Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

jason51672's Achievements


Member (2/9)



  1. I'd highly recommend the 8000fs over the 6000fs. Had both, highs and lows sounded much better to me from 8000fs.
  2. @Frzninvt I'm a newbie, so grain of salt, but I jumped into this headfirst and went a little crazy trialling about 6 different sets of fronts and centers in my home and did a bunch of A/B testing with different front and centers with speaker switches. Based on my testing my opinion is that: 1. Getting the best center you can afford is excellent advice, especially if you are using mostly for movies. I'm definitely in the camp that the center is the most important speaker (including front L & R) given that almost all of the "important" sound comes out the of the front, and most of the time the L & R just seem to play "effects." 2. Matching the fronts is overrated, especially if the timbre is somewhat similar between the speakers. I could almost never tell whether the front R & L matched the center when I was listening "blind" and someone else was changing which speakers were playing. Now in most cases, there is no reason not to match the center with the fronts especially when aesthetics are taken into consideration. In my case though, I really liked the sound of the Polk S60s but I did not like the Polk Signature series center (S30) especially compared to the rp-504c, there was no comparison. The rp-504c was the center I like the most out of all I had listened to, but I did not like the rp-6000Fs as they didn't have the clarity and heavy treble I liked in the S60s. I had read many people talk about he importance of matching the front speakers, so I listened to the Polk S60s and switched back and forth between the Polk center and the 504c with many different movies and movie scenes. I could tell no difference in the "timbre" matching between the centers, and there was no doubt that the rp-504c sounded much better with the Polk S60s than the Polk center did. Ultimately I tried the rp-8000Fs and they had the clarity & heavy treble I was looking for, so I went with them (combined with the fact that I thought they looked much better than the Polks and yes it was a definite bonus they matched the 504c) But had I not liked the rp-8000Fs I would have gone with the Polks and the mismatched rp-504c in a heartbeat, regardless of what anyone says.
  3. If you don't want to trial both and return one and can make the room I would highly recommend going with the 504c or 450c. I never compared the 404c or any other Klipsch centers but I love the 504c. I compared to other similarly sized and smaller centers including the Emotiva C2, Martin Login 50xt, Wharfedale Diamond 240c, and Polk S30. I prefered the 504c to to all of the other centers. Voices were clearer and I could hear detail and nuance I couldn't hear in the others. Music is awesome as well. Even though the 504c and the 404c use the same tweeter the 504c might have more clarity, brightness, and treble than the 404c due to the fact that the 504c has a larger horn. I trialled the RP-6000F side by side the RP-8000F and the clarity, brightness and treble in the RP-8000F was night and day better than the RP-6000F even though they have the same tweeter. I suspect the same MIGHT be true in the 404c vs the 504c.
  4. Never heard the previous Reference or Reference Premier lines so I can't compare, but as soon as I heard the R-280f I could tell what others meant by "fatiguing" in describing some Klipsch speakers. Though, I was listening for it and don't think I would have would have used the term had I not heard others use it already. I also like the bright heavy treble and don't think it would be an issue for me personally. The Polk S55/S60 and the RP-8000F also sound bright with heavy treble to me but I would not describe them as "fatiguing" in the least, so I can't say what it is that makes the R-280 "sound fatiguing."
  5. Wish I waited, paid $700 for the RZ730 3 months ago, which was a good deal at the time.
  6. Just want to add that the 150 Watt rating is the MAX continuous watts the speakers are rated for, not what they require. The RP-8060FAs will sound great with much less power. I had the RP-8000F which is the exact same speaker minus the additional atmos speaker connected to the RZ730 (They were probably getting 60W max) and they worked great. Keep in mind that even if you get the RZ830 which is rated at 120W that is for only 2 channels driven. With all the channels powered it is going to be much less. The only way you are going to get anywhere close to 150W is with an external power amplifier.
  7. I don't think you will notice much, if any difference. You would notice a huge difference with floor standing speakers in the front (rp-6000f, rp-8000f, or the older models). But if floor standing speakers are not an option for whatever reason, I would personally go with the rp 160ms just because they match your other speakers.
  8. @USER876 For the sake of keeping things simple, i fibbed a little bit in my original post. I actually had the RP-6000F and was comparing to the R-820F but was planning on getting either the RP-280F or the RP-8000F. I figured the highs would be similar if not the same between the RP-6000f & the RP-8000f given that they have the same tweeter. Boy was I wrong! The RP-8000F and the R-820F have much more treble and detail in the highs than the RP-6000F or the RP-620F. It must be because of the much larger horns. I never had a chance to try the RP-280F but I'm very happy with the RP-8000F. All around the RP-8000F is a much better speaker than the R-820F. There is no comparison in terms of build quality and the RP-8000F has the detail and clarity in the highs that the R-820F has without being fatiguing. I kept reading about people saying Klipsch were very heavy in treble to the point of being "fatiguing" to listen to for an extended period of time. Having only heard the RP-6000Fs I was completely perplexed by this because I didn't think it had heavy treble nor could if figure out what they meant by fatiguing. After listening to the R-820Fs for a couple minutes I could tell what they meant, even though I liked the heavier treble. The RP-8000F seems to have the best of both worlds. I would say the differences between R and RP more than justify the price difference. I figure you've already made your purchase, but let me know if you are still shopping and I can provide more info.
  9. Does anyone know where I can buy walnut vinyl veneer to match the new reference premiere rp-8000f, etc.? I am building a sub and would like to match the rp-8000f. Also considering using for shelves and misc trim. I trialled the Wharfedale Diamond 250 in walnut and it had the EXACT same walnut vinyl veneer as the rp-8000f, so it has to be available for purchase somewhere. Thanks in advance!
  10. I've been able to listen to the R-820F side by side the RP-8000F and I actually prefer the sound of the R-820F. I like the detail in the highs and heavier treble. I'm wondering if the RP-280F might sound more like the R-820F than the RP-8000F (heavier treble?)
  11. Hello all, I am in process of building a dedicated HT and I currently have or have decided to go with RP-8000F fronts, RP-504 center, 2 pair or of RP-500sa surrounds (one for each row of seats), RP-502s bipoles for rears and 4 in ceiling PRO-16RCs for atmos. I'm wondering if I should return the RP-502s and go with RP-500M (or RP-600M) bookshelf speakers, another pair of RP-500SAs or stick with the RP-502s's? My HT is 11.4' w x 19.5' l x 7.4' h and I have 2 rows of 3 theater seats with 9" riser for back row I decided to go with the RP-500SAs for surrounds because there is only about 22" space between the wall and the seats (where people need to walk) I need something low profile that I can partially embed in the wall. Because the RP-500SAs are fully enclosed and shallow with no ports seems like it would be safe to do so without compromising sound quality (someone please correct me if I'm wrong.) I can't do in wall speakers because there is a long window on the other side where the speakers need to go. I've been able to mount them to wall under the window (the actual speakers are in front of the window) and plan is to cover most of the speaker cabinets with the blackout curtains going in front of the window. Plan is to mount the RP-500SAs about a foot or less over ear height and angle only slightly downward rather than flush with wall to maximize atomos effect (especially with 7.4 ft ceilings and a riser.) Embedding in wall on one side and blackout curtains on the other should hide the angle mismatch with the back of the speakers. The back wall has 2 closets so rears will have to be on stands or hang from the ceiling. My thought on going with the RP-502s bipoles for rears is that the 4 sets of tweeters & 5.25 woofers in the 2 RP-502s bipoles would be good balance for the 4 sets of tweeters & 5.25 woofers in the 2 pairs of RP-500sa surrounds. But I've also heard it is best to use directional for rears especially in 7.1.4 atmos setup. Hence my question of should I go with bookshelf or another pair of 500SAs (to match surrounds.) Any suggestions, thoughts or opinions would be appreciated. Thank you!
  • Create New...