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.

I had a chance to demo some Klipsch reference series speakers last night. They are on my short list for replacing my Paradigms. I quoted demo because even though this store caries some high mid-fi stuff, its really just a big box (Nebraska Furniture Mart, the larges furniture retailer in all of North America) with poor setups, lots of switching gear in the mix, bad rooms, etc. They are the only authorized dealer in town, but they do have a 30-day satisfaction guarantee. This is not the type of demo Im used to. Here was the setup. Speakers - Klipsch RF-25/35, RC-35, and RS-25/35 and alternating between a high-end Klipsch sub being included or not. Front end/source - Denon receiver (probably a mid line 380x or possibly even a 280x or whatever is out now) and a Denon DVD player. The speakers were setup on a riser because there is no seating in the rooms, but the tweeters were still well below ear level unfortunately. Also, when listening to movie soundtracks, the arrangement put center channel tweeter well below the L/R tweeters. But here are my thoughts anyway. Ok, these things sound vastly different than anything Ive ever heard. I really dont think these are brighter than my Paradigm speakers at all. That was kind of a shock. Klipsch is such a love it or hate it sound (according to all Ive heard), that I expected to at least recognize what the Klipsch detractors talk about with brightness, harshness, etc. but I didnt. I must either have top-end hearing loss or just really like a detailed speaker. The sound just seemed really well balanced overall and surprisingly smooth. First I will describe the music listening; even though I am probably more concerned with HT, I still need a baseline. The first thing I noticed is that they make my Paradigms seem really flat. And, not in the frequency response sense (or at least thats not how I consciously perceived it) but in the way that they conveyed vocals and separated instruments more. They felt like they added texture to the music (this may or may not be right for the speaker to be doing, but I think it was the speaker doing it). Vocals on these speakers are incredible. The voices seemed to be completely separated from the music, but in a good way. They also do seem forward, but again, not in a frequency response (i.e. bright) sense, but more in an imaging/soundstage sense. There were a couple weird situations where the soundstage seemed very weird but I think the trouble was with the demo itself. The sales person clearly didnt understand the settings and modes on the receiver and I didnt bring my own material, (I know, tsk tsk). Also, all of the CDs the employee had were burned from MP3s (WTF??). In some instances, there was that same vocal separation, but it was as if once this mystical process of kind of drawing out the vocals had occurred, the vocals were then moved to some far away place. Strange effect, but I think it was a combination of poor material and poor setup. But, when the song itself sounded good, the speakers sounded great. I also like the way they filled the room. And I dont mean filled the room in a volume sense (the paradigm monitor series is plenty loud) but maybe made the room seem bigger than it was or something. Again, this is not my room, but still. Its hard to put into words but the overall effect is something that I really like. Overall, the tone seemed good, soundstage and imaging were as good as the situation would allow, and like I mentioned, there was this live, real, texture to the music. None of this may be correct in the audiophilia sense, but Ive ceased to care about any sort of validation in my equipment choices (thats a good thing). Ok, now for the home theater part. I really think the speakers shined even more here (except for one issue which I will get to). I listened both with and without a sub, and with both the larger 35 series and smaller 25 series. I think I like the overall sound of the 35 series speakers up front, but dont feel like I would benefit from the larger drivers in the rear. I think the RS-25s performed very well for surround duty. Comments and experiences related to going with a larger surround speaker are welcome. Both models where the dipoles, and I really like the effect. I have had both dipole and direct radiators in my theater at this point. I had dipoles when I still had the Paradigm performance series (Phantoms) but then decided it wasnt worth the cash when I upgraded and I went with Mini Monitors for surrounds. I really think I like the diffuse sound better, but this may just be a preference thing. The vocals were very clear on the movie soundtracks, but unfortunately, all they had was wow-factor type of material so I didnt get very good range. Also, I had to tell the sales person a couple times before he believed me that, no, I really dont listen that loud. By the time he turned it down to my preference, it was hard to judge if it was now too soft or just relatively quieter. Also, Im sure the speakers were not level matched. Now here is the one problem I mentioned earlier that I really want some comments on. The sales person used the DD (I am 90% sure it was DD) track of Jurassic Park III and the scene (forgive me, Ive never seen the movie before) where the T-Rex fights some other dinosaur. When the people arrive (this is before the fight), they see this one dinosaur on the ground, and Grant says (relax, its dead) and right then, the T-Rex that they didnt see munching on the carcass pops its head up. Now, you should all know that signature T-Rex scream that both pierces the ears and works the sub at the same time, right? Well, when that T-Rex screamed, there was very audible tweeter distortion. It was bad. I listened to it several times to make sure thats what I was hearing, and I heard it on both the RF-25s and RF-35s. But, A) Ive never heard this track before, and maybe there is some distortion on the DVD (hey, Ive seen it before), and this store is the equivalent of a Best Buy where people can walk in and out, change settings, turn gear up way too loud and damage it, etc. I would say the track was peaking at about 90-100+dB when the distortion occurred but Im not sure. I could make it go away by turning it down. Like I said, the salesperson had it turned up louder than I listen at home for sure. I wont tolerate spending that kind of money on speakers that have horribly audible distortion at below reference levels, but who knows what was actually happening with such a sketchy setup. All and all, these speakers remain on my short list, and really offer something that I was looking for above and beyond the more reserved Paradigms that I have. I would have to rely on an in-home demo with my own gear to make the final decision, but with the 30 day, no questions asked, satisfaction guarantee, it sounds like a pretty safe proposition.

So what I'm hearing is go with a full 35 front stage, but make my own decision on maybe using 25s in the rear. I'm not concerned about multichannel audio. This is home theater with a capable sub and speakers set to small. Thanks again for all the help!

Thanks for the reply. I am particularly trying to get away from direct radiators in the rear. I've had both now, and I want a diffuse soundfield. I'm also trying to move away from being concerned with (multichannel-)music as HT is definately my thing. I will be using a quite capable sub. My only conern with going up a model on BOTH the mains and the rears is how much it impacts overall cost. I dont want to have regrets later on though.

Hey all. This is my first post here but I'm also somewhat new to Klipsch. I have had Paradigm speakers for about 4 years and I want to upgrade. I dont want to go out and spend another several thousand dollars above what I have now, but I dont want to make a completely lateral move either. So that is where Klipsch comes in. 1) I need more time in front of them, but I think I like the sound. I definately think that the horns sound different than a regular tweeter, but I like it. 2) Klipsch allows their products to be sold at some "big box" type of stores, which means that IMO they can be a better value than something like Paradigm that is on such a closed dealer network. This means I think I can "upgrade" without spending thousands more than what I can hopefully get for my current speakers. Also, the Klipsch reference series sounds enough different than my Paradigms, that I dont have to jump way up the line to get a significant change. That being said, I'm looking at a blended 25/35 reference system. RF-25s, RC-35 and RS-25s. Does that sound like it makes sense? I'll be driving this with a Yamaha RX-V1200 receiver and I have an SVS sub. The speakers will be similar in size (driver wise) as my current Paradigm Monitor series EXCEPT the surrounds. I didnt want to spring for the dipole Monitor series surrounds because the 25s are pretty small and I'm using Mini Monitors as surrounds right now. But, this has always seemed like HUGE overkill to me, but let me explain. When I first got into Paradigm, I bought their "performance series" or whatever was below Monitor at the time and had the dipoles (ADP-170s). I really liked those speakers, but the ADP speakers in the Monitor line where quite a chunk of change. I always regretted going with direct radiator surrounds when I upgraded to the Monitor line though. Any way, I live in Omaha, so the only dealer is Nebraska Furniture Mart. That's bad because they dont have very good listening rooms, but good because they have a 30 day satisfaction guarantee and steller financicing. Any way, after all that, what are your thoughts? Anything else I should be considering?