No idea what system would be best for my room. Can anyone help?

[vince321]

Hello All,

 

New participant to the forum with hopes I can get some suggestions or ideas on what speaker setup would be best for my room.

 

I've kicked around floor standers and bookshelf systems, but  my room isn't that large.  My intent is to have as premium a sound as possible, but not waste money on oversized speakers I'll never tap into.  Do to simplicity of not needing speaker stands, floor standers for the front would be great.  However, using book shelf speakers if they would give a better system would be totally OK too. 

 

Would a 10", 12" or larger sub be needed?

 

 

My room is:

 

16'-6" wide x 12'-3 1/2" deep.  It is a very closed in room, so no big openings to deal with. 

 

Thanks for any assistance. 

Dan

[The History Kid]

Hey Vince, welcome!

The RF-42's have a small footprint for floorstanding speakers - but leave a fair amount to be desired. Many people praise the 62's - that might be an option if money isn't an issue. Otherwise a nice pair of RB-61's or 81's would do well too.

Do you plan on mainly using it for music or movies? Are you looking for strictly 2-ch or up to 5?

[CECAA850]

Hey Vince, welcome!

The RF-42's have a small footprint for floorstanding speakers - but leave a fair amount to be desired. Many people praise the 62's - that might be an option if money isn't an issue. Otherwise a nice pair of RB-61's or 81's would do well too.

Do you plan on mainly using it for music or movies? Are you looking for strictly 2-ch or up to 5?

 

I can't believe you didn't take this opportunity to sell your Quintets!

[The History Kid]

Haha!

I'm not someone who believes that the Quintets are flat out amazing. If they'd work in his space - and really I think he could do bookshelves at least in it - maybe. But I'd always push a good reference speaker over synergy/quintet.

Then again, if his budget is tight, and he wants to go 5.1 - then yeah...the quintet might be a good option.

Edited October 13, 2014 by IbizaFlame

[vince321]

Budget isn't tight. 

 

Floor standers would probably be preferable, but it seems most of the Klipsch floors standers are really LARGE and they just may overwhelm the room.  Would you rather RF-51's or RB-82's and would the 82's gain me anything over the 62's considering my room size?  Maybe the RF-62's or 82's?  They seem to be overkill though.

 

This room will almost entirely be dedicated to movies.  Music maybe, but certainly infrequently and not the reason for adding the system

[The History Kid]

If movies and budget isn't tight, I'd definitely go the route of the RF-82's...best bang for the buck. I wouldn't really recommend bookshelf for theater unless you were super super tight on space.

[psg]

My room is:

 

16'-6" wide x 12'-3 1/2" deep.  It is a very closed in room, so no big openings to deal with. 

 

 

 

Budget isn't tight. 

 

Klipschorns on the long wall then!  They disappear into corners and hardly take up any space!    

[Paducah Home Theater]

I've kicked around floor standers and bookshelf systems, but  my room isn't that large.  My intent is to have as premium a sound as possible, but not waste money on oversized speakers I'll never tap into.

It mainly depends on what you're listening to, how loud you like it, and what your budget is. Figure out these things first and the decision is easier.

 

Do to simplicity of not needing speaker stands, floor standers for the front would be great.  However, using book shelf speakers if they would give a better system would be totally OK too.

In my opinion that decision mainly hinges on how low you want to cross it over. If you want to run them full range at volume, that's where larger floor standers shine. However, getting them due to not having to use stands just means you have some really expensive stands. Somewhat of a waste of floor space as well. Bookshelves do well if you can cross over at 80-100 hz and let the sub(s) do the hard work. The thing is, for the same amount of money you can typically get a higher quality bookshelf compared to towers of the same price, but you'll have to rely on a sub more. The only problem in doing this is that some material isn't the greatest when you do that, such as hard rock, but movies are typically perfectly fine, that's even the THX specification, everything less than 80z from all channels gets sent to the sub(s), so the idea in general isn't inferior, some AV installers highly recommend getting higher quality bookshelves if there's a budget. But yeah if you like to crank Metallica up to 11, you're probably going to want to run them full range to get that good growl in the low vocals, bass guitar, kick drums and floor toms, so be looking for some larger floorstanding models. Getting large floorstanding ones yet continuing to cross them over fairly high is kind of a waste though.

 

Would a 10", 12" or larger sub be needed? My room is: 16'-6" wide x 12'-3 1/2" deep.

I'd get the largest sub you can afford, preferably two, due to lower frequency response and less distortion. When you run them hard you want them to sound like they're barely breaking a sweat, not out of breath. My room is only 3' longer on each side and I'm running two 18's that can flex over 2" each, with enough power that I can max them out and throw breakers, and I kind of want more. It's all subjective. I don't "need" that much for the way most people run their equipment, but when something scary happens onscreen I like to have the bejeezus scared out of me, plus I like old school 90's rap. The material that you are a fan of will drive how heavy your bottom end is.

Or, to keep it simple, two 12's ought to more than fill your room the way most people use their system, but if you're like me, you can put more to use. Whether or not it is wasted is 100% up to you and your preferences.

Edited October 13, 2014 by MetropolisLakeOutfitters

[Paducah Home Theater]

would the 82's gain me anything over the 62's considering my room size?

You'd get a little more punch and power handling on low stuff if running full range, plus they look cooler, with the woofers taking up more of the baffle area. If you cross both of them over fairly high I doubt you'd be able to tell much of a difference, but the RF-82ii's ought to growl better in full range mode.

[vince321]

Thanks for all the ideas.  The Klipsch speaker selector suggests the RF-52's based upon room size.  This is a dedicated home theater, so possibly the smaller RF-52's crossing over at 80hz with a solid sub is smartest? I like Metropolis suggestion on the subs.  I should be able to fill in all the bottom end necessary using two subs.......? Any opinions on the RF-52's?  They are so inexpensive it feels like the can't possibly perform?

[derrickdj1]

Welcome to the forum Vince.  If you are get a sub or two, then the RF 62's will be fine.  When it comes to subs, determine if you want the room shaking or want to get really loud.  That room may so well with a couple of SVS 12 in. cyclinder sub.  They are great for music also.  Get the 62's over thee 52's. 

Edited October 13, 2014 by derrickdj1

[mattSER]

The 52s may pack more of a punch than you're assuming.

I would honestly go with the 52s if you're planning on using a sub.

[Paducah Home Theater]

Any opinions on the RF-52's?  They are so inexpensive it feels like the can't possibly perform?

Bottom end punch and power handling would obviously be a bit lacking comparatively but if you cross them over high enough that part doesn't matter much.

In terms of output of smaller speakers, here's some real world examples:

1. Let's just say that my KL-650's with two 6.5's can EASILY blow you out of my room when crossed over at 80z. It's all the output I can stand with my (uncalibrated) receiver set at -15 db, you can't really talk over it even when there isn't any big dynamic peaks going on, but they easily handle the dynamics. They can easily keep up with my massive dual 18 sub setup. And, the sensitivity of the RF-52ii's is stated to be only 1 db less than these THX's.

2. My living room is over 30x30, over 900 square feet, and I have a pair of Wharfedale 6.5" bookshelves there powered by an old school JVC receiver. That's it. In terms of music playing and not movie dynamics, I can easily fill not just the entire room but pretty much the entire house plus my porches with sound, over 4,000 square feet. I'll go chill on the porch and hear them at a good volume with these things not even breaking a sweat, and that's full range. If I have doors open these two things can literally fill the house to uncomfortable levels of volume that you cannot comfortably talk over even without them being anywhere near being maxed out. The bass is surprisingly good too, most people would probably think there's a 10" sub getting a workout. Nope, just two little 6.5" bookshelves running full range.

3. I recently put on a class reunion but nobody wanted to pay for a DJ. A cheap $300 Sony receiver powering two Wharfedale towers with two 6.5" drivers was way more to fill up a medium sized ball room with 10-12 fairly large tables plus several people, if anything it was severe overkill.

So, sheer output by smallish speakers in a smallish room isn't an issue in my opinion. If you want that big and dynamic sound and want to cross over lower you'll have to get bigger towers though. If you have a decent receiver and sub setup, especially if you cross these over at like 80 hz, you'd probably literally be shocked at what they can do. I like that big rock growl coming through the front towers though so while personally I'd go bigger, I can't say that it would matter much if crossing over fairly high, unless watching the Metallica movie of course.

Edited October 13, 2014 by MetropolisLakeOutfitters

[mustang guy]

Your room is about the size of my den. I have a 60" TV, some KG-4.2's flanking a KG-2.5 center on the long wall. My rears are little Infinity surrounds I've had for years. I have a single sub which is a Paradigm DSP-3200. 

 

This is the system I watch movies on 95% of the time, and it sounds great.

 

In my opinion, you might want to consider the unappreciated KG x.x series. You can get them for a song and a dance, and they sound san fran tastic.

[Scrappydue]

let me give my two cents. i have owned every single reference speaker in the 4th gen line up except the 83's. ill tell you right now if you want towers get the rf-62. if you think bookshelves will do on stands get the rb-61 and that will leave you more money for sub or subs. 

 

the reason or the 6x size speaker is the horn is larger and will give you a much larger sound. wether playing loud or not that larger sound is something you will want. if you are looking at msrp forget those prices. 62's will cost you 750 or 61's will cost you 400. all you have to do is know where to get them. matching center the rd-62 will also cost you 400. 

 

there will not be enough difference in sound to warrant the price increase to the 82 towers from the 62 towers. the price from the 52 to 62 is easily justifiable in my opinion.

 

if you have no budget i would get the towers. if you do then get the bookshelves and spend the extra on a good quality subwoofer. 

 

speaking of subs how much bass do you feel you need? 

[garyrc]

 

My room is:

 

16'-6" wide x 12'-3 1/2" deep.  It is a very closed in room, so no big openings to deal with. 

 

 

 

Budget isn't tight. 

 

Klipschorns on the long wall then!  They disappear into corners and hardly take up any space!  

 

 

I agree!

 

I've had Klipschorns in a room smaller than yours, and they were great.  Get as big a sub as you can (or two).

 

None of the speakers mentioned will be too much acoustically, and, as psg said, Khorns disappear into the corners.

 

Try the Khorns set for Large and Small (unorthodox, I know).  Bring in the subs starting at 80 Hz, but be sure to try 60 Hz also.  At either crossover, most of the impact zone of the drums will be reproduced by the Khorns, which will do a cleaner, snappier job than almost any sub, and your sub(s) will take care of the deep bass resonance better than Khorns (~~~15 or 20 Hz to 60 or 80 Hz). 

[Scrappydue]

here is a few size comparison photos. they are good reference. 

 

 

 

 

[Scrappydue]

Getting large floorstanding ones yet continuing to cross them over fairly high is kind of a waste though.

this is kind of an off statement. as someone who just came from the kl-650 that is sounds like you have to the kpt-904's that i have now i can assure you that both being crossed at 80 is TOTALLY different. the amount of slam in the chest from my dual 15's is NIGHT AND DAY different than the kl-650's. nothing wasteful at all about having larger speakers crossed over high. 

 

a few benefits of them being crossed higher is lots of extra headroom from your avr or amp, less chance of phase issues with subs, less chance of over excursion with low frequencies causing unwanted distortion, and letting your subs do what they were intended to do. 

[K5SS]

I agree with what scrappy said. Get the RB-61's or RF-62's and RC-62 for your front 3. Use the money saved for the new R-115SW subwoofer. The center channel and the sub are by far and away the two most important speakers for home theater.

There are other brands to consider like SVS, Rythmik, Reaction Audio and PSA. A good portion of the budget should be dedicated towards the sub.

Welcome to the group!

[Heritage_Head]

Bigger is better with Klipsch almost all the time. I hear the argument on Avs towers vs bookshelfs. I get the idea that xo at 80 it shouldn't matter and all that. But that's just not the case in my experience. I have owned a lot of different Klipsch and sub or no sub it's go big or go home