Beautiful tower with bass output

[Sounds Good]

Hey group I am looking to upgrade my towers and eliminate my sub for my 2ch music setup.

I would like to get something beautiful to look at. Seems like the Klipsch RF7 checks all the boxes. For some reason I have a hard time buying "Big corporate" items. I guess they prob do as much R&D as the little guys.

I love Jim Salk's stuff and the Songtowers are really affordable for me. I just don't know if they would have the bass output I am looking for.

Currently I am using a set of SVS STS01 and a cheapie sub

 

[Swerd]

The Salk SongTower (I own a pair) and Klipsch RF7 (haven't heard it) are likely to be very different sounding speakers. I'd strongly advise you to listen to each before buying.

SongTowers have deep but un-exaggerated bass, and an overall balanced and neutral sound. See my owner's review (linked in my signature below). They also have very wide dispersion leading to very good imaging.

Judging by the frequency response curve below, I'd guess the RF7s have exaggerated bass, a broad recessed response across the mid range, and a rising treble above 2,000 Hz. Their off-axis response falls rapidly at 300 Hz and higher (compare 60° off-axis above and below). They beam sound, the opposite of wide dispersion.

 

[Sounds Good]

Cool thanks for the details.

I would say I am considering the RF7, but it certainly looks good IMO.

I've been looking at supercharged STs and Philharmonics towers.

 

[ski2xblack]

How big is the room, listening distance, and desired volumes? At anything within their dynamic limits the Salks and Phils would dance mad circles around the Klipsch, but the Klipsch would fill a larger dance hall, and their greater dynamic range brings it's own special dance factor, if not the most linear response. Really apples to oranges.

 

[Swerd]

Cool thanks for the details.

I would say I am considering the RF7, but it certainly looks good IMO.

I've been looking at supercharged STs and Philharmonics towers.

I can only tell you what I like, not what you like . Some people love Klipsch speakers. Others don't.

I can say with some confidence that people who are used to speakers that over-emphasize bass, at first think that STs have weak bass. Supercharged STs can reach a bit lower in bass, but at the expense of loudness. They are a bit less sensitive than the standard STs. They have the advantage of a more detailed sound due to the metal mid woofers.

Which Phil Towers? The Phil 3 has bass as good as or better than any speaker I've heard. And that isn't even their best quality. The Slim Tower Jr. has a similar overall sound to the ST and SCST, with the added feature of the open back mid range.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

RBH SX-8300 in sandalwood finish:


RBH SV6500:


RBH SV831/SV1212:

 

[3db]

Hey group I am looking to upgrade my towers and eliminate my sub for my 2ch music setup.

I would like to get something beautiful to look at. Seems like the Klipsch RF7 checks all the boxes. For some reason I have a hard time buying "Big corporate" items. I guess they prob do as much R&D as the little guys.

I love Jim Salk's stuff and the Songtowers are really affordable for me. I just don't know if they would have the bass output I am looking for.

Currently I am using a set of SVS STS01 and a cheapie sub

What's your budget?


I recommend PSB's Imagine T3.. That's Paul Barton, founder of PSB resting on a T3.

If they are out of your price range, try looking for a pair of used Synchrony One's like the ones below that were replaced by the T3.

 

[Sounds Good]

Thanks guys.

I am currently sep up in a bedroom about 15x15, until our car passes away. Lol long story. I like to listen medium loud I would say. Not ear bleeding but I like to hear all the instruments of what I am listing to.

Budget is around Phil slims or STs. $2500?

I enjoy listing to my STS01. They just are not very appealing to look at. I've even thought about getting them veneered..

 

[herbu]

I am looking to upgrade my towers and eliminate my sub... I would like to get something beautiful to look at.

I think you need to make a decision. Towers to eliminate your sub cost money. Beautiful to look at costs money. $2500 is not enough to get the best of both. You're gonna have to compromise on something, and you need to decide what it will be.

The Phil 3s are probably the least expensive speakers that would really let you eliminate a subwoofer for music. But they're $3500/pr, and I probably wouldn't describe them as beautiful.

The Slims at $2200/pr don't go quite as low, but look more traditional. And you know Dennis will build you either with cabinets by Salk in whatever finish you want, right?

The Song Towers, for about the same price as the Slims, don't go as low as the Slims.

With a budget of $2500, my choice would be the Slims with custom cabinets by Salk.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

It depends on the subwoofer

For towers that have bass equivalents of dual 8" subs, I would say the budget is about $2300 or more.

For towers that have bass equivalents of dual 10" subs, I would say the budget is about $3200 or more.

For towers that have bass equivalents of dual 12" subs, I would say the budget is about $5000 or more.

 

[Sounds Good]

Ive been looking at small sealed subs, 8" or 10". Not looking for floor shaking just playback of lower freq.

Truthfully I could take the price of the small subs (500-800) and up my tower budget if they would provide the same audio coverage.

 

[jcparks]

Check out the for sell forum, there are some RBH SX6300rs there dor 2200 shipped. They will probably be really close to what your looking for

Sent from my SM-G920T using Tapatalk

 

[KenM10759]

I've seen (will soon audition) those PSB T3's. Aesthetically, they really are stunning. If I had one complaint about the looks, it's those sockets for the grille. In this day where it's easy enough to embed an insert piece of steel underneath the veneer, why PSB didn't do that and use magnetic grilles is beyond my reasoning.

Cheap, they are not, in sound quality or fit & finish.

 

[Don G.]

To be honest, about the only way to really eliminate the need for a sub for a music only system, you either need to spend a lot of money or buy a tower with a powered sub section built in. You can pick up some DefTech ST's in your price range, maybe some Golden Ear Triton II's.

For HT applications, you need a sub regardless due to handling the LF signals for effects. I have Salk HT-3's which are fantastic speakers and flat down to 34 hz and still run two 15" powered subs. I have them kicking in around 40 hz and have the gain pretty low, but still, to pick up that last octave, nothing beats a sub.

 

[Don G.]

The Salk SongTower (I own a pair) and Klipsch RF7 (haven't heard it) are likely to be very different sounding speakers. I'd strongly advise you to listen to each before buying.

SongTowers have deep but un-exaggerated bass, and an overall balanced and neutral sound. See my owner's review (linked in my signature below). They also have very wide dispersion leading to very good imaging.

Judging by the frequency response curve below, I'd guess the RF7s have exaggerated bass, a broad recessed response across the mid range, and a rising treble above 2,000 Hz. Their off-axis response falls rapidly at 300 Hz and higher (compare 60° off-axis above and below). They beam sound, the opposite of wide dispersion.

I love the Salk sound, but to be fair, you really shouldn't show one graph that ends at 200 hz and another down to 10 hz. As many have said, the Klipsch sound is unique, some like it, some don't. Their biggest advantage is efficiency. You can drive them easily with a 25 wpc tube amp.

If I was going the Klipsch route, I would buy a used pair of some of their older stuff like Heresey's or Forte's. I think those are two of the best speakers they ever made and can be picked up for under $400 pretty easily. I have a pair of Forte's than I just replaced with Salk HT-3's. The HT's are more accurate and play as low as the Klipsch, but I had to change amps to drive them.

 

[Sounds Good]

I've always had my eye on the RF-7 and Cornwalls

 

[Swerd]

I love the Salk sound, but to be fair, you really shouldn't show one graph that ends at 200 hz and another down to 10 hz.

Below roughly 200-250 Hz in normal sized rooms, the reflections of bass frequencies off of floor, ceiling, and walls interact with the sound coming directly from the speaker during the measurement process. They cause large peaks and valleys in the measured frequency response curve. These are entirely due to additions and cancellations caused by the reflections, and are not caused by the speaker itself. Some reflected waves arrive at the test microphone in phase with the sound coming directly from the speaker, and others arrive out of phase. This varies with the wavelength of the sound and the distances between the speaker and the floor, ceiling, and walls. Because of this, Dennis Murphy doesn't show bass below 200 Hz in the measurements he makes. It gets difficult to explain this because of the nature of waves. Phase and timing affect their behavior.

Other frequency response curves, such as that for the Klipsch speaker, are usually made by splicing together different measurements made under different conditions above and below 200 Hz. The Canadian Research Council makes their measurements in a true anechoic chamber where there is very little reflected sound.

Dennis is also most interested in the sound range where the crossovers are in play, usually 1-2 octaves above and below the crossover frequencies. I tried to limit my comments to the mid range where the comparisons between the two speakers is valid.

The Salk HT-3s are wonderful speakers, enjoy them . As you've noted, they do need more power. As time goes by, amp power seems to get cheaper and high quality full-range speakers seem to get more expensive.

 

[Steve81]

I love Jim Salk's stuff and the Songtowers are really affordable for me. I just don't know if they would have the bass output I am looking for.

IME, the SongTowers have considerable low end capabilities, enough to reproduce most recorded music at spirited levels without missing a subwoofer. However, everything has limits. SongTowers won't be able to equal the extension of your LFM-1EX, so if you're looking to plumb the depths with the deepest organ or synthesizer notes, they may not be what you're looking for. As others have mentioned, the Phil 3s are one of the more affordable tower options for achieving that kind of extension. However, their beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

 

[Cosmic Char]

For what it is worth, I recently bought a pair of Revel F208's, and I think the bass is incredible for audio only. My room is less than 15x15, but I have 12 foot ceilings and full openings to the kitchen, breakfast area, and dining room. This creates a huge space. I am waiting on my RB-1582-MKII to arrive, so I can really make it come alive. I got it for less than retail, but it still may be above your budget.

 

[Don G.]

I've always had my eye on the RF-7 and Cornwalls

I have had Heresey's, Cornwalls and Forte's, in fact, had all three in one HT system. Talk about shaking walls.

If you get a chance, listen to the Cornwalls before you buy them. They have a much different sound to me than the others. I thought it was probably just the aged caps so I got some replacements from Jim Crites and put new ones in. I just never liked the sound. Bass was too "boomy" for me. I love the La Scala sound with basically the same tweeter and mid range, but that woofer in the big Cornwall I without ports, wasn't doing it for me. I had the same issue with the Chorus. Love the Forte sound, nice deep tight base with the 12" woofer and 12" passive radiator. Love the Heresy sound, but you need a sub to get deep.

Just my impressions from owning those three lines. Never heard the RF-7's but I understand they sound great, but again, completely different from the Heritage Line or the Forte, Chorus.