RF-62 vs RS-62 as rear surrounds?

[Mickey Ray]

Hi all, this is my first posting to these forums. Got a pair of RF-62s a few months ago, demo models on clearance at a local London Drugs for $638 after tax. They sounded great both at the store and in my living room. My room is about 21' long by 18' wide (about 3,500 cubic feet), with
the speakers set up on the longer side. Hardwood floors, no rugs.

Then, two days ago, got a pair of RF-63s at another LD, also clearance demos, $1,075 after tax. They do have a bigger soundstage, and more detailed highs. Now the RF-62s are in the rear. I see a pair of RS-62s at the latter LD for $289 each before tax.

So now I'm wondering whether to sell my RF-62s and go for the RC-62s. I've heard that lower bass tones are sometimes sent to the rears, unless they're unable to accomodate, in which case these tones are delivered to the fronts. If so, I've got the lower tones covered with my current rears. But I'm told the bipole/dipole surrounds offer wider dispersion. So it looks like it's dispersion vs bass. After tax, and with some decent stands, I'm looking at a couple hundred more for a switch to the RC-62s, depending on how much I'd get for the RF-62s.

And that might not be much, since the locals here (Vancouver, BC) tend to go for bookshelf/small sub combos. I decided to go old school, and with the RF-63s I don't really need a sub.

Gotta say I'm sold on the Klipsch sound. Dynamic and clear. Listening about 60/40 in favour of home theatre over music. Looking forward to hearing from you guys.

[Montigue231]

you know mickey dispersion and dipoles never appealed to me much. I figure im in a fixed seating position and having the speakers face my seating position is always been fine for me. I much prefer full range all the way around. If its dispersion vs bass issue..no doubt go with the full range speakers..I agree with u the 62s are great fantastic speakers but they dont offer a big sound stage. I think u have the right idea putting them in the rear..My opinion

ps... even with my kg 5.2 which have a 12 inch passive radiator for massive bass still benefits from a sub..Theres nothing like a sub for ground shaking bass..u cant really get the same effect from floor speakers

Monty

[peshewah]

Mickey, I agree with Montigue on the sub. It really improves your movies alot. Or you could sell your RC62 and get a RC64. I hear the 64 is the best center channel on the market.

[Mickey Ray]

Thanks for the input guys, and you're definitely right about the need for a sub. I'm looking at the Klipsch RW-12D. 24Hz isn't bad for extension, though 18 would be nice for those subliminal "Oh, shit something bad's about to happen" undertones. A guy on Craigslist was selling an SVS PB-12 Plus for CD$675 but according to the SVS website they don't recommend this model or rooms over 2,500 cubic feet. Still, I should have gone for it - it's not like I'd be blasting it.

My Onkyo is a 7.2, but I'd rather get one good sub. Besides, the receiver has a 'double bass' setting that repeats the lows being sent to the fronts. Not sure if this would result in the tones canceling each other out, or muddying the sound, but willing ot give it a shot.

[Montigue231]

mickey glad to see your getting a good sub..the reference sub can do the job and keep up with ur mians for sure. Listen to me carefully mickey as i want to save u lots of time and efforts and give u the advice to make ur system sound the best that it can. It took me years to finally realize that the small settings make a huge difference in sound. Set your mains to "small" in your onkyo set up..then cut your frequency range on ur amp to 80 -100hz.. set ur subs frequency range up to about 120hz. What this will do is send the low end to your sub and keep your mains sounding clean and clear with less distortion. This is the abselute best way to run your system beleive me.

Like to hear back from you after ur done putting it together..let us know your results.

Monty

[Mr. RF62]

Good advice Monty. +1

[RockOn4Klipsch]

I recently replaced my RS 7's with my RF 5's and I much prefer the full range direct radiators as surrounds.Plus it's a huge benefiit for multi channel music. THe SVS PB12 plus will be sufficient I've got a similar sized room with a PB 13 ultra and it's set at less than 1/4 and still shakes my hole house.

as far as what monty said about setting your sub that high and cutting off your RF 63 I wouldn't do but thats me. If you wanted to run your system that way you could have gon the satellite and sub route but you didn't.

I would run everything you can at full range, I do and I enjoy it, explosions are explosions and breaking glass is.....well breaking glass.

[Montigue231]

I recently replaced my RS 7's with my RF 5's and I much prefer the full range direct radiators as surrounds.Plus it's a huge benefiit for multi channel music. THe SVS PB12 plus will be sufficient I've got a similar sized room with a PB 13 ultra and it's set at less than 1/4 and still shakes my hole house.

as far as what monty said about setting your sub that high and cutting off your RF 63 I wouldn't do but thats me. If you wanted to run your system that way you could have gon the satellite and sub route but you didn't.

I would run everything you can at full range, I do and I enjoy it, explosions are explosions and breaking glass is.....well breaking glass.

Rockon , I was as stubborn as they come when it comes to this subject..When i first heard about setting to small i thought no way in hell will i set these big beasts to small ..why would i want to do that with gicantic floor speakers..UNTIL i read what Mr RF 62 and a few others had to say. He brought up a little fact about distortion and it got me thinking... after years of being a rebel to this i finally took this advice..omg i just simply love how my speakers have transformed into a true audiphile system after following his setting instructions.. If you have a good ear for sound theres no way you can disagree..

There are some very knowledgable audiophiles that log on here all the time. Some of them are top notch and have what I would call, world class systems. Dont take my word..ask them, i bet 90 percent say the same thing..the important thing is we spend alot of time and money into this hobby and to be able to get the abselute best sound we can is what matters..if i can be responsible for helping someone maximize there audio potentions ..then im happy

[Mickey Ray]

Well guys looks like I've gone and mixed things up again. Since RC-64 centres don't come cheap, or often, and I'd have to get a new TV stand to accomodate the thing anyway, I traded up - maybe traded 'in' is the better word - the RF-63s for a pair of WF-35s and a WC-24 centre. The amount comes to about the same as if I'd kept the 63s and added an RC-64. The movers are coming over Saturday to do the switch, and those mofos better do it right this time - they were gripping the 63s front and back, with their hands right over the woofers. Yeah, I know they're 81lb (the speakers, not the movers) and they got no handles on 'em but Jesus Christ man.

From what Prof Thump says, the 63s should be several feet out from a wall, and the listener at least 12ft away from them. With my surrounds a similar distance from the back wall, I'd have to stretch the room a few feet, and that is beyond my powers. So the WFs it is. I don't see myself getting the matching XW-500D, but Rockon sounds right about the SVS.

I'll try both RockOn and Montigue's advice on the speaker settings and see what works best. About Monty's way seeming to rule out the need for tower speakers, it seems like higher towers don't just have better bass, but stronger mid and treble response, too. I noticed that with the RF-63s over the 62s: it wasn't just an extra woofer in a bigger box. That's why I went with the WF-35s instead of the 34s. But stupidly, I didn'teven bother to listen to the 34s.Guess I'm just wired for 'big.'

Anyway, I'll let you guys know how it all sounds in my apartment this weekend. I heard more slam on 'Kingdom of Heaven' from my RF-63s than I did from the WF-35s, but the sound quality from the latter was at least as good, and besides, I have my 63s bi-amped.

Wonder what the break-in time is for the WF-35s? We'll see, I guess. And so, of course, will my neighbours. Maybe I should work on them a bit - grease the wheels, work the charm, ready them for the coming apocalypse...

[RockOn4Klipsch]

I recently replaced my RS 7's with my RF 5's and I much prefer the full range direct radiators as surrounds.Plus it's a huge benefiit for multi channel music. THe SVS PB12 plus will be sufficient I've got a similar sized room with a PB 13 ultra and it's set at less than 1/4 and still shakes my hole house.

as far as what monty said about setting your sub that high and cutting off your RF 63 I wouldn't do but thats me. If you wanted to run your system that way you could have gon the satellite and sub route but you didn't.

I would run everything you can at full range, I do and I enjoy it, explosions are explosions and breaking glass is.....well breaking glass.

Rockon , I was as stubborn as they come when it comes to this subject..When i first heard about setting to small i thought no way in hell will i set these big beasts to small ..why would i want to do that with gicantic floor speakers..UNTIL i read what Mr RF 62 and a few others had to say. He brought up a little fact about distortion and it got me thinking... after years of being a rebel to this i finally took this advice..omg i just simply love how my speakers have transformed into a true audiphile system after following his setting instructions.. If you have a good ear for sound theres no way you can disagree..

There are some very knowledgable audiophiles that log on here all the time. Some of them are top notch and have what I would call, world class systems. Dont take my word..ask them, i bet 90 percent say the same thing..the important thing is we spend alot of time and money into this hobby and to be able to get the abselute best sound we can is what matters..if i can be responsible for helping someone maximize there audio potentions ..then im happy

I understand completely and have changed all the setting and what
not to small and changed xover settings and what not and it does sound
very very good. There seems to be more bass (which everyone always
loves) but running everything at full range IMO is better for multi
channel listening.

The settings are much dependent on the gear
one has. If you have an integrated reciever the small setting is the
way to go. I did this with all the integrated's I've had because it did
sound much better, mostly because there's not enough juice to run
everything at full range. When I aquired seperates, the difference was
very noticeable. The small setting sounds very good but with the power
to run everything full range is the way to go.

As far as
distortion goes if you're running everything at full range when at
Reference levels you may get noticeable distortion from the integrated
a/v but with sufficient power even at reference levels one should still
not hear audible distortion because you shouldn't be reaching too deep
into the power supply with the effeciency of klipsch speaker.

Definitely
try it with both speakers and with different settings to find what you
like. I would agree with monty in the sense if you don't have
sufficient power you shouldn't stress your reciever too it's limits.

my 2 cents

[Montigue231]

Rockon another excellent subject and good point, im learning all the time in this hobby.. What your saying makes alot of sense..Cant wait to get my outlaw amp

Mickey the new tratrix horn tweeters in those are suppose to have a 80 80 dispersion instead of what klipsch has always used the 90 60 tratrix. Im curious to know how they sound and compare to the RFs...let us know.. Also like the fact there are no holes sunk into the baffle board for grill mounting..with the grills off those sure look nice...

[Mr. RF62]

Rockon, you have to remember that not everyone can afford or think about getting dedicated amplifiers for bi-amping or more amplitude. Even though some cutoff there bigger speakers from being full-range, doesn't mean they should've gone the sub/sat route as the bigger speakers will have a better sound/distorion factor with the bigger mid/woofers. Unless a person has a more capable amp, then you can cut lower, or run them full-range.

[Mr. RF62]

That was weird, as I was replying, more replys were made...I'll be alright. [:S]

[RockOn4Klipsch]

Rockon, you have to remember that not everyone can afford or think about getting dedicated amplifiers for bi-amping or more amplitude. Even though some cutoff there bigger speakers from being full-range, doesn't mean they should've gone the sub/sat route as the bigger speakers will have a better sound/distorion factor with the bigger mid/woofers. Unless a person has a more capable amp, then you can cut lower, or run them full-range.

I understand that we all want big speakers.... However if you're going to always run you speakers as small and cut off frequencies then IMO a person should invest the same money on bookshelfs insted of large floorstanders. If you spend the same money that you would have spent on floor standers and went with bookshelfs you wouldl maintain the same SQ with a better WAF.

Larger speaker does not imply better sound, take a look at the THX Ultra LCR's, they're not full range and I imagine perform above and beyond many floorstanding models. or take a look at the Palladium line of bookshelfs they probably perform great as well. If you planned on running things as small IMO one should go that route.

I understand the practice of running speakers as small, I'm not negating the performance at all just that I would run full range if possible if not, then I would run them as small.

[Mr. RF62]

So its clear...IMO = In My Opinion.

Large floorstanders IMO, look better, and have my WAF in mind. I'd be interested in the price difference between the Palladium bookshelves and the RF-62's, then again, maybe not. SQ-wise, yes they WOULD/SHOULD be different. I didn't imply that large speakers have better sound. (Not a bose fan!) Most bookshelf speaker use 1 mid/woofer speaker, and most floorstanding speaker have more than one. So a person should NOT buy a speaker say, with three 4.5" mid/woofers cause they would only sound good if in full-range???? [:S] It would sound better and less distorted and more efficient with multiple mid/woofers in a speakers system than a single driver IMO. No where near does my system sound like a HTIB, or "bookshelvey".

[Montigue231]

Rockon i do not agree with you.. Setting your floor speakers to small is not the same as having bookshelfs. The floor speakers still give u a bigger sound stage even cutting the reciever to 80hz. I hate bookshelf or satelites they dont impress me at all...they belong in bedrooms or for rear speaker sourronds..

my kg 5.2s set to small will rip any bookshelf set to large