7's are the only keeper for me.I put them all against other speakers up to $4K per set,the 7's were the only keepers.How could the7's put the Def Tech 7001 and 2000tl mids(widely "claimed"to be great and in my house right beside the 7's) to shame if they are so bad?Also,if Klipsch screwed the 7's up so bad should we trust them in the future? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JetJockey Posted October 31, 2006 Share Posted October 31, 2006 LOL, I don't think anyone said the 7's aren't a great speaker. Comparing the two is a little difficult it would seem to me, they are designed very differently to sound different, that was the whole idea of a new design. It all boils down to what sounds "amazing" to you the individual. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrWho Posted October 31, 2006 Share Posted October 31, 2006 I never said the RF-7's sounded awful and just because someone likes a speaker doesn't mean it's perfect either. I don't understand the need to get so defensive. I am merely noting distortions I've heard that don't seem to be as present in other speakers that I found myself enjoying more. Why would I give an opinion about a few speakers if I didn't listen to all of them and feel I gave each one a fair try? I know I'm more in the minority, but I'm definetly not the only one with these obvservations. 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.