The History Kid

Just to clarify, that is false. The RB-5, RB-5 II, RB-35, RB-81, and RB-81 II all used 8" woofers - and that's just the Reference lines.

.

PM Sent

There should be a fair amount of stands that work with the RS-3's. I've seen a fair share of them out there, but I couldn't tell you what they are. I've always had mine on the walls. You should be able to use just about any stand that doesn't use guides or screws (using padded feet and grips) that can be used for surrounds.

Secondary bump. I have spoken with the repair guys - they are just waiting on the new board for the unit. Apparently the last one was DOA. Not good considering the shortage of supply in chips right now. I'm probably going to try and sell these as a pair at this point. $1,400 to forum members plus shipping for the pair. I'll update perspective interest as I get updates from the repair shop (no final commitments until I have both units to ship, I'd just like to have this unit shipped from the distro to the new owner). My goal is to have these units sold ahead of an anticipated extended leave for work. I anticipate sale would be around or just after the holidays.

Look more like Cornwalls to me.

I think at my peak, I had 30 or thereabout. I've since drawn down to 22, which could possibly make it back up to 27 at some point.

I don't know about the RF-7 II, my RF-3 II's are around 8" off the wall, which is very close by most accounts. The RC-7 is closer at 3". I think in your particular application the 7's close to the wall would perform as well or better than your alternatives.

I have heard many things on the 6000-LCR's. Mostly that if you're just doing movies and nothing else, they sound really good - but that's about it. If you ever intend to have music in that room, they'll sound like a watered down mess. If I'm remembering right too, they're older than the 7 II and 64 II, and were never replaced. So you need to think; if Klipsch didn't replace them and kept on with the 7 and 64's, then that's probably where I'd place my bets. The only thing I'd swap out in there is the 64 for another 7, but that may not be practical - and if you were to do this, the 6000-LCR would have no leg to stand on to begin with.

Oh, they certainly are. The only in-wall or in-ceiling anything I'd ever entertain would be the Atmos pieces. Would never run in-wall for anything I need to constantly sound good and rich.

They're listed on Klipsch's Online Authorized Dealers: Authorized USA Online Dealers | Klipsch

Unfortunately I'm not a very good reference for tubes since I'm mostly solid state myself. The monoprice was affordable and the footprint was right for the space I was handling and the speakers I was powering. The only other brand I'm aware of at a price that I'd call reasonable is Schiit.

This is absolute bunk, and I'm disappointed there's someone in the team that's making up numbers like this. These speakers aren't "rated" for room sizes - no speaker is, and if it is, it shouldn't be.

As long as you disconnect the passive inside the speaker that should be possible. Otherwise your 4-way AXO won't do a darn thing other than add a headache. To be clear it's not possible because of the HF/LF terminals on the back. All four terminals may as well be two as they're shipped. To use them as HF/LF you will need to take the passive crossover on the back of the cup out of the equation. As for tube amps, I reckon that will depend largely on what you're mainly using your RF-5's for. I could make the simple recommendation of one of the Monoprice 50-watt tube amps, which power a pair of RSX-5's beautifully for me, but that might not be the best in your situation if we don't know what it is.

Most of that will have to do with the power supply unit of the PC, and the proximity of the pre section in the PC to the rest of the topography of the other components (including how good the shielding is). My Dell computers were terrible with noise, mostly because the motherboards in them are just standard breadbox boards that aren't really built with anything other than cost cutting in mind. When I moved to a custom build with my MSI board, there was still noise until I swapped out the power cable with just a little bit better quality one. In addition, heat can cause significant problems with components in PCs. You will see degradation over time. Laptops almost always will run hotter than desktops.

I am still skeptical of wireless speaker systems for a number of different reasons. I certainly wouldn't add a second wireless sub to this mix if there was no specification for it before hand.

My point there is that the sub is probably fine in your configuration, but otherwise...the assessment with the 110 is correct. That being said, you will only gain approximately 3 dB with adding the second sub - but with better coverage is all. You would want to look at maybe one of the SPL lines? I think that's the current.

So the short response is that you just have the upgrade itch. While it's true that you would generally have a sub that outputs more than your mains, consider the following: How often do you think you're using 100 W of power on your Quartets?

OP, you just answered your own question. See bold/underlined. It's not broken, don't fix it.

I don't remember if I took photos when I did the foam treatments. I think I had photos when I installed the XO's though, because they're actually on the back of the baffles rather than above the terminal cup. The foam that I used on the back was actually trimmed foam from the wrapping of the bass port (because the need of room for the XO). If I get a chance to take them apart again, I'll snap photos though.

That OP looks familiar These are indeed the XO's in my current RF-3's. They cleaned a lot up for the towers. The diaphragm cleaned them up a little bit more and made them a little less harsh. The wrapping of the wire inside and laying out the foam in the back (inside of course) helped with some relatively tighter bass response. They sound different enough that they're *very* obvious in A/B between a stock RF-3 and the modded RF-3.

I have modded RF-3 II's. The XO's are S/N1 and S/N2 B&K XO's. I replaced the diaphragms as well with some Crites spec'd ones and added a little extra foam on the rear of the speaker behind the woofers (made sure all the wires were wrapped too). Still have the stock cabs and drivers though.

That's stealing. Excellent deal, OP! You are correct that you shouldn't be too worried about them. Enjoy what you're getting right now and start saving. By the time you start feeling the itch, you should have enough saved up for some great speakers. Your front three are what you'll hear the most, so enjoy them for now! Andre is correct (above - just posted) - the RS-35's are the designated match to the RF-35's. However you should have a little wiggle room there up to the RS-62's if your budget eventually allows. But I digress, enjoy for now - itch later.

Age does not mean much when talking audio - especially speakers. Some of the best speakers you'll see and hear are older (look at most KHorns, Heresy, Chorus, Belles, etc). The newest speaker in any of my configurations is dated 2007, the next newest is 2003. Alone the RF-35's *or* the RC-62 II are easily $350 - so that's a hell of a deal. The 35's are the speakers that replaced the RF-3's and RF-3 II's. They were superseded by the RF-82. All will perform well over the R-28F as originally posted.

Count me as another vote to Yamaha's CX-A preamps. I'm floored at the quality of build in my 5100 and it does all that I want and more. I was able to get it on A4L for $1,500. I don't use the YPAO, but most people that I know of that use it rave about it. At the risk of a few fans balking at me, I will share that I can't stay far enough away from Emotiva products. Every single Emotiva pre or unit that I've owned that's had some kind of digital interface has had problems or failed in an unreasonably short amount of time. I don't know about their newer stuff, but at least as recently as their MC-700, their pre's and CD transports were abysmal (oops, it's a day out of warranty...guess you'll have to pay us $200 to look at it, plus shipping). Oof.