Icon line vs Synergy line vs Reference line, same price range...

[Rinsewind43110]

My question is regarding the speakers below:

WF-34

Floorstanding Speaker $1,199.00 Pair (MSRP)

RF-82

Floorstanding Speaker $1,098.00 Pair (MSRP)

F-3

Floorstanding Speaker $950.00 Pair (MSRP)

VF-36

Floorstanding Speaker $949.99 Pair (MSRP)

RF-62

Floorstanding Speaker $878.00 Pair (MSRP)

The most expensive being the Icon WF-34 is at $1200/pair, and the least expensive at $878.00 a pair are the RF-62, which are reference. The Synergy F-3's are also in this fairly narrow price band of about $900-$1200. With these 3 different speaker lines crossing over at this point, what advantages would one get choosing, say, a VF-36 over an RF-62... or a WF-34 over an RF-82? They are all floor-standers. And as I understand it, the reference line is far superior to the Icon line, with the Synergy line falling somewhere inbetween. Given this fact, what drives the speakers such as the WF-34 and VF-36 to be viable options? Is there something I'm not thinking of? Apologies if it's obvious and I'm just wasting bandwidth here! But I think it's a legitimate question and I've seen the same thing with other speaker manufacturers.

Again, thanks to anyone who takes the time to read this, and/or reply.

[Bill H.]

RF 82 line would be the best bang for your Buck, IMO..............SAVE up if needed, but this would keep you happy for a long time.

[Rinsewind43110]

There is a pair of speakers in that list that is more expensive than the RF-82's! The WF-34.

Who would choose the more expensive WF-34's over the superior RF-82's, and why?

[Bill H.]

Basically for the Looks, and limited size. Good for Apt...........

Stay Focused..........get the 82's and be done with it.........(till the upgrade bug bites !).

[Pete H]

If you are looking at it strictly from a price point, I would open it up to used and throw in the RF 7's, Cornwalls, La Scalla's can be had in that range as well as others. Then it's going to come down to personal preference as always.

[Rinsewind43110]

So I can safely assume that the advantages of the Icon and Synergy lines over equally priced reference models are non-audible? Things like design, size, WAF, etc...?

[scott0527]

Where are you getting the idea that the Reference are far superior to to the Icons? I don't think that is the case. About the only way you will really ever know is to listen to them. I've heard the Reference line and I don't think they were superior at all. But I never auditioned the two side by side and it's been a couple of years since I've heard anything from the Reference line. Maybe if I was sitting here with both lines of speakers here in front of me I would change my mind however I've just never heard that the general consensus was that Reference were superior to Icon. Icons being newer... I don't think many forum members even own them.

Currently I own the WF35 and really like them. From a pure audio standpoint, the best sounding speakers I have owned were the Klipschorns. But 'm settling for a little smaller footprint these days.

[Bill H.]

Scott,

I have heard Both. Each has its own unique features. The Icons were made for people that needed a speaker with a smaller Footprint, and they are more pleasing to the Eye but don't dominate the space.

Money wise though, you could get a set of RF 82 for less money than the Icons. the only draw back is they are a Much Bigger Speaker.

To me, the Upper level reference speakers have a larger sound stage...........but both products are better than any thing else on the Market, money wise !

JMHO.

[scott0527]

Bill,

Yea, that's more in line with what I had heard people say and my own experience. I had just never heard anyone say "far superior" as the original poster has mentioned. I've owned Synergy, Reference, Heritage and now Icon. Never all the same time though

[Rinsewind43110]

Well, I can't know I'm wrong if I don't ask!

So, they aren't far superior.

Icon WF-34: In a closed-door Magnolia display room, these speakers sounded incredible harsh and bright. Their mids were weak and their bass was not what I expect or up to my standards... at all.

Reference RF-82: In a closed-door listening room, at an audio boutique... which had seriously high-end stuff pushing them, the speakers simply blew me away. Beautiful never-ending highs and heart-palpitating bass.

These speakers could sound exactly the same under the same condition and sound that different just due to differences in rooms and amplifiers(I believe the Best Buy Icons were just running off of a Denon Receiver and the RF-82's off of something that said 'McIntosh'). 2 problems with this:

1) I have a Denon reciever, not a McIntosh rig.

2) I was under the impression Klipsch speakers did a lot with a little... high-sensitivity, more output with lower wattage. So the WF-34's should have done a lot with the Denon receiver. But perhaps even this hits a ceiling when comparing such different amp setups.

I know how the WF-34's sound on a receiver much like my own, and I know how the RF-82's sound on a cost-no-object amp rig.

So the question would be: How much of the difference in the speakers is a result of the RF-82's slight to moderate superiority in sound quality, and how much of the difference is a result of the difference in what gear is pushing sound to them?

Yes, this whole post seems over-complicated. But so does the interaction of amp -> speaker -> room -> ear.

[bombadillo]

I've gotta say, I listened to most of what you put up there with the exception of the synergy line and all I can really say is that they're all different. The RF-82 sound incredible to me but had such a huge footprint the wife hated them. I listened to the WF-34/35 line and was stunned at the detail it had. The bass difference from the 82's vs the Icon WF-34 is definitely different and the 82's will hit quite a bit lower but I cross over with a sub and it takes up the slack the WF-34's don't have. Also if price is a big difference, the wf-34 has nearly the same specs and I really couldn't hear much of a difference except a hair on the low end with the advantage going to the wf-35. Its just a sound preference. I think the sound stage was much better on the icon-w line and I can close my eyes and just feel the stage deepening further and further especially with certain music like jazz or fusion. I like both for different reasons but I like crisp, sparkly music with punch mid and punch tight bass with no slop. I felt the 82's could be used nearly without a sub at all (even though I would never let that happen ) and the low end just comes through so tight its unreal. I listen to things like dave matthews band and heard something on a song that I had literally never heard before because of the detail of the Icon W line. Ultimately its up to you, but those RF-63 are awful nice and that was a wrench in my decision when I was buying. Only reason I didn't was that I couldn't demo them locally. I hope this helps and I've had some heresys some Icons, some Quartets, a good friend has K-Horns that I get to listen to regularly, and cornwalls for rear speakers in his theater. I've gotten to demo quite a bit of Klipsch and they just keep me coming back. Something about that sound that just sends chills for me. Good luck with your decisions.