scatsob Posted June 29, 2007 Share Posted June 29, 2007 Im sure this is a dumb question but ill ask anyways. I am getting a set of speakers for graduation and found a used RF-7 system minus the sub (RF-7's, RC-7, RS-7's). I also went into a local hifi store and auditioned the RF-52 and 62 systems. Of the two I liked the 62's better, but the system is $1000 more than I can get the used RF-7 system for minus a sub. The RF-52 system, on the other hand, is almost the same prece as the RF-7 system. So the question is, is it worth it to get new middle of the road speakers or used top end speakers. Any healp here would be great. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Southern Posted June 29, 2007 Share Posted June 29, 2007 I recently purchased used RF-7's (with DeanG x-overs) and an RC-7, I would take this system over the RF-62/52 system anyday. I like my music loud and the louder I turn up the RF-7s' the sound stage gets closer and closer until you feel like you are on stage without a hint that the RF-7's are straining. I don't have any surrounds or sub at the moment but I am on the lookout for a nice used set. You didn't mention on how the RF-62 compaired to the RF-7 or what you plan on driving your speakers with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scatsob Posted June 29, 2007 Author Share Posted June 29, 2007 You didn't mention on how the RF-62 compaired to the RF-7 or what you plan on driving your speakers with. Thats kinda why I asked the question....I havent heard any RF-7s yet so I cant really compare the two. The only other Klipsch speaker ive listened to are my dads KLF-10's. As for driving....for budget reasons right now the plan is either a Pioneer VSX-517-K or Yamaha RX-V361BL. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Southern Posted June 29, 2007 Share Posted June 29, 2007 Give the RF-7's a listen and the choice will be clear. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arky Posted June 29, 2007 Share Posted June 29, 2007 rf-7 system. Get the best spks. You can upgrade sources as funds allow. Congrats on graduating. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay481985 Posted June 29, 2007 Share Posted June 29, 2007 rf-7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scatsob Posted June 29, 2007 Author Share Posted June 29, 2007 thanks for all the replys guys. As I said...kind of a dumb question as I was 99% sure the RF-7's were the way to go, just needed a little nudge. I was only thinking the latter because new is...well....new. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrMcGoo Posted June 29, 2007 Share Posted June 29, 2007 You didn't mention on how the RF-62 compaired to the RF-7 or what you plan on driving your speakers with. Thats kinda why I asked the question....I havent heard any RF-7s yet so I cant really compare the two. The only other Klipsch speaker ive listened to are my dads KLF-10's. As for driving....for budget reasons right now the plan is either a Pioneer VSX-517-K or Yamaha RX-V361BL. The RF-7s require better amplification than the Pioneer VSX-517K. It is a bottom of the barrel receiver that cannot drive such a difficult load. The RF-7s dip down to 2.8 ohms impedance. Your receiver will either shut down or fry the tweeters from clipping. Separate amps with 200 wpc are needed to get the full benefit of RF-7s. Try the used market, but be caereful. Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay481985 Posted June 29, 2007 Share Posted June 29, 2007 You didn't mention on how the RF-62 compaired to the RF-7 or what you plan on driving your speakers with. Thats kinda why I asked the question....I havent heard any RF-7s yet so I cant really compare the two. The only other Klipsch speaker ive listened to are my dads KLF-10's. As for driving....for budget reasons right now the plan is either a Pioneer VSX-517-K or Yamaha RX-V361BL. The RF-7s require better amplification than the Pioneer VSX-517K. It is a bottom of the barrel receiver that cannot drive such a difficult load. The RF-7s dip down to 2.8 ohms impedance. Your receiver will either shut down or fry the tweeters from clipping. Separate amps with 200 wpc are needed to get the full benefit of RF-7s. Try the used market, but be caereful. Bill or he doesn't have to play it that loud for now Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scatsob Posted June 29, 2007 Author Share Posted June 29, 2007 You didn't mention on how the RF-62 compaired to the RF-7 or what you plan on driving your speakers with. Thats kinda why I asked the question....I havent heard any RF-7s yet so I cant really compare the two. The only other Klipsch speaker ive listened to are my dads KLF-10's. As for driving....for budget reasons right now the plan is either a Pioneer VSX-517-K or Yamaha RX-V361BL. The RF-7s require better amplification than the Pioneer VSX-517K. It is a bottom of the barrel receiver that cannot drive such a difficult load. The RF-7s dip down to 2.8 ohms impedance. Your receiver will either shut down or fry the tweeters from clipping. Separate amps with 200 wpc are needed to get the full benefit of RF-7s. Try the used market, but be caereful. Bill or he doesn't have to play it that loud for now Thanks for the info guys. I will definately not be maxing these out any time soon.....there going in a smaller house and my son freeks when the sterio is loud. He is only 1 and cant figure out where the sound is coming from. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kain Posted June 30, 2007 Share Posted June 30, 2007 You didn't mention on how the RF-62 compaired to the RF-7 or what you plan on driving your speakers with. Thats kinda why I asked the question....I havent heard any RF-7s yet so I cant really compare the two. The only other Klipsch speaker ive listened to are my dads KLF-10's. As for driving....for budget reasons right now the plan is either a Pioneer VSX-517-K or Yamaha RX-V361BL. The RF-7s require better amplification than the Pioneer VSX-517K. It is a bottom of the barrel receiver that cannot drive such a difficult load. The RF-7s dip down to 2.8 ohms impedance. Your receiver will either shut down or fry the tweeters from clipping. Separate amps with 200 wpc are needed to get the full benefit of RF-7s. Try the used market, but be caereful. Bill I just checked the specs on that Pioneer revceiver and it's rated at 110W/channel and costs like $300 max. My Harman Kardon is also rated at 110W/channel but costed me about $2,300 when I bought it some years back. I'm sure there is a difference in quality of parts used inside but are you saying I shouldn't play it loud because my receiver will not be able to handle it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arky Posted June 30, 2007 Share Posted June 30, 2007 You don't mention your h/k model # but at $2300 new its power supply is likely much more robust than the pioneer in question. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrMcGoo Posted July 1, 2007 Share Posted July 1, 2007 Receiver specifications for power are nearly meaningless. They are measured with one channel driven. H/K is an exception to the general rule. H/K will actually deliver the rated power and will drive most 4 ohm speakers. Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kain Posted July 1, 2007 Share Posted July 1, 2007 I have listed the the H/K model number in my sig. It's the AVR 8500. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay481985 Posted July 1, 2007 Share Posted July 1, 2007 its the fact that the rf-7 dip to around 2.8 ohms and most receivers cannot do under 6 ohms. HK can drive 4 ohm speakers but as said most cannot. the 110 watts is 8 ohms but when you go from 8 to 4, the 4 ohms will pull 220 watts effectively doubling the power in which the power supply cannot handle and will go down to shut down mode. But you can effectively lower the volume to keep the wattage from going crazy (lower it 3 db reducing wattage by half in a perfect world, so reducing it 6 db is best). going from 4 to 2 ohms also doubles the wattage Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catharsis147 Posted July 1, 2007 Share Posted July 1, 2007 I have always found these figures to be a little misleading, no offense to anyone here. My Yamaha receiver (cheap $300.00) has no problem driving the RF-7's and has NEVER shut down even when playing movies at levels no one can stand but me (I live in a brownstone with no neighbors). No signs of amplifier clipping, nothing. And my reciever is only 75 watts per channel rated (not even all channels driven). In addition, there are many RF-7 lovers out there using tubes that are, what, 5 watts per channel, 10 watts per channel? Now, I undertstand that RF-7s will sing with more power, but to say that lower end receivers are incapable of driving them In My Humbe Opinion is an error, proven by my own experiences to date. Just a few thoughts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrMcGoo Posted July 1, 2007 Share Posted July 1, 2007 Catharsis, You might be surprised at the difference in sound, if you used a better processor and amplifier on your RF-7s. High end receivers typically are not designed drive 4 ohm speakers with impedance dips below 3.2 ohms. Low end receivers may overheat, shut down, clip or produce poor sound on 4 ohm speakers. The manufacturers of low end receivers recommend against their use on 4 ohm speakers. Just because a receiver does not shut down does not mean all is well, especially in terms of sound quality. Use of a $300 receiver to run RF-7s is like running a lawn tractor engine in a spots car. There is sufficient power to move the vehicle, but results are suboptimal. Your experience seems to be contrary to the general experience on this board. Your comment on tube amps leaves out the fact that tube amps generally have 4 ohm taps while receivers have no such capability and that most RF-7 owners with tube amps use more than 5 or 10 watts. Bill PS: Klipsch tech support has recommended for solid state amps 200 wpc separate amps to get the best sound out of RF-7s. B Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catharsis147 Posted July 2, 2007 Share Posted July 2, 2007 Bill, Fair enough. I probably would be surprised with a better amp (and am saving to do just that), though RF-7's are rated at 8 ohms, not four. However, I have a feeling I am not the only one driving RF-7's with a reciever (even one as low end as mine is), and am not the only one whose receiver has not shut down playing at loud levels. Then again, maybe I am just lucky...................... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrMcGoo Posted July 2, 2007 Share Posted July 2, 2007 Klipsch rates the RF-7 as 8 ohm compatible due to high sensitivity. Many 4 ohm speakers do not dip below 3 ohms while the RF-7 dips to 2.8 ohms. The RF-7 also has a difficult phase angle to drive. It is the most difficult to drive speaker that I have purchased from Klipsch, but it is justified by the sound quality. Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cjgeraci Posted July 2, 2007 Share Posted July 2, 2007 I have always found these figures to be a little misleading, no offense to anyone here. My Yamaha receiver (cheap $300.00) has no problem driving the RF-7's and has NEVER shut down even when playing movies at levels no one can stand but me (I live in a brownstone with no neighbors). No signs of amplifier clipping, nothing. And my reciever is only 75 watts per channel rated (not even all channels driven). In addition, there are many RF-7 lovers out there using tubes that are, what, 5 watts per channel, 10 watts per channel? Now, I undertstand that RF-7s will sing with more power, but to say that lower end receivers are incapable of driving them In My Humbe Opinion is an error, proven by my own experiences to date. Just a few thoughts. Bill, I know that I'm a former RF-7 junkie, but I couldn't resist............... I question the hypothesis that there are "many RF-7 lovers out there" using low-powered SET amps. Really, who?? Of all the people on this forum, I can think of two forum members who have used low-powered tube amps for driving RF-7s, and one factor in those decisions was choice of music type. I'll leave my experiences aside because I never wanted to run RF-7s with less than 35 watts push-pull - and on the 4 ohm taps. But, assuming for the sake of argument that there are plenty of people running low-powered tube amps for RF-7s, the nature of clipping by solid state and tubes are vastly different. I would never try to make a point about satisfactory power levels by referencing tube amps. Even though watts are watts - you are talking apples and oranges. I am not surprised that you can run movies at full volume with your HT receiver without it shutting down. Which speaker carries the heavy lifting in HT? Again, Bill's point is well taken. I'm sure that you can do HT loud without the receiver shutting down. But, what does it really sound like?? When you listen to music in two-channel, are your RF-7s clean and clear at levels no one can stand but you? When your RF-7s are set to "large?" Carl. 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.