pathighgate

I have a like setup; a full compliment of Syngery KSF spakers (manufactured in the late 90s). I can tell you what the salesman at the high end audio store in town told me: The Klipsch are so efficent, a decent 16 guage cable would work fine, and it would be unlikely anyone could really tell the difference between that and a pricier cable. The power supply in most higher quaity equipment is built well enough and handles power in such a way that an expensive power conditioner would be redundant. A quality surge protector is all I'd need. I'm not an expert, but I tend to trust any salesman's advice when it results in me not buying something. As for a receiver, I have a Marantz SR 7500 which with tax came out lower then your $1,000 price range. It seems to be a near perfect match for the Klipsch, producing a warmer sound without making the speakers sound too 'bright'. The only downside: No HDMI

Mine is almost always powered on. I've yet to see any damage or degredation, and the sub is nearly 9 years old. I'll occasionally shut the sub off when it's late at night and I don't want to disturb my neighbor with loud, deep booming sounds. But I'll never put it on the auto settings. It suffers something that I can best describe as "subwoofer lag"; If the movie you're watching is quiet for a while and then has a portion of the soundtrack with a heavy bass sound, it takes a few seconds for the sub to turn on. You could be watching the movie, something explodes with an underwhelming sound, and then you hear the sub click on after the action is over.

A strange thing happened to me yesterday. I replaced my older DVD player with a new one that could play SACDs. I was simply amazed. As I sat there listening to what was the best audio only recording played in my home, I realized something: This sounds so good, I don't think I could spend another dime and be able to tell the difference. I could drop $100,000 on new speakers, and to my ears it couldn't sound any better. I'm sure there are others out there with a more sophisticated auditory palette, but for me, this is it. I'm done. Purchasing new equipment for music listening would be pointless. Thankfully, the home theatre portion of this system continues to need new things (specially, a good subwoofer and satellite receiver). So it can end. Sort of.

Mines probably a little older. I bought that system back in '92 before subwoofers were standard on mini-systems. Thankfully, a nice person on these forums has made availble a pair of KSF S5s (in black!) for sale, which I've paid for. I'll probably keep the Sonys, find a cheap receiver and put them in my kitchen. I also have an older pair (purchased in '88) of Bose 101 all weather speakers that I've been trying to find a use for, but honestly, the Sonys blow them away. Someday I might put the Bose out back on the patio. Or sell them. Or something.

Fanbrain: I sent you via email the link for the KSF S5s that was sent to me (The white ones). It looks like you have an almost identical setup as I do, only a slightly different model of Sony speakers for the rear channels. Actually, mine are speakers salvaged from a 'all-in-one' Sony system I had way back in college. The components have long since been trashed, but I never managed to to throw out the speakers. They're not bad speakers, but they're certiantly not great. What surprised me the most was that my Marantz automatic speaker calibration defined them as 'large', despite (what I think) the limited output of them are. When I finally get the KSF S5s, I'll make a note as to the level of difference I get.

Thanks for the link. They're the right speakers and at the right price. The only downside is that they're white, and would stick out like sore thumbs in this room, which is almost compleatly done in dark woods. My 10.5s are Rosewood, which look great. The C-5 is black, and the C5s would have to be black too. I know that's a really bad nitpick, but the white would just look too weird in here. I like that website, and it'll be another place I check regularly. I just put my old Sony SDP E800 on eBay, and will be checking the website every day now for the Klipsch.

I've been looking for these to compleate my bedroom HT system. I have a set of KSF 10.5s that I bought in '97. About four months ago I picked up a KSF C5 center channel, and was amazed at how well matched it was to the 10.5s. I'm assuming that since the S5s were initially engineered to be a part of a complete HT system with the 10.5/8.5 and the C5 that they should sound great with what I've got. If they mesh with the system as well as the C5 did, I'll be very, very happy. I've seen the S5s on eBay before, but there's been nothing for the last month. I'm trying to get this completed soon. I've been considering picking up a pair of KSF 8.5s and using them as my surround speakers instead, considering they're made with essentially the same components as the 10.5s and should match, but there are space considerations and I'm not sure I want something that big in the back of my bedroom. Any ideas of what I should do here? Is there any place to find older Klipsch gear for sale other then eBay? Would the 8.5s end up being a better solution, since far more audio is sent to rear channels in today's movie soundtracks then they had when the KSF line was produced in the late 90s? Suggestions and expert opinions would be appreciated.

Give me a break. There's nothing wrong with Target. I shop there all the time. I'm young, single, drive a low emissions Honda Civic. I occasionally buy DVDs there. I recently picked up a Kodak V530 digital camera there (not pro grade, for sure, but a pretty nice point and shoot peice of work). I bought my GPS there, a nice hand-held Garmin. For both the camera and the GPS, they were the cheapest place in town I could find them. I once even bought an end table there. Target sells a lot of nice stuff. What they don't sell is good stereo equipment. In a pinch, I'll pick up a cable there, but I'd never go there to get speakers. People who shop at Target are not stupid. People who think Target is a good place to get stereo equipment, on the other hand, are. That's a distinction that needs to be made.

Can't help myself. Just got a new digital camera. The Klipsch KSF bedroom HT:

In a way, I like the Monster (or any brand of over-priced) cables. They offer a great starting point when you are trying out a new audio store. You walk in, say hello to the salesman, let him know what youre looking for and how much youre willing to spend. But prior to talking about equipment, options, pricing and the like, you pose a very simple question: Before we get started, Im curious about speaker cable. I want to get a good sound, but I dont want to pay more money then I need to. Are these expensive cables worth it? If the salesman says something to the effect of Some people claim to be able to tell the difference. In reality youd be better off--and would have a much more noticeable improvement--if you spend $200-$400 more on better speakers/amp rather then laying down the same amount of money on spool of Monster cables., then you know he or she is probably on the up and up, and youre probably going to be directed towards gear that sounds good, as opposed to what looks good or what theyre paying spiffs out on that week. On the other hand, if the salesperson lights up when you ask him that question, explaining in a techno-speak gibberish that you need the best darn cables you can afford. When they tell you that your system wont sound good without the expensive cables, or that you need to spend upwards of 25% of your entire sound budget on cables . . . when that happens, you simply politely thank the sales person, walk out the door and never come back. There; you just saved yourself hundreds of dollars and countless headaches which would inevitably come with dealing with a store which holds a policy of fleecing their customers who dont know any better. What Ive been curious about lately is the emergence of power conditioners. Ive heard a lot of different opinions, ranging from worthless to they improve the quality of the audio and video produced by your equipment very noticeably. . A few weeks ago I went to the local best buys Magnolia store, and they confirmed that the higher priced power systems do indeed improve the fidelity of your music and audio for HT, as well as the picture on your television. I am by no means an expert on electronics, but I fail to see how better (massaged, as one salesman put it) power makes a difference in how the sound works. My B.S. alarm instinctively was activated and I probed more. It seemed like the more specific my questions became, the more vague their responses were. It reminded me why, other then buying DVDs, I dont go to Best Buy. Today I was driving home and saw I was close to a very good locally owned/operated shop here in town. These guys manage to never set off my B.S. alarm at all, a rare feat. (they have a pretty telling view about speakers on their webpage; http://www.custom-tv.com/myths/ ) . They gave me a more rational explanation: power conditioners are little more then very good surge protectors. Other then keeping your audio gear safe from electrical disturbances and filtering out interference from your various components, the really dont do much. The salesman confirmed my suspicion that the quality of music your stereo system produces has very little to do with what kind of power you have. Its honesty like that which keeps me shopping at those kinds of places rather then Best Buy.

I'm 31 years old and still single. Occasionally I lement the fact that I've yet to get married, but then I read threads like this and can take some comfort in knowing that, at the very least, no one can tell me where or how to setup my system, or try to get me to spend my disposable income on something foolish (read: something other then my toys). I think the trick is to get as many toys as I can now, because once I'm married and lose control of the checkbook, it'll be all over.

I have been looking to upgrade my bedroom home theatre for several months. Ive asked about it here before, and have received some good advice, but I still have more questions. Its a small system in a small room, so I dont need anything fancy. I plan to stick with my main speakers (KSF 10.5), Purchase a center channel ( I dont have one right now ), Replace the rear speakers which currently arent very good, and eventually upgrade the subwoofer (Ive never been completely satisfied with the KSW-10, but getting a new one is a low priority). It would be nice (preferable) if the speakers accompanying my 10.5s had the cherry finish to match; In my opinion. The cherry looks so much better, especially in how it blends with my furnishings, compared to the black. The most important thing is that all the way around they are acoustically matched Since Klipsch discontinued their KSF line several years ago, Ive been searching the Internet (mainly eBay) to try to find a used C5 center and a pair of KSF-S5s with no success. It seems those speakers are difficult to find in the used market. A few days ago, I was looking through the selection at the local Good Guys (Theyve said that theyre going out of business and are trying to liquidate all of their inventory), I found that the have a lot of SF-1s in stock. Most of their going out of business prices arent that good, but theyre asking only about $150.00 a pair for the SF-1s. Ive done some research, and it appears the SF-1 is the replacement for the KSF 8.5. From what I remember, the 8.5 is identical to the 10.5, except it has one less 8 woofer. The tweeter looks virtually identical. What would happen if I used the SF-1s as rear speakers? Assuming of course I can find room for them (which may be a big problem). This seems like it might be overkill, but I can always turn down the volume in the back. I know these arent multidirectional like the standard Klipsch surround channels. Would the difference in these compared to the KSF C-5s or the newer version be that much different, especially considering the price? Or am I way off base here? I've also considered bookshelf speakers; thats what I have now, and while the quality of the speaker itself is poor, it does deliver that sound to my ears pretty well.

I cant speak for XM, since I have Sirius, but Ive talked to a lot of people who have XM and from the feedback Ive received, it seems that theyre more or less very similar. The major difference is in programming. Sirius has a handful of really good stations, and quite a few genres (depending on your own musical tastes), as does XM. Ive been told that XM tends to play more obscure or deep tracks, while Sirius is a little more general. Either way, youre going to get music thats pretty good(worlds better then the mostly junk they broadcast on FM). The downside is that they use a compression method that sucks out a lot of the fidelity from the recordings, at least in my ears. Your system is going to be good enough to noticeably tell the difference between sat radio and a good FM broadcast/CD. Its not *really* bad. Certainly listenable, but by no means fantastic. If youve got a good relationship with your stereo store, you might be able to cajole them into letting you demo a standalone sat component with an active subscription and listen to it at home for a few days before you buy. Its not likely, but it wouldnt hurt to try. The other thing to consider is their non music channels. I ended up deciding on Sirius over XM due to their NFL coverage. I find myself in my car on Sundays pretty often, so being able to listen to my Steelers is a bonus. Every game has two broadcasts; one for each teams local coverage. Last year I was delighted to hear the voice of Myron Cope announce for Pittsburgh again (I havent heard him since I left the region some 8 years ago). On the other hand, I believe XM has MLB, so I suppose itdepends on what you like. Sirius has three separate NPR feeds, which I love, andcountless talk format stations (which Ive never really listened to). Its great in the car because if youre on a long trip and bored, you can almost always find something interesting to listen to thats entertaining if you search long enough. Theres also Howard Stern. Not really my cup of tea, but a lot of people seem to like him, so depending on what youre into he might be a bonus too. (I believe that in 2006, Sirius is going to be the only place you can hear him). XM has their own version of Stern. . . I forget their names . . . but I believe they charge a few bucks extra to listen to them. On Sirius Stern is included with the base subscription. Id recommend at the very least going down to a place withan XM or Sirius system setup and just scanning the channels of the stations which play your favorite genres to see if they have stuff you like.

Wow. What a lot of replies. The other night a friend of a friend brought a 19 year old over and I demoed my Klipsch setup. He seemed impressed, commenting that when he got the money, it would be the kind of system hed want. The recording from THX title screen at the start of Star Wars III was enough to knock his socks off (I often times find myself playing that intro over and over again) Im not an old man (yet), but its still good to see people over 10 years my junior appreciating better audio. I spend a lot of time listening to the radio (both terrestrial, sat and Internet broadcasts). In my opinion (and, of course, your results may vary considerably), the best way to go is putting an aerial outside the house on a tower. Something good at picking up UHF signals as well as FM. The advantages of this are twofold: 1) You generally get a better, cleaner radio signal for FM music (or talk . . . I find I listen to NPR more then any other terrestrial station), and 2) The antenna can also provide better reception for digital major network HD signals for your television display (which, remember, often has 5.1 digital sound in the broadcast). Im assuming you still live with your parents, and if the house is old enough it might still have an above the roof antenna capable of receiving the FM band. So, if the folks dont mind you splicing off the antenna and running cable all over the attic or basement, it might be worth a shot. When it comes to antennas, I learned a difficult lesson: tearing down my old 15 foot eyesore tower two years before I got into HD. (I havent put another one back up because I keep hearing Direct TV is going to start providing HD network broadcasts you can get without jumping through hoops). For the radio in my bedroom, in the meantime, I have whats essentially lamp cord gauge speaker wire running outside the frame of my closet, somewhat hidden by the trim. I can pick up local FM stations crystal clear, stations from Sacramento (some 80 miles away) with varying quality going from pretty good to I think I hear something coming out of the static. I can also pick up a couple of San Francisco (90 miles away and a whole bunch of hills) stations, but even the best ones still have a fair share of static. If youre interested in radio format (hey, its great for being exposed to music youve not heard before), you might consider the option of hooking your PC up to your stereo system and checking out some of the streaming audio feeds you can pickup via broadband. For example, when chained to the desk in the mornings, I play the Los Angeles based KCRW for their Morning Becomes Eclectic programming, streaming live over the internet and running into the analog inputs on my Sony digital possessor. Depending on the quality of the feed, youll probably be able to hear a noticeable difference between Internet broadcasts and a good FM Station and/or CD, but for my ears, going that route yields an acceptable level of quality from some of the better Internet radio channels. The major downside is that you're either going to have to lug your computer into your room or buy a really long audio cord. I recently spent some $30 for a 50ft 'RCA' type cable a few months ago, only to discover that many modern sound cards have a optical (fiber) or coaxial output, meaning that I'll have to get a new soundcard and shell out even more money for a 50 foot peice of fiber. Another option: If you have Satellite or digital cable, check out some of their music choice style channels. It doesnt appear (well, sound) like theyve over compressed the audio--at least on Direct TV--and it typically gives me a pretty good listening experience. I only bring it up because Ive found most people neglect or forget the music channels theyre paying for anyway, and some of them arent that bad. On the other hand, Ive tried this with streaming audio from my Sirius sat account linked to the receiver in my car, (you get some free Internet streaming channels if youre a subscriber) but even though I really like a handfull of their stations, the audio compression is so bad over the Internet that it elicits more headaches then listening pleasure. In my (once again yours may vary) opinion 95% of all the terrestrial broadcast FM stations pretty much stink, and theres so many better options out there via Sat or the Internet that it almost seems pointless to put hard work into getting a good signal. Unless, of course, youre doing it just for the fun of doing it, which I would always encourage. Gads. Sorry for the long post.

Oh come on. You cant honestly expect an 18 year old to have a refined interior design skill. This kids room reminds me of mine back at that age, only his is a lot cleaner then mine ever was (that and I had a poster of Morton Downey Jr. on the wall . . . I was a weird kid). And hey, at least he has good taste in gear. Occasionally Ill go and substitute teach atone of the local high schools, and when it comes to audio most of the students seem content to blow all their money on really crummy car stereo systems which sound as if theyre just a head unit hooked up to an amp hooked up to giant subwoofers (why spend money on mids and tweeters? Theyre virtually useless for annoying old people!) The summer between my junior and senior year of high school, I worked long hours to save up for my own car stereo, ending up with a really good sounding pair of Infinity Kappas and a Concorde tape deck. I loved those Infinities, and was crushed when they finally cracked upon Somehow back then, audio purchased with earned money just seemed to sound better. In any event, kudos to this guy for having a more refined ear then his typical peer. JeffDurbin: I used to have an old Duel record player that was a hand-me-down from my father. It was wood too (well, genuine simulated wood grain). What I thought was neat was that it could play multiple records . . . something of a precursor to the modern CD changers we have now (yeah, I know its quite a stretch to say that). You could load 4 records, and when one record finished playing the next one would drop down automatically. The turntable died about 5 years ago, and Ive yet to be in the presence of mind to replace it. A shame, really, since Ive got several dozen good LPs, including a copy of Dave Brubecks Take Five in excellent condition which I personally believe sounds much better then the same recording on CD. 33kifan: The KSF10.5s are a floor standing loudspeaker made (I believe) between 96 and 99. Each has two 8 drivers and a horn, weighs about 50 lbs and has the very nice cherry wood finish. They somewhat resemble yours from the picture.