imahawki

I made the purchase today. I bought the RF-82ii, RC-62ii, and RS-52ii at Nebraska Furniture Mart. I think I got a pretty good deal but I'm not sure if discussing pricing is allowed. I also bought a new TV, so they're all being delivered on the 14th after I get back from vacation.

I think you guys have convinced me. Thanks for the feedback.

I already have my room wired for surrounds up near the ceiling level and have used DRs in this space before. I'm not sure the RS series will do much for me because there is no "back wall" for the sound to bounce off of. There is over 20 feet of empty space behind the home theater area as the room is nearly 40ft long. Plus to be honest, I've always found bi/dipole surrounds to be incredibly overpriced. I've owned some in the past. When I had a Paradigm setup I owned the their dipole surround that went with what at the time was called their "performance series". When I upgraded to the "monitor series" I ditched the dipoles and went DR and never had a complaint.

I went and listened to the Klipsch speakers today. I listened to the RC-62II with both the RF-62IIs and RF-82IIs as well as what must have been Klipsch RS20s based on the shape. I was very impressed. Even though they had the sub turned up way to high, I was able to fiddle around enough (and turned it off for part of the session) to get a fair impression. I'll probably go with the 82s based on the size of my room. I'll also be going with probably RB-51s based on the shape of my room but haven't decided for sure yet. I don't feel like I need a ton of bass from my surrounds as they tend to provide more directional queues and I've never really seen a huge benefit personally out of having larger surrounds.

Am I stretching it to assume that Klipsch speakers would have an inherent advantage in large rooms? I have a large finished basement that is all one room and it is 800 square feet with 7'8" ceilings and is all one open space. I'm looking at building a HT around either RF-62IIs or RF-82IIs. Do you think high effeciency speakers will help fill the room better?

And the "made in china" sticker was probably made in Malaysia

Well I recently faced the same decision. I find that people often make odd assumptions about dipole surrounds. First of all, I would bet that of all the people who will give you their opinion one way or another, only about 25% of them have probably actually heard both types in any more situation than a demo. We always say you need to pick your own speakers for your room, no the dealer demo room, but apperently this doesnt apply as we can all rule out dipoles by listening at the dealer? Hmmm.... Second, there seems to be this general thought that a dipole surround will totally diffuse the sound to a point where its not localizable. That is entirely untrue (from someone who has owned both dipole and monopole in their own HT room). All it does is make it seem like the speaker is both bigger than it is and that maybe its a little farther away. This is usually good as it expands your perception of overall room size and most peoples home theaters are smaller than a commercial theater. Third, there is a ton of evidence to support the use of dipoles as being prefered by the "experts" and standard setters in the land of Home Theater. Why do so many companies make dipole surrounds if they are so inferior? Why does THX still recomend it as part of their standard and companies that make THX speaker packages use them? Home theaters are intended to reproduce the sound of a cinema (within reason... many people HT are more accurate and have better frequency response than the local megaplex) which use a whole array of speakers as side and rear surrounds. This is what dipoles are designed to reproduce. When a sound comes from over your left shoulder in a movie theater, you can tell, but if you are sitting in the middle of the theater, the sound was actually coming from a speaker that was in front of you, and beside you and behind you too. But because the speakers that are nearest you to the side and behind, are the ones that are loudest (from the simple fact of being closer) psychoacoustics take over and you perceive the sound to be coming from over your shoulder. This should work for the person 10 rows in front of you and 10 rows behind too. This technology works using direct radiators in theaters, but there you have the ability to use dozens of them and they are place sometimes 20+ feet above your ears. Listen to a set of dipole surrounds sometime. The sound is diffuse, but its not muddy, run together or unlocalizable at all.

Although -15 on the dial is probably supposed to get you close to an actual SPL (say 85dB) like you would use on Avia. This more than anything, is probably to overcome room noises, etc. but with such efficient speakers, it may not be necessary to turn it up that loud. I'm just guessing here.

Does anyone know of any RF-35 reviews done by audio magazines? It seems like I saw a review of the new reference series, but it was on like IGN or something. Any links? Thanks.

Today I went and auditioned two more home theater setups; Definitive Technology and Atlantic Technology. Def Tech The Def Tech setup was a pretty good comparison to what I currently have because they were similar in size and they were hooked up to equipment very similar to my own. The mains were the bipolar BP 2006. They have apparently been replaced by the BP 7006 but the dealer didnt have those in yet. The main difference between the old and new model is that the 200X have a single 8 powered woofer per tower while the 700X have the powered woofer plus a passive radiator. I didnt notice that the bipole design either added to or detracted from the overall sound and to be honest, I wasnt thrilled about the prospect of trying to integrate the powered towers since I already have a sub. The rest of the 5.1 setup included a lower-end center, that might not have been a very good match, and some bipole surrounds. The center did not have the recognizable Def Tech grill-fabric sock all the way around like some of the higher end center channels do. The surrounds looked like they were probably no bigger than 5.25 woofers, but again, they were bipole (or perhaps dipole). The source was a pretty high end Yamaha DVD player and a Yamaha receiver that was just a little bit lower down the line than mine, so all in all, a pretty good comparison except of course the room. I listened to some movie scenes that I am familiar with (5th Element and Gladiator) as well as some 2 channel audio. The sound in general really wasnt anything inspiring. The towers sounded very full but still tight and controlled, but you must consider that they each had a powered sub in them. I think that you would have to really be able to hear and appreciate the nature of the bipole mains in or to make the Def Techs worth the money (about $900 for the mains, reduced because they were old models) and they really didnt do any thing special for me. I just didnt hear them. Also, I would have some major concerns about integration in my current room. Im not sure I could get them far enough from the front wall. Atalantic Well, I was pretty disappointed with this audition, but not because of the actual speakers. I asked the employee if they still carried Atlantic, and he said yes. So he leads me back to this room and I walk in and its like the top of the line reference room. Runco projector, amps and processors that cost more than my car, etc. It is set up with the Atlantic 6200 series which you can get for around $8000 but MSRP is closer to $10k. I had a listen, even though it is grossly out of my range, but they informed me that they could order me the 4200 set without a sub for around $2400. That is probably in my price range, but seems a bit silly for speakers with 5.25 woofers and which I would have to order without hearing. I didnt have a listen to the B&Ws which they also carry because Ive heard them previously. While theyre a bit more laid back, they dont differ greatly from my current Paradigms. So at this point, Klipsch is still at the top of my short list, which is getting shorter. I also generally think that I will probably go with a wide dispersion surround. As the poly-pole surrounds (whatever technolgy company XYZ was using) generally sound better to me in my demos.

---------------- On 4/16/2004 1:31:05 PM homeslice wrote: Direct radiators for me also. With dolby digital there are alot of surround effects that would be ruined by dipole/bipoles. Direct radiators are also the THX standard if that means anything. ---------------- Uh, not exactly. Read the section on Surround Channel Loudspeakers. It both describes and visually depicts a di/bipole design. http://www.thx.com/mod/techlib/speakers.html Also, if you look at a company like Atlantic Technology (http://www.atlantictechnology.com/systems1.htm) or M&K many they use dipoles in many (possibly ALL in ATs case) of their THX certified system. I'm not trying to change your minds, but I wonder why you insist the dipoles are somehow now "wrong"

That's what I thought Eric. Do you (or any one else) have any comments about choosing surrounds (size and model) etc?

---------------- On 4/15/2004 11:18:47 AM dantfmly wrote: i would go with direct radiating on the rear also. It is not just for multi channel music. If you have anything above pro logic. You will have surround effects, that dipole/bipole rear speakers just can not do correctly. In dolby digital you do want the sound to be coming from the rear at times for some effects. I'm glad i never went to dipole/bipole rear surrounds. ---------------- I dont understand this mentality. The sound still comes from the rear, its just a little more diffused. Its not any quieter, it doest drop information, etc. What sound effect would dipoles not be able to reproduce? Its going to give you a different sound, but so would another brand of speakers. I dont get it. My goal is to create a sound FIELD behind me, not sound eminating from two separate speakers.

"A good starting point would be to set your channel levels at zero, start the test tone, and then increase the main volume until you hit 75dB on the left front speaker." This is right (or at least partially, where you set the dBs will depend on the disk). The test tracks on test disks are recorded a certain level in relationship to reference (or in relationship to having the signal on the disk being maxed out at 0dB... the signal on any disk can be recorded at zero where it cant be recorded any louder down to -xxx where it would be inaudable regardless of how much you turn it up). On Avia and Video essentials, you should set your left speaker to +-0 and then turn the volume up to either 75 or 85 dB on the meter. I think Avia is 85 and and VE is 75 but I'm not positive. What this does, is it means that your receiver has to put out that many watts to reach reference levels at audio peaks on a disk where the levels havent been reduced like the test tones have. This also tells you where reference is on your dial. This is the best way to calibrate. Some people also recommend finding the # where you listen at and using that, even if it means your test tones are at 60dBs because THAT is the amount of power your receiver puts out when you are listening, regardless of reference. I dont like that method though because once you get down into the 60s or lower, you run the risk of other sounds effecting your reading. I like to calibrate at either 75 or 85 dBs.

What I do know is that in this forum the opinion on Rears/Surrounds differs greatly as a whole. Now there may be a more specific consensus for them in your situation where HT is by and large the main use, but I still gather that that varies significantly also. Its not just here, you can find arguments regarding dipole/bipole vs. direct radiator surrounds on any HT forum on the net I think its largely preference and intended use.