mutant Posted November 30, 2002 Share Posted November 30, 2002 Any good or bad experiences here? Are they as smooth and as good sounding overall (besides having less bass) as the RB-5's? I am looking for speakers to use in a "nearfield" setup in a small room (8X10 ft.),so I was wondering if having these speakers placed as close as 18 inches to the wall behind them will result in noticeable bassport "chuffing" sounds or serious soundstaging impairments? (My currently owned speakers are sealed-box Spendor S-3/5's, and they work fine in this setup, but I am in the mood to change speakers...) Should I search for another sealed-box or front-ported design for this room instead? Also, I cannot tell from the Klipsch website whether or not these speakers are bi-wireable or not. Any help would be appreciated, thanks! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mutant Posted December 2, 2002 Author Share Posted December 2, 2002 Well, no answers to this post of mine yet so I guess I will have to answer it myself! I did some research while I was out (including a search under "RB-5" on this site), and found some good references to the RB-3. One professional review I found at the ecoustics website compared it very favorably to the RB-5 (that was also previously reviewed in the same publication). The most important difference between the two speakers is simply that the RB-3 is designed for a smaller room - the overall sonic quality and characteristics are about identical to the RB-5, but the RB-3 has a more subdued treble region and a different off/on-axis response combination that will probably make this smaller Klipsch sound better than the larger one in smaller rooms (like mine). (By the way, this reviewer recommends that both models be faced straight ahead in a room, not angled toward the listener, for "smoothest sound") The RB-5 measures ever so slightly flatter and smoother overall than the RB-3. But flat measurements alone do not guarantee the best sound in every application! Certain other characteristics of the RB-5 will likely negate some of this "purity" in a too small room, where the RB-3 will probably reign supreme. When heard in a large dealer showroom for example, the RB-5 will appear more impressively "extended", due to more bass and less rolled-off treble, and therefore more "open" (as some people on this forum have noted)? But, the RB-3's should be easier to live with in a small room (when located closer to the listener and to the back and side walls) than the RB-5. I have finally auditioned both models and I preferred the RB-3 over the RB-5 in "nearfield" mode, due to the combination of the abovementioned characteristics. Due mostly to the more "forward" treble on the RB-5, I felt it was ultimately less transparent and less invisible than the RB-3, especially in close-nearfield (6 feet or so away, triangulated). And the low bass on the RB-3 is nothing to sneeze at - it's powerful and tight and rolls off at about the same rate (until 70 hz. or so) as the RB-5 but simply does not go as loud or as low. Many people will not feel the need for a sub even with the "small" RB-3, but if used with a good sub, set at around 70-80 hz., you cannot feel bass deficient in any event. If you want a standmounted speaker to fill a larger room, then go with the RB-5. Otherwise, the RB-3 might be the better sounding speaker (for less money!) for you. And today, I very happily bought the Klipsch RB-3. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deang Posted December 2, 2002 Share Posted December 2, 2002 well well well -- ya just couldn't wait could you? Hee hee, I know the feeling. It's tough. You did good! You compared them head on and made a choice -- also keeping in mind where you were going to put them and how you were going to listen. Cool. I also listen nearfield. Not because I have too -- but because I like too. I'm sure you are getting a very good sound out of those. I don't agree with the straight ahead placement. Toe them in and get that energy directed into the listening area, instead of reflecting off of the side walls. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sunnysal Posted December 3, 2002 Share Posted December 3, 2002 congrats on the 3's, I did the same type of comparison and preffered the 5's...to each his own. I tend to play them kinda loud and like the slightly deeper, stronger bass from the 5's but hey, they both sound terrific! really sleeper speakers in my opinion. they can hold their head up with some pretty pricey two-way speakers out there IMO. what do you drive them with? tony Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mutant Posted December 3, 2002 Author Share Posted December 3, 2002 Hi, Sunnysal! In the store I auditioned them while connected to some Yamaha AV receiver. At home now they are hooked up to my single-ended 20 watt per channel N.E.W. A-20.1 amp. This has made a nice improvement - the warmer, more euphonic sound of this little high current class-A amp is just frosting on the cake. (It supplies more than enough power for this application) I'm smiling now... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sunnysal Posted December 4, 2002 Share Posted December 4, 2002 I found, at first, mine sounded a little bright, but now after a year of listening (some of it very loudly) it sounds quite smooth in the treble. BTW I have it driven my a McIntosh MA6400 integrated amplifier. A little overkill in power for these speakers but I have gotten the volume up to 12o'clock (on a "Bad Company's Greatest Hits" album I think! lol!) and danced around the room (don't tell anyone! lol!)...in the end I ended up toeing them in, semmed to improve imaging for me...warm regards, tony Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.