Craig John

Correct, I *want/need* a backbox to seal the backwave from the frontwave, (because my ceiling tiles won't perform this task.) Are the backboxes *only* used for fire-retardation? I thought they helped with sound isolation also. What about improving SQ by reducing wall resonances? Finally, isn't a sealed box better than an infinite baffle, especially if the baffle size is limited? An "infinite" baffle design generally requires a baffle much larger than a 2' x 2' piece of plywood. To get the full extension of 49 Hz out of the CDT-5800-C, I would probably need a 70" or greater baffle in each direction. http://melhuish.org/audio/baffle.html Also, I'm concerned that adding a 1/2" of plywood will increase the installation "mounting depth". Will the speaker be able to be installed properly with the 1" from the grill cover to the the speaker, (1/2" of ceiling tile + 1/2" of plywood)? In addition, the extra 1/2" of mounting depth will use up all the overhead clearance I have, bringing the enclosure into contact with the overhead joists: not what I was hoping for in terms of sound isolation. You don't seem to think the backbox is a good idea. Why? Craig

Steve, The ceiling tiles are "acoustic" and absorb mid- and hi-freqiencies, but are transparent to bass. As such they would make poor quality baffles. Hence the need to "seal" them in an enclosure. Does placing them in a "sealed" enclosure change their FR? I am not looking to mount them to the framework of the ceiling, just lay the enclosure on top of the ceiling tile. The tiles are 1/2" thick, so the standard thickness of drywall. I have 6" of clearance to the overhead joists, so 5" of backbox plus 1/2" of celing tile leaves 1/2" of clearance. Assuming these speaker/backbox combo's are not ridiculously heavy, I'm thinking this should work. I just need to know if I need an "installation kit" to install the speakers, or if the backboxes come with the kits. Thanks. Craig

I am considering some in-ceiling speakers with backboxes in a dropped, acoustical ceiling as the rear surround speakers in a 7.1 setup. I currently have RB-75's, RC-7 and RS-7's in a 5.1 setup. Would the CDT-5800-C be the best match for my speakers. They will be mounted in the ceiling about 6 ft. behind the LP. Second, I want to use the new backboxes, ME-800-C or (ME-650-C if I go with a 6.5" speaker.) (Actually, I *need* to use the backboxes as the ceiling tiles would not provide an adequate baffle for the speakers.) Are there any special mounting considerations with the backboxes on/in an acoustical ceiling tile? Can they just sit on top of the ceiling tile? Also, do you need an istallation kit, or does the backbox have the installation kit included? Thanks, Craig

Are RS-7's Bipole or Dipole? IOW, are the horns wired in-phase or out of phase? What differences could one expect if they were wired "the other way"? Thanks. Craig

I agree. My RB-75's are killer, especially mated with my Earthquake MKV-15 subwoofer. The RB-81's are probably better yet. Craig

I am considering the Klipsch Ref. CDT-5800-C to use as an in-ceiling rear surround speaker, mated to a set of RB-75's, RC-7, and RS-7's. Does anyone know if these will be a good tonal match for the rest of my Ref. speakers? They are a rotating, swiveling design that allows for directionality control. They will be mounted about 10 ft. behind the LP. Is this too far back for the amount of tilt/swivel that they are capable of? Also, I will be mounting them in an acoustic tile ceiling. I think I should enclose them in such an installation, (otherwise the back wave would interfere with the front wave as it wouldn't be blocked by the acoustic tile, at least at low and low-midrange frequencies). Klipsch makes an enclosure, but it looks to be just a steel box with some insulation. I think they want $100 for one. Has anyone used these enclosures, and are they worth the money? Thanks, Craig

As near as I can tell, the ICBM is for multichannel audio (SACD and DVD-Audio) only. It doesn't work with DD, PLIIx or DTS, (non of the HT processing modes). It would be a wonderful tool if it could accept the optical digital or PCM outputs of digital audio sources. Then one could manage the bass of each channel independently. However, it only accepts and processes the individual channel outputs of mutichannel audio. Craig

Here is a "Secrets" article that describes the problem I am having trying to integrate my mains and sub, and the reason I don't want full range speakers for my next upgrade: http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/volume_12_2/feature-article-slope-troubles-6-2005.html Add to the described crossover problem a strong room resonance (+12 dB) from 45 to 60 Hz, and the problem is compounded significantly. In fact, even with my L/C/R's set to "Small" I still have almost flat response from the Forte's from 80 Hz down to the high 30's. (When set to "Large" I get a large peak at the resonance frequency that the filter in the crossover tames partially in "Small" mode). I end up truning the sub down to reduce the response above 40 Hz and I lose a lot of good LF stuff. I think it would be much easier to use "satellite" speakers with a rolled off LF response and then deal with the resonance by EQ'ing the sub. (I can't add bass traps because my room is finished and the WAF won't allow it.) I've e-mailed Steve Phillips and asked him to join the discussion. Hopefully he will. I couldn't find his username by doing a serach for any of the likely derivations. Craig

I did a search for Steve Phillips but it returned no results. How do I contact him? BTW, I'm new to this forum. Who is Steve Phillips? Thanks. Craig

---------------- On 6/16/2005 12:57:56 PM damonrpayne wrote: Reference Premier! ---------------- Please explain. Thanks. Craig

---------------- On 6/16/2005 12:52:54 PM DrWho wrote: Why are you considering getting the RB-75 instead of the RF-7 for mains? Once you get stands and all that, the price difference is much less between the two and the RF-7 simply sounds better (and it will take up the same floor space as well). ---------------- I am considering the RB-75's instead of the RF-7's because I currently have the Forte's which have virtually the same FR extension as the RF-7's (32 Hz), and I'm having a tough time integrating them into my THX system. They have too much response below the crossover point -- and even when they are set to small. The additive effect of the mains and the sub make it difficult to calibrate the sub. I end up with too much response above 32 Hz and not enough below that. Part of it is my room. I have a large room resonance from 45 to 60 Hz, right in the middle of the octave below the crossover. I'm thinking it will be easier to integrate and calibrate my sub if I have a more rolled off set of "satellite" main speakers. Maybe this is not a valid assumption. How are people with RF-7's setting their bass management? Large or Small? What crossover? Thanks. Craig

---------------- you do realize a huge difference a price right? Kinda hard to compare....based on that for me..... ---------------- Yes, I realize there s a significant price differential. I mentioned it at several points in my OP. What I'm asking is, can I get very close to the THX performance with the RB-75. It seems to have a similar design philosophy, execution and specifications as the THX stuff. Are you familiar with the RB-75? Can you compare the sound quality and the absolute volume levels between it and the THX stuff? I know I like the sound quality and volume levels of my RC-7. The RB-75 is in the same "Reference" family as the RC-7. In fact, it's billed as the "bookshelf" version of the RF-7. If the RB-75 has a similar sound, I would be happy with it, as long as I can integrate it in a manner similar to a THX arrangement. Not to mention the fact that I can save some money. Thanks for any insights you can give me. Craig

I currently have a set of Klipsch Forte's L/R and an RC-7 CC. I am thinking about replacing my Forte's. I am currently using the THX mode in my receiver, (Onkyo TX-NR 901) with all speakers set to "Small." However I have the crossover set to 60 Hz. The Forte's are certainly not "satellite" speakers like the THX spec calls for. They are rated to 32 Hz. If I were to replace them with real satellite speakers, such as the Klipsch THX speakers, I could then use the THX mode the way it was intended; with an 80 Hz crossover. So, my choices are: 1) Klipsch KL-650-THX L/C/R. This would require the purchase of 3 speakers and 2 stands, and the sale of my RC-7. 2) Klipsch KL-525-THX L/C/R. This would require the purchase of 3 speakers and 2 stands, and the sale of my RC-7. 3) Klipsch RB-75 L/R and keep my RC-7 CC. This would require the purchase of 2 (less expensive) speakers and 2 stands. All of these systems are 2-way, horn-loaded designs. They all have the same sensitivity, power handling and impedance. The 650's use 2, 6-inch drivers in a front ported design, and are flat to 48 Hz. The 525's use 2, 5.25" drivers in a sealed design and are flat to 80 Hz, (the true THX spec.) The RB-75's use 1, 8-inch driver in a front ported design and are flat to 42 Hz. The THX speakers appear to use the same tweeter driver, (a 1" (2.5cm) magnetically shielded, titanium dome compression driver with 9.6oz ceramic magnet structure), and the same 10" x 6" horns. The RB-75 has a K-50.1-DB 1.75" (4.45cm) Titanium dome compression driver with an 8" square horn. I certainly like the look of the RB-75 over the slightly over-square boxes of the THX speaker. They would also be the least expensive option. However, sound quality is more important than the looks or the price, (within reason, of course). How much would I give up, sound-quality-wise, with the RB-75's over the THX speakers? Will the THX speakers have more total volume output, i.e., play louder? Does the rectangular horn shape of the THX speakers affect the dispersion characteristics? How much would that change with the RB-75's? Can I get similar THX performance with the RB-75/RC-7 combo as with the THX product? What about LF extension? Is it better to have a speaker that has extension below the THX spec of 80 Hz? Or, does that make it harder to integrate the mains and sub? (My sub is an Earthquake Supernova MKV-15, which I don't intend to replace any time soon). The RB-75 has the lowest LF extension of the 3 speakers, but I don't know how loud it will play without distortion. I assume the THX speakers will play louder without distortion than the RB-75, but how much louder? Thanks for any insights. Craig

Thanks for sharing.

Upon further examination, I'm pretty sure I'm dealing with a back-panel de-lamination. Using a high-intensity light, one can see a separation of the entire bottom joint between the back panel and the interior braces. The braces seem intact at their attachments to the side and bottom panels, but there is a gap between the bottom frame and the back panel. It appears that the back panel has shrunk or shifted away from the bottom panel. This separation extends up the left rear side of the cabinet a few inches. This is what I first observed as the gap in the "paint-line" on the back of the speeaker. I'm beginning to think that the best solution is removal, clean-up and re-installation of the rear panel. I have a woodworker/cabinet builder coming over on Thursday evening to look at it and give me advice. I'll let you know what he says. Thanks for all your responses. Craig