Klipsch RF-3 II vs. Klipsch RB-5 II vs. Klipsch RS-7 as surrounds

[Kain]

Which, in your opinion, is the better surround speaker out of these three? Many people have told me that they prefer NOT to have WDST speakers.

[Salacakli]

I like RF-3 II very much

[Stephen328]

For surrounds floor standers rock! So much more bass, and better soundstage. Talk to the ears, if i rember right, he has RF-5 surrounds and RF-7 Rear SUrrounds (7.1). Rock on! hehe..

[Kain]

But isn't the subwoofer meant to handle the bass?

[whell]

With the ability to set front, side (if you have a 7.1 setup) and rear speakers to "large", you can bypass the crossover inside your receiver/processor, and deliver a clear, full range signal to all channels, save maybe your RC-3 or RC-7 center channel.

If you choose to go this route, my suggestion would be to make sure you have amplification that will handle this load. I'm pretty sure your "average" HT receiver might not be able to deliver. Separate amplification would be a huge help, even to run a separate amp for the L/R channels, and let the receiver handle the center and rears (assuming a 5.1 setup) would be, IMHO, a huge help.

Yes, the sub would still be there to handle the ".1" signal for the bass track in any multi-channel mode. For music, many processors/receivers allow the user to set the sub output for a L/R channel mix, which can provide added slam for those who want it.