bought klipsch rf-7

[rushisrighton]

Hey guys, I was just recently posting about purchasing a 1095 and 1090 when I happend upon a good deal on a pair of rf-7's to replace my rf 3's, well one thing lead to another and now I have new rf-7's and also bought the rc-7 center channel, a yamaha rx-v757 receiver (just a temporary one for now) and a pair of rb-10 for front effects, I now have a complete 9.2 klipsch reference system! Seven channel music sounds incredible. System goes as follows:

Front L/R - rf-7's
center rc-7
front L/R effects rb-10's
surround L/R - rs-3's
surround back L/R - rf-3's

Subs Klipsch ksw 15
klipsch ksw 12 (eventually to be replaced by new reference subs)

Your guys's prompting of how good the rf-7's are is what prompted me to buy and they are very good, sad part is that rotel will have to wait for me to restock my bank account. Movies are UNREAL, I watched lord of the rings and it was like watching it for the first time, a 9.2 system is SO much more immersive then my 5.2 sony ES setup, the yamaha sounds very good but requires alot more to setup, (remote confusing to operate, at least to a guy who is used to sony). A complete 200% improvement on my home theater system, would have loved to have tried some rotel gear..........sometime soon though. The rf-7's get two thumbs up :T :T

[DrJRapp]

Congratulations from another Klipsch fan. Just for kicks try interchanging the Rb10s and the RS3s and let us know what changes.

[soundhound]

Ditto rushisrighton, congrats, good to hear. The RF3's make great surrounds w/ the 7 series fronts. An SVS sub tends to blend very nicely with the combo as well. I believ Chris D. made the change some time ago and was "pleasantly" surprised. I replaced a descent Yamaha pre w/ Rotel and the results were incredible. Enjoy.......

[FENDEBENDER]

I'm also an rf 7 convert with a 1090 rotel and i'm thinking about the 1095 for stereo only, i was wondering at sane volumes (of course i go higher than that) is there any sound difference quality wiseto you and if so what. Good luck enjoy.

[DrJRapp]

Fendebender....The following is a list of the sound output of the RF7 at various power levels at 1 meter. Sound drops off at about 3 db per meter. If your listening position was 14 feet (about 3 meters) from the speaker then the 200 watts per channel of a 1095 will deliver 118db continuous. Having two speakers (stereo) increases this by 3 db to 121db continuous with peaks to about 125 db.. At this point the drywall is shaking off the studs qand the nails are backing out of the framing. Sound is no longer heard, but felt. The 1095 is just starting to clip so the sound is a bit compressed (distorted), but it doesn't matter much because everyone has long since left the building.

102 @ 1 watt
105 @ 2 watts
108 @ 4 watts
111 @ 8 watts
114 @ 16 watts
117 @ 32 watts
120 @ 64 watts
123 @ 128 watts
126 @ 256 watts (continuous power rating)
129 @ 512 watts
132 @ 1024 watts (peak power rating)

[arrow]

hey Dr you would not happen to have this sort of info for the rf-3's cuase that would come in handy. I used to have it but it appears that i have lost it.

[DrJRapp]

hey Dr you would not happen to have this sort of info for the rf-3's cuase that would come in handy. I used to have it but it appears that i have lost it.

Sure....the RF3 is 98 db/w/m vs the RF7s 102. So

98 db = 1 watt
101db = 2 watts
104 db = 4`watts

etc etc.

[arrow]

120 would be about 75 watts ?

[rushisrighton]

Thanks guys,
I wish I had more time to do things, but I do immensly enjoy the time I do get to set up my system. I don't think in my situation switching the rb-10's with the rs-3's would be optimal becaus I have walls up front that would interact with them,(but I will eventually try it after I can put my theater room back together just for you jerry!) but it was my first thought to put them up front and put a pair of rc-3's for my surrounds with the rf-3's for back but I ended up selling my one rc'-3 and buying the rb-10's for the front (rc-3 was way too tall for my wall to use as effects or I definently would have!) I'm still on the fence about the yamaha receiver, can't seem to find which surround sound settings sound right, and which music settings are good, any opinions from any yamaha owners past or present?

[DrJRapp]

120 would be about 75 watts ?

Nope more like 170 watts for 120db

[arrow]

Dr thanks it is rather conforting to know that i can not produce the sound of a jet engine so maybe my hearing will not fail me oh so soon. Thanks for the info.

[DrJRapp]

Dr thanks it is rather conforting to know that i can not produce the sound of a jet engine so maybe my hearing will not fail me oh so soon. Thanks for the info.

Kewl, just think you can make enough noise to drive away the neighbors, or the most ardent velcro-lady.

[arrow]

first sorry for stealing this thread
but Dr was it you that had a post awhile back about modding the rf-3's or modding klipsch in general. I love the horn sound but they are just a bit on the bright side

[Indytown]

Fendebender....The following is a list of the sound output of the RF7 at various power levels at 1 meter. Sound drops off at about 3 db per meter. If your listening position was 14 feet (about 3 meters) from the speaker then the 200 watts per channel of a 1095 will deliver 118db continuous. Having two speakers (stereo) increases this by 3 db to 121db continuous with peaks to about 125 db.. At this point the drywall is shaking off the studs qand the nails are backing out of the framing. Sound is no longer heard, but felt. The 1095 is just starting to clip so the sound is a bit compressed (distorted), but it doesn't matter much because everyone has long since left the building.

102 @ 1 watt
105 @ 2 watts
108 @ 4 watts
111 @ 8 watts
114 @ 16 watts
117 @ 32 watts
120 @ 64 watts
123 @ 128 watts
126 @ 256 watts (continuous power rating)
129 @ 512 watts
132 @ 1024 watts (peak power rating)

I can see why you like the new 100 watt Rotel 1077; your speakers are very efficient.

[FENDEBENDER]

Thanks dDjrapp

Of course i have the 1095 and am looking for a 1090 i notice you picked up on this.

Your talking a about a fix signal i notice on some cd/dvd/s based on my experience some aren't recorded very hot and i need the whole 200 watts 8O to get near those level and of course on others the nails are popping.. which i like. Its hard to compare but seemes like my old yamaha professional amp at 200 watts drove them much harder to the point i think my pre amp (Elite 56 txi may be mis matched ?)) is not driving the amp to its
potential i get around 105 db on most material at near max levels at 12 ft back hence hoping the 1090 would be a touch more. Any thoughts

[DrJRapp]

Its hard to compare but seemes like my old yamaha professional amp at 200 watts drove them much harder to the point i think my pre amp (Elite 56 txi may be mis matched ?)) is not driving the amp to its
potential i get around 105 db on most material at near max levels at 12 ft back hence hoping the 1090 would be a touch more. Any thoughts

Perhaps the voltage output of the 56txi may be too low. One of the drawbacks of using a receiver as a pre-pro is that they are not optimized for that job as a true pre-pro would be. I have listened to my RSP 1098 drive my former Rmb 1075 amp and now my buddy has that amp and is driving with a Rotel RSP 1056. It doesn't achieve the same spl it did with my 1098.

I don't think a bigger amp is the answer. Try a proper pre-pro first.

[rushisrighton]

Hey guys I'm very close to possably purchasing another set of rf-7's to use as back surrounds, and allready have a guy willing to purchase my rf-3's and the rest of my old speakers.

Hopefully the deal goes through then that would just leave finding a set of rs-7's or another pair of rf-7's for surrounds and finding a rsw15 and after that I think I will be done purchasing speakers. I think haveing three pairs of rf-7s and a rc-7 would be quite the setup which could definently lead to some nice gear worthy enough to drive them! (how to get a pair of rf-7's to hang on the wall as front effects channels?:})

[DrJRapp]

You may want to consider an alternative to the RSW. It's a good sub, but only a good sub. A 9.1 Ref 7 series deserves better. Klipsch is not really a subwoofer company. I use an SVS PB12 Plus 2 myself.

[rushisrighton]

Well it's official, I am soon going to own a second pair of rf-7's thanks to one of our fellow audiogoner's. Just paid today, should see them pretty soon.

DRJRAPP - I think you're right, it's been a long time since I've been on svs's website and their subs do look alot better. Have you ever had your sub up against an rsw15 or do you feel that it's far superior by any rights? I know their cylinders would not work in my house. I'm going to spend awhile checking out some sub forums before deciding.

[rockbobmel]

You may want to consider an alternative to the RSW. It's a good sub, but only a good sub. A 9.1 Ref 7 series deserves better. Klipsch is not really a subwoofer company. I use an SVS PB12 Plus 2 myself.

Hi Jerry,

Have you compared the RSW-15 to the SVS PB12+2? How would it compare to my old Velodyne ULD15? Thanks

[rushisrighton]

rockbobmel..... From what I've been reading, the rsw15, while being a good sub, quite quick for a 15 on music and musical in the upper ranges, lacks the depth that the pb-12+2 can deliver, and the pb-12+2 should walk on the velo & klipsch. It is very large though, check out the avs forum mainpage there was just a review on it.

Since there was a new post in this thread I thought I would update since it was this forum that got me started. System now just about done..
Klipsch RF-7 mains, RC-7 center, RF-7's and RC3ii's for dual surrounds,
RF-7 surround back channels. and now DUAL svs pc-ultra's 8O and velodyne sms-1. (waiting on second pc-ultra to arrive) guess I changed my mind on the cylinder look and rb-10 front effects. Still no processor or amps.

[maseline_98]

Fendebender....The following is a list of the sound output of the RF7 at various power levels at 1 meter. Sound drops off at about 3 db per meter. If your listening position was 14 feet (about 3 meters) from the speaker then the 200 watts per channel of a 1095 will deliver 118db continuous. Having two speakers (stereo) increases this by 3 db to 121db continuous with peaks to about 125 db.. At this point the drywall is shaking off the studs qand the nails are backing out of the framing. Sound is no longer heard, but felt. The 1095 is just starting to clip so the sound is a bit compressed (distorted), but it doesn't matter much because everyone has long since left the building.

102 @ 1 watt
105 @ 2 watts
108 @ 4 watts
111 @ 8 watts
114 @ 16 watts
117 @ 32 watts
120 @ 64 watts
123 @ 128 watts
126 @ 256 watts (continuous power rating)
129 @ 512 watts
132 @ 1024 watts (peak power rating)

So what would be the optimal power for these speakers? I'm currently looking at purchasing a pair, but I don't know if my Marantz SR8400(110/ch) or my HK AVR630(75/ch) would be nearly enough, thus causing me to go out and buy one of those nifty rotel amps...

[soundhound]

Rotels RB 1080 (200/channel) is a beautiful match with them. It handles the dynamics better than the RB 1070 (130/channel), and the RB 1090 is overkill unless your providing sound for an auditorium. I have owned all 3 with the RF 7's, and by far my favorite was the 1080. It does detail at low db like neither of the other 2, and could pop your ear drums at higher db without breaking a sweat.

[maseline_98]

I called my local dealer about the rb-1080 and he told me that he will have a rb-1072 with a week or so and I should check it out as well. I'm new to the amp thing and was wondering if anybody has any experience with the digital amps?

[audiocvk]

congrats on your new RF-7 speakers!

I am new to Klipsch, but not to Rotel. I now own Klipsch RF-7 speakers and a pair of new Klipschorn's. I love my Klipsch RF-7 speakers and I run them with Rotel the RB-1090, RC-1090, and RCD-1072 and it's very stunning for music and movies like I was told so many times. I am a true believer and user now of Klipsch with Rotel.

THE ROTEL RB-1090/RC-1090 IS NOT AN OVER-KILL!!!!! with the Klipsch RF-7 speakers! Once you hear it you will know what I'm talking about! The RB-1080 also goes well with it.

Enjoy them! I know you will!

[audiocvk]

I better say that again! The RB-1090 is NOT an over-kill for the Klipsch RF-7 speakers! It's an amazing combo and you will have to pick your jaw up off the floor once you experience it.

I dis-agree with "Soundhound" about the RB-1080. I have the RB-1080 on another setup and it's a great amp but at lower volumes it doesn't do as well as the RB-1090, with the RB-1080 you have to turn it up past say about 8 o'clock to get it to open up and then it sounds great. The RB-1090 doesn't have this short-coming. It's been pointed out in some reviews with the RB-1080 where they say the RB-1090 got it right.

Also, I own both and the RB-1090 is the best Rotel has to offer. The RB-1080 "IS NOT" the better out of the two. It's easy to hear the differences with my setups. The Rotel RB-1090 remains my most favorite out of all the Rotel amp products, it's a wonderful amp and the RB-1080 follows after it.

[chinets]

Congrats!!

[soundhound]

I better say that again! The RB-1090 is NOT an over-kill for the Klipsch RF-7 speakers! It's an amazing combo and you will have to pick your jaw up off the floor once you experience it.

I dis-agree with "Soundhound" about the RB-1080. I have the RB-1080 on another setup and it's a great amp but at lower volumes it doesn't do as well as the RB-1090, with the RB-1080 you have to turn it up past say about 8 o'clock to get it to open up and then it sounds great. The RB-1090 doesn't have this short-coming. It's been pointed out in some reviews with the RB-1080 where they say the RB-1090 got it right.

Also, I own both and the RB-1090 is the best Rotel has to offer. The RB-1080 "IS NOT" the better out of the two. It's easy to hear the differences with my setups. The Rotel RB-1090 remains my most favorite out of all the Rotel amp products, it's a wonderful amp and the RB-1080 follows after it.

And there we have it, The gospel.
I am off to sell my 5K VTL power amp (kept the 7's) and get me another RB-1090......
Regardless of my room treatments, speaker placements, the sound I have assembled, I Have to get me a 1090 today,
Thanks.......

Opinions are often taken as facts on these forums, and many times there is merit to the different opinions for one reason or another.
The best, most accurate advice any one can give is, get one and try it, or come on over and bring your favorite discs. Room acoustics make a HUGE impact on perceived sound.
One could put a 50K system in a wrong enviroment, and you will hear it right away, and by the same token you could put a 15K system in a "tuned" enviroment and will have listeners saying "JVC is great, Mark Levinson's stuff sucks".

3/4's of the fun of this hobby (obsession) is getting to where we want to be, the trial and error, thrill of the hunt, and once a milestone is achieved, its time to raise the bar and have at it again.

Thanks for the insight audiocvk, enjoy your new Rotel-Klipsch combo, its a dandy.

[mpeak]

I'm in agreement with "audiocvk" and have found the same with my RB-1090 and RB-1080. Both are great amps but it it's clear the RB-1090 is even a better Rotel Amp as Rotel built it with even a better build of dual mono design and the RB-1080 is of single design. The RB-1090 has 8 caps the size of Coke Pop cans and 2 very large PS., the RB-1080 has 4 mini pop can size caps and 1 large PS.

If you have equip that reveals the difference, you will hear it between the RB-1080 and RB-1090, even the reviews support it. Both amps are great and the RB-1080 will get you where you want to get, the RB-1090 is even better if you can afford it and is a lifetime amp that you will never want to let go! I'm keeping my as long as I live! I love it and it sound so nice and it's hard to get a build quality like either of these amps these days!

Here are some review captures for the RB-1090:

Stereophile, Jan. 2000

The level of listening fatigue engendered by the Rotel RB-1090 is one of the lowest I've encountered in a solid-state amplifier. In this respect it reminded me of amplifiers from Rowland and YBA - pretty good company for a $2000 amplifier! With the RB-1090 in the system, I could listen to music for long periods and fell little inclination to change amplifiers.

The RB-1090's other major strength was its harmonic accuracy: the ability of an amplifier to preserve the distinctive timbres of voices and musical instruments. Many solid-stage amplifiers - even some very expensive ones - have a problem in this area, giving music a somewhat unnatural, "electronic" quality. Not the RB-1090. Trupmpets sounded like trumpets: violins sounded like violins rather than synthesized version thereof. Voices had much of the "rounded" quality they have in real life, with sibilants neither softened nor artificially enhanced. Some audiophiles point out that most of the time the power drawn from an amplifier is less than a watt, and it's that first watt that is critical to musical reproduction. Rotel engineers have assuredly got that first watt right.

----------------------------------------------------------
The Inner Ear Report:

"Rotel's strength is designing electronics and building them as cost efficiently as possible without deteriorating quality. The RB1090 is practically two totally separate power amplifiers which share a single chassis and a (detachable) power cord. Our listeners' overall impressions were that the amplifier sounds extremely smooth across its frequency range, almost delivering what is often referred to as "tube-like" information. This amp never sounds hard or clinical‹as in sterile. Rather, it sounds rich, full-bodied and melodious. The Rotel's clearly audible forté is its capacity to deliver a most astounding sound-stage. We feel that some loudspeakers one might use with the Rotel will sound more revealing than others. As many loudspeakers feature somewhat harder and more forward sound, it stands to reason that the RB1090 will provide an excellent match."

-----------------------------------------------------------

The absolute Sound - BEST BUY, the Rotel RB-1090

"Voluptuous and yin-like, and ever so slightly laid back in character, the RB-1090 is capable of extracting the lowest rumble that a speaker is capable of. But it also extracts high-frequency information like a hummingbird sips nectar, but for sheer orchestral weight the 1090 has
the gravitas to make it one of the best pound-for-pound deals in the high end - maybe
one of the best ever."

------------------------------------------------------------

SoundStage!

"Through all of my listening, the RB-1090’s dynamics were impressive by any measure, and they were
definitive for their price point. You’re looking at more than twice the price to get something that’s substantially better and maintains so much muscle. With the RB-1090, you might not know what you’re missing if you never go back and compare it against a pricier reference. In fact, if the Rotel amp were inserted into my system on the sly, I don’t think I’d pick up on it right away.
Truly, the Rotel RB-1090 is noteworthy for its power output and sound quality, and I hadn’t mentioned that it’s a handsome beast to boot -- all for $1999 clams. If the Rotel RB-1090 is in your budget, or even if you were thinking to spend a thousand dollars more, you’d do well to audition it. Perhaps you could better this amp if you could give up the power with, say, a very sensitive pair of speakers, but the RB-1090's combination of traits is difficult to match."

RB-1080 review capture:


Stereophile - March 2002

The 1080 was virtually noiseless (except for the music) and my first impressions was of a somewhat soft, dry sound lacking in dynamics. Balance across the audible spectrum was smooth, with tight, impressive bass, but there seemed to be a lack of presence. The treble was clean and detailed. Such hastily formed opinions are as often wrong as they are right: in the case of the 1080, they were mostly right but definitely imcomplete. The Rotel had two discrete personalitites. At low leves, such as one might use for casual listening, the characteristics were as described above. I was persistently bothered by a micro-dynamic compression that sucked life out of the music, even though the really big monents did not lack for impact. I was also disturbed by a reticence in the treble that, by contrast, made the extreme treble transients of cymbals and triangles seem a bit over the top. But when I turned up the volume, the 1080 came to life. The glossing-over of small dynamic changes weas replaced by a clarity of inner detail that can happen only if subtle dynamics are not lost.

The Rotel was capble of truly impressive performance - but only when played at substantial levels. When I turned down the gain, the sound faded into pale miniatures.

[Drewbert]

How do the RF-7s compare to the RF-82s?

[soundhound]

http://Forums.klipsch.com/Forums/

[soundhound]

oops.........

[soundhound]

I'm in agreement with "audiocvk" and have found the same with my RB-1090 and RB-1080. Both are great amps but it it's clear the RB-1090 is even a better Rotel Amp as Rotel built it with even a better build of dual mono design and the RB-1080 is of single design. The RB-1090 has 8 caps the size of Coke Pop cans and 2 very large PS., the RB-1080 has 4 mini pop can size caps and 1 large PS.

Glad to hear it mpeak, that is 2 happy 1090 owners.
The word "better" is used far to loosley around the web.
Rotel builds quality components @ all levels, so to judge one "better" built is probably a bad choice of words.
As far as power supply caps, (thus the higher wattage rating) one would expect it with higher current transformer secondaries, higher current capacity rectifiers, and more output transistors to attribute to larger supply storage.
Does "more" negate "better"? No. It does give one braging rights, and if thats what some are in the hobbie for, cool, it ain't me.
The start of this thread was about Klipsch RF 7 speaks, which are insanely efficient, with impedance dips to around 2 1/2 ohms, and to many, (I will save the server space by leaving off the quotes) the 1080 is all one could ever ask.
Regardless of all published reviews, quotes, and comments on the web, I urge people spending their hard earned jing, to go Listen for themselves. Thats advice that can be put in the bank.

[mpeak]

There is way more than just 2 happy RB-1090 owners!

Thanks, but there will always be different opinions and even though mine doesn't agree with yours totally, like I said that the 1080 will get you where you want to be. I have them both and for my setup, there is a difference and I prefer the RB-1090. I like the RB-1080 too! I think many people who go to the Rotel dealer and compare the two can pretty much make a wise choice of what they are willing to pay and what fits their own budget. They both are fine amps and you can't lose out with either. Rotel has a great value for the money and you get it for either the RB-1080 or RB-1090. I'm not a person to ever "over state" anything and very logical with my evaluations and I stand by my RB-1090 claims, as well as my RB-1080. I'm not trying to enforce any one to pay more for something that isn't there like you kind of suggest, I'm just stating truth from my experience is all and all I would expect from any one sharing the same but I thank you for your opinion and sharing with us! Enjoy! :T

[mpeak]

How do the RF-7s compare to the RF-82s?

The Klipsch RF-83 is what replaced the RF-7 so it would be more fair to compare it with the RF-83. To sum up the difference from what I hear and what is being said on the Klipsch forums:

The RF-7's have more presense and more in your face so to speak.

The RF-83's are more refind and not as in your face.

Both speakers are very nice. The right choice for you will depend on how you like your music. Both are very detailed with maybe the slight edge to the RF-7's since they are more in your face sound. I like both and both are kind of different. Careful equipment setup is important for each for the best sound. Klipsch needs quality equip. to sound great. For my taste, I prefer the RF-7's more but I could easily be happy with either!!