Zen Traveler Posted April 23, 2007 Share Posted April 23, 2007 Thanks to the Gurus on this Forum I am getting a better understanding of my speakers every day. I also plan on keeping my RF-7 speakers for the next few years. [H] If any of you have previous Threads that you feel would be helpful to RF-7 owners please post the links here. To start off with: My room is less than 14' x 21'/ 2300 cu. ft., and I have had a prolonged, sublime Home Theater experience over the years. Unfortunately my Denon AVR 4802R got fried and I am waiting on the AVR 4806 replacement. [li] Here are two good threads dealing with POWER Requirements for the RF-7: http://forums.klipsch.com/forums/thread/306485.aspx http://forums.klipsch.com/forums/1/541614/ShowThread.aspx After perusing both, I had several thoughts and 2 questions. In the May 2002 Sound and Vision article, the professional reviewer gave (the now vintage) Reference HT High Marks in his 22 x 16 room, with the system being driven by a B&K AVR 307, which is THX ultra rated. I realize that Separates are definitely a good investment for the RF-7's, but I am curious if my Denon THX ultra II AVR, which is rated down to 3.2 Ohms, covers the dip in the RF-7's at the Reference levels that I listen? Am I missing any nuances or am I damaging my speakers? [^o)] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zen Traveler Posted April 23, 2007 Author Share Posted April 23, 2007 Here is a link to the Denon AVR 4806: http://usa.denon.com/ProductDetails/237.asp Is it powerful enough to compensate for the dip at 2.8 ohms that the RF-7's have? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wuzzzer Posted April 23, 2007 Share Posted April 23, 2007 It would depend on how loud you listen to them. Most receivers will run out of useable watts pretty quick at high levels. Many of them will push RF-7s to high SPL levels but won't be putting out as much bass as a separate high powered amp or high-end receiver would. I would imagine that's why many RF-7 owners feel their speakers are harsh sounding. Crank the volume level and the receiver has no problem amplifying the upper frequencies but the bass/lower midrange fall behind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zen Traveler Posted April 23, 2007 Author Share Posted April 23, 2007 Mine don't sound harsh to me or anyone that have heard them. I can listen at Reference levels for long periods of time and have never heard "clipping," or have shut down my AVR. I also wonder if I am harming my speakers in the long run even though I don't hear clipping. [:^)] Here is a Review of the AVR 4806: http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/volume_12_4/denon-avr-4806-receiver-12-2005-part-1.html The key points were 1) he was able to drive his 4 Ohm Final Acoustic ESLs and that it actually produced 114 WPC into 7 channels. It produced 183 watts with 2 channels being driven. It's rated at 130 WPC. Right now I am driving my system below with a Denon AVR 3805 and with smaller RB-75's as Side and Rear Surrounds (where as with the 4802R I could play RF-3's and RS-7's, along with my rear RB-75s). It sounds good at low levels but it at least a good 6 dB lower than my normal levels with the THX ulta II Denon. I also prefer the THX ultra Music and Movie settings which is supposed to take the brightness out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Speedball Posted April 23, 2007 Share Posted April 23, 2007 I understand clipping is quite obvious to hear, I never heard it either. if you decide to throw them more power or even go with seperates be prepared to hear a difference, I did. [] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ou8thisSN Posted April 23, 2007 Share Posted April 23, 2007 While we own a pair of rf7s, I am more interested in asking whehter the RF83 also has this 'dip' that you guys are talking about. I'm considering separates for it as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zen Traveler Posted April 23, 2007 Author Share Posted April 23, 2007 Hi Speedball, What did you upgrade from? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fish Posted April 23, 2007 Share Posted April 23, 2007 I think the power output of the Denon is enough to do the job,it may not be plenty(only my opinion) but enough...A separate amp offers other features besides power,generally better over all performance from top to bottom.The preamp section is just as,or more important than the amp for the 7's.If you love the sound of your set then maybe sometime try an amp so you'll know. I'd always suggest anyone that owns 7's try a variety of amps/prepros to see what sounds best. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay481985 Posted April 23, 2007 Share Posted April 23, 2007 While we own a pair of rf7s, I am more interested in asking whehter the RF83 also has this 'dip' that you guys are talking about. I'm considering separates for it as well. yes it still has the ohm dip Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zen Traveler Posted April 23, 2007 Author Share Posted April 23, 2007 ...A separate amp offers other features besides power,generally better over all performance from top to bottom.The preamp section is just as,or more important than the amp for the 7's.If you love the sound of your set then maybe sometime try an amp so you'll know... I appreciate the sentiment that I didn't cut and past. [] After reading EVERY page of the AVR 4806 Owners Thread at AVS I found there were people last year buying the 4806 for the preamp section alone and using seperates. Is that a good sign? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zen Traveler Posted April 23, 2007 Author Share Posted April 23, 2007 Hi OuthisSN, Right now I am running RF-3's as my preferred side surrounds. I also have RS'7's as "B"Surrounds and sit within 4' of both. I wanted to go RF-7 as side surrounds but felt they would be too big. My RF-3's are raised to match my RF-7's. I wonder if the RF-83's would work out better there. Does anyone have any ideas? If the RF-83's{edited} are a little more laid back...[^o)] Even sitting close would the RF-7's work out better... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhilMays Posted April 23, 2007 Share Posted April 23, 2007 If you are just enjoying movies I feel RF-7's for side surrounds is WAAAAYYYY overkill. If you are enjoying multi channel music then perhaps that would be a move you would appreciate. I too have a very similar set-up. I use RF-3's as my side surrounds and have looked at placing the RS-7's as a B set. Funny thing is you can't find them like you once could. As for the Pre amp I can say this. I have a Yamaha RX-Z1 that pushed 130WPC and it did a very nice job. I then used it as a pre/pro and added an AMC 150WPC 5 channel amp and oh my, did those speakers open up. I now use Yamaha M-80's at 260WPC and I can get everything from those 7's that I want, or could want! I really like the Denon 3800 and up lines. I think any of them from that point up would make a very good pre/pro. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
falcon20x Posted April 23, 2007 Share Posted April 23, 2007 You lost me there. What do you mean by the RF 3's being more laid back? Also if you thought that RF 7's were to big, size wise, you are not going to like the RF 83. The RF 83 have a width of 9.2" vs 11.6" for the RF 7 but the depth is 20" vs 16", which makes it a pain in the butt to set up, as they need to be as far as two to four feet from the wall to show there potential. I don't have RF 7 ( I'm actually looking to get a pair) but I can tell you the RF 83 are easy to drive with middle of road equipment and will make you happy regardless where you put them, for that matter Star Power had them against the wall, enclosed in a HT center and they still sounded good enough to me to buy them. Or may be it was they sounded better that my RF 3's and I knew how much better they will sound is they were set up right? lol If I get the RF 7, I will set them up in the back as well , I'll let you know how it worked out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay481985 Posted April 23, 2007 Share Posted April 23, 2007 I like the rf-83 in the corner Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrMcGoo Posted April 24, 2007 Share Posted April 24, 2007 The RF-7s and the RF-83 both have an impedance dip to 2.8 ohms. Most receivers do not handle the low impedance well unless the receiver is set to small with an 80 Hz crossover for the RF-7s. The B&K AVR-307 is an exception. It uses 3 pairs of MOS-FETs per channel while most receivers use a single pair. I currently run my RF-7s as small with a crossover at 50 Hz. This takes a great deal of current to sound good, but you do get stereo bass. A receiver's inability to follow an impedance curve results in poor frequency response and harsh sound. Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zen Traveler Posted April 24, 2007 Author Share Posted April 24, 2007 You lost me there. What do you mean by the RF 3's being more laid back? Also if you thought that RF 7's were to big, size wise, you are not going to like the RF 83. The RF 83 have a width of 9.2" vs 11.6" for the RF 7 but the depth is 20" vs 16", which makes it a pain in the butt to set up, as they need to be as far as two to four feet from the wall to show there potential... I forgot to put the "8" in front of the "3." [:$] I went back and edited it. Insofar as the difference in towers--My RF-3 is rear ported and the RF-83 is narrower than the RF-7 which is a consideration. I appreciate you reminding me about the depth of the RF-83's. I am completely satisfied with the RF-3 and may also try to find a pair of RF-5's, but don't think that would be much of an upgrade. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zen Traveler Posted April 24, 2007 Author Share Posted April 24, 2007 The RF-7s and the RF-83 both have an impedance dip to 2.8 ohms. Most receivers do not handle the low impedance well unless the receiver is set to small with an 80 Hz crossover for the RF-7s. The B&K AVR-307 is an exception. It uses 3 pairs of MOS-FETs per channel while most receivers use a single pair. Bill Hi Bill, How would I find out how many MOS-FETs the Denon 4806 uses? I would assume the THX ulta II specs that the amps be able to drive speakers down to 3.2 ohms makes this AVR not your typical receiver. I provided the link to the 4806 above and I compared it to the B&K AVR 307 and the major things I found was that the B&K was 12 lbs heavier but they both had near the same rated power consumption of 1200 watts. Given the reviewers results (and I had to figure Klipsch steered him in the direction to what to power their speakers with when they sent them to him) I wonder if I am at the edge of what my speakers are capable of in my small HT. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrMcGoo Posted April 24, 2007 Share Posted April 24, 2007 In the past, the Denons always used one pair of MOS-FETs per channel. Space in all receivers is at a premium. The lack of transistor output devices tends to limit current flow in the frequencies where there is an impedance dip. Hence, it affects frequency response etc. I have a Pioneer flagship that I use as a processor. It does ok with the RF-7s, but outboard amplification does better. The processor section is excellent athough it is a bit dated at the moment. Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zen Traveler Posted April 24, 2007 Author Share Posted April 24, 2007 I appreciate your comments Bill and I have followed your posts. BTW, I mistakenly backed out of the deal on the Sunfire Grand that you currently own....If I could turn back time. [] I still prefer to play my speakers Large but understand your reasoning for setting RF-7's to Small. I wonder if my small room and that I have several of my speakers raised might make me prefer my settings. I also realized you have the Pioneer Ultra II unit. Do you know what the rated Power Consumption number is on it? The Denon AVR 4802R is 10.5 A. I remember reading from one of the links at the top of this thread that was something to look at. [^o)] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zen Traveler Posted April 24, 2007 Author Share Posted April 24, 2007 Hey jacksonbart, Are you still powering your RF-7's with a Denon AVR 5803? 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.